"Despite specific comments urging EPA to consult and EPA's conclusions in the Risk Assessment that additional analyses and cooperation with the Services were necessary, EPA finalized its CTP Registration Decision without consulting with NMFS or FWS as required by Section 7 of the ESA [Endangered Species Act]," states the complaint.
The groups say the government's authorization of the pesticide violates the Endangered Species Act. They want a court order vacating the EPA authorization of CTP use.
The groups' lead counsel is Patti Goldman, with Earthjustice, of Seattle.
http://www.cnsenvironmentallaw.com/2014/06/05/2500.htm
The groups say the government's authorization of the pesticide violates the Endangered Species Act. They want a court order vacating the EPA authorization of CTP use.
The groups' lead counsel is Patti Goldman, with Earthjustice, of Seattle.
http://www.cnsenvironmentallaw.com/2014/06/05/2500.htm
The EPA registered the pesticide in January, including product mixtures containing other pesticides such as thiamethoxam.
Cyantraniliprole; Pesticide Tolerances
This is how it works...I took the time to find out...Even read the entire paper!
ACTION...Final Rule.
SUMMARY...This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of cyantraniliprole in or on multiple commodities that are identified and discussed later in this document. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company (DuPont) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
ϟ ...a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ϟ ...dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary
ϟ ...data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established,
ϟ ...An acute dietary risk assessment was not conducted
ϟ ...intermediate-term exposures are not likely because of the intermittent nature of applications by homeowners.
ϟ ...In addition, the submitted data support the conclusion that the effects on the thyroid are secondary to effects on the liver.
ϟ ...Post-application incidental oral exposures for children may occur for short- and intermediate-term durations due to the persistence of cyantraniliprole. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at EPA.
ϟ ...EPA has assumed that cyantraniliprole does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances.
ϟ ...no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
ϟ ...No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, cyantraniliprole is not expected to pose an acute risk.
ϟ ...2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to cyantraniliprole from food and water will utilize 50% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old (the population group receiving the greatest exposure) and 22% of the general U.S. population.
ϟ ...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 cyantraniliprole residues.
ϟ ...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 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 establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level. Currently there are no Codex MRLs for cyantraniliprole.
ϟ ...Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cyantraniliprole, 3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-N-[4-cyano-2-methyl-6-[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1 H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on....
Cyantraniliprole; Pesticide Tolerances
This is how it works...I took the time to find out...Even read the entire paper!
ACTION...Final Rule.
SUMMARY...This regulation establishes tolerances for residues of cyantraniliprole in or on multiple commodities that are identified and discussed later in this document. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company (DuPont) requested these tolerances under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA).
ϟ ...a quantitative acute dietary exposure assessment is unnecessary.
ϟ ...dietary exposure assessment for the purpose of assessing cancer risk is unnecessary
ϟ ...data be provided 5 years after the tolerance is established,
ϟ ...An acute dietary risk assessment was not conducted
ϟ ...intermediate-term exposures are not likely because of the intermittent nature of applications by homeowners.
ϟ ...In addition, the submitted data support the conclusion that the effects on the thyroid are secondary to effects on the liver.
ϟ ...Post-application incidental oral exposures for children may occur for short- and intermediate-term durations due to the persistence of cyantraniliprole. Further information regarding EPA standard assumptions and generic inputs for residential exposures may be found at EPA.
ϟ ...EPA has assumed that cyantraniliprole does not have a common mechanism of toxicity with other substances.
ϟ ...no need for a developmental neurotoxicity study or additional UFs to account for neurotoxicity.
ϟ ...No adverse effect resulting from a single oral exposure was identified and no acute dietary endpoint was selected. Therefore, cyantraniliprole is not expected to pose an acute risk.
ϟ ...2. Chronic risk. Using the exposure assumptions described in this unit for chronic exposure, EPA has concluded that chronic exposure to cyantraniliprole from food and water will utilize 50% of the cPAD for children 1-2 years old (the population group receiving the greatest exposure) and 22% of the general U.S. population.
ϟ ...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 cyantraniliprole residues.
ϟ ...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 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 establish a tolerance that is different from a Codex MRL; however, FFDCA section 408(b)(4) requires that EPA explain the reasons for departing from the Codex level. Currently there are no Codex MRLs for cyantraniliprole.
ϟ ...Therefore, tolerances are established for residues of cyantraniliprole, 3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-N-[4-cyano-2-methyl-6-[(methylamino)carbonyl]phenyl]-1 H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide, including its metabolites and degradates, in or on....
No comments:
Post a Comment