UNITEDSTATESENVIRONMENTALPROTECTIONAGENCYWASHINGTON,D.C.20460N0\11'1Z014OFFICEOFCHEMICALSAFETYANDPOLLUTIONPREVENTIONMEMORANDUMSUBJECT:FROM:THRU:BEADChemicalProfile(BCP)forRegistrationReview:Fenpyroximate(129131)Mallampalli,Nikhil,Ph.D.,EntomologistML(;)BiologicalAnalysisBranch:..:.----DonAtwood,Ph.D.,EntomologistfrJScienceInformationandAnalysisBranchStephenSmearman,EconomistMEconomicAnalysisBranchBiologicalandEconomicAnalysisDivision(7503P)ArnetJones,ChiefBiologicalAnalysisBranchDiannSims,Chief.ScienceInformatioanAnalysisBranchTimothyKiely,ChiefQEconomicAnalysisBranchBiologicalandEconomicAnalysis1vision(750TO:MiguelZavala,ChemicalReviewManagerPatriciaParrott,ChiefRiskManagementandImplementationBranchIIIPesticideRe-evaluationDivision(7508P)PeerReviewPaneldate:September3,2014Page1ofllSUMMARYFenpyroxiniate("Fujimite"®and"Portal"®)wasfirstregisteredintheU.S.in2000andbelongstothepyrazolefamilyofacaricides/insecticides.Themechanismofactionoffenpyroximateistheinhibitionofmitochondrialelectrontransport.TheInsecticideResistanceActionCommittee(anindustrygroupoftechnicalexperts)classifiesitinModeofActionGroup21A.Themajoragriculturalusesitesincludealmonds,oranges,pecans,grapefruit,apples,andcotton.Theregisterednon-agriculturalusesitesinclude;lawns,ornamentals,andrecreationalareas.Accordingtoavailableproprietaryinformation,thehighestusageofthispesticide,intermsofbothtotalpoundsappliedandtotalacrestreated,wasonalmonds.Fenpyroximateusehasgenerallybeenincreasingsince2004,bothintermsofpoundsusedandacrestreated.Notablerecentincreasescanbeseeninsomecitruscrops,suchasgrapefruit.Thismaybepartlyduetothecomparativelygoodefficacyoffenpyroximateagainstbothmitesandpsyllids,andagenerallackofwidespreadresistancetothispesticideinspidermitesintheU.S.Fenpyroximateisagoodchoiceforgrowerstargetingmitepopulationsconsistingmainlyofmotileimmatureandmaturelifestages,andmayalsobeanincreasinglyfrequentchoiceofgrowersseekingtousemultipletypesofpesticidestogetseason-longcontroltheAsiancitruspsyllidincitrus(wherethisinsectisavectoroftheincurablegreeningdisease).INTRODUCTIONTheBiologicalandEconomicAnalysisDivision(BEAD)ChemicalProfile(BCP)providesanoverviewofthepestmanagementrolesandquantitativeusageinformationforfenpyroximate.TheBCPincludesavailablepublicand/orprivateuseandusagedataforfenpyroximateandageneraldiscussionofbiologicalaspects,intendedtodescribetheroleofthischemicalinpestmanagement.Additionalinformationonuseis availableintheFenpyroximateLabelDataReportprovidedinthepublicdocketforthischemical.InformationprovidedinthisBEADChemicalProfile(BCP)maybeusedbystakeholders(e.g.,usersandregistrants),OPPriskandbenefitassessors,andOPPriskmanagers,andthegeneralpublicduringtheRegistrationReviewprocessofthispesticide.AGRICULTURALUSESITESFenpyroximateisregisteredforuseonavocado,tropical/subtropicalfruits,citrusfruits,cotton,cucumber,fieldcom,popcorn,silagecom,seedcom,fruitingvegetables,grapes,smallfruitvineclimbing(exceptfuzzykiwifruit),hops,lowgrowingberry(exceptcranberries),melons,mint,nonbearingdeciduousfruittrees/nuttrees/vines,pomefruit,treenuts,tuberousandcormvegetables,snapbean,stonefruit,greenhousecucumber,andgreenhousetomatoes.Page2ofllNON-AGRICULTURALUSESITESNon-agriculturalusesiteswhicharelabeledforfenpyroximateapplicationincludelawns,ornamentalturf(i.e.commerciallawn,golfcourses,cemeteries,athleticfields,seedcrop,grownforsod),ornamentalfloweringplants,ornamentalfoliageplants,ornamentalvines,ornamentalwoodyshrubs,ornamentaltrees,andrecreationalareas.FORMULATIONSANDAPPLICATIONMETHODSFenpyroximateisformulatedasanemulsifiableconcentrate.Applicationmaybemadeusingeithergroundorairequipment.IDSTORYOFBEADASSESSMENTSFORFENPYROXIMATEFenpyroximatewasfirstregisteredforuseintheU.S.in2000.Asearchofthe