[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 244 (Thursday, December 23, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 72846-72851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-27602]



40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0542; FRL-9199-01-OCSPP]

Bicyclopyrone; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.


SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of 
bicyclopyrone in or on the fresh and dried forms of lemongrass, 
rosemary, and wormwood. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC., requested these 
tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).

DATES: This regulation is effective December 23, 2021. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before February 22, 2022 
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-2019-0542, is available at 
https://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.
    Due to the public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA 
Docket Center (EPA/DC) and Reading Room is closed to visitors with 
limited exceptions. The staff continues to provide remote customer 
service via email, phone, and webform. For the latest status 
information on EPA/DC services and docket access, visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marietta Echeverria, 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: 
[email protected].


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 Office of the 
Federal Register's e-CFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40.

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-2019-0542 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 
February 22, 2022. 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-2019-0542, by one of 
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the online instructions for submitting

[[Page 72847]]

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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
    Additional instructions on commenting or visiting the docket, along 
with more information about dockets generally, is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

II. Summary of Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of April 22, 2021 (86 FR 21317) (FRL-10022-
59), and of June 1, 2021 (86 FR 29229) (FRL-10023-95), EPA issued a 
document pursuant to FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(3), 
announcing the filing of a pesticide petition (PP 9F8777) by Syngenta 
Crop Protection, LLC, P.O. Box 18300, Greensboro, NC 27419-8300. The 
petition requested that 40 CFR part 180 be amended by establishing 
tolerances for residues of the herbicide bicyclopyrone, 4-hydroxy-3-
{time} 2-[(2-methoxyethoxy)methyl{-6-(trifluoromethyl) 
3pyridylcarbonyl{bicyclo[3.2.1]oct-3-en-2-one, in or on rosemary, fresh 
at 0.03 parts per million (ppm); rosemary, dried at 0.3 ppm; 
lemongrass, fresh at 0.3 ppm; lemongrass, dried at 0.5 ppm; wormwood, 
fresh at 0.05 ppm and wormwood, dried at 0.09 ppm. That document 
referenced a summary of the petition prepared by Syngenta Crop 
Protection, LLC., the registrant, which is available in the docket, 
https://www.regulations.gov. There were no comments received in 
response to the notice of filing.

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 bicyclopyrone including 
exposure resulting from the tolerances established by this action. 
EPA's assessment of exposures and risks associated with bicyclopyrone 

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 
children. The bicyclopyrone database is considered complete for risk 
assessment purposes.
    Bicyclopyrone is a 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD)-
inhibiting chemical. HPPD is an enzyme involved in the catabolism of 
tyrosine, an essential amino acid for mammals. Recently OPP evaluated 
(HPPD Inhibiting Herbicides: State of the Science. 9/18/2020. Authors: 
K. Yozzo and M. Perron) a proposed mode-of-action (MOA)/adverse-outcome 
pathway (AOP) for HPPD inhibitors in mammals and determined there was 
sufficient evidence to establish the MOA/AOP. The initiating event in 
the MOA/AOP for HPPD-inhibiting chemicals, including bicyclopyrone, 
involves binding of the chemical to the HPPD enzyme causing complete or 
virtually complete enzyme inhibition, which leads to a build-up of 
systemic tyrosine levels (tyrosinemia) and a spectrum of tyrosine-
mediated effects. In laboratory animals, these have been identified as 
ocular and skeletal developmental effects.
    Bicyclopyrone is classified as ``Suggestive Evidence of 
Carcinogenic Potential'' based on the presence of rare ocular tumors in 
male rats. The EPA has determined that using a non-linear approach 
(i.e., chronic reference dose (cRfD)) will adequately account for all 
chronic toxicity, including carcinogenicity that could result from 
exposure to bicyclopyrone.
    A complete discussion of the toxicological profile for 
bicyclopyrone as well as specific information on the studies received 
and the nature of the adverse effects caused by bicyclopyrone 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 in the document titled ``Bicyclopyrone: Human Health Risk 
Assessment for the Establishment of Permanent Tolerances for Residues 
in/on Lemongrass, Rosemary, and Wormwood'' (hereinafter ``Bicyclopyrone 
Human Health Risk Assessment'') in docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-
0542 in regulations.gov.

