### Page 1 of 9 **U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY**

**Washington, D.C. 20460**
OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

### PC Code: 090100 DP Barcode: 404711 **January 1 7**  **, 2013 MEMORANDUM**  **SUBJECT:** Tier II Drinking Water Exposure Assessment to E stablish Tolerance s of

Chlorantraniliprole on Citrus Fruits Group 10
- 10, Pome Fruits Group 11
- 10, Cereal Grain Crop Group 15 (except Rice), and Cereal Grain Forage, Fodder, and Straw, Crop Group 16. **TO:** Sidney Jackson , Risk Manager Reviewer Barbara Madden , Risk Manager **FROM:** Christopher M. Koper, Chemist

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) **THROUGH:** Ed Odenkirchen, Ph.D. , Acting Branch Chief, ERB1

Sujatha Sankula , Ph.D., Lead Biologist Michael B. Lowit, Ph.D., Ecologist (Secondary Reviewer) Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) **Executive Summary** A Tier II screening

- level drinking water ass essment was conducted for a p etition submitted by DuPont De Nemours and Company to establish tolerance s of chlorantraniliprole for the Citrus Fruits Group 10
- 10, Pome Fruits Group 11

- 10, Cereal Grain Crop Group 15 (except Rice), and the Cereal Grain Forage, Fodder, and Straw Crop Group 16. Chlorantraniliprole can be applied to citrus and pome fruits by foliar ( aerial and ground) application according to the DuPontTM 

### Altacor® 

### insect control (EPA Reg. No. 352
- 730 ) label
. In addition, the insecticide can be applied to cereal grains crop group 15 and 16 by f oliar application according to the DuPontTM 

### Coragen ® 

### insect control (EPA Reg. No. 352

- 729 ) label and foliar and chemigation techniques according to the DuPontTM 

### Prevathon® 

### insect control (EPA Reg. No. 352
- 844 ) label
. The estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs ) are based on the maximum proposed application rates specified in the product label s . The EDWCs for the human health risk assessment are presented in **Table 1**
. For surface water, the EDWCs for the scenarios modeled in this assessment did not exceed the previous EDWCs for use on cranberries reported in a previous drinking water assessment (D 381819+) dated 01 December 2010. The previously reported acute concentration of 55.30 μg/L, annual mean (chronic) concentration of 39.87μg/L and the 30 ye ar annual average

### Page 2 of 9

concentration of 39.87μg/Lare greater than the reported EDWCs from the proposed us es for all scenarios reported in Table 1 . Therefore, the current EDWCs for surface water do not supersede the drinking water concentrations for cranberry previously

estimated for this chemical. For groundwater, based on the proposed highest annual use rates for citrus and pome fruits , the SCI
- GROW model concentrations of chlorantraniliprole was 0.85 μg/L ( **Table 1**  ). This value was lower than 1.06 μg/Lreported for in the previous drinking water assessment (D348133) dated 10 January

20 08
. Therefore , the current EDWC does not supersede the previous EDWC
. In conclusion, the current EDWCs for surface water and groundwater do not supersede previous calculated EDWCs for chlorantraniliprole. **Table 1. Chlorantraniliprole Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations**  **(EDWC s)**  **1** 

### for Surface Water **and Ground Water based on**  **S elected Crop Scenarios**  **Proposed Label Use**  **PRZ M/EXAMS**  **Scenario 1**  **(first app date) Me** **thod 2**  **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 **DupontTM Altacor**  **®** 

### insect control with **RYNA**

### X**PYR ®**  

### [EPA Reg. No. 352 **- 730]**  Citrus Fruits Crop Group 10
- 10 FL Citrus (Dec. 23

– foliar) A 2 app @ 0.100 lb a.i./acre (7

- day interval) 

### 8.37 1.82 1.14 G 

### 8.28 1.76 1.06 Pome Fruits Crop Group 11
- 10 CA Fruit ( July 12

– foliar) A
2 app @ 0.100 lb a.i./acre (10

- day interval) 

### 4.05 2.96 2.40 G 

### 3.13 2.12 1.61 NC Apple (October 5

– foliar) A 

### 8.18 2.76 1.73 G 

### 7.78 2.56 1.49 OR Apple ( October 10

– foliar) A 

### 5.59 2.63 2.12 G 

### 5.10 2.32 1.80 PA Apple (September 25

– foliar) A 

### 7.05 3.49 2.06 G 

### 6.79 3.21 1.73 **DupontTM Coragen**  **®** 

### insect control with **RYNA**

### X**PYR ®**  

### [EPA Reg. No. 352 **- 729]**  Cereal Grains Crop Group 15 (except rice) Cereal Grain Forage, Fodder, and Straw

Crop Group 16 ND Wheat ( July 8

– foliar) A 3 app @ 0.065 lb a.i./acre (7

- day interval) 

