UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON D.C., 20460

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

PC Code: 028869

DP Barcode: D392988 

### MEMORANDUM

DATE:

SUBJECT:

TO:

THROUGH:

FROM: May 8, 2012

Ecological Risk Assessment for Fluoxastrobin for the Proposed New Use on Rice

Heather Garvie, Risk Manager Reviewer Fungicide Branch Registration Division (7504P)

# ~~J13)."" Dana Spatz, Branch Chie

Rosanna Louie-Juzwiak, Risk Assessment Proce eade
Environmental Risk Branch III
Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)**~.;;:-** 

### Melissa Panger, Ph.D., Senior Scientist

Rochelle F. H. Bohaty Ph.D., Chemist

## ~~ Environmental Risk Branch III
Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) has completed a review of the new use request for fluoxastrobin for use on rice. Ecological risk assessments have been conducted for
fluoxastrobin and various uses with application rates similar to or higher than those being proposed
for the new use on rice [see USEP A, 2004 (D2891 04); USEPA, 2008 (D349270, D349282);
US EPA, 2009 (D356983, D357729, D366187); US EPA, 2011 (D379112+)]. Therefore, an abbreviated ecological risk assessment is provided here.

The risk assessment for the proposed new use of fluoxastrobin on rice results in level of concern (LaC) exceedences for listed and non-listed freshwater fish (RQs: acute 

### = 0.21; chronic 

### = 1.7),
freshwater invertebrates (RQs: acute 0.78; chronic 

### = 2.1), and estuarine/marine invertebrates (RQs:

acute 

### = 1.8; chronic 

### = 152) on an acute and chronic exposure basis. The RQ for non-vascular aquatic plants (RQ
= 

### 1.2) also exceeds the listed species LaC. Risks to terrestrial organisms (animals and plants), estuarine/marine fish, and vascular aquatic plants are not expected from the

### 2

proposed new use for fluoxastrobin.

Data deficiencies and data gaps described in this assessment are similar to those identified in previous assessments (see D349270, D349282, D356983, D357729, D366187 , D379112+ ) and are
summarized below. The only exception is that new terrestrial plant studies have been submitted that
ha d not been included in previous ecologica l risk assessments, but are considered here

. In addition, this assessment also considers a recently submitted aquatic field dissipation study conducted on
rice. This study has several deficiencies , but does provide characterization for the risk assessment.

The two new T ier I terrestrial plant studies show that the EC 25 

### values for seedling emergence and vegetative vigor a re greater than the concentration tested ( i.e ., >2.18 lb a.i./acre). The vegetativ e vigor study (MRID 48520002) i s classified as acceptabl e. The seedling emergence study (MRID 48520001) is classified as acceptable except for the results for lettuce, onion, and ryegrass which were invalidated due to poor emergence in the study controls (10%, 66%, and 52% emergence, respectively). Although, a seedling emergence study for lettuce, onion, and ryegrass remains a data

gap for fluoxastrobin, additional plant data are not needed to evaluate the current action ( i.e

., the proposed new use on rice). Previous Tier I plant studies showed no effects at con centrations ( i.e

., 0.54 lb a.i./acre) higher than the application rate proposed for the rice use ( i.e ., 0.18 lb a.i./acre).

W hole sediment toxicity studies were originally requested as confirmatory data when fluoxas t robin was first registered ( e.g ., see the EPA‟s fluoxastrobin fact sheet from 2005 1 

### ). Two sediment toxicity
studies were submitted to the EPA, but they were both classified as invalid (MRIDs 45865505 and
45865 506). Additionally, a microcosm study that included benthic organisms (MRID 4640 4901)

was submitted, but the study wa s classified as supplemental and does not fulfill guideline requirements for a sediment toxicity study

. A qualitative description of the microcosm study acute endpoints and study deficiencies were provided in an EFED Me morandum (USEPA, 2005, D312642) and corresponding Data Evaluation Record. T herefore

, EFED has recommended requesting sediment toxicity data in each ecological risk assessment conducted for new uses of fluoxastrobin since the chemical was first registered f or use in the United States. I 

### n addition, the following studies listed below under the D ata G aps section were requested in a letter from the EPA to Arysta LifeScience North America Corporation regarding the master label amendments on December 18, 2008. The following studies remain data deficiencies and gaps for fluoxastrobin:

Data deficiencies:

A 96

- hour acute study on the toxicity of technical fluoxastrobin to sheepshead minnow (MRID
458654

- 17) does not meet guideline solubility limit recommendations for an acute toxicity study ( OCSPP 850. 1075)

. The study may be upgraded to acceptable if documentation on the limit of fluoxastrobin solubility in sal twater under test conditions is provided to the EPA for review. The registrant previously requested that this study be upgraded to acceptable; however, the request was denied (see EFED Memorandum D 334233, 2008)

.



### Data gaps:

Whole Sediment: Acute Freshwater Invertebrates ( OCSPP 850.1735) : A 10

- day spiked sediment

1 http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/factsheets/fluoxastrobin.pdf

### 3

study can address uncertainties regarding freshwater sediment

- dwelling organisms.

Whole Sediment: Acute Marine Invertebrates ( OCSPP 850.1740) : A 10

- day spiked sediment study
can address uncertainties regarding estuarine/marine sediment

- dwelling organisms.

Whole Sediment: Chronic Invertebrates Freshwater and Marine ( OCSPP 850.1770; OCSPP 850.1760 or OECD 218) : A 28

- day spiked sediment study can address uncertainties regarding
freshwater and estuarine/marine sediment

- dwelling organisms.

