### Page 1 of 25 **U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY**

**Washington, D.C. 20460**

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

### PC Code: 067710 DP Barcode: 402100 **MEMORANDUM November**  **6 ,**  **20 1**  **2 SUBJECT:**  Tier II Drinking Water Assessment for the New Use Registration of

Indoxacarb on Dry

Beans, Snap Beans, Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup 13 - 07F and Low - Growing Berry Subgroup 13 - 07H. **TO:** Laura Nollen , Risk Manager Reviewer

Barbara Madden , Risk Manager Registration Division (7505P) Mike Metzger Risk Assessment Branch 5 Health Effects Division (7509P) **FROM:** Christopher M. Koper, Chemist

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) **THROUGH:** He Zhong, Ph.D. , Biologist

Sujatha Sankula , Ph.D., Lead Biologist Ed Odenkirchen, Ph . D. , Acting Branch Chi ef Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

### Page 2 of 25

**1. E**  **XECUTIVE SUMMARY** A Tier I I screening - level drinking water assessment was conducted to support the human health ri sk assess ment for the proposed new use registration for indoxacarb . Modeled application rates represent the maximum application rates from the proposed label s ( DuPont TM Avaunt ® 

### , EPA Reg. No. 352 - 597 and DuPont TM Steward® 

### EC, EPA Reg. No. 352 - 638 ) for use on dry beans, snap beans, small fruit vine climbing subgroup 13 - 07 F and low - growing berry subgroup 13 - 07H . F or dry and snap beans and the low - growing berry subgroup , the proposed maximum application rate is 0.44 lbs. a.i./acre (4 applications at 0.11 lbs. a.i./acre) . F or cranberry and the small fruit vine climbing subgroup , the proposed maximum application rate is 0.22 lbs. a.i./acre (2 application s at 0.11 lbs. a.i./acre). In addition, aerial and ground f oliar spray applications and chemigation techniques are the proposed application methods. Blockage of the neuronal sodium channel produces the insecticidal mode of action of indoxacarb. The insecticidal activity of the compound is believed to be attributed to the rapid and extensive conversion o f indoxacarb in insects to a more active metabolite ( IN - JT333). In ins ects, IN - JT333 has greater affinity for the sodium channel complex compared to the parent compound . Indoxacarb exists as an isomer pair taking form as the active (S) isomer and inactive (R) isomer. The major rou tes of degradation of indoxacarb include alkaline - catalyzed hydrolysis, photodegradation in water, and microbial mediated degradation. A cumulative residue modeling approach was used to account for the environmental fate and transport of indoxacarb plus degradation products with toxicological concern ( IN - JT333, IN - KG4333, IN -KT413, IN ML437 - 0H) (USEPA 2000 ). The Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC ) of the Health Effects Division (HED) reviewed the degradate structures to determine residues of concern. B ased on the MARC me morandum , a Total Toxic Residue (TTR) approach ( **Table 1** ) should be applied for the parent indoxacarb and the degradation products with toxicological concern ( IN - JT333, IN -KG4333, IN - KT413, IN - ML437 - 0H) for the drinking water assessment. **Table 1. Total Toxic Resid**  **ue (TTR) Expression Matrix:**  **Residues of**  **Concern: Structure:**  Drinking Water Indoxacarb

( (S) active isomer)

N N O C l

O N O C H 3 O O F F F O O C H 3



### IN - JT333

### Page 3 of 25

**Table 1. Total Toxic Resid**  **ue (TTR) Expression Matrix:**  **Residues of**  **Concern: Structure:**  IN -KG4333

IN -KT413

IN -ML437 - 0H

Based on MARC d ecision memorandum (D267726 ) 

### T he recommended estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) for the human health riskassessment are based on highest predicted value for surface water and groundwater ( **Table 2**  ) , which are based on two application s of 0.1 1 lbs. a.i./acre/ season on cranberry and four application s of 0.11 lbs. a.i./acre on beans and berries respectively . **Table 2. Recommended**  **Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs) 1**  

### fo **r Surface Water and Ground Water**  **Drinking Water**  **Source Model** 

**Sc enario**  **Me thod**  **2 Maximum**  **Application Rate (interval between**  **applications) 1**  **- in**  **- 10** 

**year acute**  **(** 

### μg/L **) 1**  **- in**  **- 10** 

**year chronic**  **(** 

### μg/L **) 30**  **- year** 

**average (**  

### μg/L **)** Surface Water Provisional Cranberry Model

Cranberry PCM 2 app @ 0.11 lb a.i./acre 59.26 18.48 18.48 Gro und Water SCI - GROW

(Beans, Berries) -- 4 app @ 0.1 1 lb a.i./acre 0.33 0.33 0.33

### Page 4 of 25

**Table 2. Recommended**  **Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs) 1**  

### fo **r Surface Water and Ground Water**  **Drinking Water**  **Source Model** 

**Sc enario**  **Me thod**  **2 Maximum**  **Application Rate (interval between**  **applications) 1**  **- in**  **- 10** 

**year acute**  **(** 

### μg/L **) 1**  **- in**  **- 10** 

**year chronic**  **(** 

### μg/L **) 30**  **- year** 

**average (**  

### μg/L **)** 1 For surface water (PRZM/EXAMS), EDWC values adjusted with a Percent Cropped Area (PCA) factor of 0.87. For ground water (SCI - GROW), no PCA adjustment was utilized. 2 PCM = The Provisional Cranberry Model (PCM) is a provisional refinement to the Tier I Rice Model (v1.0, May 8, 2007). Refinements include the addition of simple degradation processes in dry and flooded conditions and a water depth of twelve inches, rather than the water depth of four inches used in the rice model. These modifications allow estimation of screening - level peak and annual mean EDWC s of residues of concern that may occur in untreated surface water used as drinking water following use on cranberri es. 

### 2. **PROB LEM FORMULATION**  A Tier II drinking water assessment (DWA) utilized modeling to estimate the surface water and groundwater concentrations of indoxacarb in drinking water source water (pre -treatment) resulting from use on vulnerable sites . No monitoring data are available for indoxacarb at the time of this assessment. While Tier I DWAs are designed to screen out chemicals with low potential risk for posing a drinking water concern, the Tier II assessment provides more site - specific, refined model ing estimates of exposure by using additional environmental fate parameters, specific soil data, weather information, and management practices to estimate dai ly concentrations for an extended period of time (up to 30 years). This Tier II surface water ass essment reflects application of indoxacarb at the maximum label rate and with scenario s intended to be representative of an environment that is more vulnerable to runoff and leaching than where most of the assessed commodities may be present . 

### 2.1. **Background** Indoxacarb insecticidal mode of action is the b lockage of the insect ’s neuronal sodium channel s. The insecticidal activity of the compound is believed to be attributed to the rapid and extensive conversion o f indoxacarb to a more active metabolite ( IN - JT33 3). In insects, IN - JT333 has greater affinity for the sodium channel complex compared to the parent compound. Indoxacarb was initially registered in October 2000 for control of certain lepi dopteran pests including beat army worm and is also considered an organophosphate (OP) replacement. 

