Page 2 of 15 The 2002 risk assessment addressed exposures and risks associated with the dietary, drinking water, and residential uses of asulam only. Based on the analysis conducted for the TRED, acute and chronic dietary and drinking wate r exposures for asulam do not present risks of concern. The residential exposure assessment conducted for the 2002 TRED determined that residential exposure are unlikely to occur base d on label restrictions and product cost. Occupational exposures were addressed in an exposure assessment conducted for the 1995 RED. The occupational exposure assessment indicated that worker risks were not of concern.

HED’s problem formulation conclusions ar e as follows. 1) The dietary exposure assessment is adequate based on current me thodologies. 2) An updated drinking water assessment using current modeling methods is requi red. 3) The residential exposure assessment should be updated to reflect curre nt standard operating procedur es. 4) An updated occupational exposure assessment is needed. 5) The aggregat e risk assessment needs to be updated based on current methodologies. 6) Studi es required under 40 CFR Part 158 as a part of the new data requirements for registration of a pesticide (f ood and non-food uses) incl ude an immunotoxicity study and acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies.

.Introdu c

H whether s to suppo r asulam, u policies a

Use Pro f

A variety o

ornamen t hedgero w addition, Local N e soluble/ c residues in/on su g division i ground a

Chemic a

Asulam N Chemica l Asulam

Commo n IUPAC n CAS # Chemica l Asulam S

Commo n IUPAC n CAS # c tion

H ED has eva

s ufficient d a

r t Registrati o

u pdates to it s

a nd risk ass e

f

ile

A sulam is a s

f annual gr a t als, turf (fo r

w s, lumbery a asulam is u

e eds Registr a

c oncentrate l

of asulam ( m g arcane and l i n plants. R

a nd aerial sp r

a l Identit y

N omenclatur e l Structure

n name

n ame

l Structure S odium Salt

n name

n ame luated the e x

a ta are avail a

o n Review.

s toxicity, e x

e ssment met h

s elective sys t

a sses and br o

r sod only) a

a rds, storag e sed on spin a

a tion issued iquid (sodi u

m ethyl sulfa n l ivestock co R egistered as u

r ay applicat i

e

P a x isting hum a

a ble and wh e

HED has c o

x posure and h ods.

t emic poste m

o adleaf wee d

a nd non-cro p

e areas and i n

a ch grown f o in 2008. T h

u m salt of as u

n ilylcarbam a mmodities (

u la m produ c i on equipme n

A N 3

A S 2

a ge 3 of 15 a n health ris k

e ther a new h

o nsidered th e

usage data b

m ergent car b d s on sugarc a p land areas (

n dustrial pl a

o r seed in W h e only en d

- u

u lam). Tole

a te) and its s ( 40 CFR §1 8

c ts are appli e

n t.

A sula m N

-(4-Amino p 3 337-71-1

A sulam, Sodi u S odium meth y 2 302-17-2 k assessme n h uman heal t

e most rece n b ases, and c u

b amate herb i

a ne, Christ m ( boundary f e

a nt sites, an d W ashington a n

u se formula t

rance are es t

s ulfanilami d 8 0.360). As u

e d by comm

p henyl)sulfo n

u m Salt
y l ( EZ )-sulfani l n ts for asula m t h risk asses s

n t risk asses s

u rrent Agen c

i cide used t o

m as tree pla n

e nces, fence r d warehouse

n d Oregon u t ion of asul a t ablished fo r d e containin g

u lam acts b y ercial opera t

n ylcarbamic a c

l ylcarbonimid a m to determ i

s ment is ne e

s ments for

c y science

o control a

n tations,

r ows, lots). In

u nder a Spec

a m is a

r combined
g metabolite s y inhibiting c t ors using

c id methyl

a te i ne

e ded

ial

s

c ellPage 4 of 15 Hazard Identification/Toxicology

Asulam is of low acute toxicity by oral, dermal and inhalation routes of exposure. It is not an eye or skin irritant or a dermal sensitiz er. Subchronic and chronic toxicity studies in the rat and dog demonstrate that the thyroid gland is a target or gan for asulam. A two-year combined chronic/oncogenicity feeding study in rats showed hyperplastic changes in thyroid follicular cells. Subchronic studies in dogs showed increased absolute and relative thyroid weights in both sexes. Other toxicological effects included adrenal medullary hyperplastic alterations in male rats, and decreased body weight gains in male and female rats.