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 the NOAEL and the LOAEL are identified. 
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 https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
    The ability of a species to clear excess tyrosine can impact its 
sensitivity to HPPD-inhibiting chemicals and its relevance for human 
health risk assessment. Therefore, during the evaluation of the MOA/AOP 
for HPPD inhibitors in mammals, endpoints for human health risk 
assessment of HPPD inhibitors, including bicyclopyrone, were selected 
from studies available in mice and dogs. The developmental and 
reproduction toxicity studies in mice

[[Page 72848]]

are not available for bicyclopyrone; however, mouse developmental and 
reproduction toxicity studies for other HPPD inhibitors are available 
for bridging across the chemical class. The reproduction toxicity study 
for mesotrione (a HPPD inhibitor) provides the lowest point of 
departure (no-observed adverse-effect level (NOAEL) = 71 mg/kg/day) for 
these studies and was considered in conjunction with the bicyclopyrone 
database for endpoint selection.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for bicyclopyrone used for 
human risk assessment can be found in the Bicyclopyrone Human Health 
Risk Assessment in the docket.

C. Exposure Assessment

    1. Dietary exposure from food and feed uses. In evaluating dietary 
exposure to bicyclopyrone, EPA considered exposure under the 
petitioned-for tolerances as well as all existing bicyclopyrone 
tolerances in 40 CFR 180.682. EPA assessed dietary exposures from 
bicyclopyrone 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.
    No such effects were identified in the toxicological studies for 
bicyclopyrone; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure 
assessment is unnecessary.
    ii. Chronic exposure. In conducting the chronic dietary exposure 
assessment EPA used the 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 conducted a partially refined analysis that 
assumed average field trial residues for registered crops, tolerance 
levels for the proposed crops, average empirical processing factors for 
registered crops, anticipated residues for livestock commodities, and 
percent crop treated (PCT) for registered crop commodities.
    iii. Cancer. Based on the data discussed in Unit III.A., EPA has 
determined that a separate cancer exposure assessment does not need to 
be conducted and that using a non-linear approach (i.e., reference dose 
(RfD)) will adequately account for all chronic toxicity, including 
carcinogenicity, that could result from exposure to bicyclopyrone.
    iv. Anticipated residue and percent crop treated (PCT) information. 
Section 408(b)(2)(E) of FFDCA authorizes EPA to use available data and 
information on the anticipated residue levels of pesticide residues in 
food and the actual levels of pesticide residues that have been 
measured in food. If EPA relies on such information, EPA must require 
pursuant to FFDCA section 408(f)(1) that data be provided 5 years after 
the tolerance is established, modified, or left in effect, 
demonstrating that the levels in food are not above the levels 
anticipated. For the present action, EPA will issue such data call-ins 
as are required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(E) and authorized under 
FFDCA section 408(f)(1). Data will be required to be submitted no later 
than 5 years from the date of issuance of these tolerances.
    Section 408(b)(2)(F) of FFDCA states that the Agency may use data 
on the actual percent of food treated for assessing chronic dietary 
risk only if:
     Condition a: The data used are reliable and provide a 
valid basis to show what percentage of the food derived from such crop 
is likely to contain the pesticide residue.
     Condition b: The exposure estimate does not underestimate 
exposure for any significant subpopulation group.
     Condition c: Data are available on pesticide use and food 
consumption in a particular area, and the exposure estimate does not 
understate exposure for the population in such area.
    In addition, the Agency must provide for periodic evaluation of any 
estimates used. To provide for the periodic evaluation of the estimate 
of PCT as required by FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(F), EPA may require 
registrants to submit data on PCT.
    The chronic dietary assessment incorporated the following average 
PCT estimates: Barley, 1%; field corn, 10%; sweet corn, 5%; pop corn, 
10% (used the higher of the corn PCTs); and wheat, 5% (used spring 
wheat PCT which was higher than winter wheat PCT). The PCT for 
livestock commodities is based on the PCT value for the livestock feed 
item used in the dietary burden with the highest percent crop treated 
(field corn, 10%).[FEDREG][VOL]*[/VOL][NO]*[/NO][DATE]*[/
    In most cases, EPA uses available data from the United States 
Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Statistics Service 
