[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 161 (Friday, August 21, 2026)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54228-54234]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-17088]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

[EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0455; FRL-13520-01-OCSPP]


Carboxin; Pesticide Tolerances

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of 
carboxin in or on multiple crops that are discussed later in this 
document. Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), UPL 
Delaware Inc. submitted a petition to EPA requesting that EPA establish 
a maximum permissible level for residues of this pesticide in or on the 
identified commodities.

DATES: This regulation is effective August 21, 2026. Objections and 
requests for hearings must be received on or before October 20, 2026 
and must be filed in accordance with the instructions provided in 40 
CFR part 178 (see also Unit I.C. of this document).

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identified by docket 
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2022-0455, is available at 
https://www.regulations.gov. Additional information about dockets 
generally, along with instructions for visiting the docket in person, 
is available at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Smith, Registration Division 
(7505T), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460-0001; main telephone 
number: (202) 566-1030; email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary

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.
     Crop production (NAICS code 111).
     Animal production (NAICS code 112).
     Food manufacturing (NAICS code 311).
     Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS code 32532).
    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. What is EPA's authority for taking this action?

    EPA is issuing this rulemaking under section 408 of the Federal 
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a. FFDCA section 
408(b)(2)(A)(i) 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.'' FFDCA section 
408(b)(2)(A)(ii) 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. FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(C) 
requires EPA to give special consideration to exposure of infants and 
children to the pesticide chemical

[[Page 54229]]

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 . . .''

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

    Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21 U.S.C. 346a(g), any person may file 
an objection to any aspect of this regulation and may also request a 
hearing on those objections. If you fail to file an objection to the 
final rule within the time period specified in the final rule, you will 
have waived the right to raise any issues resolved in the final rule. 
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-
2022-0455 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 October 20, 2026.
    EPA's Administrative Law Judges Division (ALJD), in which the 
Hearing Clerk is housed, urges parties to file and serve documents by 
electronic means only, notwithstanding any other particular 
requirements set forth in other procedural rules governing those 
proceedings. See ``Order Urging Electronic Filing and Service,'' dated 
December 3, 2025, which can be found at https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2025-12/2025-12-03-order-urging-electronic-filing-and-service.pdf. Although EPA's regulations require submission via U.S. 
Mail or hand delivery, EPA intends to treat submissions filed via 
electronic means as properly filed submissions; therefore, EPA believes 
the preference for submission via electronic means will not be 
prejudicial. When submitting documents to the ALJD electronically, a 
person should utilize the ALJD e-filing system at https://yosemite.epa.gov/oa/eab/eab-alj_upload.nsf.
    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 at https://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. If you wish to 
include CBI in your request, please follow the applicable instructions 
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets#rules and clearly 
mark the information that you claim to be CBI. Information not marked 
confidential pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be disclosed publicly by EPA 
without prior notice.

II. Petitioned-For Tolerance

    In the Federal Register of September 29, 2025 (90 FR 46544 (FRL-
12474-07-OCSPP)), 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 1F8976) by UPL Delaware, Inc. and UPL NA, Inc., 630 
Freedom Business Center, Suite 402, King of Prussia, PA 19406. The 
petition requested that 40 CFR 180.301 be amended by establishing 
tolerances for residues of the fungicide carboxin in or on vegetable, 
legume, forage and hay, except soybean, subgroup 7-22A at 2 parts per 
million (ppm); vegetable, legume, pulse, bean, dried shelled, except 
soybean, subgroup 6-22E at 0.2 ppm; and vegetable, legume, pulse, pea, 
dried shelled, subgroup 6-22F at 0.2 ppm. The petition also requested 
that 40 CFR 180.301 be amended by removing the tolerance for residues 
of carboxin in or on bean, dry, seed. The document referenced a summary 
of the petition prepared by UPL Delaware, Inc. and UPL NA Inc., which 
is available in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov.
    The September 29, 2025 notice of filing supersedes two earlier 
notices of filing published in the Federal Register on January 3, 2023 
(88 FR 38) (FRL-9410-08-OCSPP), and September 12, 2023 (88 FR 62499) 
(FRL-10579-07-OCSPP), which were based on earlier versions of the same 
petition (PP 1F8976) requesting tolerances for crop subgroup 6-22E: 
dried shelled bean, except soybean at 0.2 ppm; crop subgroup 6-22F: 
pulses, dried shelled pea at 0.2 ppm; pea, dry, forage at 0.4 ppm; and 
pea, dry, hay at 2 ppm. UPL Delaware, Inc. and UPL NA, Inc. 
subsequently amended their petition as noticed in the September 29, 
2025, Federal Register.
    EPA received one comment in response to the September 29, 2025, 
notice of filing expressing concerns that pesticide use is linked to 
cancer and other chronic diseases and any ``exemption'' should rarely 
be allowed outside of uses tied to national security. EPA also received 
one comment in response to the September 12, 2023, notice of filing 
expressing concerns about pesticide residues in food and their 
connection to resistance and allergic reactions.
    The Agency acknowledges the commenters' concerns regarding 
potential health effects associated with pesticide use. However, the 
existing legal framework provided by section 408 of the FFDCA 
authorizes EPA to establish a tolerance when it determines that the 
tolerance is safe. Upon consideration of the validity, completeness, 
and reliability of the available data, as well as other factors the 
FFDCA requires EPA to consider, EPA has determined that the carboxin 
tolerances established in this action are safe. The commenters provided 
no information supporting the conclusion that these tolerances are not 
safe.