Developmental toxicity studies in the rat a nd the rabbit are available for asulam. There was no indication of treatment-related effects on developmental parameters in the rabbit developmental toxicity study. Developmental eff ects were seen in the rat study but only at maternally toxic doses. A two-generation reproduc tion study in the rat showed treatment related decrease in mean live births pe r litter in the first generation providing evidence for a quantitative increased susceptibility of the rat fetus relative to adults. Parental sy stemic toxicity included decreased body weights and organ weight effects (increased abso lute and relative thyroid and liver weights). A comparative thyroid rat assa y in adults and offspr ing was required based on increased thyroid weights observed in rats, mice and dogs following subchronic and chronic exposures, hyperplastic changes in the thyroi d follicular cells and thyroid gland C-cell carcinomas in male rats, and because none of the available toxicity studies examined potential changes in thyroid hormone levels. In addition, 21-day dermal and 28 day inhalation studies in rats with examination of thyroid weight and pathology were required. Asulam is classified as Group C, possible human carcinogen, based on thyroid an d adrenal tumors in the rat study. HED determined that a low dose linear extrapolati on risk model was not appropriate and that a quantitative cancer risk a ssessment was not required.

For the 2002 TRED, toxicity endpoints or poi nts of departure (PODs ) were selected for oral (dietary and drinking water), dermal and inhalation exposure to asulam. No acute dietary toxicity endpoint was identified because no adverse effect attributable to a single dose of asulam was observed. A chronic reference dose (cRfD) was established based on a chronic toxicity study in rats. An incidental oral endpoint wa s selected for potential residential exposure. Dermal and inhalation endpoints for worker expo sure and potential reside ntial handler exposure were identified in the TRED assessment. Althou gh dermal and inhalation toxicity studies were available, these studies did not include an examin ation of the thyroid gland, the target organ for asulam. Therefore, oral endpoints were selected to assess potential effects from dermal and inhalation exposure. Because quantitative increase d susceptibility in offs pring/fetuses was seen in the rat reproduction study the FQPA factor of 10X was retained. No endpoints of concern regarding dermal toxicity, inhala tion toxicity or other adverse effects were identified for the occupational exposure assessment conducted for the 1995 RED.

Data Requirements

The requirements for dermal, inhalation and comparative thyroid studies have been waived based on a reevaluation of thyroid eff ects (TXR 0052827, J. Liccione, 1/7/05). Acute and subchronic neurotoxicity studies are requi red to fulfill revised 40 CFR Part 158 ToxicologyPage 5 of 15 Data Requirements under 870.6200. An immunotoxicity st udy is required as a part of new data requirements in the 40 CFR Part 158 for convent ional pesticide regist ration. Because the immune system is highly complex, studies not specifically conducted to assess immunotoxic endpoints are inadequate to char acterize a pesticide’s potential immunotoxicity. While data from hematology, lymphoid organ weights, and hi stopathology in routine chronic or subchronic toxicity studies may offer useful information on potential immunotoxic e ffects, these endpoints alone are insufficient to predic t immunotoxicity. Once all of th e newly required toxicity data have been received and reviewed, the Asulam Re gistration Review Team recommends that the points of departure and safety factors be reexamined and a ne w risk assessment conducted, if
necessary.

Conclusions

The HED Registration Review problem formula tion team has re-evaluated the toxicity analysis conducted for the 1995 and 2002 asulam risk assessments based on current Agency policies. Based on this evaluati on, the toxicity data base is su bstantially complete. PODs for oral (i.e., dietary, drinking water exposure, in cidental oral) exposure are adequate. Dermal, inhalation and PODs for the worker exposure assessment need to be revised and updated consistent with the endpoints identified for the TRED assessment. However, given the previous waiver of requirements for new dermal and inhala tion toxicity studies based on a reassessment of thyroid effects, dermal and i nhalation PODs for worker and/or residential handler exposure identified for the TRED need to be reevaluate d to include available route specific studies as appropriate. In addition, the FQPA safety factor should be reevaluated based on current policy. Acute neurotoxicity, subchronic neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies are required under the updated 40 CFR Part 158 requirements (Appendix B).