BEADdatabasesforpreviousanalysesforfenpyroximateindicatesthattherearenorecordsofpriorBEADbenefitsassessments.However,thereisoneemergencyexemptionrequestforfenpyroximate.In2006,NebraskarequestedtheuseoffenpyroximatetocontrolVarroamiteinbeehivesbecauseofresistancetoavailablealternatives(fluvalinateandcoumaphos).BEADconcurredwiththeassessment,indicatingthatfenpyroximatewouldbeoneofveryfewalternativesforcontrolofaseriouspestinbees(BrassardandLee2006).FENPYROXIMATEUSAGEAgriculturalUsageUsageoffenpyroximateandnumberofacrestreatedbothshowedasteadyincreasefrom2004to2012(Figure1).However,since2010,therehasbeenadecreaseintotallbsappliedbutacontinuedincreaseintotalareatreated(acres).Thisislargelytheresultofincreaseduseincottonatanaveragerateof0.05lb/a.i./acrewithadeclininguseonalmondsin2012(0.134lb/a.i./acre)andorangessince2008(0.128lb/a.i./acre)(Table4).Thesteadyincreaseinthenumberofacrestreatedevenwithrelativelylowpercentcroptreatedsuggeststhatgrowersarefindingbenefitsforusingfenpyroximate.Page3ofllFiure1.NationalFen25,00002004 20052006 20072008 2009201020112012YearSource:ProprietaryData,2004-2012Fire2.NationalFenyroximateUsaeAcresTreatedfrom2004to2012.250,000020042005200620072008 20092010 20112012YearSource:ProprietaryData,2004-2012Areviewoftotalfenpyroximateusagedataforthelast5yearsindicatesthattheprimaryusesiteisalmonds,accountingforapproximately40.2%ofbothtotallbsappliedand33.3%oftotalacrestreated(Table1).Ofthemajorusesites,asshownintheScreeningLevelUsageAnalysis(SLUA)(BEAD,2014),allbutcottonhaveanaverageof5%croptreated(Table2).Page4ofllAy.e!'JgeAIAppliedAnnu&)JyAlmonds7,100Oranges3,600Pecans1,900Grapefruit900Ales700Cotton7004052,9002027,9001121,200514,60048,60047,600%QfTotalFenproxim.ateAcres.341814369*TotalAcresTreatedsumsallacrestreatedforacrop,includingthoseacresthatreceivemultipletreatments.Source:ProprietaryData,2008-2012Tbl2Pae.ercentC Tropreated .hFWitenpyrox1mate.CropTreated.'.Lbs.A.I.Av.enJ,geMaximumAlmonds5,000510Oranges3,000510Pecans2,000510Grapefruit1,000515Apples1,000510Cotton1,000<1<2.5Source:BEAD2014SLUATable3(below)indicatesstateswiththehighestusageoffenpyroximateintermsoflbsa.i.appliedandacrestreated.Californiaisbyfarthestatewiththehighestfenpyroximateusageat64.1%oftotalfenpyroximatelbsappliedand60.3%oftotalacrestreated.ThisisprimarilyaresultofthedominanceofCaliforniaintheproductionofcitrusandalmonds.Table3.StateswithhestUseofFenpyroximate(2008-2012).State%.ofTotal•%ofTotalAcres1--FenpYJ"Dxim.ateLbsTreatedwithApplied'•Fe:Qp:Y.m.ximate-"*California64California60Florida14Georgia14Georgia11Florida9Louisiana4Louisiana8NewYork2NewYork3Washington2Washington3*TotalAcresTreatedsumsallacrestreated,mcludmgthoseacresthatrece1vemultipletreatments.Source:ProprietaryData,2008-2012Page5ofllApplicationRatesandMethodsFenpyroximateapplicationratesrangefrom0.050to0.196lbsa.i.acreforthemajorsitesintheUnitedStates(Table4).Thehighestapplicationrateisforgrapefruitat0.196lbsa.i./acreandthelowestforcottonat0.050lbsa.i./acre.a e .enpyroxrmateseonoprops:verage..ate,-Tbl4FuA I R20082012T CACropAverageTotalLbsAverageTotalAvg.A.I.RateAcresTreated*(lbsa.i./acres)Almonds7,10052,9000.134Oranges3,60027,9000.128Pecans1,90021,2000.091Grapefruit90014,6000.196Apples7008,6000.086Cotton7007,6000.050*TotalAcresTreatedsumsallacrestreatedforacrop,mcludmgthoseacresthatreceivemultipletreatments.Source:ProprietaryData,2008-2012Table5providesaveragefenpyroximateapplicationratesbystate.Highestapplicationrate,0.179lbsa.i./acre,isusedinFloridaandprimarilyrelatedtocitrusproduction.LowestapplicationrateisforcottoninLouisiana,0.050lbsa.i./acre.Table5.CaliforniaFloridaGeorgiaLouisianaNewYorkWashinon*TotalAcresTreatedsumsallacrestreated,includingthoseacresthatreceivemultipletreatments.Source:ProprietaryData,2008-2012[;'Accordingtoproprietarydata,groundapplicationaccountsfor99%offenpyroximatepoundsapplied,and97%oftotalacrestreated.Fenpyroximateapplicationsareallfoliar,withmaximumseasonalapplicationrateandnumberofapplicationsdependentuponcrop,pestandbearing/nonbearingcropstatus.Page6ofllGeographic Distribution ofFenpvroximate