III. Final Tolerance Action

A. Aggregate Risk Assessment and Determination of Safety

    Consistent with FFDCA section 408(b)(2)(D) and the factors 
specified therein, 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 carboxin, including exposure resulting from the 
tolerances established by this action. EPA's assessment of exposures 
and risks associated with carboxin follows.

B. 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 toxicity database for carboxin is adequate, with the exception 
of a subchronic inhalation toxicity study. In subchronic and chronic 
feeding studies in rats with carboxin, the kidney was the primary 
target organ with effects including chronic progressive nephropathy and 
histopathological changes showing increased incidence and severity with 
time. For dogs and mice, the primary target organ appeared to be the 
liver. The developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and the 
reproduction study in rats with carboxin indicated no increased 
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of the fetuses or pups, as 
compared to adults. In the carcinogenicity study in mice with carboxin, 
dose-related increases in the incidence of liver centrilobular 
hypertrophy were observed; however, this is considered to be an 
adaptive rather than an adverse response. Carboxin is classified as 
``Not Likely to Be Carcinogenic to Humans'' based on the lack of 
evidence of

[[Page 54230]]

carcinogenicity in male and female rats and mice in acceptable 
carcinogenicity studies. Carboxin exhibits low acute toxicity via oral 
(Toxicity Category III), inhalation (Toxicity Category IV), and dermal 
(Toxicity Category III) routes of exposure. It is a slight eye irritant 
(Toxicity Category III). It is not a skin irritant (Toxicity Category 
IV) and is negative for dermal sensitization. The developmental 
toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and the reproduction study in rats 
with carboxin indicated no increased quantitative or qualitative 
susceptibility of the fetuses or pups, as compared to adults. In the 
developmental toxicity studies in rats for carboxin, no adverse effects 
were observed in either the dams or the fetuses. In a developmental 
toxicity study in rabbits, abortions were observed at 750 mg/kg/day on 
GDs 27-28. The abortions are considered to be both maternal and 
developmental adverse effects. In a two-generation reproduction study 
with carboxin in rats, the reproductive effects (decreased fertility 
indices in F2b parents) and offspring effects (decreased pup weight) 
occurred at higher doses than the parental effects (gross and 
histopathological changes in the kidneys, e.g., chronic nephritis).
    Although no high temperature hydrolysis data is available for 
carboxin, the chemical structure of carboxin suggests that the release 
of aniline may occur following the processing of carboxin-treated crop 
commodities. Aniline may be a potential degradation product of carboxin 
in cooked food, but it is toxicologically different from carboxin. EPA 
has classified aniline as a B2-probable human carcinogen with an oral 
cancer slope factor of 5.7 x 10-3 (mg/kg/day)-1, 
which is considered very conservative for cancer assessment of aniline. 
The Agency did not identify any other oral endpoint for aniline.
    Specific information on the risk assessment conducted in support of 
this action, including on the studies received and the nature of the 
adverse effects caused by carboxin and aniline, can be found in the 
document titled ``Carboxin: Human Health Risk Assessment for the Use of 
Liquid Formulations on Dried Shelled Peas; to Establish a Tolerance for 
Residues in/on Vegetable, legume, pulse, pea, dried shelled, subgroup 
6-22F and Vegetable, Legume, Forage and Hay, Except Soybean, Subgroup 
7-22A; to Convert the Existing Tolerance for Residues in/on Bean, Dry, 
Seed Tolerance to Vegetable, legume, pulse, bean, dried shelled, except 
soybean, subgroup 6-22E; and to Allow a 0-Day Plantback Interval for 
Vegetable, Legume, Pulse, Pea, Dried Shelled, Subgroup 6-22F in 
Conjunction with a Tolerance on this Crop Subgroup'' (hereinafter 
``Carboxin Human Health Risk Assessment'') which is available in the 
docket for this action.

