ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

[OPP-2006-xxxx; FRL-xxxx-1] 

Flutolanil; Notice of Filing a Pesticide Petition to Amend Tolerances
for a Certain Pesticide Chemical in or on Food 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

----------------------------------------------------------------------- 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the submission of a new pesticide
petition proposing to amend the regulations in 40 CFR §180.484 for the
indirect or inadvertent residues of the fungicide flutolanil
[N-(3-(1-methylethoxy) phenyl)-2-(trifluoromethyl) benzamide] and its
metabolite, M-4, desisopropylflutolanil
[N-(3-hydroxyphenyl)-2(trifluromethyl) benzamide], on various food and
feed commodities.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket identification (ID) number OPP-
2006-xxxx, must be received on or before date. 

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically, by mail, or through
hand delivery/courier. Follow the detailed instructions as provided in
Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: By mail: Mary Waller, Registration
Support Branch, Registration Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460- 0001; telephone number: (703) 305-9354; e-mail
address:  ADVANCE \d4 waller.mary@epa.gov.

 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 

You may be affected by this action if you an agricultural producer, food
manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. Potentially affected categories
and entities may include, but are not limited to: 

· Crop production (NAICS 111) 

· Animal production (NAICS 112) 

· Food manufacturing (NAICS 311) 

· Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS 32532)

 This listing is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by this
action. Other types of entities not listed in this unit could also be
affected. The North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS)
codes have been provided to assist you and others in determining whether
this action might apply to certain entities. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity,
consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 

1. Docket. EPA has established an official public docket for this action
under docket ID number OPP-2006-xxxx. The official public docket
consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any
public comments received, and other information related to this action.
Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not
include Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is
the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the
Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119,
Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA. This docket facility
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The docket telephone number is (703) 305-5805. 

2. Electronic access. You may access this Federal Register document
electronically through the EPA Internet under the ``Federal Register''
listings at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/. An electronic version of the
public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and
comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at
http://www.epa.gov/edocket/ to submit or view public comments, access
the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available
electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available
docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I.B.1.
Once in the system, select ``search,'' then key in the appropriate
docket ID number. Certain types of information will not be placed in the
EPA Dockets. Information claimed as CBI and other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute, which is not included in the
official public docket, will not be available for public viewing in
EPA's electronic public docket. EPA's policy is that copyrighted
material will not be placed in EPA's electronic public docket but will
be available only in printed, paper form in the official public docket.
To the extent feasible, publicly available docket materials will be made
available in EPA's electronic public docket. When a document is selected
from the index list in EPA Dockets, the system will identify whether the
document is available for viewing in EPA's electronic public docket.
Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you
may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through
the docket facility identified in Unit I.B. EPA intends to work towards
providing electronic access to all of the publicly available docket
materials through EPA's electronic public docket. For public commenters,
it is important to note that EPA's policy is that public comments,
whether submitted electronically or in paper, will be made available for
public viewing in EPA's electronic public docket as EPA receives them
and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material,
CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will
provide a reference to that material in the version of the comment that
is placed in EPA's electronic public docket. The entire printed comment,
including the copyrighted material, will be available in the public
docket. Public comments submitted on computer disks that are mailed or
delivered to the docket will be transferred to EPA's electronic public
docket. Public comments that are mailed or delivered to the docket will
be scanned and placed in EPA's electronic public docket. Where
practical, physical objects will be photographed, and the photograph
will be placed in EPA's electronic public docket along with a brief
description written by the docket staff. 

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? 

You may submit comments electronically, by mail, or through hand
delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the
appropriate docket ID number in the subject line on the first page of
your comment. Please ensure that your comments are submitted within the
specified comment period. Comments received after the close of the
comment period will be marked ``late.'' EPA is not required to consider
these late comments. If you wish to submit CBI or information that is
otherwise protected by statute, please follow the instructions in Unit
I.D. Do not use EPA Dockets or e-mail to submit CBI or information
protected by statute. 