### 7.37 4.62 3.85 G 

### 6.93 4.27 3.48 KS Sorghum (September 3

– foliar) A 

### 10.30 4.16 2.57 G 

### 10.03 4.06 2.40 **DupontTM Prevathon**  **®** 

### insect control with **RYNA**

### X**PYR ®**  

### [EPA Reg. No. 352 **- 844]**  Cereal Grains Crop Group 15 (except rice) Cereal Grain Forage, Fodder, and Straw Crop Group 16 ND Wheat (July 8

– foliar) A 3 app @ 0.067 lb a.i./acre (7

- day interval) 

### 7.57 **4.75 3.96**  G 

### 7.12 4.38 3.57 C 

### 6.09 3.66 2.90 KS Sorghum (September 3

– foliar) A 

### 10.58 4.28 2.64 G 

### 10.30 4.17 2.47 C 

### 8.45 3.58 1.95 **Groundwater** SCI
- GROW Citrus and Pome Fruits

-- 2 app @ 0.100 lb a.i./acre 

### 0.85 0.85 0.85 1 EDWC values adjusted with a Percent Cropped Area (PCA) factor of 0.91. Bold numbers denote maximum EDWC values. 2 A = aerial application, G = ground application, C = chemigation

### Page 3 of 9

**Introduction** Chlorantranil iprole (DPX

- E2Y45) is an insecticide belonging to the diamide class of chemistry
. The specific mode of action is through chlorantranil iprole binding with insect ryanodine receptors (http://www.rsc.org/chemistry world/News/2006/June/28060601.asp )
. This mode of action causes muscle contraction , which leads to paralys is and ultimately death of the insect. Chlorantraniliprole is persistent and mobi le in terrestrial and aquatic environments. Extended chlorantraniliprole use is expected to cause accumulation of residues in soil from year to ye ar. Major routes of dissipation are expected to be alkaline

- catalyzed hydrol ys is, photodegradation in water, leaching, and runoff. Detailed description of fate and transport properties of chlorantraniliprole can be obtained from the comprehensive drinking water assessment (D348133 ) dated 10 January 2008
. The Agency

has received two aquatic field dissipation studies conducted on rice in California (MRID 48930703) and Italy (MRID 48930704) (DP 407351). These studies are currently under review. **Monitoring Data** There was no surface water or ground water monitoring data available for chlorantraniliprole. Since the Agency

lacks sufficient monitoring data to complete a comprehensive drinking water assessment, estimated drinking water concentration s (EDWCs) were made by reliance on mo deling the environmental fate and transport characteristics of chlorantraniliprole
. **Drinking Water Exposure Modeling** The Agency

does not have exposure scenarios for modeling all use sites and locations in the country . Therefore, the Agency risk assessments rely

on a series of representative model scenarios to represent a suite of use sites and l ocations. Because the submitted chl orantraniliprole labels propose a range of application rates with various application approaches and various crops, EFED conducted a comprehensive modeling anal ys is of the recommended application conditions f or chlorantraniliprole. This analys is provides a series of possible use scenarios to assess the impact of application rate, application method, and crop on chlorantraniliprole concentrations in surface and ground water . The e stimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) were generated using EFED’s standard suite of models. **Models** Pesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM v3.12 .2, May 12, 2005 ) 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 chlorantraniliprole residues that may occur in surface water used as drinking water. The PRZM model simulates 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

### Page 4 of 9

PRZM/EXAMS model and users manuals may be downloaded from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) Water Models web

-page (USEPA, 2013 ). Percent Crop Areas (PCA) that account for the maximum area within a watershed that may be planted with the modeled crop are applied to concentrations predicted b y 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 P otential (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 user’s manual is currentl y under development; however, information concerning the model can be found on the EPA Water Models web

-page (USEPA, 2013 ). **Input Parameters** Input parameters for the PRZM/EXAMS and SC I
- GROW model s are listed in **Table 2**  and **Table 3**  . Explanations of various model input parameters are discussed below. **Table 2. PRZM/EXAMS Input P arameters for**  **Chlorantraniliprole Input Parameter**  **: Value**  **: Comment:**  **Source :**  Scenario (s): Citrus Group 10