C. 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, 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://www.epa.gov/science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/assessing-human-health-risk-pesticides.
    A summary of the toxicological endpoints for carboxin and aniline 
used for human health risk assessment can be found in the Carboxin 
Human Health Risk Assessment, which is available in the docket for this 
action.

D. Exposure Assessment

1. Dietary Exposure From Food and Feed Uses
    In evaluating dietary exposure to carboxin and aniline, EPA 
considered exposure under the petitioned-for tolerances as well as all 
existing carboxin tolerances in 40 CFR 180.301. EPA assessed dietary 
exposures from carboxin and aniline in food as follows:
    i. Acute exposure. Carboxin. 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 carboxin; 
therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure and risk assessment is 
not necessary.
    Aniline. There are no data to determine an acute endpoint for 
aniline at this time; therefore, a quantitative acute dietary exposure 
and risk assessment for carboxin-derived aniline residues was not 
conducted.
    ii. Chronic exposure. Carboxin. In conducting the chronic dietary 
exposure assessment for carboxin, EPA used the Dietary Exposure 
Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database 
Version 4.02, which uses 2005-2010 food consumption data from the 
United States Department of Agriculture's National Health and Nutrition 
Examination Survey, What We Eat in America. As to residue levels in 
food, EPA assumed tolerance-level residues, default processing factors, 
and 100 percent crop treated (PCT) for all crops.
    Aniline. Aniline is a high temperature hydrolysis degradate for 
another registered pesticide, buprofezin. The highly refined estimated 
dietary exposure of the most highly exposed adult population (adults 
50-99 years old) to buprofezin-derived aniline in cooked foods is 
0.000052 mg/kg/day. Estimated chronic exposures to buprofezin-derived 
aniline residues are orders of magnitude below any potential chronic 
non-cancer reference dose for aniline. Any chronic exposures to 
carboxin-derived aniline residues are expected to be significantly 
lower than to buprofezin-derived aniline residues based on carboxin's 
limited use patterns and lower tolerance-level residues in food 
commodities. Therefore, a quantitative chronic non-cancer dietary 
exposure and risk assessment for carboxin-derived aniline residues is 
not necessary.
    iii. Cancer. Carboxin. Based on the data discussed in Unit III.A., 
EPA has concluded that carboxin is not likely to be carcinogenic to 
humans. Therefore, a dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of 
assessing cancer risk is not necessary.
    Aniline. Due to the absence of high temperature hydrolysis data for 
carboxin, a quantitative cancer dietary exposure and risk assessment 
for carboxin-derived aniline residues was not conducted. However, 
cancer dietary exposure and risk assessments for buprofezin-derived 
aniline residues are currently available. See ``Buprofezin: Acute, 
Chronic (Food and Drinking Water) and Cancer (Aniline; Cooked Food 
Only) Aggregate Dietary Exposure

[[Page 54231]]