(USDA/NASS), proprietary market surveys, and the California Department 
of Pesticide Regulation (CalDPR) Pesticide Use Reporting (PUR) for the 
chemical/crop combination for the most recent 10 years. EPA uses an 
average PCT for chronic dietary risk analysis and a maximum PCT for 
acute dietary risk analysis. The average PCT figure for each existing 
use is derived by combining available public and private market survey 
data for that use, averaging across all observations, and rounding to 
the nearest 5%, except for those situations in which the average PCT is 
less than 1% or less than 2.5%. In those cases, the Agency would use 
less than 1% or less than 2.5% as the average PCT value, respectively. 
The maximum PCT figure is the highest observed maximum value reported 
within the most recent 10 years of available public and private market 
survey data for the existing use and rounded up to the nearest multiple 
of 5%, except where the maximum PCT is less than 2.5%, in which case, 
the Agency uses less than 2.5% as the maximum PCT.
    The Agency believes that the three conditions discussed in Unit 
III.C.1.iv. have been met. With respect to Condition a, PCT estimates 
are derived from Federal and private market survey data, which are 
reliable and have a valid basis. The Agency is reasonably certain that 
the percentage of the food treated is not likely to be an 
underestimation. As to Conditions b and c, regional consumption 
information and consumption information for significant subpopulations 
is taken into account through EPA's computer-based model for evaluating 
the exposure of significant subpopulations including several regional 
groups. Use of this consumption information in EPA's risk assessment 
process ensures that EPA's exposure estimate does not understate 
exposure for any significant subpopulation group and allows the Agency 
to be reasonably certain that no regional population is exposed to 
residue levels higher than those estimated by the Agency. Other than 
the data available through national food consumption surveys, EPA does 
not have available reliable information on the regional consumption of 
food to which bicyclopyrone may be applied in a particular area.
    2. Dietary exposure from drinking water. The Agency used screening 
level water exposure models in the dietary exposure analysis and risk 
assessment for bicyclopyrone in drinking water. These simulation models 
take into account data on the physical, chemical, and fate/transport 
characteristics of bicyclopyrone. Further information regarding EPA 
drinking water models used in pesticide exposure assessment can be 
found at https://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/about-water-exposure-models-used-pesticide.
    The Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC) computer model 
was used to generate surface water Estimated

[[Page 72849]]

Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs), while the Pesticide Root Zone 
Model for Groundwater (PRZM-GW) and the Screening Concentration in 
Ground Water (SCI-GROW) models were used to generate groundwater EDWCs. 
The maximum acute and chronic surface water EDWCs associated with 
bicyclopyrone use were 3.43 and 1.02 parts per billion (ppb), 
respectively. For groundwater sources of drinking water, the maximum 
acute and chronic and cancer EDWCs of bicyclopyrone in shallow 
groundwater from PRZM-GW were 4.82 and 4.2 ppb, respectively.
    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). Bicyclopyrone is not 
registered for any use patterns that would result in residential 
    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.''[FEDREG][VOL]*[/VOL][NO]*[/
    The Agency is required to consider the cumulative risks of 
chemicals sharing a common mechanism of toxicity per OPP's Guidance For 
Identifying Pesticide Chemicals and Other Substances that have a Common 
Mechanism of Toxicity, which can be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/guidance-identifying-pesticide-chemicals-and-other. As a result, the Agency has determined 
that the (p-hydroxyphenyl-pyruvate dioxygenase) HPPD inhibitors, 
including bicyclopyrone, share a common mechanism of toxicity as 
discussed in the HPPD Inhibiting Herbicides: State of the Science paper 
(HPPD Inhibiting Herbicides: State of the Science. 9/18/2020. Authors: 
K. Yozzo and M. Perron). As explained in that document, the members of 
this group share the ability to bind to and inhibit the HPPD enzyme 
resulting in elevated systemic tyrosine levels and common apical 
outcomes that are mediated by tyrosine, including ocular and 
developmental effects. In 2021, after establishing a common mechanism 
grouping for the HPPD inhibitors, the Agency conducted a cumulative 
risk assessment (CRA) (J. Godshall; 30-June-2021; D462487) and 
concluded that cumulative exposures to HPPD inhibitors (based on 
proposed and registered pesticidal uses at the time the assessment was 
conducted) did not present risks of concern.