Dietary and Drinking Water Exposure

The residues of concern in plants, livestock and drinking water are free and conjugated asulam, sulfanilamide, N 4 -acetylasulam, and N 4 -acetylsulfanilamide determined as a common moiety. A dietary exposure an alysis for food only was conducted for the 2002 TRED using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model DEEM-FCIDTM. An acute dietary risk assessment was not performed since there was no acu te endpoint identifie d by HIARC. A refined chronic dietary analysis was conducted for asulam using anticipate d residues (ARs) based on field trial data and percent crop trea ted information. C hronic dietary risks showed no risks of concern for the general U.S. population a nd all population subgroups. The chronic dietary risk estimate for children 1-6 years (the highest exposed population subgroup) was 1% of the chronic population adjusted dose (PAD). The chronic dietary risks for all ot her populations was <1% of the acute and chronic population adjusted doses (PADs).

The Environmental Fate and Effects Divi sion (EFED) performed a Tier I drinking water assessment to determine estimated enviro nmental concentrations (EECs) for asulam in surface water and groundwater. Chronic drinki ng water levels of concern (DWLOCs) were calculated based on dietary exposure and wa ter consumption estimates and default body weights. For the aggregate food and water exposur e assessment, levels of concern for asulam in drinking water were compared with EECs of as ulam in ground water and surface water. BasedPage 6 of 15 on this analysis, EECs for surface water and groundwater were not of concern (i.e., EECs were below the acute and chronic DWLOCs)

Data Requirements

The data base for the dietary and drinking water assessment is complete. No additional data are required. The following product chemistry da ta were required in the TRED for technical asulam sodium salt: GLN 830.6317 (Storage Stability) and 830.6320 (Corrosion Characteristics). These data have been have been submitted and are under review.

Conclusions

The dietary and drinking water exposure a ssessments need to be updated to reflect current methodologies for assessing combined dietary and drinking water exposures. Additionally, drinking water EECs were derived using older versions of the surface and ground water modeling programs. Therefore, a drinki ng water assessment using the Agency's most current modeling is needed to estimate drin king water concentrations for asulam.

Tolerances and International Harmonization

There are no proposed or esta blished Codex MRLs for residue s of asulam in/on food/feed items; therefore, there are no compatibility questi ons with respect to U.S. tolerances and Codex MRLs. The tolerance expression for asulam n eeds to be reviewed and updated as necessary based on HED’s Interim Guidance on Tolerance E xpressions (S. Knizner, 5/27/09). A summary of US and international tolera nces and maximum residue limits is provided in Appendix C.

Residential Exposure

A qualitative review of residential exposure conducted for the 2002 TRED concluded that a quantitative residential exposure assessment was not required since ther e were no registered residential uses and potential residential expos ures were not anticip ated as a result of applications of asulam. Quantitative resident ial exposure assessments were not conducted for either the 1995 RED or the 2002 TRED.

Conclusions

The qualitative residential exposure review needs to be reevaluated based on current standard operating procedures. Based on current standards, a quantitat ive residential exposure assessment may be required (i.e., an assessment of residential exposures associated with use of asulam on non-cropland areas may be needed).

Aggregate Exposure

The aggregate risk assessment integrat ed dietary and drinking water exposure assessments. For the TRED, the long term a ggregate risk was assessed by adding exposure estimates from dietary and drinking water pathways, calculating a DWLOC based on thePage 7 of 15 aggregate exposure estimate and comparing the DWLOC with model based EECs determined by EFED. Model-based estimates for allowable concentrations in surface water and groundwater were less than the short-term DWLOCs indicating that aggregat e exposure to asulam via food, water exposure is less than HED’s level of concern.

Conclusions

The aggregate exposure assessment for chr onic food and water exposure needs to be updated to reflect current standard operating pro cedures (SOPs). Additio nally, if a quantitative residential exposure assessment is required ba sed on current SOPs, a short term aggregate assessment which combines food, water and reside ntial exposures will also be needed.

