[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 227 (Monday, November 26, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 60366-60372]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25690]



40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971; FRL-9977-14]

Pyrifluquinazon; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.


SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of 
pyrifluquinazon in or on multiple commodities that are identified and 
discussed later in this document. Nichino America, Inc. requested these 
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective November 26, 2018. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before January 25, 2019, 
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office of Pesticide Programs Regulatory 
Public Docket (OPP Docket) in the Environmental Protection Agency 
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 
1301 Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001. The Public 
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the OPP 
Docket is (703) 305-5805. Please review the visitor instructions and 
additional information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Goodis, Director, Registration 
Division (7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-
0001; main telephone number: (703) 305-7090; email address: 


I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    You may be potentially affected by this action if you are an 
agricultural producer, food manufacturer, or pesticide manufacturer. 
The following list of North American Industrial Classification System 
(NAICS) codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide to help readers determine whether this document applies to them. 
Potentially affected entities may include:
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).

B. How can I get electronic access to other related information?

    You may access a frequently updated electronic version of EPA's 
tolerance regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through the Government 
Printing Office's e-CFR site at http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40tab_02.tpl.

C. How can I file an objection or hearing request?

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an 
objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a 
hearing on those objections. You must file your objection or request a 
hearing on this regulation in accordance with the instructions provided 
in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, you must identify 
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971 in the subject line on the first 
page of your submission. All objections and requests for a hearing must 
be in writing, and must be received by the Hearing Clerk on or before 
January 25, 2019. Addresses for mail and hand delivery of objections 
and hearing requests are provided in 40 CFR 178.25(b).
    In addition to filing an objection or hearing request with the 
Hearing Clerk as described in 40 CFR part 178, please submit a copy of 
the filing (excluding any Confidential Business Information (CBI)) for 
inclusion in the public docket. Information not marked confidential 
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA without 
prior notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your objection or hearing 
request, identified by docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971, by one of 
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Do not submit 
electronically any information you consider to be CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
     Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental Protection Agency Docket 
Center (EPA/DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 
     Hand Delivery: To make special arrangements for hand 
delivery or delivery of boxed information, please follow the 
instructions at http://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along 
with more information about dockets generally, is available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerances

    In the Federal Register of December 9, 2016 (81 FR 89036) (FRL-
9953-69) and September 15, 2017 (82 FR 43352) (FRL-9965-43), EPA issued 
a document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), 
announcing the filing of pesticide petitions (PP 6F8502 and PP 7E8578, 
respectively) by Nichino America, Inc., 4550 New Linden Hill Road, 
Suite 501, Wilmington, DE 19808. The petitions requested that 40 CFR 
part 180 be amended by establishing tolerances for residues of the 
insecticide pyrifluquinazon, (1-acetyl-3,4-dihydro-3-[(3-
(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-2(1H)-quinazolinone), as follows: PP 6F8502 
requested tolerances for residues in or on Almond, hulls at 0.4 parts 
per million (ppm); Brassica head and stem vegetables (crop group 5-16) 
at 0.4 ppm; Cattle, fat at 0.01 ppm; Cattle, meat at 0.01 ppm; Cattle, 
meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; Citrus fruits (crop group 10-10) at 0.5 
ppm; Citrus, oil at 14 ppm; Cotton, gin byproducts at 4.0 ppm; Cotton, 
undelinted seed at 0.2 ppm; Cucurbit vegetables (crop group 9)

[[Page 60367]]