- 10 : FL Citrus Pome Group 11
- 10 : CA Fruit NC, OR, PA Apple Cereal Grains Crop Groups 15 and 16 : ND Wheat KS Sorghum representative scenarios for each use N/A

Maximum Single Application Rate lbs a.i./acre (kg a.i./ha) 0.065 (0.073) 0.067 (0.075) 0.100 (0.112) proposed maximum single application rate proposed label
Applications per Year Citrus and Pome: 2 Cereal Groups 15,16: 3 l abel directions. Application number for maximum single application rate. proposed label Application Interval (days ) Citrus: 7 Pome: 10 Cereal Groups 15,16: 7 proposed application intervals proposed label

### Page 5 of 9

**Table 2. PRZM/EXAMS Input P arameters for**  **Chlorantraniliprole Input Parameter**  **: Value**  **: Comment:**  **Source :**  Date of Initial Appl ication (scenario/day/month) Citrus Group 10

- 10 : FL Citrus: 23

- 12 Pome Group 11
- 10 : CA Fruit: 12

- 07 NC Apple: 05

- 10 OR Apple: 10

- 10 PA Apple: 25

- 09 Cereal Grains Crop Groups 15 and 16 : ND Wheat: 08

- 07 KS Sorghum: 03

- 09 Date of initial application was calculated from the crop scenario’s harvest date, Pre

- Harvest Interval (PHI), number of applications and application interval as written on the proposed labels. Crop Scenarios

Application Method Foliar: aerial and ground Chemigation l abel directions proposed label CAM Input 2 (foliar: aerial, 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 Citrus and Pome: 3 Cereal Grains 15,16: 1 ...remaining pesticide on foliage is (1) converted to surface application to the top soil layer, (3) is retained as surface residue and continues to decay. This input only applies to foliar applications (CAM 2). 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) 483.15
-- -- Vapor Pressure at 25°C (torr) 1.57 x 10 - 13

-- DuPont 16517 Henry’s Law Constant (atm

- m3 /mol) 9.76 x 10 - 14 estimated calculated from solubility, vapor pressure and molecular weight Solubility in Water (mg/L) 1.023
-- MRID 46889026 Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KO C) (L/kg OC) 330 1 represents the average KOC from 5 values MRID 46889123 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half

- life (days) 627 2 , 3, 4 Calculated 90 th percentile of mean
. (mean= 509 days, SD= 253 days , t = 1.40 , n= 9 ) *S everal reported half

- lives in MRID 46889124 were not used because of poor fit with first

- order degradation model MRID 46889014 MRID 46889015 MRID 46889124 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half

- life (days) 341 2 Calculated 90 th percentile of mean
. Mean= 178 days, SD= 74.95 days , t= 3.078 , n=2 MRID 46889 016 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half

- life (days) 624 208 days single half

- life (3 × 208 days per EFED guidance) DuPont 14568
Hydrolysis Half

- lives (days) 0 (stable) pH 7 MRID 46889017

### Page 6 of 9

**Table 2. PRZM/EXAMS Input P arameters for**  **Chlorantraniliprole Input Parameter**  **: Value**  **: Comment:**  **Source :**  Aqueous Photolysis Half

- life (days) 32.8 5 Natural sunlight half

- l ife MRID 46889122 N/A = Not Applicable 1 = Koc values include 152, 438, 535, 268, 255. 2 = tinput=Mean + (t90,n
- 1 *SD) / √N 3 = EFED recalculated first

- order half

- lives for both benzo

- and pyrazole

- labeled chlorantraniliprole. The calculated half

- lives are based on aerobic s oi l metabolism data in non

- sterile soil at 25 0 C. Half

- lives used in the assessment inc lude 578, 537, 375, 41, 247, 228, 889, 924 , 396 days. 4 = The 90 th percentile of the mean half

- life for chlorantraniliprole was 600 days for half

- lives values presented in the OECD Chlorantraniliprole Volume 3(1): Annex B, Environmental Fate and Behavior. (mean = 491 ( 886, 539, 380, 233, 323, 629, 423, 518 days); SD=203; t90, n
- 1 =1.417; N=8 5 = The natural sunlight half

- life value of 32.8 days was modeled because this better half

- life characterizes the behavior of chlorantraniliprole in the environment. MRID 46889018 calculates a half

- life of 0.31 days from a xenon arc lamp experiment using continuous irradiation.