Occupational Exposure

A qualitative worker exposure assessment was conducted for the 1995 RED based on potential handler and post-applica tion exposures to asulam. At th at time, the Agency determined that a quantitative occupational exposure asse ssment was not required because the toxicology criteria for a quantitative assessment were not triggered and no endpoint s of concern regarding dermal toxicity, inhalation toxi city or other adverse effects were identified. Dermal and inhalation endpoints for worker e xposure were identified for the TRED. However, because the risk assessment was conducte d to support a TRED only, no o ccupational exposure and risk assessments were conducted for the assessment conducted in 2002.

Conclusions

An updated occupational risk assessment is n eeded for the Registration Review of asulam in light of significant changes to standard expos ure protocols, assumptions and algorithms and to incorporate updated dermal and inhalation PODs.

Incident Report

An updated incident report was recently conducted. Based on the low frequency and severity of incident cases, there does not appear to be a concern at this time that would warrant further investigation. The Agency will continue to monitor the incident information and if a concern is triggered, additional analysis wi ll be included in the risk assessment.

Endocrine Disruption

As required under FFDCA section 408(p), EP A has developed the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) to determine whether certain substances (inc luding pesticide active and other ingredients) may have an effect in humans or wildlife si milar to an effect produced by a “naturally occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as the Administrator may designate.” The EDSP employs a two-tiered ap proach to making the statutorily required determinations. Tier 1 consists of a battery of 11 screening assays to identify the potential of a chemical substance to interact with the estrog en, androgen, or thyroid (E, A, or T) hormonal systems. Chemicals that go th rough Tier 1 screening and are found to have the potential toPage 8 of 15 interact with E, A, or T hormonal systems will proceed to the next stag e of the EDSP where EPA will determine which, if any, of th e Tier 2 tests are necessary base d on the available data. Tier 2 testing is designed to identify a ny adverse endocrine related eff ects caused by the substance, and establish a dose-response relationship between the dose and the E, A, or T effect.

Between October 2009 and February 2010, EPA issu ed test orders/data call-ins for the first group of 67 chemicals, which contains 58 pesticide active ingredients and 9 inert ingredients. This list of chemicals was sele cted based on the potenti al for human exposure through pathways such as food and water, resi dential activity, and cer tain post-application agricultural scenarios. This list should not be construed as a list of known or likely endocrine disruptors.

Asulam is not among the group of 58 pesticide ac tive ingredients on the initial list to be screened under the EDSP. Under FFDCA sec. 408(p) the Agency must screen all pesticide chemicals. Accordingly, EPA anticipates issuin g future EDSP test orders/data call-ins for all pesticide active ingredients.

For further information on the status of the ED SP, the policies and procedures, the list of 67 chemicals, the test guidelines and the Tier 1 screening battery, plea se visit our website: http://www.epa.gov/endo/.

Cumulative

EPA does not have, at this time, available data to determine whether asulam has a common mechanism of toxicity w ith other substances. EPA has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding for asulam and any other subs tances and, asulam does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances which have tolerances in the U. S. Therefore, EPA has not assumed that asulam has a common mech anism of toxicity with other substances.

Human Studies

No human studies were used in past risk assessments conducted for asulam. However, any future occupational and/or residential assessments conducted for asulam will be based on data contained in HEDs generic pesticide expos ure databases such as the Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database (PHED), the Agricultural Re entry Task Force (ARTF) Database and the Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force (ORETF ) Database. EPA has reviewed all the studies supporting these multi-pesticide generic expos ure databases, and has found no clear and convincing evidence that the conduct of any of them was either fundame ntally unethical or significantly deficient relative to the ethical st andards prevailing at the time the research was conducted. All applicable requir ements of EPA’s Rule for the Protection of Hu man Subjects of Research (40 CFR Part 26) have been satisfied, and there is no regulatory barrier to continued reliance on these studies.Page 9 of 15 Environmental Justice

Potential areas of environmental justice concer ns, to the extent possi ble, were considered in this human health risk assessment, in ac cordance with U.S. Execu tive Order 12898, "Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations," http://www.eh.doe.gov/oepa/guidance/justice/eo12898.pdf ).