and Risk Assessments for the New Use on Bushberry Crop Subgroup 13-07B 
and Proposed Amendment to Expand the Use on Succulent Beans to All 
Members of Proposed Edible Podded Bean Legume Vegetable Subgroup 6-
22A'' and ``Buprofezin. Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed New 
Use on Bushberry Crop Subgroup 13-07B and Proposed Amendments to Expand 
Use on Succulent Beans to All Members of Proposed Edible Podded Bean 
Legume Vegetable Subgroup 6-22A and Use on Greenhouse-Grown Tomatoes 
and Peppers to All Members of Fruiting Vegetable Crop Group 8-10'' in 
docket ID number EPA-HQ-OPP-2020-0235. EPA conducted a qualitative 
assessment of cancer dietary exposure and risk for carboxin-derived 
aniline residues based on the assessments for buprofezin-derived 
aniline residues.
    Buprofezin is applied as a broadcast foliar application on a 
variety of food crops with the maximum seasonal application rates 
ranging from 0.7 to 4.0 pounds of active ingredient per acre per 
growing season. Tolerances established for residues of buprofezin in or 
on various food commodities range from 0.02 to 80 ppm, with most 
tolerances greater than 0.2 ppm. Buprofezin residue data indicate that 
there is a proportion of buprofezin residues in or on food crops that 
is available for conversion to aniline during food processing that is 
subjected to high temperature cooking conditions. A highly refined 
cancer dietary exposure and risk assessment for buprofezin-derived 
aniline residues was conducted for cooked food only using an oral 
cancer slope factor (Q1* of 5.7 x 10-3 (mg/kg/
day)-1) for aniline. This assessment was conducted using a 
maximum conversion factor of buprofezin to aniline of 18.9%, which was 
the highest found in a high temperature hydrolysis study of buprofezin-
derived aniline and was applied to estimate residues of buprofezin-
derived aniline which may form in food as a result of cooking. The 
highly refined estimated dietary exposure of the most highly exposed 
adult population (adults 50-99 years old) to buprofezin-derived aniline 
in cooked foods is 0.000052 mg/kg/day.
    Any dietary exposure to carboxin-derived aniline residues in cooked 
foods are expected to be significantly lower than buprofezin-derived 
aniline residues based on carboxin's limited use patterns and lower 
tolerance-level residues. Carboxin is used for pre-planting seed 
treatment, with low maximum application rates ranging from 0.005 to 
0.825 pounds of active ingredient per acre per year. Carboxin residues 
in or on certain food crops were non-detectable or below the limit of 
quantitation (LOQ) based on field trials conducted at exaggerated use 
rates. Residue data for other food crops indicate that there was not 
much carboxin residue, at the most less than 0.025 to less than 0.2 
ppm, available for conversion to aniline during food processing that is 
subjected to high temperature cooking conditions. Tolerances 
established for residues of carboxin in or on various food commodities, 
including the tolerances established in this action, range from 0.03 to 
0.2 ppm, with several tolerances at 0.2 ppm. The LOQ of the residue 
data collection method was 0.025 ppm, whereas the LOQ of the 
enforcement analytical methods was 0.2 ppm, indicating that many of the 
tolerances at 0.2 ppm would be much lower if not for the limitation of 
the enforcement analytical methods. These low residue levels can be 
attributed to carboxin's limited used patterns.
2. Dietary Exposure From Drinking Water
    The Agency used screening level water exposure models in the 
dietary exposure analysis and risk assessment for carboxin in drinking 
water. These simulation models take into account data on the physical, 
chemical, and fate/transport characteristics of carboxin. Further 
information regarding EPA drinking water models used in pesticide 
exposure assessment can be found at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/models-pesticide-risk-assessment.
    For surface water, estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWC) 
were modeled using Pesticide in Water Calculator (PWC) (version 1.52) 
for seed treatment of all labeled crops except rice. EDWCs for rice 
seed treatment use were modeled by Pesticide in Flooded Applications 
Model Version 2. For groundwater, EDWCs were modeled using PWC and the 
six standard groundwater scenarios at the maximum application rate of 
0.825 lb a.i./A/yr for registered crops. The highest post breakthrough 
average EDWC for carboxin residues of concern (i.e., carboxin and its 
sulfoxide metabolite) was 81.7 [micro]g/L or parts per billion (ppb) in 
groundwater. The EDWC of carboxin residues of concern in surface water 
from chronic exposure was minimal (6.2 [micro]g/L). EDWCs were directly 
entered into the dietary exposure model. For the chronic dietary risk 
assessment, the ground water concentration value of 81.7 ppb was used 
to assess the contribution to drinking water.
    For aniline, the Agency has determined that there is no expectation 
of carboxin-derived aniline residues in 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., from lawn and garden 
pest control, indoor pest control, termiticides, and flea and tick 
control on pets).
    Carboxin is not registered for any specific use patterns that would 
result in residential exposure to carboxin or carboxin-derived aniline.
4. Cumulative Effects From Substances With a Common Mechanism of 
Toxicity
    Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the 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 approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA has not made 
a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to carboxin and any other 
substances. For the purposes of this action, therefore, EPA has not 
assumed that carboxin 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 EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/cumulative-assessment-risk-pesticides.