### 2.2. **Use Characterization** The registrant is seeking new use registration on dry beans, snap beans, small fruit vine climbing subgroup 13 - 07F and low - growing berry subgroup 13 - 07H. For dry and snap beans and the low - growing berry subgroup , the proposed maximum application rate is 0.44 lbs. a.i./acre (4 applications at 0.11 lbs. a.i./acre) . F or cranberry and the small fruit vine climbing subgroup , the proposed maximum application rate is 0.22 lbs. a.i./acre (2 application s at 0.11 lbs. a.i./acre). T he proposed application methods are aerial and ground foliar spray applications and chemigation techniques . The maximum proposed u ses of indoxacarb can be found in **Table 3** .

### Page 5 of 25

**Table 3 .**  **Application Information for the P**  **roposed New** **Use s**  **of Indoxacarb Use Pattern**  **Form ula**  **Application Me** **thod PHI** 

**(days) Applicatio**  **n Interval (days**  **) Maximum Single** 

**Application Rate (lbs. a.i./acre)**  **Maximum**

**Number of Applications**  **(season) Seasonal**  **Maximum**

**Application Rate (lbs a.i./acre)**  Beans (Dry) DuPontTM

Avaunt® Foliar

Chemigation 7 7 0.11 4 0.44 Beans (Snap) DuPontTM

Avaunt® Foliar

Chemigation 7 3 0.11 4 0.44 Lo wGrowing Berry DuPontTM

Avaunt® Foliar

Chemigation 30 7 0.11 4 0.44 Small Fruit Vine Climbing DuPontTM

Avaunt® Foliar

Chemig ation 7 21 0.11 2 0.22 Beans (Dry) DuPontTM

Steward ® EC Foliar

Chemigation 7 7 0.11 4 0.44 

### 2.3. **Conceptual Model** A. Risk hy

pothesis The following risk hypothesis is being employed for this national - scale drinking water assessment: Indoxacarb, when used in accordance with proposed labels, can result in off -site movement of the chemical through runoff after rain events, soil and possible wind erosion, and spray d rift, leading to h uman exposure through consumption of contaminated drinking water. 

### B. Conceptual model The source of th e stressor is th e insect sodium channel blocker, indoxacarb . The mechanisms of release of indoxacarb are foliar aerial and ground application s , as well as through chemical irrigation systems ( chemigation) . Environmental transport of indoxacarb can occur through surface water runoff after rain events , soil and possible wind erosion and spray drift. Leaching into groundwater is not ex pected to be a maj or dissipation pathway based on submitted batch equilibrium, aged soil co lumn leaching and terrestrial field dissipation studie s which showed that indoxacarb having a low potential to leach. Surface water runoff from the areas of application is assumed to follow topography. Spray drift will follow the wind directions. Potential emission of volatile compounds is not considered as a via ble releas e mechanism for indoxacarb , since volatilization is not expected to be a significant route of dissipation for this chemical because of the low vapor pressure and Henry’s Law constant of the compound. 

### 3. **ANALYSIS 3.1.**  **Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization** The proposed DupontTM Avaunt ® 

### insecticide contains 30% of active ingredient of (S) isomer of Indoxacarb which is formulated as a water dispersible granule formulation. In addition, the proposed

### Page 6 of 25

DupontTM Steward® 

### EC insecticide contains 15.84 % of active ingredient of (S) isomer of Indoxacarb which is formulated as an emulsifiable concentrate . Most of the environmental fate studies were carried out with the either one of two older formulati ons: DPX - JW062 with a 50:50 (S: R) racemic mixture and DPX - MP062 with a 75 :25 (S: R) racemic mixture. T he following fate and transport characterization is for indoxacarb (parent) only. The half lives differ in **Table 4**  because of the total toxic residue (TTR) approach re commended by the MARC me morandum ( D267726 ). More informati on regarding the TTR approach including calculations can be found in the original assessment (USEPA 2000 ). The major routes of degradation for indoxacarb ( DPX - JW062 ) are alkaline - catalyzed hydrolysis, photodegradation in water, and microbial mediated de gradation . **Appendix III** summarizes indoxacarb’s degradation profile, including maximum percent formation. DP X - JW062 had abiotic hydrolysis halflives of 519 days in pH 5 buffer solution, 38 days in pH 7 buffer solution, and 1 day in pH 9 buffer solution (MRID 44477301) . The major hydrolysis degradation product was IN -KT413 (48% ) . Additional abiotic hydrolysis data indicate indanone and trifluroromethoxyphenyl labeled DPX - MP062 (3S: 1R ratio) had hydrolysis half - lives of 577.62 days in pH 5 buffer soluti on, 21.80 days in pH 7 buffer solution, and 1.11 days in pH 9 buffer solution (MRID 45795801) . Major degradation products included IN - KT413 (88.1%) and IN - MF014 (14.7%). A supplementary hydrolysis study showed the enantiomeric ratio of the isomers of indoxacarb remained constant during the study. The photodegradation half - life for DPX - JW062 was 3 .16 days in pH 5 buffer solution (MRID 44477302). Major degradation products included IN - KB687 (22.1% ) and IN -MF014 (37.8%) for phenyl labeled DPX - JW06 2 and IN -MH304 (19.9%) and MW297 (14.1%) for indanone labeled indoxacarb . Additional aqueous photolysis data indicate DPX -MP062 had a environmental phototransformation half - life of approximately 5 days (MRID 45795802). Major photodegradation products were identi fied as IN MH304 (32 .3 %), IN - CO639 (10.2%) and IN - MA573 (1 9.9 %) for indanone labeled indoxacarb; and IN MF014 (37.6 % ), IN - KB687 (28.7 %) for phenyl labeled indoxacarb. Additionally, numerous unidentified polar and non -polar degradation products were f ound for both labels of indoxacarb. A supplementary photodegradation study showed the enantiomeric ratio of the isomers of indoxacarb remained constant during the study. The extent of DPX - JW062 photodegradation on soil is questionable because there was extensive degradation in dark controls with similar degradation products (MRID 44477303). The dark control corrected half

- life was 126 days. The major degradation product was IN - KB68 7 (22%) . DPX - JW062 degraded with half - lives ranging from 3 to 693 days in aerobic soil metabolism studies (MRIDs 44477304, 45166303, 457 950803, 45795812, 45906701). Maximum formation rates for major degradates included IN - J T 333 (18.6% - 45906701), IN - KG433 (39.7% - 45166303), IN - JU 873 (12.9% - 45166303), IN -ML438 (9.7% - 45166303), IN - MK 643 (12% - 45166303, 44477304), IN - MK 6 38 (28.1%

- 45166303), IN -ML 437 OH (13% - 44477304), IN -KB 687 (11% - 44477304), CO 2 

### (35.73% - 45795803) and non - extractable residues (66.1% - 45906701). DPX - JW062 degraded with half - lives ranging fro m 18 to 34 days in near-neutral aerobic aquatic environments (MRID 44477306). Maximum formation rate for major degradates included IN - JT333 ( 10 .5 % of applied, half

- life of 54 day s under aerobic soil conditions ), Unknown A (24.1%), CO 2 

### (19%) and non - extrac table residues (38%). In addition, D P - MP062 degraded wi th total system half - lives of 30.7 and 21.3 days in a pond water/sediment and lake water/sediment systems, respectively (MRID 45793301). For the pond water/sediment system, maximum formation rates for major degradation products included IN -KT413 (42.1%) , IN - MP819 (10.3%) and IN - MS775 (12.8%). In the lake water/ sediment system, maximum formation rates for major degradation products included IN - JT333 (25.7%) , IN -KT41 3 (31.4%) and CO 2 