1. Electronically. If you submit an electronic comment as prescribed in
this unit, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address,
and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body of your
comment. Also include this contact information on the outside of any
disk or CD ROM you submit, and in any cover letter accompanying the disk
or CD ROM. This ensures that you can be identified as the submitter of
the comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on
the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edit
your comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the
body of a comment will be included as part of the comment that is placed
in the official public docket, and made available in EPA's electronic
public docket. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties [[Page 76944]] and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your comment. 

 i. EPA Dockets. Your use of EPA's electronic public docket to submit
comments to EPA electronically is EPA's preferred method for receiving
comments. Go directly to EPA Dockets at  ADVANCE \d4 http://www.epa.gov/
edocket/, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Once in the system, select ``search,'' and then key in docket ID number
OPP-2006-xxxx. The system is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means
EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact
information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. 

 ii. E-mail. Comments may be sent by e-mail to opp-docket@epa.gov,
Attention: Docket ID Number OPP-2006-xxxx. In contrast to EPA's
electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail system is not an ``anonymous
access'' system. If you send an e-mail comment directly to the docket
without going through EPA's electronic public docket, EPA's e-mail
system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail addresses that
are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are included as part
of the comment that is placed in the official public docket, and made
available in EPA's electronic public docket. 

 iii. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit comments on a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to the mailing address identified in Unit I.C.2. These
electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect or ASCII file
format. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. 

2. By mail. Send your comments to: Public Information and Records
Integrity Branch (PIRIB) (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP),
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460-0001, Attention: Docket ID Number OPP-2006-xxxx. 

3. By hand delivery or courier. Deliver your comments to: Public
Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Office of Pesticide
Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall
#2, 1801 S. Bell St., Arlington, VA, Attention: Docket ID Number
OPP-2006-xxxx. Such deliveries are only accepted during the docket's
normal hours of operation as identified in Unit I.B.1. 

 ADVANCE \d4 D. How Should I Submit CBI to the Agency? 

     Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI
electronically through EPA's electronic public docket or by e-mail. You
may claim information that you submit to EPA as CBI by marking any part
or all of that information as CBI (if you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM,
mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then identify
electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that
is CBI). Information so marked will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to
one complete version of the comment that includes any information
claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the
information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public
docket and EPA's electronic public docket. If you submit the copy that
does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or
CD ROM clearly that it does not contain CBI. Information not marked as
CBI will be included in the public docket and EPA's electronic public
docket without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the
procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

E. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA? 

You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments: 

1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 

2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 

3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that
support your views. 

4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at
the estimate that you provide. 

5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 

6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this notice. 

7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID
number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of
your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register
citation. 

 ADVANCE \d4 

II. What Action is the Agency Taking? 

EPA has received a pesticide petition as follows proposing the
establishment and/or amendment of regulations for residues of a certain
pesticide chemical in or on various food commodities under section 408
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a. EPA
has determined that this petition contains data or information regarding
the elements set forth in FFDCA section 408(d)(2); however, EPA has not
fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted data at this time or
whether the data support granting of the petition. Additional data may
be needed before EPA rules on the petition. 

List of Subjects 

Environmental protection, Agricultural commodities, Feed additives, Food
additives, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements. 

Dated: xxxxxxxxxxxx xx, 2006.

Lois Rossi, Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide
Programs.

Nichino America, Inc.

PP XXXXXX

Summary of Petition

EPA has received a new pesticide petition from Nichino America, Inc.,
4550 New Linden Hill Road, Suite 501, Wilmington, DE 19808-proposing,
pursuant to section 408 (d) of FFDCA, 21. U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40
CFR 180.484 by establishing increased tolerances for residues of the
fungicide flutolanil [N-(3-(1-methylethoxy)phenyl)-2-(trifluoromethyl)
benzamide] and its metabolite, M-4, desisopropylflutolanil
[N-3(3-hydroxyphenyl)2-(trifluromethyl) benzamide].  Flutolanil and M-4
are detected directly in the LC/MS MS-detection method used for corn and
cotton. Inadvertent or indirect tolerances in or on the following raw
agricultural commodities (RACs) are proposed: 

corn, field, forage at 0.30 ppm, 

corn, field, grain at 0.20 ppm, 

corn field, stover at 0.30 ppm; 

cotton, undelinted seed at 0.20 ppm. 