E. 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. 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.

[[Page 54232]]

2. Prenatal and Postnatal Sensitivity
    The developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and the 
reproduction study in rats with carboxin indicated no increased 
quantitative or qualitative susceptibility of the fetuses or pups, as 
compared to adults. In the developmental toxicity studies in rats for 
carboxin, no adverse effects were observed in either the dams or the 
fetuses. In a developmental toxicity study in rabbits, abortions were 
observed at 750 mg/kg/day on GDs 27-28. The abortions are considered to 
be both maternal and developmental adverse effects. In a two-generation 
reproduction study with carboxin in rats, the reproductive effects 
(decreased fertility indices in F2b parents) and offspring 
effects (decreased pup weight) occurred at higher doses than the 
parental effects (gross and histopathological changes in the kidneys, 
e.g., chronic nephritis).
3. Conclusion
    EPA has determined that reliable data show the safety of infants 
and children would be adequately protected if the FQPA safety factor 
were reduced to 1X for dietary exposure scenarios. The current action 
does not have residential uses; if any future actions have residential 
uses, then the FQPA safety factor would also be 1X for all residential/
non-occupational exposure scenarios, with the exception of inhalation 
scenarios due to the lack of a subchronic inhalation toxicity study. 
That decision is based on the following findings:
    i. With the exception of a subchronic inhalation toxicity study, 
the toxicity database for carboxin is adequate for FQPA evaluation. 
Developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits and a two-generation 
reproduction toxicity study in rats with carboxin are available for 
FQPA consideration.
    ii. There is no evidence of neurotoxicity in the existing toxicity 
database. No guideline acute or subchronic neurotoxicity studies were 
submitted; however, no indications of neurotoxic effects were observed 
in any of the subchronic or chronic studies in dogs, mice, or rats. 
Based on a Weight-of-Evidence approach, EPA determined that the acute 
and subchronic neurotoxicity studies are not required at this time.
    iii. There was no evidence of increased quantitative or qualitative 
susceptibility in the developmental toxicity studies in rabbits or rats 
with carboxin.
    iv. There is no residual uncertainty with respect to the dietary 
exposure database. A conservative chronic dietary (food and water) risk 
assessment was conducted for carboxin incorporating tolerance-level 
residues, EPA's default processing factors, 100 PCT, and the highest 
EDWCs. There are no residential uses for carboxin. These assessments 
will not underestimate the exposure and risks posed by carboxin.

F. 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. Carboxin: 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, carboxin is not 
expected to pose an acute risk, and an acute aggregate risk assessment 
is not required.
2. Carboxin: Chronic Risk
    Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic 
exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to carboxin from food 
and drinking water will utilize 87% of the cPAD for all infants less 
than 1 year old, the population group receiving the greatest exposure. 
There are no residential uses for carboxin. Therefore, chronic 
aggregate exposures and risk estimates are equivalent to the chronic 
dietary (food and drinking water) exposure and risk estimates. These 
risks are not of concern.
3. Carboxin: Short- and Intermediate-Term Risk
    Short- and intermediate-term aggregate exposure takes into account 
short- and intermediate-term residential exposure plus chronic exposure 
to food and water (considered to be a background exposure level). 
Carboxin is not registered for any specific use patterns that would 
result in residential exposure. Therefore, short- and intermediate-term 
risk is equal to chronic dietary risk, which is not of concern.
4. Carboxin: Aggregate Cancer Risk for U.S. Population
    Based on the lack of evidence of carcinogenicity in two adequate 
rodent carcinogenicity studies, carboxin is classified as ``Not Likely 
to be Carcinogenic to Humans,'' and quantification of cancer risk is 
not required.
5. Aniline
    There are no data to determine an acute endpoint for aniline at 
this time; hence, an acute dietary risk assessment was not conducted 
for carboxin-derived aniline residues. The highly refined estimated 
chronic exposure of the most highly exposed adult subpopulation (adults 
50 to 99 years old) to buprofezin-derived aniline residues is 0.000052 
mg/kg/day. Estimated chronic exposures to buprofezin-derived aniline 
residues are orders of magnitude below any potential chronic non-cancer 
reference dose for aniline. Any chronic exposures to carboxin-derived 
aniline residues are expected to be significantly lower than to 
buprofezin-derived aniline residues based on carboxin's limited use 
patterns and lower tolerance-level residues. Therefore, a quantitative 
chronic non-cancer dietary risk assessment for carboxin-derived aniline 
residues is not necessary to conclude with reasonable certainty that 
chronic exposures from carboxin-derived aniline residues do not pose a 
non-cancer dietary risk. The highly refined estimated chronic exposure 
of the most highly exposed adult subpopulation to buprofezin-derived 
aniline results in an upper bound cancer risk estimate of 3 x 
10-7. Based again on carboxin's limited use patterns and 
lower tolerance-level residues, the Agency concludes that the cancer 
risk estimate for buprofezin-derived aniline residues indicates that 
there should not be any cancer risk from carboxin-derived aniline 
residues.
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 
carboxin residues.