### (25.8%).

### Page 7 of 25

DPX - JW06 2 degraded with half - lives of 147 and 231 days in anaerobic soil -water environments (MRID 44477305). Maximum formation rate for major degradates included IN - JT333 ( 28.2 % of applied) , IN KT413 ( 16.0 %) and non - extractable residues ( 43 %). In addition, DPX - JW062 degraded with total system half - lives of 192 and 315 days for the indanone and phenyl label indoxacarb, respectively, in a floodedsilt loam sediment system (MRID 45 795804) . Similarly, major degradates included IN - J T333 and IN KT413 (16.0%) . Enanti omeric ratios of the R and S isomers remained constant during the study. Degradation products of indoxacarb had different half - lives in aerobic soils. IN - KT413 and IN - MK638 were non -persistent (t 1/2 

### 1.3 to 16.2 days) in foreign and US mineral soils (MRID 45906703, 45795816). IN - KG433 and IN - JU873 were non -persistent to moderately persistent (t 1/2 

### 10.5 to 58.7 days) in aerobic soils (MRIDs 45795815 and 45795814 ). In contrast, IN - MK643 was persistent (t 1/2 

### 141.5 to 346.6 days) in aerobic soils (MRID 457958 17). Degradation products except for CO 2 

### were not identified. However, the degradation pathways were generally associated with oxidative mineralization to CO 2 

### and residue incorporation into non - extractable soil organic matter. The results of batch equilibrium studies suggest low mobility of DPX - JW062 and IN - JT333 in terrestrial and aquatic environments. Reviewer calculated soil: water partition coefficients for DPX - JW062 are 29 ml/g in Myaka sand soil, 30 ml/g in Donna sandy clay loam soil, 99 ml/g in Chino loam soil, and 40 ml/g in a Tama silt loam soil (MRIDs 44477308 and 45795809). Soil: water partition coefficients for IN JT333 are 251 ml/g in Myaka sand soil, 115 ml/g in Donna sandy clay loam soil, 308 ml/g in Chino loam soil, and 147 ml/g in a Tama silt loam soil. There was no correlation between soil organic matter content and indoxacarb soil: water partitioning coefficients. The calculated Kds for indoxacarb degradation products (IN -KT413, IN -KG433, IN -MK638, and IN - MK643) rang ed from 1.2 to 11.3 ml/g in five US and foreign mineral soils (MRIDs 45795808, 45906702, 45795807, 45795806). In contrast, the calculated Kds for IN - JU873 rang ed from 52.1 to 406.4 (MRID 45795805). With an exception of IN JU873, the batch equilibrium data suggest indoxacarb degradation products may exhibit some mobility in soil. Aged soil column leaching studies, however, indicate aged residues of DPX - MP062 have low mobility in packed soil columns (MRID 44477309). Plant and soil volatility studies indicate that DPX - JW062 has low volatility from plant and soil surfaces, since after 168 hours of incubation, < 3% of applied radioactivity had volatilized from lettuce plants and soil surface (MRID 44491703). For DPX - JW062, at 10 and 100 ug/L concentrations , t he calculated fish bioconcentration factors were 395 to 504X for edible tissues, 1568 - 2081X for nonedible tissues, and 1044 - 1351X for whole fish tissues, respectively (MRIDs 44477319 and 45805301). When based on residues of the active isomer, DPX KN128, maximum BCFs were 24 in fillet, 153 in viscera, and 90 in whole fish for the 10 ppb exposure. The major degradation product in fish tissues (>10% recovered) was IN - JT333. Minor degradation products (<10% recovered) were IN -ML811, IN - KT319, IN -KG433, and IN - JU8 73. The depuration halflife of bioaccumulated indoxacarb 14C residues ranged from 6.55 to 7.88 days. For DPX - JW062 applied at 0.6 lbs ai/A on bare sand soil , the calculated field dissipation half - lives rang ed from 72 to 79 days in Florida and California , respectively (MRIDs 44477312, 44477315 and 44477316). Field studies on bare ground soils using radiolabeled DPX - JW062 and with 0.88 lb a.i./A application rate indicated field dissipation half - lives ranging from 29 to 113 days in Delaware and Texas and 7 3 to 119 days in California and Florida, respectively (MRIDs 44477311 and 45850002 ). The degradate IN - JT333 was detected in all field studies. The degradate IN - KG433 was only detected in the radiolabeled field studies. Some leaching of parent and resid ues occurred but were not detected below 45 cm (18 inches).

### Page 8 of 25

**3.2. Drinking Water Exposure Modeling**  Estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) were generated using EFED’s standard suite of models. Since there is no standard scenario to model berry, the sp ecialty Oregon Berry OP scenario was utilized. In addition, the Provisional Cranberry Model was utilized to model cranberry. The maximum application rate for the proposed new uses was modeled. 

### 3.2.1. **Models** Pesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM v3.12 .2, May 12, 2 005 ) and Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS v2.98.04.06, April 25, 2005 ) are simulation models coupled with the input PE5.pl shell (PE5, PE Version 5.0, November 15, 2006 ) to generate EDWCs of indoxacarb residues that may occur in surface water used as drinking water. The PRZM model s imulates pesticide movement and transformation on and across the agricultural field resulting from crop application s . The EXAMS model simulates pesticide loading via runoff, erosion, and spray drift assuming a standard watershed of 172.8 ha that drains into an adjacent standard drinking water index reservoir of 5. 26 ha, an average depth of 2.74 m. A more detailed description of the index reservoir watershed can be found in Jones et al ., 1998. The coupled PRZM/EXAMS model and users manuals may be downloaded from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Models web -page (USEPA, 2011 ). Percent Crop Areas (PCA) that account for the maximum area within a watershed that may be planted with the modeled crop are app lied to concentrations predicted by PRZM/EXAMS . Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI - GROW v2.3, Jul. 29, 2003) is a regression model used as a screening tool to estimate pesticide concentrations found in ground water used as drinking water. SCI GROW was developed by fitting a linear model to ground water concentrations with the Relative Index of Leaching Potential (RILP) as the independent variable. Ground water concentrations were taken from 90 - day average high concentrations from Prospective Ground Water studies. The RILP is a function of aerobic soil metabolism and the soil -water partition coefficient. The output of SCI - GROW represents the concentrations of residue s that might be expected in shallow unconfined aquifers under sandy soils, which is representative of the ground water most vulnerable to pesticide contamination and likely to serve as a drinking water source. The SCI - GROW model and user’s manual may also be downloaded from the EPA Water Models web -page (USEPA, 2011 ). The Provisi onal Cranberry Model is a provisional refinement to and based on the same assumptions as the Tier I Rice Model (v1.0, May 8, 2007). Refinements include the addition of simple degradation processes in dry and flooded conditions and a water depth of twelve inches, rather than the water depth of four inches used in the rice model. These modifications allow estimation of screening - level peak and annual mean EDWCs of indoxacarb residues of concern that may occur in untreated surface water used as drinking water following use on cranberries. Degradation of indoxacarb residues of concern on dry cranberry bog soil is assumed to occur predominantly via aerobic microbial metabolism. Residue degradation in flooded bogs is assumed to occur via aerobic microbial metab olism in the water column and via anaerobic microbial metabolism in the sediment. Cranberry bogs are not typically flooded until the night before harvesting. Because use of indoxacarb on cranberries is proposed for up to two applications, each seven days apart, with a thirty - day pre -harvest interval, the proposed single application rate (0. 22 lbs a.i./A) was aged on dry soil with the Provi sional Cranberry Model for two durations, applied at thirty seven and thirty days before harvest. The resulting resid ues (in lbs a.i./A) were then summed together and input used as for the flooded component of the model to estimate peak and annual mean EDWCs in bog tailwater following harvest.