### Table 3. SCI**- GROW Input Parameters for Chlorantraniliprole.**  **Input Parameter Value**  **Comment Source**  Maxim um Application Rate per growing season (lbs a.i./A) 0.100 (citrus and pome fruits ) maximum rates from proposed labels proposed label Applications per Year 2 label directions proposed label Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KOC) (L/kg OC) 15 2 lowest KOC value because there was greater than a three

- fold variation among five values MRID 46889123 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half

- life (days) 410 Median value of 9 values since there are more than 4 metabolism values as suggested by guidance MRID 46889124 MRID 46889015 MRID 46889124 

### Application methods and rates were obtained from the following proposed label s : DuPontTM 

### Altacor® 

### insect control (EPA Reg. No. 352
- 730), DuPontTM 

### Coragen® 

### insect control (EPA Reg. No. 352
- 729) and DuPontTM 

### Prevathon® 

### (EPA Reg. No. 352

- 844 )
. Standard percent cropped areas (PCA) were used for all agricultural uses as estimates of the extent of watershed on which crops are grown (Effland et al. , 1999). The default agricultural PCA of 0.91 was used for the proposed uses because they are not confined to specific regions of the United States. Actual fractions of cropped areas could be less in s ome areas of the country
. A representative PRZM/EXAM model input and output data for Kansas Sorghum (foliar aerial application) is attached in **Appendix A**  **.** In addition, the SCI
- GROW model input and output data for citrus and pome fruit use are attached in **Appendix B**  **.**

### Page 7 of 9

**REFERENCES** Effland, W. R., N. C. Thurman, I. Kennedy. 1999. Proposed Methods for Determining Watershed

- derived 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. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/scipoly /sap/1999/index.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. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/scipoly /sap/1998/index.htm USEPA. 200 5
. PRZM
- 3, A Model for Predicting Pesticide and Nitrogen Fate in the Crop Root and Unsaturated Soil Zones: Users Manual for Release 3.0. May 2005
. USEPA. 2009 . Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides , Version 2.1 . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, October 22, 2009
. USEPA. 2013 . Water Models. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pesticides: Scienc e and Policy
. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/