Use Fenpyroximate

has widespread

usage

in the United

States (Figure

3). States

with highest

pounds used

per 1,000

crop acres grown include California,

Louisiana,

Georgia,

Florida,

and New York. The greatest

use

in California

is primarily

related

to almond

and citrus production.

Pecans

and citrus

are associated

with

the usage shown

in the Southeast.

Usage

in the Northern

U.S.

is associated

with apple production. Please

refer

to Appendix

A (below)

for additional

details

on the scope

and context

of this map. Pounds

Active Ingredient per 1,000

Crop Acres Grown 0

No Data 0<0.01 D

o.o1

- o.1o -0.10-0

. 50 ->0.50 Figure

3. Annual

average agricultural

use intensity offenpyroximate

(2008-2012).

· Non-Agricultural

Usage BEAD's

data

for fenpyroximate

use

on non-agricultural

sites

are limited.

The
only available estimate

of use

is

10 lbs

a.i.

on nursery

I greenhouse

turf

and ornamentals

(Proprietary

Data, 2012).

Page

7 ofllROLE

OF FENPYROXIMATE

IN PEST MANAGEMENT Fenpyroximate's

chemical

structure

is based

on that

of the botanical insecticide

rotenone.

It

is placed

by the Insecticide

Resistance

Action Committee

(an industry

group

of technical

experts) in Mode

of Action

Group

21A (rotenone

is

in Group

21

B). Other

U.S. registered

chemicals included

in Group

21

A are pyridaben, tebufenpyrad,

and tolfenpyrad. As noted

in the discussion

of usage

trends (above)

, growers

of various

tree crops, particularly almonds,

seem

to

be increasing

their

use

of fenpyroximate.