EPA has determined that the petition contains data or information
regarding the elements set forth in section 408(d)(2) of the FFDCA;
however, EPA has not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the submitted
data at this time or whether the data supports granting of the petition.
Additional data may be needed before EPA rules on the petition.

A. Residue Chemistry

1. Plant metabolism. The metabolic profile of flutolanil is well
understood and has been elucidated in the three crops; peanuts, rice,
and cucumber. The metabolic profile is similar in all crops. The major
route of degradation is 4'-0-dealkylation to desisopropylflutolanil,
followed by conjugation. Other metabolites may occur at very low levels
due to hydroxylation and oxidation of the side chain, hydroxylation of
the aniline ring, and methylation of the hydroxyl groups. These minor
metabolites were also subject to conjugation. The residues of concern
are the parent, flutolanil, and M-4.

2. Analytical Method. A previously submitted analytical method
designated AU-95R-04 (MRID 45104001), a gas chromatography, mass
spectrometry detection method has been independently validated and is
adequate for enforcement purposes for flutolanil residue detection in
soybean and wheat raw agricultural commodities. A liquid chromatography,
mass spectrometry detection method XAM-65, is submitted with this
tolerance petition and is adequate for enforcement purposes of
flutolanil residue detection in corn and cotton raw agricultural
commodities. A multi-residue method for flutolanil has been previously
submitted.

3. Magnitude of residue. Ten rotational crop field residue trails were
conducted in 1994 in Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Virginia,
Oklahoma, and North Carolina. Flutolanil formulated as Moncut 70WP was
applied to bare soil at a total seasonal rate for peanuts (the highest
labeled rate for use on food crops) at 2.0 lb. a.i./acre, followed by
planting of the typical rotational crops wheat, soybeans, corn and
cotton at 30 days after application. The rotational crops were grown to
maturity and samples of relevant commodities collected at the
appropriate developmental stage. These applications of flutolanil
resulted in residues that are within the proposed crop tolerances.

Processing studies were conducted for corn and cotton using samples of
corn grain and cottonseed collected from one of the trial sites above,
using normal agricultural practice. Residues of concern were within the
proposed crop tolerances.

B. Toxicological Profile

An extensive battery of toxicology studies has been conducted with
flutolanil. EPA has evaluated the available toxicity data and considered
its validity, completeness, and reliability as well as the relationship
of the results of the studies to human risk. The nature of the toxic
effects caused by flutolanil is discussed in Unit III.A. of the Final
Rule on Flutolanil Pesticide Tolerance published in the Federal Register
on February 20, 2001 (66 FR 10817) (FRL-6761-1).

1. Animal metabolism. The metabolism of flutolanil has been extensively
studied in various species of mammals. Studies in rats, ruminants, and
poultry suggest that flutolanil is not well absorbed following oral
administration. Once absorbed, however, it is rapidly metabolized,
primarily to desisopropylflutolanil and it conjugates, and rapidly
excreted via urine and feces.

2. Endocrine effects. No special studies have been conducted to
investigate the potential of flutolanil to induce estrogenic or other
endocrine effects. No evidence of such effects has been observed in the
subchronic, chronic or reproductive studies previously discussed. Thus,
the potential for flutolanil to cause endocrine effects is considered to
be not relevant.

3. Toxicity endpoint selection. Flutolanil is of low acute toxicity via
all route of administration and did not induce significant maternal or
developmental toxicity in either rats or rabbits, even at the limit dose
of 1000 mg/kg/day. Furthermore, no evidence of toxicity was noted
following repeated dosing at 1000 mg/kg/day in a 21-day dermal toxicity
study. Thus acute dietary, occupational and residential risk assessments
are not considered necessary. The Agency has concluded that the cPAD
(chronic population adjusted dose) for flutolanil should be 0.87
mg/kg/day, based on the NOEL of 87 mg/kg/day from the rat 2-year
chronic/oncogenicity study and a 100-fold uncertainty factor. The Agency
has also determined that the cancer classification for flutolanil should
be “Group E-Evidence of Non-Carcinogenicity for Humans.”