at 0.06 ppm; Fruiting vegetables, tomato subgroup 8-10A at 0.20 ppm; 
Fruiting vegetables, pepper/eggplant subgroup 8-10B at 0.15 ppm; Goat, 
fat at 0.01 ppm; Goat, meat at 0.01 ppm; Goat, meat byproducts at 0.01 
ppm; Horse, fat at 0.01 ppm; Horse, meat at 0.01 ppm; Horse, meat 
byproducts at 0.01 ppm; Leafy vegetables (crop group 4-16) at 5 ppm; 
Leaf petiole vegetables (crop subgroup 22B) at 1.5 ppm; Milk at 0.01 
ppm; Pome fruits (crop group 11-10) at 0.04 ppm; Sheep, fat at 0.01 
ppm; Sheep, meat at 0.01 ppm; Sheep, meat byproducts at 0.01 ppm; Small 
fruit vine climbing subgroup (crop subgroup 13-07F) except fuzzy 
kiwifruit at 0.6 ppm; Stone fruits, cherry subgroup 12-12A at 0.2 ppm; 
Stone fruits, peach subgroup 12-12B at 0.03 ppm; Stone fruits, plum 
subgroup 12-12C at 0.015 ppm; Tree nuts (crop group 14-12) at 0.01 ppm; 
and Tuberous and corm vegetables (crop subgroup 1C) at 0.01 ppm and PP 
7E8578 requested a tolerance for residues in or on imported tea at 20 
ppm. Those documents referenced summaries of the petitions prepared by 
Nichino America, Inc., the registrant, which are available in the 
docket, http://www.regulations.gov. Comments were received in response 
to the first notice of filing, and EPA's response can be found in Unit 
    Consistent with the authority in section 408(d)(4)(A)(i), EPA is 
establishing tolerances that vary from what the petitioner sought. The 
reasons for these changes are explained in Unit IV.D.

III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA allows EPA to establish a 
tolerance (the legal limit for a pesticide chemical residue in or on a 
food) only if EPA determines that the tolerance is ``safe.'' Section 
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) of FFDCA defines ``safe'' to mean that ``there is a 
reasonable certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure 
to the pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary 
exposures and all other exposures for which there is reliable 
information.'' This includes exposure through drinking water and in 
residential settings, but does not include occupational exposure. 
Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA requires EPA to give special 
consideration to exposure of infants and children to the pesticide 
chemical residue in establishing a tolerance and to ``ensure that there 
is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and 
children from aggregate exposure to the pesticide chemical residue. . . 
    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), and the factors 
specified in FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D), EPA has reviewed the available 
scientific data and other relevant information in support of this 
action. EPA has sufficient data to assess the hazards of and to make a 
determination on aggregate exposure for pyrifluquinazon including 
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. 
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with pyrifluquinazon 

A. Toxicological Profile

    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. EPA has also considered 
available information concerning the variability of the sensitivities 
of major identifiable subgroups of consumers, including infants and 
    The effects observed following dietary exposure to pyrifluquinazon, 
primarily targeted the liver, thyroid, kidney, hematopoietic system, 
and the male and female reproductive organs. Nasal toxicity was 
observed following chronic oral exposures to rats, mice, and dogs, but 
was not observed following inhalation exposure to rats. Inhalation 
exposure for 28 days in rats resulted in portal-of-entry effects in the 
form of terminal airway inflammation in the lungs of males at an 
equivalent oral dose that was higher than those causing nasal effects 
in dogs (the most sensitive species for nasal toxicity). Systemic 
effects following inhalation exposure to pyrifluquinazon consisted of 
clinical signs including palpebral closure, splayed gait, hunched 
posture, ataxia, piloerection, lethargy, and ocular effects. No adverse 
effects were seen in rats following dermal exposure. Pyrifluquinazon 
showed no signs of immunotoxicity.
    Pyrifluquinazon showed signs of increased pre- and postnatal 
quantitative susceptibility in rats. In the rat developmental toxicity 
study, maternal effects (decreased body weights, and mean gravid 
uterine weights) were seen at a higher dose than fetal effects 
(decreased anogenital distances (AGD) in males, increased incidences of 
skeletal variations, and increased incidences of supernumerary ribs). 
In the two-generation reproduction study in rats, systemic parental 
effects were consistent with the general systemic toxic effects in rats 
and occurred at doses higher than those eliciting offspring and 
reproductive effects. Offspring effects included decreased body weights 
and decreased AGD in the male pups, which is also considered a 
reproductive effect. In the rabbit developmental toxicity study, a 
decreased number of live fetuses per doe was observed, which is 
considered a maternal and developmental adverse effect since it is 
unknown whether the effect occurred from toxicity to maternal animals 
or the fetuses. In addition, effects were observed in reproductive 
organs (epididymides, testes, uterus).
    Signs of neurotoxicity were observed in the acute neurotoxicity 
(ACN) study, and consisted of: Decreased motor activity, prostrate, 
ataxia, hyporeactivity, hunched posture, loss of the righting reflex, 
coldness to touch, lacrimation, bradyapnea, piloerection, and ptosis. 
Signs of neurotoxicity were also observed in the subchronic oral study 
and the inhalation study in rats at doses that caused portal-of-entry 
    Exposure to pyrifluquinazon resulted in increased incidences of 
testicular interstitial cell tumors (Leydig tumors) in both male rats 
and mice. Based on its review of the available data, EPA has concluded 
that pyrifluquinazon is ``not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at 
levels that do not alter rodent hormone homeostasis.'' This conclusion 
is based on the following: (1) The Agency was only able to conclude 
that one type of Leydig cell tumor (in the male mice) is treatment-
related because the type of rat tested has a high background rate for 
this tumor type; (2) the suggested mode of action is supported by the 
available data and indicates that the tumors are not likely to occur 
below doses that trigger androgen receptor degradation in sex-specific 
tissues leading to changes in circulating androgen related hormones; 
and (3) neither the parent molecule nor its metabolites showed evidence 
of genotoxicity or mutagenicity. For these reasons and because the 
level that triggers tumor development is higher than 70.1 mg/kg/day and 
the chronic reference dose is 0.06 mg/kg/day, EPA has determined that 
quantification of cancer risk using a non-linear approach (i.e., 
chronic reference dose) will adequately account for all chronic 
toxicity, including carcinogenicity that could result from exposure to 
    Specific information on the studies received and the nature of the 
adverse effects caused by pyrifluquinazon as well as the no-observed-
adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) and the lowest-observed-adverse-effect-
level (LOAEL) from the toxicity studies can be found at http://www.regulations.gov in document ``Pyrifluquinazon: Human Health Risk 
Assessment for the Proposed Use on Tuberous and Corm Vegetables, Leafy