### Page 9 of 25

The cranberry bog water depth of twelve inches is a maximum depth recommended by the Cape Cod Cranberry Growers Association (2001). Previous assessments of mesotrione uses that employed the Provisional Cranberry Model assumed a water depth of eighteen inches (DP barcode 339984, USEPA, 2004; DP barcode 325840, USEPA, 2006a), which is within the range of water depths traditionally used. However, modern water conservation pressures are causing cranberry growers to reduce the flood depth to fewer inches above the vertical cranberry branches, which grow up to eight inches high (Cape Co d Cranberry Growers Association, 2001; The Cranberry Institute, 2008). Therefore, a twelve - inch deep flood is a reasonable refinement to model assumptions. The equations used in the Provisional Cranberry Model are briefly described in **Appendix II** . 

### 3.2.2. **Inp ut Parameters**  For dry and snap beans and low growing berries, the maximum application rate (4 application s at 0.11 lbs. a.i./acre) was modeled to capture the maximum EDWCs . In addition, the maximum application rate (2 application s at 0.11 lbs. a.i./acre) was modeled for cranberries and the small fruit vine climbing subgroup . F oliar (a erial and ground) spray applications and chemigation methods were modeled for these maximum use rates. Application timing was based on the crop scenario’s harvest date, p re -harvest interval (PHI) , application interval and total number of applications . Chemical property input values were chosen according to the current input parameter guidance (USEPA, 2009 ). Standard PCA s were used for all uses as estimates of the extent of watershed on which crops are grown (Effland et al . , 1999). The default agricultural PCA of 0.87 was used for the proposed new uses because they are not confined to specific regions of the U.S. Actual fractions of cropped areas could be less in some areas of the country. Input parameters and explanations for the PRZM/EXAMS and SCI - GROW and Provisional Cranberry models are listed in **Table 4**  , **Table 5** , and **Table 6**  **,** respectively . **Table 4. PRZM/EXAMS Input P arameters for**  **Indoxacarb Input Parameter**  **: Value**  **: Comment:**  **Source :**  Scenario (s): Beans (Dry and Snap) : MI Bean Low Growing Berry : OR Berry Cranberry Small Fruit Vine Climbing : NY Grape representative scenarios for each use EFED Scenarios

Maximum Single Application Rate lbs a.i./acre (kg a.i. /ha) All proposed uses : 0.11 (0.124) proposed rate Proposed labels Applications per Year Beans (Dry and Snap) : 4 Low Growing Berry : OR Berry: 4 Cranberry: 2 Small Fruit Vine Climbing : 2 L abel directions. Label specifies rates per crop . If there are multiple crops grown per year , yearly rates may be higher. Proposed labels

### Page 10 of 25 **Table 4. PRZM/EXAMS Input P arameters for**  **Indoxacarb Input Parameter**  **: Value**  **: Comment:**  **Source :**  Application Interval (d ays ) Beans (Dry and Snap): 7 Low Growing Berry: 7 Small Fruit Vine Climbing: 21 Label directions Proposed labels Date of Initial Application (scenario: day- month) Bean (Dry) : MI Bean: 07 - 08 Bean (Snap) : MI Bean: 11 - 08 Low Growing Berry : OR Berry: 09 - 06 Small Fruit Vine Climbing : NY Grape: 17 - 09 For all crops, the date of initial application was calculated from the harvest date from the crop profile and the Pre - Harvest Interval (PHI) and number and interval of applications from the proposed label. Crop Scenarios and proposed labels

Application Method Aerial (foliar) Ground (foliar) Chemigation l abel directions Proposed labels CAM Input 2 (foliar: aerial and ground) 1 (chemigation) (1 ) Soil applied, default incorporation depth, linearly decreasing with depth (2) linear foliar based on crop canopy US EP A, 2005 IPSCND Input Beans (Dry and Snap): 2 Low Growing Berry: 3 Small Fruit Vine Climbing: 3 ...remaining pesticide on foliage is (1) converted to surface application to the top soil layer, (2) completely removed after harvest, (3) is retained as surface residue and continues to decay. US EP A, 2005 Spray Drift Fraction 0.16 (aerial) 0. 064 (ground) 0 (chemigation) -- Input parameter guidance (USEPA, 2009 ) Application Efficiency 0.95 (aerial) 0.99 (ground) 1.0 (chemigation) -- Input parameter guidance (USEPA, 2009 ) Molecular Mass (g/mol) 527.8 -- Product Chemistry Vapor Pressure at 25 °C (torr) 1.9 x 10 - 10

-- Product Chemistry Henry’s Law Constant (atm- m 3 /mol) 1.6 x 10 - 10

-- Calculated from water solubility, vapor pressure and molecular weight Solubility in Water (mg/L) 0.8 pH 7 at 20 °C Product Chemistry Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KOC ) (L/kg OC ) 400 Since this assessment is based on cumulative residues, the mean value for IN - KG433 was used because it has the lowest non - sand Kf and Koc of the residues of toxicological concern MRID 45795806

Aerobic Soil Metabolism Hal f - life (days) 267 Rate Constant = 0.0026/day. Linear fitting techniques using the first order degradation model provided a poor description of the data as shown b y non - significant F tests and R2

. Therefore, nonlinear fitting techniques with the first order decay mod el were used to estimate rate constants for indoxacarb residue degradation. MRID 44477304 MRID 44477307

### Page 11 of 25 **Table 4. PRZM/EXAMS Input P arameters for**  **Indoxacarb Input Parameter**  **: Value**  **: Comment:**  **Source :**  Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half

- life (days) 71 Rate Constant = 4.0 x 10 - 4/hour. Non - l inear fitting techniques were utilized as described in ASM above. MRID 44477306 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half

- life (days) 577 Rate Constant = 5.0 x 10 - 5 /hour. Non - l inear fitting techniques were utilized as described in ASM above. MRID 44477305 Hydrolysis Half

- lives (days) 0 (stable) Rate Constant = 1. 5 x 10 - 4/hour. Non - l inear fitting techniques were utilized as described in ASM above. MRID 44477301 Aqueous Photolysis Half - life (days) 0 (stable) -- MRID 44477302 

### Table 5. SCI**- GROW Input P**  **arameters for Indoxacarb**  **Input Parameter Value**  **Comment Sourc**  **e** Maximum Single Application Rate per growing season (lbs a.i./A) 0.11 maximum single application rate Proposed labels Applications per Year 4 (beans, berries) l abel directions Proposed labels Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KOC ) (L/kg OC ) 360 1 median value of IN - KG433 degradate data because there was not a greater than a thre e fold variation among five values MRID 45795806 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half - life (days) 267 2 Rate Constant = 0.0026/day. MRID 44477304 MRID 44477307 1 = Individual Koc values for the degradate IN - KG433 (518, 360, 433, 348, 343). 2 = Linear fitting techniques using the first order degradation model provided a poor description of the data as shown b y non - significant F tests and R2