For web-spinning

mite pests

of almonds, fenpyroximate

is one

of several

options recommended

by the University

of California (California

is by

far

the largest

source

of almonds

in the U.S.). Recent guidance

has

the following

to say about

its effect

on mites: "Contact

toxin

to juveniles

and adults

with

long residual

activity. Residues

are toxic

to both pest

and predator

mites

for several

weeks.

A good choice

under extreme

mite pressure

in the absence ofbeneficials."

(UCIPM

2014). Pyridaben (another acaricide

with

the same Mode

of Action

as fenpyroximate)

does

not have

any such description,

though

it

is also mentioned

as

a spider

mite control

option

for this crop.

This suggests

that fenpyroximate

is more effective

than pyridaben

if mite populations

have

high numbers

of

all motile

life stages

of mites. A survey

of internet accessible

news reports

and extension

service publications

did

not identify clear reasons

as

to why fenpyroximate

usage

is increasing

in recent

years. However,

it

is well established

that mites (particularly

spider

mites,

a major

target

of such

use) develop resistance rapidly

to most acaricides

once

they

are used widely

and with

little rotation

of chemistries. BEAD

did

not locate reports

of widespread

pest resistance

to fenpyroximate

in the U.S. However,

the Arthropod

Pesticide Resistance

database, maintained

by Michigan

State University,

does

list several

reports

of resistance

in mite populations

in Brazil, Turkey,

Europe, and northeast

Asia

(see http://www.pesticideresistance.com

for public

access

to the database).

In addition,

at least one recent

news

item mentions

anecdotal

reports

of reduced susceptibility

to fenpyroximate

in spider

mite populations

in pears grown

in Washington

(Warner

2014). Warner

(2014)

also mentions

that growers

may

be using materials

such

as fenpyroximate

in greater amounts

(and

with

less attention

to rotating

with other chemistries)

because

it

is one

of

a few options

that

can control

both mites

and psyllids

(insects

that suck plant

sap

and

that

are sometimes

vectors

of serious

plant diseases).

It

is not clear

if this issue

is specific

to pears

or

is applicable

to the other

crops

that show recent

use

of fenpyroximate.

However

, given

the high concern

among

citrus growers

that

has been created

by the spread

of the Asian

citrus psyllid

(the vector

of the incurable

greening

disease),

it may

be

a factor underlying

use

in oranges. BEAD

notes

that fenpyroximate

has

not received

a full (Section

3) registration

for

use against Varroa

mites

in beehives.

The emergency

exemption

for this

use

in Nebrasaka

that

was reviewed by BEAD (Brassard

and

Lee 2006)

also appears

not

to have

been renewed

since

2006. However, the Section

18 database maintained

by the Registration

Division

indicates

that several

other states

, including California

, Illinois, Missouri,

and North Dakota,

have requested (and received) this

use (occasionally

also

for

use against

the small

hive beetle, another

pest

of commercial beekeeping)

for various

years between

2008

and 2010

(see http://cfuub.epa.gov/oppref/section18/search.cfm

for additional

details).