[[Page 60368]]

Vegetables (including greenhouse-grown lettuce), Brassica Head and Stem 
Vegetables, Fruiting Vegetables (including greenhouse-grown pepper and 
tomato), Cucurbit Vegetables (including greenhouse-grown cucumber), 
Citrus Fruits, Pome Fruits, Stone Fruits, Small Vine Climbing Fruit 
(excluding fuzzy kiwifruit), Tree Nuts, Leaf Petiole Vegetables, and 
Cotton, and for the Establishment of a Tolerance without a U.S. 
Registration for Residues in/on Imported Tea'' on pages 16-24 in docket 
ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0971.

B. Toxicological Points of Departure/Levels of Concern

    Once a pesticide's toxicological profile is determined, EPA 
identifies toxicological points of departure (POD) and levels of 
concern to use in evaluating the risk posed by human exposure to the 
pesticide. For hazards that have a threshold below which there is no 
appreciable risk, the toxicological POD is used as the basis for 
derivation of reference values for risk assessment. PODs are developed 
based on a careful analysis of the doses in each toxicological study to 
determine the dose at which no adverse effects are observed (the NOAEL) 
and the lowest dose at which adverse effects of concern are identified 
(the LOAEL). Uncertainty/safety factors are used in conjunction with 
the POD to calculate a safe exposure level--generally referred to as a 
population-adjusted dose (PAD) or a reference dose (RfD)--and a safe 
margin of exposure (MOE). For non-threshold risks, the Agency assumes 
that any amount of exposure will lead to some degree of risk. Thus, the 
Agency estimates risk in terms of the probability of an occurrence of 
the adverse effect expected in a lifetime. For more information on the 
general principles EPA uses in risk characterization and a complete 
description of the risk assessment process, see http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/factsheets/riskassess.htm.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for pyrifluquinazon used 
for human risk assessment is shown in Table 1 of this unit.