. Therefore, nonlinear fitting techniques with the first order decay model were used to estimate rate constants for idoxacarb residue degradation. **Table 6**  **. Provisional Tier 1 Cranberry**  **Model Input Param eters for**  **Indoxacarb Input Parameter**  **Value Source**  Application Rate (lbs a.i./A) 0.11 Proposed label Applications per Year 2 Proposed label Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KOC) (L/kgOC) 400 Represents the mean value for IN - KG433 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half - life (days) 267 Rate Constant = 0.0026/day Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half - l if e (days) 71 Rate Constant = 4.0 x 10 - 4/hour Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half - life (days) 577 Rate Constant = 5.0 x 10 - 5 /hour 

### 3.2.3. **Modeling Results** The maximum use patterns were modeled to yield the maxim um EDWCs for surface water and groundwater ( **Table 7** **)** . T he recommended maximum EDWC concentrations are as follows. For surface water, cranberry yielded the highest EDWCs. The 1 - in - 10 yr annual peak (acute) concentration was **59.26 μg/L**  , the 1 - in - 10 yr annual mean (chronic) concentration was **18.48 μg/L**  and the 30 -year annual mean (cancer chronic) concentration was **18.48 μg/L**  . For groundwater, based on the proposed highest annual use rate for beans and berries , the SCI - GROW mode l estimated the indoxacarb concentration at

### Page 12 of 25

**0.33 μg/L**  . Since these values are greater than the previous established EDWCs for cotton (D293793, D355124) , they will supersede all previous EDW Cs generated for indoxacarb. Representative PRZM/EXAMS, SCI - GROW and Cranberry model outputs with input parameter data are attached in **Appendix I** . 

### Table **7. Indoxacarb Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWC s)**  **1** 

### for Surface **Water and Ground Water**  **based on selected Crop Scenarios Proposed**  **Label Use PRZ** **M/EXAMS**

**Scenario 1**  **(first app date) Me** **thod 2**  **Maximum Application Rate**  **(interval between appli**  **cations) 1**  **- in**  **- 10**  **year acute**  **(** 

### μg/L **) 1**  **- in**  **- 10** 

**year chronic**  **(** 

### μg/L **) 30**  **- year** 

**average (**  

### μg/L **) DuPont** **TM Avaunt**  **® and Steward**  **® EC**  **Insecticides Surface Water**  Beans (Dry) MI Bean

(August 7 ) A 4 app @ 0.11 lb a.i./acre (7 days) 18.68 6.03 3.50 G 18.50 5.81 3.18 C 17.01 5.40 3.13 Beans (Snap) MI Bean

(August 11 ) A 4 app @ 0.11 lb a.i./acre (7 days) 18.90 5.77 3.14 G 18.38 5.53 2.80 C 15.74 4.92 3.10 Lo w Growing Berry (including Cranberry) OR Berry **3** (June 9) A 4 app @ 0.11 lb a.i./acre (7 days) 4.19 1. 97 1.54 G 3.55 1.53 1.10 C 3.03 1.16 0.74 Provisional Cranberry Model -- 2 app @ 0.11 lb a.i./acre (7 days) **59.26 18.48**  **18.48** Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup NY Grape

(September 17) A 2 app @ 0.11 lb a.i./acre (21 days) 4.49 1.86 1.32 G 3 .94 1.60 1.04 C 3.16 1.21 0.75 **Ground Water** SCI GROW Bean

Berry -- 4 app @ 0.11 lb a.i./acre **0.33 0.33**  **0.33** 1 For surface water (PRZM/EXAMS), EDWC values adjusted with a Percent Cropped Area (PCA) factor of 0.87. For ground water (SCI - GROW), no PC A adjustment was utilized. Bold numbers denote maximum EDWC values. 2 A = aerial application, G = ground application , C = chemigation. 3 Since there is no standard scenario to model berry, the specialty Oregon Berry OP scenario was utilized. 

### 3.2.4. **Monitorin g Data**  There was no surface water or groundwater monitoring data available; therefore, the surface water and ground water assessment was based solely on the PRZM/EXAMS, SCI - GROW and Provisional Cranberry modeling , respectively . 

### 3.2.5 **Drinking Water Tre atment**  There is no available information on the drinking water trea tment effects on indoxacarb .

### Page 13 of 25

**4. Uncertainties**  **, Assumptions and Limitations** 1.) A major uncertainty in the assessment is the lack of environmental fate data for the toxic transformation produc ts of DPX - JW062 (Indoxacarb) . In order to address this uncertainty, EFED has conducted the Tier II modeling on the summed DPX - JW062 residues instead of individual residues. This approach was taken because the environmental fate studies were deficient in addressing the identification and fate of DPX - JW062 transformation products in the tolerance expression. In cases where the environmental fate data did not adequately identify DPX - JW062 residues such as the aerobic aquatic and anaerobic aquatic studies, the half - lives were calculated on cumulative residues rather than the summation of toxic DPX JW062 residues. 2.) The cumulative residue modeling method assumes environmental fate properties for indoxacarb and its degradation products ( IN - JT333, IN - KG4333, IN - KT413, IN - ML437 - 0H) are similar. This modeling approach provides a conservative assessment process for consideration of simultaneous formation and decline of indoxacarb residues. 3.) Indoxacarb degradation can be characterized as a “hockey stick” behavior wi th a rapid degradation rate followed by a slower degradation rate. Selection of a suitable soil degradation half

- life is difficult due the large discrepancy of half - lives estimated using linearized first - order degradation model and 2 parameter exponential decay model. 4.) Other uncertainties in the modeling are associated with the selection of the most representative model for describing DPX - JW062 residue degradation. Linear fitting techniques using the first order degradation model (ln(y/a)= -bt) provided a p oor description of the aerobic soil metabolism data as shown by non - significant F tests and low coefficients of determination (R 2 

### ). Therefore, nonlinear fitting techniques (as employed through Sigmaplot -Regression Wizard) with the first order decay model (y=ae -bx

### ) were used to estimate rate constants for DPX - JW062 residue degradation. This fitting procedure was used to estimate the degradation rate constants for hydrolysis, aerobic soil metabolism, aerobic aquatic metabolism, and anaerobic aquatic metabolism. 5.) The lowest adsorption Koc coefficient of the toxic DPX - JW062 residues (IN - KG433) was used to represent sorption in soil and aquatic environments. 6.) The proposed label specifies rates per crop. If there are multiple crops grown per year , the yearly rate may be higher resulting in underestimation o f risk if the proposed commodities are grown more than one crop per year. 7.) In general, the likelihood that multiple crops from the list of proposed uses will be found within a single watershed where indox acarb is used is unknown; therefore, the default Percent Crop Area (PCA) of 0.87 was utilized.

### Page 14 of 25

**5. Conclusions:**  The Tier II drinking water exposure estimates are based on the indoxacarb proposed new uses represented by the maximum use patterns ba sed on the proposed label . Review of the surface water and groundwater data , the Provisional Cranberry Model yielded the maximum EDWCs in this assessment. The 1 - in - 10 yr annual peak (acute) concentration was **59.26 μg/L**  , the 1 - in - 10 yr annual mean (chroni c) concentration was **18.48 μg/L**  and the 30 -year annual mean (cancer chronic) concentration was **18.48 μg/L**  . For groundwater, based on the proposed highest annual use rate representing beans and berries , the SCI GROW mode l estimated the indoxacarb concentration at **0.33 μg/L**  . The estimated drinking water concentrations generated in this assessment **supersede** all other values for indoxacarb since they represent the highest concentrations to date.