As a part of every pesticide risk assessment , OPP considers a large variety of consumer subgroups according to well-esta blished procedures. In line with OPP policy, HED estimates risks to population subgroups fr om pesticide exposures that ar e based on patterns of that subgroup’s food and water consumption, and activ ities in and around the home that involve pesticide use in a residential setting. Whenever appropriate , non-dietary exposures based on home use of pesticide products and associated ri sks for adult applicators and for toddlers, youths, and adults entering or playing on treated ar eas postapplication are evaluated. Further considerations are currently in development, as OPP has committed resources and expertise to the development of specialized software and mode ls that consider expo sure to bystanders and farm workers as well as lifestyle and traditiona l dietary patterns among specific subgroups.

Conclusions/Future Actions Needed

The actions needed in the future Registra tion Review for asulam are listed below.

Hazard Identification an d Endpoint Selection The existing hazard identification and endpoint selection assessment for the occupational exposure assessment needs to be revised to reflec t the PODs identified in the TRED and the fact that requirements for new route sp ecific inhalation and dermal studies have been waived. The FQPA safety factor needs to be reevaluated based on current OPP polic y. Acute neurotoxicity, subchronic neurotoxicity and immu notoxicity studies are required in accordance with the revised 40 CFR Part 158 Toxicology Data Requirements.

Dietary Exposure and Risk The dietary and drinking water exposure assessm ents need to be updated to reflect current methodologies for assessing combined dietary and drinking water exposures. An updated drinking water assessment using the Agency's mo st current modeling is needed to estimate drinking water concentrations for asulam.

Residential Exposure and Risk The residential risk assessment should be upda ted to reflect current policies and SOPs.

Aggregate Exposure and Risk The existing aggregate exposure assessment needs to be updated to reflect current SOPs. In addition, if a quantitative reside ntial exposure assessment is re quired, a short term aggregate assessment which combines food, water and reside ntial exposures will also be needed.Page 10 of 15 Occupational Exposure and Risk The existing occupational exposure assessment need s to be reevaluated an d revised based on an updated toxicity assessment and current refi ned exposure assumptions and algorithms.

Incident Report Based on the incident report, there does not appear to be a concern at this time. The Agency will continue to monitor the incident information a nd if a concern is triggered, additional analysis will be included in the risk assessment.

Data Requirements

- Acute Neurotoxicity (GLN 870. 6200a) - Subchronic Neurotoxi city (GLN 870.6200b) - Immunotoxicity study (GLN (870.7800)Page 11 of 15 References

Asulam. HED Human Health Assessment for the Tolerance Reassessment Eligibility Decision J. Morales (2/28/02, D276505)

Asulam – Report of the FQPA Safety Factor Committee C. Christensen (2/5/02, TXR No. 0050454)

Asulam – 2 nd Report of the Hazard Identification Re view Committee J Liccione (12/6/01 TXR No. 0050324)

Asulam – Tolerance Reassessm ent Eligibility Decision Document. Product and Residue Chemistry Chapter J. Morales (12/6/01 D2778884)

Conclusions of the HED Metabo lism Assessment Review Committee on Asulam and Degradates of Concern in Water for TRED C. Eiden (1/23/02, D280438)

Occupational and Residential Exposure Asse ssment and Recommendations for the Asulam Reregistration Eligibility Document (RED), J. Evans (3/30/94, D187156)

Asulam. Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment fo r the Tolerance Reassessment Eligibility Decision J. Morales (12/18/01, D279592)

Asulam and Sodium Asulam: Review of Huma n Incidents. S. Recore (11/30/10, D383616)

WA080001; Asulox Herbicide on Spinach Grown for S eed in Washington State. Special Local Needs Registration – Section 24c W. Wassell (4/22/08, D389977)

Asulam: Data Call-In Waiver Requests J. Liccione (1/7/05, TXR No. 0052827)Page 12 of 15 Appendix A

Summary of Toxicity Endpoints and Doses for Asulam Risk Assessment

EXPOSURE SCENARIO DOSE (mg/kg/day) ENDPOINT STUDY

Acute Dietary An appropriate endpoint attributable to a single dose was not identified.