 Table--Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Pyrifluquinazon for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment
                                    Point of departure
        Exposure/scenario            and uncertainty/     RfD, PAD, LOC for     Study and toxicological effects
                                      safety factors       risk assessment
Acute dietary (Females 13-49       NOAEL = 5 mg/kg/day.  Acute RfD = 0.05 mg/ Developmental Toxicity Study (rat)
 years of age).                    UFA = 10X...........   kg/day.             LOAEL = 10 mg/kg/day based on
                                   UFH = 10X...........  aPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/    decreased AGD in males, increased
                                   FQPA SF = 1X........   day.                 incidences of skeletal variations
                                                                               (total), and increased incidences
                                                                               of supernumerary ribs.
Acute dietary (General population  NOAEL = 100 mg/kg/    Acute RfD = 1 mg/kg/ Acute Neurotoxicity Screening
 including infants and children).   day.                  day.                 Battery
                                   UFA = 10X...........  aPAD = 1 mg/kg/day.  LOAEL = 300 mg/kg/day based on
                                   UFH = 10X...........                        increased incidences of clinical
                                   FQPA SF = 1X........                        signs and effects on functional
                                                                               observational parameters,
                                                                               dehydration, decreased motor
                                                                               activity, prostrate, ataxia,
                                                                               hyporeactivity, scant or no
                                                                               feces, hunched posture, lost
                                                                               righting reflex, decreased body
                                                                               temperatures, lacrimation,
                                                                               bradyapnea, piloerection, ptosis,
                                                                               and decreased grip strength),
                                                                               decreased body weights and body-
                                                                               weight gains, decreased food
                                                                               consumption, and decreased brain
Chronic dietary (All populations)  NOAEL= 6.25 mg/kg/    Chronic RfD = 0.06   Carcinogenicity (mouse)
                                    day.                  mg/kg/day.          LOAEL = 27.1/25.0 mg/kg/day (M/F)
                                   UFA = 10X...........  cPAD = 0.06 mg/kg/    based on decreased mean body
                                   UFH = 10X...........   day.                 weight in males; and increased
                                   FQPA SF = 1X........                        incidences of tactile hair loss
                                                                               in males, endometrial hyperplasia
                                                                               of the uterine horn in females,
                                                                               follicular cell hypertrophy of
                                                                               the thyroid in males, and
                                                                               subcapsular cell hyperplasia of
                                                                               the adrenal in males.
Cancer (Oral, dermal, inhalation)   Classification: ``Not likely to be carcinogenic to humans at levels that do
                                                       not alter rodent hormone homeostasis.''

    FQPA SF = Food Quality Protection Act Safety Factor. LOAEL = 
lowest-observed-adverse-effect-level. LOC = level of concern. mg/kg/day 
= milligram/kilogram/day. MOE = margin of exposure. NOAEL = no-
observed-adverse-effect-level. PAD = population-adjusted dose (a = 
acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. UF = uncertainty factor. 
UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). 
UFDB = to account for the absence of data or other data 
deficiency. UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among 
members of the human population (intraspecies).

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary 
exposure to pyrifluquinazon, EPA considered exposure under the 
petitioned-for tolerances. EPA assessed dietary exposures from 
pyrifluquinazon in food as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk 
assessments are performed for a food-use pesticide, if a toxicological 
study has indicated the possibility of an effect of concern occurring 
as a result of a 1-day or single exposure. Such effects were identified 
for pyrifluquinazon. In estimating acute dietary exposure, EPA used the 
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity 
Intake Database (DEEM-FCID) Version 3.16. This software uses 2003-2008 
food consumption data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's 
(USDA's) National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, What We Eat 
in America, (NHANES/WWEIA). As to residue levels in food, EPA assumed 
tolerance level residues, default processing factors, and 100 percent 
crop treated (PCT) for all proposed uses.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure 

[[Page 60369]]