### Page 8 of 9

**Appendix A. Representative PRZM/EXAMS Output:**  **KS Sorghum** 

**– Aerial Application**  stored as CerealsBKSSorghumA.out Chemical: Chlorantraniliprole PRZM environment: KSsorghumSTD.txt modified Tueday, 29 M ay 2007 at 12:55:46 EXAM S environment: ir298.exv modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 05:14:07 Me tfile: w1 3996.dvf modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 05:14:51 Water segment concentrations (ppb) Ye ar Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Ye arly 1961 7.14 7.00 6.69 6.33 5.76 1.67 1962 4.48 4.45 4.22 3.75 3.45 2.38 1963 2.07 2.04 1.93 1.69 1.66 1.32 1964 9.34 9.15 8.45 6.27 4.61 1.79 1965 8.26 8.10 7.47 6.39 5.75 3.77 1966 4.35 4.29 4.06 3.62 3.33 2.06 1967 9.56 9.38 8.90 7.73 7.19 3.41 1968 8.52 8.36 8.04 7.07 6.47 3.65 1969 4.98 4.91 4.65 4.13 3.81 2.74 1970 9.48 9.33 8.70 7.55 6.80 2.90 1971 7.78 7.64 7.08 6.15 4.94 2.94 1972 5.67 5.58 5.25 4.96 4.59 3.14 1973 20.16 19.77 18.86 16.63 15.10 5.58 1974 10.11 9.98 9.44 8.40 7.73 5.16 1975 5.35 5.26 4.94 3.97 3.82 2.84 1976 4.21 4.15 3.91 3.44 3.15 2.19 1977 5.73 5.63 5.24 4.83 4.53 2.02 1978 11.79 11.54 10.73 9.16 8.38 3.68 1979 5.82 5.71 5.49 5.15 4.49 3.33 1980 13.94 13.67 13.01 11.52 9.90 4.15 1981 9.22 9.08 8.55 7.53 6.89 4.76 1982 4.73 4.67 4.42 4.04 3.75 2.52 1983 5.35 5.25 4.92 4.45 3.99 2.29 1984 4.58 4.49 4.36 4.17 3.97 2.36 1985 9.51 9.35 8.69 7.92 7.28 3.15 1986 6.24 6.13 5.86 5.19 4.78 3.17 1987 3.31 3.27 3.10 2.78 2.59 1.80 1988 1.95 1.91 1.78 1.65 1.53 1.18 1989 7.88 7.73 7.18 6.18 5.67 2.52 1990 4.71 4.65 4.38 3.92 3.64 2.55 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Ye arly 0.032258065 20.16 19.77 18.86 16.63 15.10 5.58 0.064516129 13.94 13.67 13.01 11.52 9.90 5.16 0.096774194 11.79 11.54 10.73 9.16 8.38 4.76 0.129032258 10.11 9.98 9.44 8.40 7.73 4.15 0.161290323 9.56 9.38 8.90 7.92 7.28 3.77 0.193548387 9.51 9.35 8.70 7.73 7.19 3.68 0.225806452 9.48 9.33 8.69 7.55 6.89 3.65 0.258064516 9.34 9.15 8.55 7.53 6.80 3.41 0.290322581 9.22 9.08 8.45 7.07 6.47 3.33 0.322580645 8.52 8.36 8.04 6.39 5.76 3.17 0.35483871 8.26 8.10 7.47 6.33 5.75 3.15 0.387096774 7.88 7.73 7.18 6.27 5.67 3.14 0.419354839 7.78 7.64 7.08 6.18 4.94 2.94 0.451612903 7.14 7.00 6.69 6.15 4.78 2.90 0.483870968 6.24 6.13 5.86 5.19 4.61 2.84 0.516129032 5.82 5.71 5.49 5.15 4.59 2.74 0.548387097 5.73 5.63 5.25 4.96 4.53 2.55 0.580645161 5.67 5.58 5.24 4.83 4.49 2.52 0.612903226 5.35 5.26 4.94 4.45 3.99 2.52 0.64516129 5.35 5.25 4.92 4.17 3.97 2.38 0.677419355 4.98 4.91 4.65 4.13 3.82 2.36 0.709677419 4.73 4.67 4.42 4.04 3.81 2.29 0.741935484 4.71 4.65 4.38 3.97 3.75 2.19 0.774193548 4.58 4.49 4.36 3.92 3.64 2.06 0.806451613 4.48 4.45 4.22 3.75 3.45 2.02 0.838709677 4.35 4.29 4.06 3.62 3.33 1.80 0.870967742 4.21 4.15 3.91 3.44 3.15 1.79 0.903225806 3.31 3.27 3.10 2.78 2.59 1.67 0.935483871 2.07 2.04 1.93 1.69 1.66 1.32 0.967741935 1.95 1.91 1.78 1.65 1.53 1.18

0.1 11.62 11.38 10.60 9.08 8.32 4.70 **4.28** * (PCA Adjusted) **10.58** * Average of yearly averages: 2.90 **2.64** * * PCA adjusted values Inputs generated by pe5.pl - Novemeber 2006 Data used for this run: Output File: CerealsBKSSorghumA Me tfile: w1 3996.dvf PRZM scenario: KSsorghumSTD.txt EXAM S environment file: ir298.exv Chemical Name: Chlorantraniliprole Description Variable Name Value Un its Comments Mo lec ular weight mwt 483.15 g/mol Henry's Law Const. henry 9.76E- 14 atm-m^3/mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.57E- 13 torr Solubility sol 1.023 mg/L Kd Kd mg/L Koc Koc 330 mg/L Photolysis half-life kdp 32.8 days Hal f-life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 341 days Hal fife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 624 days Hal fife Aerobic Soil M etabolism asm 627 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 0.075 kg/ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.16 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 9- Mar 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 0.075 kg/ha Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. app. rate 2 apprate 0.075 kg/ha Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 UPTKF Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR Reservoir Flag for runoff calc. RUN OFF total none, monthly or total(average of entire run)

### Page 9 of 9

**A ppendix B**  **. SCI**  **- GROW Output File**  **s :**  SCIGROW VERSION 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECTS DIVIS ION OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY SCREENI

NG MODEL FOR AQUATIC PESTICIDE EXPOSURE SciGrow version 2.3 C hemical:Chlorantraniliprole use on Citrus and Pome Fruits T ime is 1/15/2013 1:11:16

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

-------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- 0.100 2.0 0.200 1.52E+02 410.0

---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- G roundwater screening cond (ppb) = 8.50E
- 01 or 0.85 ppb ********************************************   ** **********************