C. Aggregate Exposure

1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. Chronic dietary risk
analyses were conducted to estimate the potential flutolanil residues
in/on the following crops: rice, peanuts, potato, wheat, corn cottonseed
(undelinted), and soybeans. Meat, milk, poultry, and egg residues were
included. Analyses were performed using the Lifeline TM Version 3.0
which incorporates data as reported by respondents in the USDA 1994-1996
and 1998 Nationwide Continuing Surveys of Food Intake by Individuals
(CSFII) and accumulated exposure to the chemical for each commodity.
Chronic exposure estimates to food were based on tolerance levels and
assumed 100% crop treatment, yielding the worst case chronic dietary
exposure estimates.

2. Food. An acute dietary assessment is not required as there is no
acute toxicity associated with flutolanil exposure.

The chronic dietary exposure estimated food exposure to be 0.0027
mg/kg/day for the U.S. population, based on the Lifeline TM Version 3.0.
The number of individuals simulated was 3000. The highest exposure group
was children, age 1-2, with exposures of 0.0069 mg/kg/day. These are
considered conservative values as all exposure was based on tolerance
levels and assumed all crops were treated with flutolanil.

3. Drinking water. The potential for flutolanil to leach into
groundwater has been assessed in two terrestrial field dissipation
studies, a long-term terrestrial field dissipation study, and an aquatic
field dissipation study. Under field conditions, the half-life of
flutlanil varied from 101 to 123 days in the long-term study, which was
consistent with the other field studies, and was approximately 180 days
in the aquatic environment. Flutolanil strongly adsorbs to soil
following application and did not exhibit mobility under either
terrestrial or aquatic conditions. Based on these observations, the
Agency concluded that the most important means of dissipation in surface
was and also in groundwater will most likely be dilution. Due to the
lack of sufficient monitoring exposure data to complete a dietary risk
assessment for flutolanil in drinking water, models that best accounted
for the application of flutolanil to rice paddies were used to simulate
exposure to flutolanil in drinking water. Based on the First
Approximation Rice Model and Screening Concentrations in Ground Water
(SCI-GROW) model, the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of
flutolanil for acute exposures are 3.8 parts per billion (ppb) for
surface water and 0.34 ppb for ground water. The EECs for chronic
exposures are 3.8 ppb for surface water and 0.34 ppb for ground water.

4. Non-Dietary Exposure. The term “residential exposure” is used in
this document to refer to non-occupational, non-dietary exposure (e.g.
for lawn and garden pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and
flea and tick control on pests). Flutolanil is currently registered for
use on the following residential non-dietary sites: Turf grass. The risk
assessment was conducted using the following residential exposure
assumptions: There are non-occupational uses associated with flutolanil.
Non-occupational handlers may mix, load, and apply flutolanil products
on turf grass. These exposures were assessed for inhalation risk.
Post-application inhalation exposure following turfgrass treatment is
considered negligible and was not assessed. Because certain flutolanil
products are registered for use on residential lawns, post-application
exposure to infants may result in their hand-to-mouth activities on
treated turf. The MOE’s for these scenarios ranged from 6.7 x 102 to
1.4 x 103. These MOEs are greater than the LOC of 100 and lie above the
Agency’s level of concern.

5. Cumulative exposure to substances with a common mechanism of
toxicity. Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of FFDCA requires that, when
considering whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the
Agency consider “available information” concerning the cumulative
effects of a particular pesticide’s residues and “other substances
that have a common mechanism of toxicity.”

Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a cumulative risk
approached based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made a
common mechanism of toxicity finding as to flutolanil and any other
substances and flutolanil does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite
produced by other substances. For the purposes of this tolerance action,
therefore, EPA has not assumed that flutolanil has a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA’s
efforts to determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity
and to evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy
statements released by EPA’s OPP concerning common mechanism
determinations and procedures for cumulating effects from substances
found to have a common mechanism on EPA’s website at
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.

Flutolanil has demonstrated only minimal toxicity in animal studies. The
mechanism of this toxicity is not known. Furthermore, there are no
available data to indicate that flutolanil has a common mechanism of
toxicity with other substances. Thus, only the potential risks from
flutolanil are being considered in this document.