EPA used DEEM-FCID, Version 3.16 software with 2003-2008 food 
consumption data from the USDA's NHANES/WWEIA. As to residue levels in 
food, EPA assumed tolerance level residues, default processing factors, 
and 100 PCT for all proposed and registered uses.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data summarized in Unit III.A., EPA has 
concluded that pyrifluquinazon would not pose a cancer risk to humans 
at dose levels below the chronic reference dose. Therefore, a separate 
dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is 
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. 
EPA did not use anticipated residue and/or PCT information in the 
dietary assessment for pyrifluquinazon. Tolerance-level residues and/or 
100% CT were assumed for all food commodities.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening-
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk 
assessment for pyrifluquinazon in drinking water. These simulation 
models take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/
transport characteristics of pyrifluquinazon. Further information 
regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide exposure 
assessment can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
    Based on the Pesticides in Water Calculator (PWC) and Pesticide 
Root Zone Model Ground Water (PRZM GW), the estimated drinking water 
concentrations (EDWCs) of pyrifluquinazon for acute exposures are 
estimated to be 7.52 parts per billion (ppb) for surface water and 10.3 
ppb for ground water; for chronic exposures for non-cancer assessments 
are estimated to be 3.99 ppb for surface water and 9.02 ppb for ground 
    Modeled estimates of drinking water concentrations were directly 
entered into the dietary exposure model. For acute dietary risk 
assessment, the water concentration value of 10.3 ppb was used to 
assess the contribution to drinking water. For chronic dietary risk 
assessment, the water concentration of value 9.02 ppb was used to 
assess the contribution to drinking water.
    3. From 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 pets). Pyrifluquinazon is 
not registered for any specific use patterns that would result in 
residential exposure.
    4. Cumulative effects from 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.''
    EPA has not found pyrifluquinazon to share a common mechanism of 
toxicity with any other substances, and pyrifluquinazon does not appear 
to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the 
purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has assumed that 
pyrifluquinazon does not have 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 EPA's website at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

D. Safety Factor for Infants and Children

    1. In general. Section 408(b)(2)(C) of FFDCA provides that EPA 
shall apply an additional tenfold (10X) margin of safety for infants 
and children in the case of threshold effects to account for prenatal 
and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the database on toxicity 
and exposure unless EPA determines based on reliable data that a 
different margin of safety will be safe for infants and children. This 
additional margin of safety is commonly referred to as the FQPA Safety 
Factor (SF). In applying this provision, EPA either retains the default 
value of 10X, or uses a different additional safety factor when 
reliable data available to EPA support the choice of a different 
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Pyrifluquinazon showed signs 
of increased pre- and postnatal quantitative susceptibility in the 
developmental toxicity study and in the two-generation reproduction 
study in rats. In the rabbit developmental toxicity study, observed 
maternal and developmental effects were considered adverse since it is 
unknown whether the effects occurred from toxicity to maternal animals 
or the fetuses.
    3. Conclusion. EPA has determined that reliable data show the 
safety of infants and children would be adequately protected if the 
FQPA SF were reduced to 1X. That decision is based on the following 
    i. The toxicity database for pyrifluquinazon is complete.
    ii. Evidence of potential neurotoxicity was observed for 
pyrifluquinazon; however, the concern is low since there were no 
neuropathological changes in any tissue, clear NOAELs were established 
for the observed effects, and the endpoints selected are protective. No 
additional UFs were required to account for neurotoxicity.
    iii. Although there is evidence of increased quantitative fetal 
susceptibility following in utero exposure to pyrifluquinazon in rats 
and quantitative postnatal susceptibility in the two-generation 
reproduction study, the concern for all observed effects is low 
because: (1) The effects are well characterized, (2) clear NOAELs were 
established, and (3) risk assessment endpoints used were from the 
developmental rat and 2-generation reproduction studies.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure 
databases. The dietary food exposure assessments were performed based 
on 100% CT and tolerance-level residues. EPA made conservative 
(protective) assumptions in the ground and surface water modeling used 
to assess exposure to pyrifluquinazon in drinking water. These 
assessments will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by 

E. Aggregate Risks and Determination of Safety

    EPA determines whether acute and chronic dietary pesticide 
exposures are safe by comparing aggregate exposure estimates to the 
acute PAD (aPAD) and chronic PAD (cPAD). For linear cancer risks, EPA 
calculates the lifetime probability of acquiring cancer given the 
estimated aggregate exposure. Short-, intermediate-, and chronic-term 
risks are evaluated by comparing the estimated aggregate food, water, 
and residential exposure to the appropriate PODs to ensure that an 
adequate MOE exists.
    1. Acute risk. Using the exposure assumptions discussed in this 
unit for acute exposure, the acute dietary (food plus water) risk for 
the U.S. population utilizes 1.2% of the acute population-adjusted dose 
(aPAD) and 2.5% for children 1-2 years old, who had the highest 
exposure estimate. For females 13 to 49 years old, for which the Agency 
used a different endpoint, the acute risk utilized 23% of the aPAD.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this 
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded

[[Page 60370]]

that chronic risk from pyrifluquinazon in food and water will utilize 
13% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old, the population subgroup 
receiving the greatest exposure. There are no residential uses for 
    3. Short- and intermediate-term risk. The Agency's assessment of 
short- and intermediate-term risk aggregates short- and intermediate-
term residential exposure plus chronic exposure to food and water 
(considered to be a background exposure level). Short- and 
intermediate-term adverse effects were identified; however, 
pyrifluquinazon is not registered for any use patterns that would 
result in short- or intermediate-term residential exposure. Because 
there is no residential exposure and chronic dietary exposure has 
already been assessed under the appropriately protective cPAD (which is 
at least as protective as the POD used to assess short-term risk), no 
further assessment of short- and intermediate-term risk is necessary, 
and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating 
short- and intermediate-term risk for pyrifluquinazon.
    4. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Based on the 
information referenced in Unit III.A., EPA has concluded that exposure 
to pyrifluquinazon is unlikely to cause cancer effects at doses that do 
not alter rodent hormone homeostasis. Because the chronic reference 
doses is protective of those alterations and the Agency's assessment 
concludes that aggregate exposure to pyrifluquinazon does not pose a 
chronic risk, EPA has determined that aggregate exposure to 
pyrifluquinazon is unlikely to pose a cancer risk to the U.S. 
    5. Determination of safety. Based on these risk assessments, EPA 
concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result 
to the general population, or to infants and children from aggregate 
exposure to pyrifluquinazon residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology, high-performance liquid 
chromatography with tandem mass-spectrometry detection (HPLC-MS/MS) is 
available to enforce the tolerance expression for crop commodities. For 
livestock commodities, the method used is a modified QuEChERS LC/MS/MS 
method. These methods may be requested from: Chief, Analytical 
Chemistry Branch, Environmental Science Center, 701 Mapes Rd., Ft. 
Meade, MD 20755-5350; telephone number: (410) 305-2905; email address: 

B. International Residue Limits

    In making its tolerance decisions, EPA seeks to harmonize U.S. 
tolerances with international standards whenever possible, consistent 
with U.S. food safety standards and agricultural practices. Section 
408(b)(4) of the FFDCA specifically requires that EPA determine whether 
the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) has established a maximum 
residue level (MRL) for the commodity and to explain the reasons for 
departing from the Codex level when establishing tolerances at a 
different level. The Codex Alimentarius is a joint United Nations Food 
and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization food standards 
program, and it is recognized as an international food safety 
standards-setting organization in trade agreements to which the United 
States is a party. EPA may also take into account MRLs established by 
other countries when determining what tolerance levels to set 
    The Codex has not established a MRL for residues of 
pyrifluquinazon. EPA is establishing the tolerance for residues of 
pyrifluquinazon in or on tea to harmonize with Japan.

C. Response to Comments

    EPA received two comments, only one of which was specific to the 
petition for pyrifluquinazon tolerances. The specific comment opposed 
``allowing such high residues'' but did not provide any information 
relevant to the safety of the pesticide. The Agency recognizes that 
some individuals believe that pesticides should be banned on 
agricultural crops; however, the existing legal framework provided by 
section 408 of the FFDCA states that tolerances may be set when persons 
seeking such tolerances or exemptions have demonstrated that the 
pesticide meets the safety standard imposed by that statute. The 
comment appears to be directed at the underlying statute and not EPA's 
implementation of it; the citizen has made no contention that EPA has 
acted in violation of the statutory framework.

D. Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances

    Almost all the tolerances being established in this rule differ 
from the petitioner requested in minor ways. For crop subgroups 
``vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C,'' ``stone fruits, plum 
subgroup 12-12C,'' and crop group ``nut, tree, group 14-12,'' the 
appropriate tolerance level (0.02 ppm) is based on the sum of the LOQs 
for pyrifluquinazon and metabolite IV-01, rather than on the LOQ for 
one analyte (0.01 ppm), as requested. In addition, EPA determined that 
a tolerance is needed for residues in or on the processed commodity 
citrus dried pulp, so EPA is establishing that tolerance in accordance 
with 40 CFR 180.40(f)(1)(i)(A). Based on the dietary burden 
calculations and the residue profile in the cattle feeding study, EPA 
concluded that tolerances are not needed for pyrifluquinazon residues 
of concern in milk, livestock meat, fat, or meat byproducts as expected 
secondary residues are less than 1/10th the combined LOQs. However, a 
tolerance for livestock liver is needed at the LOQ (pyrifluquinazon, 
metabolite IV-01, and metabolite IV-203) corresponding to a tolerance 
of 0.04 ppm. The combined LOQs for pyrifluquinazon, metabolite IV-01, 
and metabolite IV-203 in parent equivalents corresponded to 0.035 ppm; 
therefore, a tolerance of 0.04 ppm is required for the liver of cattle, 
goat, horse, and sheep. For the remainder of tolerances being 
established, EPA used corrected commodity names, and adjusted 
tolerances levels based on available residue data, proportionality 
adjustments to the crop field trial data. and correcting for potential 
decline during frozen storage, which resulted in increased recommended 
tolerances. Finally, EPA notes that although the notice of filing 
indicated that the petition requested a tolerance for almond, hulls at 
0.01 ppm, the petition itself requested a tolerance at 0.4 ppm. 
Nevertheless, based on available residue data, the Agency has 
determined that a tolerance of 0.60 ppm is necessary to cover residues 
from this use.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of 
pyrifluquinazon, (1-acetyl-3,4-dihydro-3-[(3-pyridinylmethyl)amino]-6-
and its metabolites in or on Almond, hulls at 0.60 ppm; Cherry subgroup 
12-12A at 0.30 ppm; Citrus, dried pulp at 2.0 ppm; Citrus, oil at 30 
ppm; Cotton, gin byproducts at 6.0 ppm; Cotton, undelinted seed at 0.30 
ppm; Fruit, citrus, group 10-10 at 0.70 ppm; Fruit, pome, group 11-10 
at 0.07 ppm; Fruit small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, 
subgroup 13-07F at 0.30 ppm; Leaf petiole vegetable, subgroup 22B at 
1.5 ppm; Peach subgroup 12-12B at 0.04 ppm; Plum subgroup 12-12C at 
0.02 ppm; Nut, tree, group 14-12 at 0.02 ppm; Tea, dried at 20 ppm; 

[[Page 60371]]

brassica, head and stem, group 5-16 at 0.60 ppm; Vegetable, cucurbit, 
group 9 at 0.07 ppm; Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10 at 0.30 ppm; 
Vegetable, leafy, group 4-16 at 5.0 ppm; Vegetable, tuberous and corm, 
subgroup 1C at 0.02 ppm; Cattle, liver at 0.04 ppm; Goat, liver at 0.04 
ppm; Horse, liver at 0.04 ppm; and Sheep, liver at 0.04 ppm. For the 
plant commodities, compliance with the tolerance is determined by 
measuring residues of the parent compound and the IV-01 metabolite; for 
the livestock commodities, compliance is determined by measuring 
residues of the parent compound and the free and conjugated forms of 
IV-01 and IV-203 metabolites.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action establishes tolerances under FFDCA section 408(d) in 
response to a petition submitted to the Agency. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted these types of actions from 
review under Executive Order 12866, entitled ``Regulatory Planning and 
Review'' (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993). Because this action has been 
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866, this action is not 
subject to Executive Order 13211, entitled ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); Executive Order 13045, entitled 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); or Executive Order 13771, 
entitled ``Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs'' (82 
FR 9339, February 3, 2017). This action does not contain any 
information collections subject to OMB approval under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), nor does it require any 
special considerations under Executive Order 12898, entitled ``Federal 
Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 
Low-Income Populations'' (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    Since tolerances and exemptions that are established on the basis 
of a petition under FFDCA section 408(d), such as the tolerance in this 
final rule, do not require the issuance of a proposed rule, the 
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.), do not apply.
    This action directly regulates growers, food processors, food 
handlers, and food retailers, not States or tribes, nor does this 
action alter the relationships or distribution of power and 
responsibilities established by Congress in the preemption provisions 
of FFDCA section 408(n)(4). As such, the Agency has determined that 
this action will not have a substantial direct effect on States or 
tribal governments, on the relationship between the national government 
and the States or tribal governments, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government or between 
the Federal Government and Indian tribes. Thus, the Agency has 
determined that Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 
43255, August 10, 1999) and Executive Order 13175, entitled 
``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 
67249, November 9, 2000) do not apply to this action. In addition, this 
action does not impose any enforceable duty or contain any unfunded 
mandate as described under Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
(UMRA) (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
    This action does not involve any technical standards that would 
require Agency consideration of voluntary consensus standards pursuant 
to section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 272 note).