### Page 15 of 25

**REFERENCES** Cape Cod Cranberry Growers Association. 2001. Cranberry Water Use: An Information Fact Sheet. Ju ne, 2001. Online at: http://www.cranberries.org/pdf/wateruse.pdf Effland, W. R., N. C. Thurman, I. Kennedy. 1999. Proposed Methods for Determining Watershedderived Percent Crop Areas and Considerations for Applying Crop Area Adjustments to Surface Water Screening Models. Presentation to the FIFRA Science Advisory Panel, May 27, 1999. The Cranberry Institute. 2008. About Cranberries. 2 003 - 2008. Online at: http://www.cranberryinstitute.org/about_cranberry.htm Jones, R. D., S. Abel, W. R. Effland, R. Matzner, R. Parker. 1998. An Index Reservoir for Use in Assessing Drinking Water Exposure. Proposed Methods for Basin - scale Estimation of Pesticide Concentrations in Flowing Water and Reservoirs for Tolerance Reassessment. Presentation to FIFRA Science Advisory Panel, June 29 - 30, 1998. USEPA 2000. Index Reservoir Drinking Water Assessment for DPX - JW062 {(R,S) - methyl - 7 - chloro 2,5 - dihydro - 2 - [(methylcarbonyl)[4 - (trifluoromethoxy) phenyl] amino]carbonyl]indeno[1,2 - e][1,3,4]oxadiazine -4a(3H) - carboxylate} and its Transformation Products. DP 267726. USEPA. 2004. Wol f, J. Section 18 Request for Use of Mesotrione on Cranberry in Oregon and Washington. DP Barcode D339984. EFED memorandum to RD. Undated. USEPA. 2006. Standardized Soil Mobility Classification Guidance. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Memorandum. April 21, 2006. USEPA. 2009 . Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides , Version 2.1 . U.S. Environmental Protecti on Agency, Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention , Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, October 22, 2009 . USEPA. 2011 . Water Models. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Scienc e and Policy. Last updated: June 30, 2011 . Online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/

### Page 16 of 25 **Appendix I :**  **Model Outputs: PRZM/EXAMS, SCI**  **- GROW**  **, Cranberr y** 

### Page 17 of 25

**Representat ive PRZM/EXAM Output: Michigan Bean**  **– Aerial Application**  stored as SnapBeanA.out Chemical: Idoxacarb PRZM environment: MIbeansSTD.txt modified Tueday, 29 M ay 2007 at 13:56:44 EXAMS environment: ir298.exv modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:14:07 Me tfile: w14826.dvf modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:15:04 Water segment concentrations (ppb) Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 10.40 10.09 9.37 8.62 8. 09 2.73 1962 5.08 5.01 4.75 4.32 4. 09 3.05 1963 3.49 3.40 3.21 2.96 2. 69 1.80 1964 4.62 4.51 4.10 3.56 3. 32 1.94 1965 8.09 7.88 7.46 6.89 6. 22 3.20 1966 4.53 4.42 4.03 3.62 3. 56 2.78 1967 5.46 5.37 5.12 4.66 4. 60 2.95 1968 8.42 8.22 7.98 6.93 6. 20 3.67 1969 4.47 4.41 4.21 3.95 3. 67 2.48 1970 7.63 7.46 6.91 6.49 6. 12 2.61 1971 4.36 4.30 4.07 3.67 3. 46 2.77 1972 7.31 7.17 6.82 6.19 5. 99 3.36 1973 5.22 5.09 4.69 4.22 4. 26 3.12 1974 4.48 4.39 4.10 3.76 3. 63 2.67 1975 23.37 23.05 21.26 18.45 16. 62 6.71 1976 9.64 9.52 9.02 8.16 7. 61 4.56 1977 6.02 5.89 5.55 4.83 4. 55 2.40 1978 5.27 5.18 4.80 4.07 3. 71 2.44 1979 3.09 3.01 2.71 2.34 2. 19 1.72 1980 8.59 8.36 7.65 6.50 5. 90 2.50 1981 15.97 15.62 14.44 12.44 11. 69 5.23 1982 7.72 7.64 7.26 6.50 6. 07 4.77 1983 6.71 6.53 5.97 5.52 5. 15 3.36 1984 4.58 4.47 4.14 3.91 3. 82 2.60 1985 22.36 21.75 19.76 16.77 15. 05 6.02 1986 23.32 22.79 21.51 18.92 17. 44 8.62 1987 13.12 12.79 11.86 10.06 9. 18 6.71 1988 7.06 6.88 6.37 5.92 5. 71 4.12 1989 11.22 10.93 9.91 8.27 7. 53 4.03 1990 5.41 5.30 4.92 4.78 4. 65 3.50 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0. 03 23.37 23.05 21.51 18.92 17. 44 8.62 0. 06 23.32 22.79 21.26 18.45 16. 62 6.71 0. 10 22.36 21.75 19.76 16.77 15. 05 6.71 0. 13 15.97 15.62 14.44 12.44 11. 69 6.02 0. 16 13.12 12.79 11.86 10.06 9. 18 5.23 0. 19 11.22 10.93 9.91 8.62 8. 09 4.77 0. 23 10.40 10.09 9.37 8.27 7. 61 4.56 0. 26 9.64 9.52 9.02 8.16 7. 53 4.12 0. 29 8.59 8.36 7.98 6.93 6. 22 4.03 0. 32 8.42 8.22 7.65 6.89 6. 20 3.67 0. 35 8.09 7.88 7.46 6.50 6. 12 3.50 0. 39 7.72 7.64 7.26 6.50 6. 07 3.36 0. 42 7.63 7.46 6.91 6.49 5. 99 3.36 0. 45 7.31 7.17 6.82 6.19 5. 90 3.20 0. 48 7.06 6.88 6.37 5.92 5. 71 3.12 0. 52 6.71 6.53 5.97 5.52 5. 15 3.05 0. 55 6.02 5.89 5.55 4.83 4. 65 2.95 0. 58 5.46 5.37 5.12 4.78 4. 60 2.78 0. 61 5.41 5.30 4.92 4.66 4. 55 2.77 0. 65 5.27 5.18 4.80 4.32 4. 26 2.73 0. 68 5.22 5.09 4.75 4.22 4. 09 2.67 0. 71 5.08 5.01 4.69 4.07 3. 82 2.61 0. 74 4.62 4.51 4.21 3.95 3. 71 2.60 0. 77 4.58 4.47 4.14 3.91 3. 67 2.50 0. 81 4.53 4.42 4.10 3.76 3. 63 2.48 0. 84 4.48 4.41 4.10 3.67 3. 56 2.44 0. 87 4.47 4.39 4.07 3.62 3. 46 2.40 0. 90 4.36 4.30 4.03 3.56 3. 32 1.94 0. 94 3.49 3.40 3.21 2.96 2. 69 1.80 0. 97 3.09 3.01 2.71 2.34 2. 19 1.72 0. 10 21.72 21.14 19.23 16.34 14. 71 6.64 5.77 18.90 Average of yearly averages: 3.61 3.14 Inputs generated by pe5.pl - Novemeber 2006 Data used for this run: Output File: SnapBeanA Me tfile: w14826.dvf PRZM scenario: MIbeansSTD.txt EXAMS environment file: ir 298.e xv Chemical Name: Idoxacarb Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Mo lec ular weight mwt 527. 8 g/mol He nry's Law Const. henry 1.60E-10 atm-m^3/mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.90E-10 torr Solubility sol 0. 8 mg/L Kd Kd mg/L Koc Koc 400 mg/L Photolysis half-life kdp 0 days Hal f-life Aerobic Aquatic M etabolism kbacw 71 days Hal fife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 577 days Hal fife Aerobic Soil M etabolism asm 267 days Hal fife Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Hal f-life Me thod: CAM 2 integer See PRZMmanual Incorporation Depth: DEPI cm Application Rate: TAPP 0. 124 kg/ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.16 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 8-Nov dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. app. rate 1 apprate 0. 124 kg/ha Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. app. rate 2 apprate 0. 124 kg/ha Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. app. rate 3 apprate 0. 124 kg/ha Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 2 UP TKF Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0. 5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR Reservoir Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF total none, monthly or total(average of entire run)