D. Safety Determination

1. U.S. Population

The (cPAD) was determined to be 0.87 mg/kg/day based on an oral NOEL of
87 mg/kg/day in the rat chronic oncogenicity study and an uncertainty
factor of 100X for inter- and intra-species variations and an FQPA
children’s safety fax of 1X. Based on the existing tolerances in rice,
peanuts, and secondary commodities plus the proposed tolerances in
soybean, wheat, corn and cotton commodities, the chronic food exposure
is estimated to be 0.0027 mg/kg/day for the U.S. population in general.
There is generally no concern for exposures below 100% of the cPAD since
the cPAD represents the exposure level at or below which daily exposure
over a lifetime will not pose any appreciable risks to human health.
Therefore, there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to
the U.S. population in general from aggregate exposure to flutolanil.

i. Acute risk. An acute risk assessment is not required as there is no
acute toxicity associated with flutolanil exposure.

ii. Chronic Risk. Based on the toxicology data base and available
information on anticipated residues, the chronic dietary exposure to the
U.S. Population (total) was estimated to be 0.0027 mg/kg/day, which
represented a margin of exposure (MOE) of 5980 and 0.031% of the cPAD.
The most sensitive exposure group was children, age 1-2, with exposures
of 0.0069 mg/kg/day. This represented a MOE of 1750 and 0.79% of the
cPAD. Based on these assessments, it can be concluded that there is
reasonable certainty of no harm to the U.S. population or any population
subgroup from exposure to flutolanil.

2. Infants and children. Data from reproductive and developmental
toxicity studies are generally sued to assess the potential for
increased sensitivity of infants and children. No evidence of
developmental toxicity was evident. Therefore, there is no reason to
believe there is an increased sensitivity in infants and children. The
FQPA safety factor was determined to be 1X.

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

OPP estimates the total aggregate exposure to a pesticide from food,
drinking water, and residential uses.

1. Acute Risk. Acute aggregate risk is based upon the estimated risks
from the combined exposures of food and drinking water sources. EPA did
not recommend an acute dietary endpoint for flutolanil, therefore no
acute aggregate risk assessment was conducted and there is no
expectation of acute risk.

2. Chronic Risk. Using the exposure assumptions and modeling estimates
of exposure discussed earlier, and based on a cPAD of 0.87 mg/kg/day, it
is concluded that exposure to flutolanil from food, including the
additional new uses, will utilize <1% of the cPAD for all subpopulation
groups. In addition, there is potential for chronic dietary exposure to
flutolanil in drinking water. The DWLOC for the general population is 3
X 104 and for infants less than one year old 8.6 x 103. Based on the use
pattern, chronic residential exposure to residues of flutolanil is not
expected. In addition there is potential for chronic dietary exposure to
flutolanil in drinking water. After calculation DWLOCs and comparing
them to the EECs for surface and ground water, the EPA concluded that
the aggregate exposure to no exceed 100% of the cPAD. The MOEs scenarios
for the non-dietary exposure ranged from 6.7 x 102  to 1.4 x 10 3 .
These MOEs are greated than LOC of 100 and are above the Agency’s
level of concern. Therefore, these three routes of exposure, when
aggregated, present a certainty of no harm to the population.

3. Short-Term Risk. Short-term aggregate exposure takes into account
residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water (considered
to be a background exposure level).

EPA has determined that although residential exposure could occur with
the use of flutolanil, no toxicological effects have been identified for
short-term dermal toxicity. Incidental oral exposure to adult
residential handlers is expected to be insignificant and is therefore
not assessed. Incidental oral exposure to infants eating treated turf is
assessed below under intermediate-term aggregate risk.

4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Flutolanil is classified
as a “not likely” to be a human carcinogen considering the Proposed
EPA Weight-of-the-Evidence Categories (August, 1999), based on lack of
evidence of carcinogenicity in male and female rats and mice up to the
guideline limit dose and on the lack of mutagenicity in an acceptable
battery of mutagenicity studies. Therefore, no cancer risk is required.

5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population,
and to infants and children from aggregate exposure to flutolanil
residues.

F. International Tolerances

Canada, Codex, and Mexico do not have maximum residue limits (MRLs) for
flutolanil or desisopropylfultolanil residues on corn, or cotton.