VII. Congressional Review Act

    Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 
EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required 
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and 
the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of 
the rule in the Federal Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' 
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, 
Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: November 9, 2018.
Michael Goodis,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.
    Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows:


1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321(q), 346a and 371.

2. Add Sec.  180.701 to subpart C to read as follows:

Sec.  180.701  Pyrifluquinazon; tolerances for residues.

    (a) General. (1) Tolerances are established for residues of the 
insecticide pyrifluquinazon, including its metabolites and degradates, 
in or on the commodities in the table below. Compliance with the 
tolerance levels specified below is to be determined by measuring only 
the sum of pyrifluquinazon (1-acetyl-3,4-dihydro-3-[(3-
(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-2(1H)-quinazolinone) and its metabolite IV-01 
(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-3,4-dihydro-1H-quinazolin-2-one), calculated as 
the stoichiometric equivalent of pyrifluquinazon.

                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
Almond, hulls...............................................        0.60
Cherry subgroup 12-12A......................................        0.30
Citrus, dried pulp..........................................         2.0
Citrus, oil.................................................          30
Cotton, gin byproducts......................................         6.0
Cotton, undelinted seed.....................................        0.30
Fruit, citrus, group 10-10..................................        0.70
Fruit, pome, group 11-10....................................        0.07
Fruit, small vine climbing, except fuzzy kiwifruit, subgroup        0.30
Leaf petiole vegetable, subgroup 22B........................         1.5
Peach subgroup 12-12B.......................................        0.04
Plum subgroup 12-12C........................................        0.02
Nut, tree, group 14-12......................................        0.02
Tea, dried\1\...............................................          20
Vegetable, brassica, head and stem, group 5-16..............        0.60
Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9................................        0.07
Vegetable, fruiting, group 8-10.............................        0.30
Vegetable, leafy, group 4-16................................         5.0
Vegetable, tuberous and corm, subgroup 1C...................        0.02
\1\ There are no U.S. registrations as of November 26, 2018 for use on

    (2) Tolerances are established for residues of the insecticide 
pyrifluquinazon, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on the 
commodities in the table below. Compliance with the tolerance levels 
specified below is to be determined by measuring only the sum of 
pyrifluquinazon (1-acetyl-3,4-dihydro-3-[(3-pyridinylmethyl)amino]-6-
[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-2(1H)-quinazolinone) and 
the free and conjugated forms of its metabolites IV-01 (3-[(pyridin-3-
dihydro-1H-quinazolin-2-one) and IV-203 (6-[1,2,2,2-tetrafluoro-1-
trifluoromethyl)ethyl]-1H-quinazolin-2,4-dione), calculated as the 
stoichiometric equivalent of pyrifluquinazon.

[[Page 60372]]

                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
Cattle, liver...............................................        0.04
Goat, liver.................................................        0.04
Horse, liver................................................        0.04
Sheep, liver................................................        0.04

    (b) Section 18 emergency exemptions. [Reserved]
    (c) Tolerances with regional registrations. [Reserved]
    (d) Indirect or inadvertent residues. [Reserved]

[FR Doc. 2018-25690 Filed 11-23-18; 8:45 am]