It

is not clear

why Page

8 ofllfenpyroximatehasnotbeengrantedmorewidespreaduseunder Section18orSection3authority,giventhatVarroamitesareaverycommonpestofcommercialhoneybees.INFORMATIONTHATMAYBEUSEFULFORBEAD'SFUTUREWORKONFENPYROXIMATETheAgencycurrentlydoesnothaveimportantinformationonfenpyroximate.Obtainingthefollowinginformationforallregisterednon-agriculturalsitesmayimprovefutureassessmentsconductedbytheAgencyrelatedtotheuseandimportanceoffenpyroximate.•Totalpoundsactiveingredientapplied•Percentcrop/sitetreated•Applicationrates:typicalandmaximum•Frequencyofapplication•ApplicationIntervals•Methodsofapplication•Targetornichepests•Efficacyinformation/productperformanceInaddition,obtainingthefollowingusageinformationmayimprovefutureassessmentsconductedbytheAgencyrelatedtotheuseandimportanceoffenpyroximateinagriculturalsettings:1)Typicalapplicationtimingineachregisteredcrop.2)Ifmorethanoneapplicationistypicallymade,thetypicalre-applicationinterval(percrop).3)Recentresistancereportsforfenpyroximateinpopulationsofimportanttargetpests,inparticularcasesofcross-resistancetootheracaricides.REFERENCESBrassard,D.andA.Lee.2006.BEADReviewofNebraskaEmergencyExemptionRequestforFenproximatetoControlVarroaMitesinBeehives(07NE01;DP#333436).BEAD.2014.ScreeningLevelUsageAnalysis(SLUA)forfenpyroximate.[Accessibleinthefenpyroximateregistrationreviewdocketatwww.regulations.gov]ProprietaryData.2004-2012.UCIPM.2014.UCIPMPestManagementGuidelines:Almonds.Publication#3431oftheUniversityofCaliforniaAgriculturalandNaturalResourcesStatewideIPMProgram.Availableonthewebathttp://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PDF/PMG/pmgalmond.pdfAccessedAugust2014].Page9ofllWarner,G.2014.PreventionistheBestStrategy:MitesCanSoonDevelopResistancetoOverusedMiticides.GoodFruitGrowerMagazine,April2014issue.Availableonthewebathttp://www.goodfruit.com/prevention-is-best-strategy/[AccessedAugust2014].Page10ofllAPPENDIX

A The map included

above (Figure

3)

is primarily

for

the

use

of the risk assessors

in the Environmental

Fate

and Effects Division.

The

map provides

a very broad geographical

view

of the average

annual amount

(in pounds)

of the active ingredient

applied

per 1,000

acres

of crop acres grown.

These

data

are included

in the maps because

risk assessors

are interested

in the **amo~t**

of

a pesticide

used across agricultural

land.

The calculated

values presented

in the map are

not equivalent

to

an application

rate

(lb

ail A). The

data used

to make

these

maps

have several limitations.

Any interpretation

of the maps should consider

the underlying

data

and

the associated limitations

carefully. The numerator

(annual

average

pounds applied)

is based

on private

market

surveys

of pesticide use

in agriculture

averaged

over

the

last

five years (Proprietary

Data, 2008-2012).

These surveys cover

about

60 crops

and

are targeted

in states

that produce

the majority

of the crop. Although the surveys

capture

most

of the

use

of

a particular

active ingredient

in agriculture,

there

are several limitations

to these surveys. • States

with minor production

of

a surveyed

crop

are

not sampled • Not

all types

of pesticides

are surveyed

in every

crop

in every

year • Many specialty

crops

with

very small acreages

are

not included

in the survey The result

of these limitations

is that states

that show

no usage

may actually

have

a small amount of the active ingredient

being

used.

In some

cases

the displayed

use intensity

may

be distorted because

the surveyed

crops

and

the reported pesticide

usage

may

not accurately

represent

the actual pesticide

usage

on the crops produced

in the state. The denominator

(1,000

crop acres grown)

was

also obtained

from

the same private

market survey database.

The "Crop

Acres Grown"

variable represents

the total

acres grown

in

a given state

of

all

of the s'urveyed

crops.

This value

is independent

of pesticide

usage

and pesticide registration.

It

is important

to note

that

the surveyed

crops (about

60)

are sampled

from

states that

are major producers

of each

crop. Therefore,

there

are cases where

the actual

crop acreage

in a state

is higher

than

that reported

by crop acres grown

in the survey because

either

that

state and/or

crop

was

not included

in the survey. The reader

should

pay particular

attention

to the figure legends

and realize

that

a map prepared for

a particular

chemical

is not directly comparable

to

a map prepared

for

a different

chemical

as the legend

bins

will likely

be different.

Page

11 ofll