IV. Other Considerations

A. Analytical Enforcement Methodology

    Adequate enforcement methodology is available to enforce the 
tolerance expression. The Pesticide Analytical Manual, Vol. II lists 
three methods for determining the combined residues of carboxin and its 
metabolites,

[[Page 54233]]

determined as the common moiety, aniline, and expressed as carboxin. 
These methods include a colorimetric method, which in principle is 
based on the alkaline hydrolysis of carboxin and its sulfoxide 
metabolite to produce aniline; and gas-liquid chromatography (GLC) 
methods. A GLC/Mass Selective Detector data-collection method is also 
available to enforce tolerances for carboxin.

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 MRLs for carboxin in 
or on any commodities.

V. Conclusion

    Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of carboxin, 
5,6-dihydro-2-methyl- N-phenyl-1,4-oxathiin-3-carboxanilide, including 
its metabolites and degradates, in or on Vegetable, legume, forage and 
hay, except soybean, subgroup 7-22A at 2 ppm; Vegetable, legume, pulse, 
bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6-22E at 0.2 ppm; and 
Vegetable, legume, pulse, pea, dried shelled, subgroup 6-22F at 0.2 
ppm. The existing tolerance for bean, dry, seed at 0.2 ppm is removed 
as unnecessary, because this commodity is covered by the new tolerance 
for Vegetable, legume, pulse, bean, dried shelled, except soybean, 
subgroup 6-22E at the same level.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and executive orders 
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/regulations/and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    This action is exempt from review under Executive Order 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993), because it establishes or modifies a 
pesticide tolerance or a tolerance exemption under FFDCA section 408 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.

B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation

    Executive Order 14192 (90 FR 9065, February 6, 2025) does not apply 
because actions that establish a tolerance under FFDCA section 408 are 
exempted from review under Executive Order 12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the PRA 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., because it does not contain any 
information collection activities.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    Since tolerance actions 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 RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., do not apply to this 
action.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

    This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or 
more (in 1995 dollars and adjusted annually for inflation) as described 
in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely 
affect small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any 
State, local, or Tribal governments or on the private sector.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it will 
not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the National Government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because it will 
not have substantial direct effects on Tribal governments, on the 
relationship between the Federal Government and the Indian Tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian Tribes.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 
April 23, 1997) because tolerance actions like this one are exempt from 
review under Executive Order 12866. However, EPA's 2026 Policy on 
Children's Health applies to this action. This rule finalizes tolerance 
actions under the FFDCA, which 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 . . 
.'' (FFDCA 408(b)(2)(C)). The Agency's consideration is summarized in 
Unit III.E.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use

    This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355) 
(May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866.

J. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    This action does not involve technical standards that would require 
Agency consideration under NTTAA section 12(d), 15 U.S.C. 272.

K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)

    This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA 
will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to the 
Comptroller General of the United States. 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: August 3, 2026.
Charles Smith,
Director, Registration Division, Office of Pesticide Programs.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR chapter I is 
amended as follows:

[[Page 54234]]

PART 180--TOLERANCES AND EXEMPTIONS FOR PESTICIDE CHEMICAL RESIDUES 
IN FOOD

0
1. The authority citation for part 180 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. In Sec.  180.301, amend table 1 to paragraph (a) by:
0
a. Removing the entry for ``Bean, dry, seed''; and
0
b. Adding alphabetically the entries ``Vegetable, legume, forage and 
hay, except soybean, subgroup 7-22A'', ``Vegetable, legume, pulse, 
bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6-22E'', and ``Vegetable, 
legume, pulse, pea, dried shelled, subgroup 6-22F''.
    The revisions and additions read as follows:


Sec.  180.301   Carboxin; tolerances for residues.

    (a) * * *

                        Table 1 to Paragraph (a)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                * * * * *
Vegetable, legume, forage and hay, except soybean, subgroup            2
 7-22A......................................................
Vegetable, legume, pulse, bean, dried shelled, except                0.2
 soybean, subgroup 6-22E....................................
Vegetable, legume, pulse, pea, dried shelled, subgroup 6-22F         0.2
 
                                * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2026-17088 Filed 8-20-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P