### Page 18 of 25

**SCI -**  **GROW Output :**  **SCIGROW VERSION 2.3**  **ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECTS DIVISION OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS**  **U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY**  **SCREENING MODEL FOR AQUATIC PESTICIDE EXPOSURE**  **SciGrow version 2.3 chemical:Idoxacarb**  **time is 10/10/2012 23:40:11**

**------------------------------------------------------------------------ Application Number of Total Use Koc So**  **il Aerobic rate (lb/acre) applications (lb/acre/yr) (ml/g) metabolism (days)** 

**------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0.110 4.0 0.440 3.60E+02 267.0** 

**------------------------------- -----------------------------------------**  **G roundwater screening cond (ppb) = 3.34E**  **- 01 or 0.33 ug/L**  **************************************************************************** 

### Provisional Cranberry **Output :**  **Pr ovi**  **sional Cr** 

**anberr y**  **Mo del**  **Equat ion**  **s:** EEC= EEC0*exp( -day * (dw * AAM t1 /2 ) + ( ds ed * θ* An AM t1 /2 ) + (ds ed * ρ* Kd * An AM t1 /2 ) / ( dw + d se d * (θ+ ρ* Kd )))) EEC0= Ap p rat e * 100 / ( dw + (ds ed * (θ+ ( ρ* Kd / 1 000)))) **Inp ut** **s Mo**  **del P**  **arame te**  **rs Ca**  **lc ul**  **at ed**  **Parameters Ex**  **pos ure**  **Wat er**  **Pe ak**  **21-d Me**  **an 60-d**  **Me an**  **Pa ra**  **met er**  **Valu e**  **Pa ra**  **met er**  **Va lue**  **Pa ra**  **met er**  **Va lue**  Eco Pa ddy Ap pl ic at ion r

at e (l bs /A) **0. 22**  Wate r co lu mn dept h (m) 0. 305 Ap p. r at e (k g/ ha) 0. 24662 Eco 7-d Ta il Ko c ( L/ kg ) **400** Se di ment d ept h (m) 0. 01 Kd i nput( L/ kg ) 4 **Pe ak**  **Ann ua**  **l Me an**  If no Ko c, e nt er Kd ( L/ kg ) Organic f rac tio n of se dim ent 0. 01 AAM rat e k ( 1/ d) 0. 009763 DW ( raw) 7-d Ta il 68 21 Ae r aq met abolis m t1 /2(d) **71** Se di ment b ul k d ens ity ( kg /m3 ) 1300 An AM rat e k ( 1/ d) 0. 001201 87% PCA 

### 59. **26 18.**  **48** An aer aq met abolis m t1 /2(d) **577** Se di ment p oros ity 0. 509 ASM rat e k ( 1/ d) 0. 002596 77% PCA ( R4) **52 16**  Ae r so il meta bol is m t1 /2(d) **267** 63% PCA ( R17) 43 13 *W at er co lu mn dept h is 1 2 inc hes (0. 305 m)to1 8 inc hes (0. 457 m) .. 46% PCA ( R2) 31 10 14% PCA ( R1) 9. 5 3. 0 Ap p rat e, 37 d ( lb s/A)= 0. 11 **Pre -P**  **CA Valu**  **es** Ap p rat e, 30 d ( lb s/A)= 0. 11 68. 11 Pe akEEC Tota l lb s/A at h arv

es t = **0. 22**  21. 24 An nual Mean Ta ilwat er EDWC

### Page 19 of 25 

## Appendix II **: Provisional Cranberr y Model Equations**  The Provisional Cranberry Model is a refinement of the Tier I Rice Model v1.0 (Equation s 1 and 2 ) , which is a simple equilibrium partitioning equation that calculates a single, screening - level concentration in rice paddy water and releas ed tailwater based on a compound’s applic ation rate and soil mobility . **Equation s**  **1 -** **2 : Tier I Rice Model v1**  **.0 (USEPA, 2007b).** 

#   d b sed sed w ai w 

## K d d m C 

 3 2 0 

## 10

' 10

 

##    (1) and, if appropriate: OC d 

## K K 01 . 0  (2) where, C w0 

### = initial water concentration [μg/L] m ai 

### ' = mass applied per unit area [kg/ha] Kd 

### = water- sediment partitioning coefficient [L/kg] KOC 

### = organic carbon partitioning coefficient [L/kg] dw 

### = water column depth = 0.10 m d sed 

### = sediment depth = 0.01 m θ sed 

### = porosity

of sediment = 0.509 ρ b 

### = bulk density

of sediment = 1300 kg/m 3 

### First, the Tier I Rice Model was provisionally modified (Equation 3 ) to include as inputs degradation rate constants in order to estimate single, screening - level concentration s in paddy water or tailwater at a given time after application. **Equation 3 : Provisional Modified Ri** **ce Model (Jones, 2006).**     

##     t K d d k

K d k d k d w w d b sed sed w d b sed sed sed w 

## e C C         

  



  

##   3 3 3 2 1 10 10 0     

### (3) where, C w 

### = water concentration [μg/L] t = interval since last application [ d] k 1 

### = upper 90 th 

### percentile rate constant in water column [ 1/d] k2 

### = upper 90 th 

### percentile rate constant in pore water [ 1/d] k3 

### = upper 90 th 

### percentile rate constant for adsorbed residues [ 1/d] Then, the Provisional Modified Rice Model water column depth was lengthened to a depth that is used to flood cranberry

bogs ( i.e. , 12 inches; Cape Cod Cranberry Growers Association, 2001 ). 