Acute RfD = not established

Chronic Dietary NOAEL = 36 mg/kg/day UF = 100 FQPA Safety Factor = 10 The LOAEL was 180 mg/kg/day based on hyperplastic changes in the adrenal medulla and in thyroid follicular cells of males. Combined Chronic Toxicity/Oncog enicity in the rat

Chronic RfD = 0.36 mg/kg/day Chronic PAD = 0.036 mg/kg/day

Incidental Oral, ShortTerm A toxicity endpoint was not selected be cause there are no residential uses.

Incidental Oral, Intermediate-Term A toxicity endpoint was not selected be cause there are no residential uses.

Dermal, Short-Term Oral NOAEL a = 50 mg/kg/day The LOAEL was 250 mg/kg/day based on significant decreases in mean live births per litter. Two Generation Reproduction Study in the rat

Dermal, IntermediateTerm Oral NOAEL a = 50 mg/kg/day The LOAEL was 250 mg/kg/day based on significant decreases in mean live births per litter. Two Generation Reproduction Study in the rat

Dermal, Long-Term Oral NOAEL a = 36 mg/kg/day The LOAEL was 180 mg/kg/day based on hyperplastic changes in the adrenal medulla and in thyroid follicular cells of males. Combined Chronic Toxicity/Oncog enicity in the rat

Inhalation, ShortTerm Oral NOAEL b = 50 mg/kg/day The LOAEL was 250 mg/kg/day based on significant decreases in mean live births per litter. Two Generation Reproduction Study in the rat

Inhalation, Intermediate-Term Oral NOAEL b = 50 mg/kg/day The LOAEL was 250 mg/kg/day based on significant decreases in mean live births per litter. Two Generation Reproduction Study in the rat

Inhalation, Long-Term Oral NOAEL b = 36 mg/kg/day The LOAEL was 180 mg/kg/day based on hyperplastic changes in the adrenal medulla and in thyroid follicular cells of males. Combined Chronic Toxicity/Oncog enicity in the ratPage 13 of 15 Appendix B

Guideline Number: 870.6200 Study Title : Neurotoxicity Battery (Acute and Subchronic Studies) Rationale for Requiring the Data This is a new data requirement under 40 CFR Part 158 as a part of the data requirements for registration of a pesticid e (food and non-food uses).

The Neurotoxicity Screening Battery (OPPTS 87 0.6200) is designed to evaluate the potential adverse effects on the nervous system from exposure to pesticide chemicals. The Agency believes that the guideline studies are inadequate in thei r assessment of behavioral effects and do not use optimal methods to evaluate the potential toxicity to the nervous tissue structure and function. To detect and characterize these potential effects more fully, a battery of more sensitive testing is required. The objective of this neurotoxicity batt ery testing is to evaluate the incidence and severity of the functional and/or behavioral effects, the level of motor activity, and the histopathology of the nervous system. The acute neurotoxicity study is required to detect possible effects resulting from a single e xposure. The subchronic neurotoxicity study is intended to detect possible effects resulting from re peated or long-term exposures. Practical Utility of the Data

How will the data be used?

The acute and subchronic neurotoxic ity studies provide critical scientific information needed to characterize potential hazard to the human population on the ner vous system from pesticide exposure. These studies can provide data on a wide range of functiona l tests for evaluating neurotoxicity including sensory effects, neuromuscular effect s, learning and memory and histopathology of the nervous system. For ex ample, animal studies with organophosphorous chemicals have shown neurotoxicity to be th e primary toxic endpoints (e.g., cholinesterase inhibition) of concern in rodents and non-rodents. These animal studies can be used to select endpoints and doses for use in risk assessment of all exposure scenario s and are considered a primary data source for reliable reference dose cal culation. The Agency has established an oral reference dose (RfD) for assess ing dietary risks for a number of chemicals (e.g., organophoshates and carbamates) where neurotoxicity was th e most sensitive e ndpoint of concern.

How could the data impact the Agency's future decision-making?