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 Food Quality 
Protection Act (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 factor.
    2. Prenatal and postnatal sensitivity. Although there is potential 
evidence of neurotoxicity and increased quantitative susceptibility, 
concern is low because neurotoxicity was only observed in the rat, 
which is not considered a relevant model for evaluating HPPD 
inhibitors, and selected endpoints are protective of the potential 
sensitivity/susceptibility for animal models appropriate for evaluating 
HPPD inhibitors.
    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 for all exposure scenarios, except for the 
chronic dietary endpoint where the FQPA SF is being retained as a 
database UF because of the use of a LOAEL as the point of departure 
(UFL). That decision is based on the following findings:
    i. The toxicity database for bicyclopyrone is complete.
    ii. There is no evidence of neurotoxicity in the bicyclopyrone 
database, including in the rat acute or subchronic neurotoxicity 
studies; however, histopathological findings were observed in the 
chronic dog study (swelling of the dorsal root ganglion and nerve fiber 
degeneration). Concern is low since the chronic dietary endpoint is 
based upon these effects, and these are the most sensitive effects in 
the bicyclopyrone hazard database in one of them most appropriate 
species for risk assessment.
    iii. There was evidence of increased susceptibility in rat and 
rabbit developmental studies for bicyclopyrone. Since developmental and 
reproduction toxicity studies in mice are not available for 
bicyclopyrone, mouse developmental and reproduction toxicity studies 
for other HPPD inhibitors are available for bridging. In some 
instances, increased quantitative susceptibility was also observed in 
these mouse studies, including the 2-generation reproduction toxicity 
study for mesotrione. Although there was evidence of increased 
susceptibility, concern is low because: (1) Rat and rabbits were not 
considered appropriate animal models for assessing human health risk 
for HPPD inhibitors, (2) there are clear NOAEL/LOAEL values for the 
observed developmental and offspring effects, (3) developmental/
offspring effects in mice for other HPPD inhibitors were seen at doses 
>=600 mg/kg/day, except the mesotrione 2-generation reproduction 
toxicity study, (4) the offspring LOAEL of 300 mg/kg/day in the 
mesotrione reproduction toxicity study was set conservatively based on 
a low incidence of opaque/cloudy eyes, and (5) selected endpoints are 
protective of any potential sensitivity observed in mice.
    iv. There are no residual uncertainties identified in the exposure 
databases. The dietary assessment does not underestimate exposure. In 
addition, there are no currently proposed residential uses.

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. An acute aggregate risk assessment takes into 
account acute exposure estimates from dietary consumption of food and 
drinking water. No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure 
was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, 
bicyclopyrone is not expected to pose an acute risk.
    2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this 
unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to 
bicyclopyrone from food and water will utilize 9.5% of the cPAD for all 
infants, the population group receiving the greatest exposure.