## i.e. , dw 

### = water column depth = 0. 305 m

### Page 20 of 25

In order to model degradation prior to the flood at harvest, the application rates for n number of pre - harve st applications were independentl y degraded over the interim until flooding and then summed (Equation 4). **Equation 4 :**  **Degra dation in**  **a Dry Bog.**  

# 

 

##   n t

k n ai ai n



## e m m 1 4



## ' ' (4) where, m ai 

### ' = mass per unit area at flood [kg/ha] m ai 

### ' n 

### = mass applied per unit area on the nth 

### application [kg/ha] k4 

### = upper 90 th 

### percentile rate constant on dry bog [ 1/d] tn 

### = interval from the nth 

### application to harvest [ d] n = number of pre - harvest applications The following four equations and parameter sets constitute the Provi sional Cranberry Model (Equations 1 - 4). **Equation s 1**  **- 4** **: Provisional Cranberry Model.**  

#   d b sed sed w ai w 

## K d d m C 

 3 2 0 

## 10

' 10

 

##    (1) and, if appropriate:

OC d 

## K K 01 . 0  (2) where, C w0 

### = initial water concentration [μg/L] Kd 

### = water- sediment partitioning coeffic ient [L/kg] KOC 

### = organic carbon partitioning coefficient [L/kg] dw 

### = water column depth = 0. 305 m d sed 

### = sediment depth = 0.01 m θ sed 

### = porosity

of sediment = 0.509 ρ b 

### = bulk density

of sediment = 1300 kg/m 3 

### and, lastly :     

##     t K d d k

K d k d k d w w d b sed sed w d b sed sed sed w 

## e C C         

  



  

##   3 3 3 2 1 10 10 0     

### (3) where, C w 

### = water concentration [μg/L] t = interval since flood [d] k 1 

### = upper 90 th 

### percentile rate constant in water column [ 1/d] k2 

### = upper 90 th 

### percentile rate constant in pore water [ 1/d] k3 

### = upper 90 th 

### percentile rate constant for adsorbed residues [ 1/d]

### Page 21 of 25

**Appendix III: Indoxacarb’s Degradation Profile Code Name/**  **Synonym Chemical Name**  **Chemical Structure Study Type**  **MRID Maximum**  **Formation (% Applied)**  **IN -**  **KT413 CAS**  **Name :** 

sodium 7 - chloro - 2,5, - dihydro - 2 - [[(methoxycarbonyl)[4 - (trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]amino]car bonyl]indeno[1,2 - e][l,3,4]oxadiazine - 4a(3H) - carboxylic acid **Molecular Weight :**  513.82 g/mol (free acid) Hydrolysis 44477301 **48 .0**  Hydrolysis pH 7 45795801 **47.1** Hydrolysis pH 9 **88.1** Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 45793301 **42.1** Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism 44477305 **16.0**



### IN **- MF014**  **CAS Name :** 

methyl 2 - [[[4 - (trifluoromethoxy)phenyl] amino ]carbonyl]hydrazine carboxylate Hydrolysis pH 5 45795801 6.1 Hydrolysis pH 7 **14.7** Aqueous P hotolysis 44477302 **37.8** Aqueous P hotolysis 45795802 **37.6**



### IN **- MH304**  **CAS Name :** 

Not Reported Aqueous P hotolysis 44477302 **19.9**

### Page 22 of 25

**Appendix III: Indoxacarb’s Degradation Profile Code Name/**  **Synonym Chemical Name**  **Chemical Structure Study Type**  **MRID Maximum**  **Formation (% Applied)**  Aqueous P hotolysis 45795802 **32.3** 

### MW 297 **CAS Name :** 

Not Reported

Proposed structure; not proven due to inability to synthesize standard Aqueous P hotolysis 44477302 **14.1**



### IN **- KB687**  **CAS Name :** 

methyl[4 (trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]c arbamate **Molecular Weight :**  235.16 g/mol Aqueous P hotolysis 44477302 **22.1** Aqueous P hotolysis 45795802 **28.7** Soil Photolysis 44477303 **22.0** Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44477304 **1 1.0**  

### IN **- C0639**  **CAS Name :** 

4 - chloro - 1,2 -benzenedicarboxylic acid Aqueous P hotolysis 45795802 **10.2**



### IN **- MA573**  **CAS Name :** 

2 - carboxy- 5 - chloro benzeneacetic acid Aqueous P hotolysis 45795802 **19.9**



### IN **- JT333**  **CAS Name**  **:**

methyl - 7 - chloro - 2,5 - dihydro - 2 - [[[4 (trifluoromethoxy)p henyl]amino ]carbonyl]indeno[1,2 e][1,3 ,4]oxadia zine - 4a(3H) - carboxylate Aerobic Soil Metabolism 45906701 **1 8.6**  Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 44477306 **10.5**

### Page 23 of 25

**Appendix III: Indoxacarb’s Degradation Profile Code Name/**  **Synonym Chemical Name**  **Chemical Structure Study Type**  **MRID Maximum**  **Formation (% Applied)**  **Molecular Weight :**  469.81 g/mol Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 45793301 **25.7**

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism 44477305 **28.2** 

### IN **- KG433**  **CAS Name**  **:**

Methyl - 5 - chloro - 2,3 - dihydro - 2 - hydroxy- 1[[[(methoxycarbonyl)[4 - (trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]amino]car bonyl]hydrazono] - 1H - indene - 2 - carboxylate **Molecular Weight :**  515.83 g/mol Aerobic Soil Metabolism 45166303 **39.7**



### IN **- JU873**  **CAS Name**  **:**

1 - [[[[4 - (trifluoromethoxy)phenyl] amino] carbonyl]hydrazono] - 1H indene - 2 - carboxylate **Molecular Weight :**  457.8 g/mol Aerobic Soil Metabolism 45166303 **12.9**

### Page 24 of 25

**Appendix III: Indoxacarb’s Degradation Profile Code Name/**  **Synonym Chemical Name**  **Chemical Structure Study Type**  **MRID Maximum**  **Formation (% Applied)**  **IN -**  **ML438 CAS**  **Name :** 

7 - chloro - 2,4 - dihydro - 4 - [4 - 4 - (trifluo romethoxy)phenyl] - 3H indeno[2,1 - e] - 1,2,4 - triazin - 3 - one **Molecular Weight :**  379 g/mol Aerobic Soil Metabolism 45166303 **9.7**



### IN **- MK643**  **CAS Name**  **:**

l,2 - dihydro - 5 - (trifluoromethoxy) - 2H - benzimidazol - 2 - one **Molecular Weight :**  218.14 g/mol Aerobic Soil Metabolism 45166303 44477304 **12.0**



### IN **- MK638**  **CAS Name**  **:**

[4 - (trifluoromethoxy)phenyl)urea **Molecular Weight :**  220 g/mol Aerobic Soil Metabolism 45166303 **28.1**



### IN **- ML437**  **- OH**  **CAS Name**  **:**

**Not Reported** Aerobic Soil Metabolism 44477304 **13.0**

### Page 25 of 25

**Appendix III: Indoxacarb’s Degradation Profile Code Name/**  **Synonym Chemical Name**  **Chemical Structure Study Type**  **MRID Maximum**  **Formation (% Applied)**  **IN -**  **MP819 CAS**  **Name :** 

lndenol[1 ,2 - e][1 ,3,4]oxadlazine - 1 (2H) - carboxylic acid, 7 - chloro - 3,5 - dlhydno - 2 - [[[4 - (triftuoromethoxy)phenyl]amino]car bonyl] - , methyl ester **Molecular Weight :**  469.8 g/mol Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 45793301 **10.3**



### IN **- MS775**  **CAS Name**  **:**

7 - Chloro - 4a,5 - dihydro -N - (4 - (trifluoromethoxy)phenyl]idenol[ 1 ,2 - e][1 ,3,4]oxadiazine - 2(3H) - carboxamide **Molecular Weight :**  411.8 g/mol Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 4579 3301 **12.8**



### Unknown A Unidentified Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 44477306 **24.1** 

### CO **2 Carbon Dioxide**  

### O=C=O Aerobic Soil Metabolism 45795803 **35.7** Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 44477306 **19.0** Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 45793301 **25.8** 

### Unextractable **Residues** Aerobic Soil Metabolism 45906701 **66.1** Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 44477306 **38.0** Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism 44477305 **46.8**