If the acute or subchronic neur otoxicity studies show that asulam poses either a greater or a diminished risk than that given in the interim decision’s conclusion, the risk assessment for asulam may need to be revised to reflect the magnit ude of potential risk derived from the new data.

If the Agency does not have this data, a 10X database uncertainty factor may be applied when conducting a risk assessment using the currently available studies.Page 14 of 15 Guideline Number: 870.7800 Study Title : Immunotoxicity Rationale for Requiring the Data This is a new data requirement under 40 CFR Part 158 as a part of the data requirements for registration of a pesticid e (food and non-food uses).

The Immunotoxicity Test Guideline (OPPTS 870 .7800) prescribes functional immunotoxicity testing and is designed to evaluate the potenti al of a repeated chemical exposure to produce adverse effects (i.e., suppression ) on the immune system. Immunos uppression is a deficit in the ability of the immune system to respond to a chal lenge of bacterial or vi ral infections such as tuberculosis (TB), Severe Acqui red Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) , or neoplasia. Because the immune system is highly complex, studies not specifically conducted to assess immunotoxic endpoints are inadequate to charact erize a pesticide’s potential im munotoxicity. While data from hematology, lymphoid organ weights, and hist opathology in routine ch ronic or subchronic toxicity studies may offer useful information on potential immunotoxic e ffects, these endpoints alone are insufficient to predict immunotoxicity.

Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used?

Immunotoxicity studies provi de critical scientific informati on needed to characterize potential hazard to the human population on the immune system from pesticide exposure. Since epidemiologic data on the effects of chemical exposures on immune parameters are limited and are inadequate to characterize a pesticide’s potential immunotoxicity in humans, animal studies are used as the most sensitive endpoint for risk as sessment. These animal studies can be used to select endpoints and doses for use in risk assessm ent of all exposure scenar ios and are considered a primary data source for reliable reference dos e calculation. For example, animal studies have demonstrated that immunotoxicity in rodents is one of the more sensitive manifestations of TCDD (2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenz o-p-dioxin) among developm ental, reproductive, and endocrinologic toxicities. Additionally, the EPA ha s established an oral reference dose (RfD) for tributyltin oxide (TBTO) based on observed immunotoxicity in animal studies (IRIS, 1997).

How could the data impact the Agency's future decision-making?

If the immunotoxicity study shows th at the test material poses eith er a greater or a diminished risk than that given in the inte rim decision’s conclusion, the risk assessments for the test material may need to be revised to reflect the magnit ude of potential risk derived from the new data.

If the Agency does not have this data, a 10X da tabase uncertainty factor may be applied for conducting a risk assessment from the available studies.Page 15 of 15 Appendix C

International Residue Limits

Asulum/Sodium asulam (106901/106902; 11-16-2010) Summary of US and International Tolerances and Maximum Residue Limits Residue Definition : US Canada Mexico 2 Codex 3 40 CFR 180.360: Plant/Livestock: combined residues of asulam (methyl sulfanilylcarbamate) and its sulfanilamide containing metabolites None None

Commodity 1 Tolerance (ppm) /Maximum Residue Limit (mg/kg) US Canada Mexico 2 Codex Cattle, fat 0.05 Cattle, meat 0.05 Cattle, meat byproducts 0.2 Goat, fat 0.05 Goat, meat 0.05 Goat, meat byproducts 0.2 Hog, fat 0.05 Hog, meat 0.05 Hog, meat byproducts 0.2 Horse, fat 0.05 Horse, meat 0.05 Horse, meat byproducts 0.2 Milk 0.05 Sheep, fat 0.05 Sheep, meat 0.05 Sheep, meat byproducts 0.2 Sugarcane, cane 1.0 Sugarcane, molasses 30

Completed: M. Ne gussie; 11/17/2010

1 Includes only commodities of interest for this action. Tolerance values should be the HED recommendations and not those proposed by the applicant.

2 Mexico adopts US tolerances and/or Codex MRLs for its export purposes.

3 * = absent at the limit of quantitation; Po = postharvest treatment, such as treatment of stored grains. PoP = processed postharvest treated co mmodity, such as processing of treated stored wheat. (fat) = to be measured on the fat portion of the sample. MRLs indicated as propose d have not been finalized by the CCPR and the CAC.