[[Page 72850]]

    3. Short-term risk. A short-term adverse effect was identified; 
however, bicyclopyrone is not registered for any use patterns that 
would result in short-term residential exposure. Short-term risk is 
assessed based on short-term residential exposure plus chronic dietary 
exposure. Because there is no short-term 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-
term risk is necessary, and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk 
assessment for evaluating short-term risk for 
    4. Intermediate-term risk. An intermediate-term adverse effect was 
identified; however, bicyclopyrone is not registered for any use 
patterns that would result in intermediate-term residential exposure. 
Intermediate-term risk is assessed based on intermediate-term 
residential exposure plus chronic dietary exposure. Because there is no 
intermediate-term 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 intermediate-term 
risk), no further assessment of intermediate-term risk is necessary, 
and EPA relies on the chronic dietary risk assessment for evaluating 
intermediate-term risk for bicyclopyrone.
    5. Aggregate cancer risk for U.S. population. Because the Agency 
has determined that the chronic RfD will be protective of any potential 
cancer risk and there are no chronic risks that exceeds the Agency's 
level of concern, EPA concludes that there is not a concern for cancer 
risk from exposure to bicyclopyrone.
    6. 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 bicyclopyrone residues.
    More detailed information about the Agency's analysis can be found 
in the Bicyclopyrone Human Health Risk Assessment in docket ID number 
EPA-HQ-OPP-2019-0542 in regulations.gov at https://www.regulations.gov.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology liquid chromatography-mass 
spectroscopy/mass spectroscopy (LCMS/MS) methods for tolerance 
enforcement have been developed and independently validated. For all 
matrices and analytes, the level of quantification (LOQ), defined as 
the lowest spiking level where acceptable precision and accuracy data 
were obtained, was determined to be 0.01 ppm for each of the common 
moieties, SYN503780 and CSCD686480, for a combined LOQ of 0.02 ppm is 
available to enforce the tolerance expression.
    The method 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: 
[email protected].

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. EPA 
considers the international maximum residue limits (MRLs) established 
by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), as required by FFDCA 
section 408(b)(4).
    The Codex has not established a MRL for residues of bicyclopyrone 
in/on lemongrass, rosemary, or wormwood.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of 
bicyclopyrone, 4-hydroxy-3-{2-[(2-methoxyethoxy)methyl]-6-
(trifluoromethyl)-3-pyridylcarbonyl{time} bicyclo[3.2.1]oct-3-en-2-one, 
including its metabolites and degradates in or on lemongrass, dried at 
0.5 ppm; lemongrass, fresh at 0.3 ppm; rosemary, dried at 0.3 ppm; 
rosemary, fresh at 0.03 ppm; wormwood, dried at 0.09 ppm; and wormwood, 
fresh at 0.05 ppm.

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) or Executive Order 13045, entitled 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997). 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

[[Page 72851]]

Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 180

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

    Dated: December 9, 2021.
Marietta Echeverria,
Acting Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    PREAMB][SUPLINF][HED]*[/HED]Therefore, for the reasons stated in 
the preamble, EPA is amending 40 CFR chapter I 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. In Sec.  180.682, amend paragraph (a)(1) by:
a. In the introductory text, removing ``table below'' and ``specified 
below'' and adding ``following table'' and ``specified in this 
paragraph (a)(1)'' in their places, respectively; and
b. In the table, adding a table heading and entries in alphabetical 
order for ``Lemongrass, dried''; ``Lemongrass, fresh''; ``Rosemary, 
dried''; ``Rosemary, fresh''; ``Wormwood, dried''; and ``Wormwood, 
    The additions read as follows:

Sec.  180.682  Bicyclopyrone; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *
    (1) * * *

                       Table 1 to Paragraph (a)(1)
                                                              Parts per
                         Commodity                             million
                                * * * * *
Lemongrass, dried..........................................          0.5
Lemongrass, fresh..........................................          0.3
Rosemary, dried............................................          0.3
Rosemary, fresh............................................         0.03
                                * * * * *
Wormwood, dried............................................         0.09
Wormwood, fresh............................................         0.05

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2021-27602 Filed 12-22-21; 8:45 am]