### 4

PROBLEM FORMULATION

Flu oxastrobin [( E )

- {2

- [6

- (2

- chlorophenoxy)

- 5

- fluoropyrimidin

- 4

- yloxy]phenyl}(5,6

- dihydro

- 1,4,2

- dioxazin

- 3

- yl)methanone O

- methyloxime; CAS 361377

- 29

- 9 ; PC code 028869] was first registered
in the United States in 200 5 and is currently registered for use on a n u m ber of crops (see Use
Characterization below)

. This assessment is for the proposed new use on rice

.

M ode of Action

Fluoxastrobin is a “leaf

- systemic” strobilurin fungicide. Strobilurin fungicides are site

- specific compounds that provide significant control of plant diseases caused by pathogens. They work by interfering with respiration in plant

- pathogenic fungi. These types of fungicides also possess translaminar activity, therefore en abling them to move through treated leaves and providing cont rol
on both leaf surfaces. Fluoxastrobin inhibits spore g ermination and mycelial growth. The chemical identification as well as physical

- chemical properties of fluoxastrobin are provided in Table 1

.

Table 1 . Physical

- Chemical Characteristics of Fluoxastrobin

Chemical Name ( E )

- {2

- [6

- (2

- chlorophenoxy)

- 5

- fluoropyrimidin

- 4

- yloxy]phenyl}(5,6

- dihydro

1,4,2

- dioxazin

- 3

- yl)methanone O

- methyloxime

Chemical Structure

Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) Registry Number 361377

- 29

- 9

Molecular Formula C 21 H 16 ClFN 4 O 5 USEPA Pesticide Code (PC #) 028869
Smiles Notation Clc4ccccc4Oc3ncnc(Oc2ccccc2C(=N \ OC)/C=1OCCON=1)c3F Molecular Weight 458.8 g/mol Vapor Pressure (25 °C) 4.23 x 10 - 12 torr Water Solubility ( 20 °C ) 2.3 mg/L

Henry‟s Law Constant 1.01 x 10 - 7 Pa m 3 / mole (9.98 atm

- m 3 /mol) Log K
ow 2.86



### U se Characterization

Fluoxastrobin is currently registered for use on peanut, tuberous and corm vegetables, leaf petioles

, fruiting vegetables, cucurbits, ornamentals, turf and as a seed treatment on potato, peanut and grass

. Maximum single application rates range from 0.12 to 0.55 lb a.i./a and maximum yearly application

### 5

rates range from 0.24 to 2.2 lb a.i./a. 2 

### Application methods currently registered include aerial, chemigation, and gro und sprays. While the geographic extent of fluoxastrobin use is unknown

, it is likely widespread based on the wide variety of approved uses.

Arysta LifeScience North America, LLC has submitted a new use request for fluoxastrobin [ Fluoxastrobin 480 SC Fungicide

, EPA Reg. No. 66330

- 64 (40.3% fluoxastrobin) ; this master label will be the basis of the following products: EVITO® SC Fungicide, DISARMTM 480 SC Fungicide (ABN: Armor TechTM DISARMTM 480 SC Fungicide), and Fluoxastrobin 480 SC Fungicide Seed

Treatm ent ] for use on rice

. Fluoxastrobin 480 SC Fungicide is a suspension concentrate formulation containing a single active ingredient (40.3% fluoxastrobin). Table 2 presents the proposed application rates for the new proposed use and label amendments

.

Table 2

. Proposed Fluoxastrobin Application Rates For Use on Rice

Crop Single Application

Rate Range
lb a.i./acre No. of

Applications Minimum

Retreatment
Interval ( days ) Max Annual

Application
Rate lb a.i./acre/yr Application

Technique

Rice 0.1 8 2 2 7 0.3 6 Air, Ground,
and Chemigation



### The proposed use on rice is for a foliar application that can be applied with aerial , chemigation, and ground application equipment. The maximum number of proposed fluoxastrobin applications on rice is two per season with a maximum single application rate of 0.18 lb a.i./a and a minimum application interval of 27 days 3 

### (as shown in Table 2 ) . The maximum yearly application rate is
0.36 lb a.i./a. The label limits applications to 28 days prior to harvest. The label does not limit direct application s to flooded fields nor does it require a water holding period prior to discharging paddy water after fluoxastrobin applications. The geographic extent of the use is not specifically limited by the label; however, the majority o f the rice production in the United States occurs in Arkansas, California

, Mississippi, Missouri, Louisiana , and Texas. Survey data from the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) on rice acres planted in the United States for the year 2010 is provided in Table 3

. 4 

### Rice has also been grown in Florida, Oklahoma, and Tennessee

. 5

2 For turf, t he label permits four applications at a rate of 0.50 lb ai/A; however, the maximum yearly application rate is 2.2 lb a.i./a; therefore, the maximum single application rate is assumed to be 0.55 lb a

. i

. / a

. The discrepancy is the result of the number of sign ificant figures assumed in application rate conversion calculations.

3 Email from Heather Garvie (EPA/RD ) to Rosanna Louie

- Juzwiak (EPA/EFED), March 15 , 201 2

. 4 S urvey data from the from the Quick Stats Database of the National Agricultural Statistics S ervice available at http://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/results/6432EC45

- FA6F

- 3DE6

- A48F

- 98F1917AAEA8

5 2007 census data from the Quick Stats Database of the National Agricultural Statistics Service available at http://quick stats.nass.usda.gov

.

### 6

Table 3 . Summary of Acres Planted W ith R ice in 2010 4

State Acreage Planted (x 1000) Percent Production (cwt) Percent

Arkansas 1,791 49% 115,675,000 48%

California 558 15% 44,326,000 18%

Louisiana 540 15% 32,625,000 13% Mississippi 305 8% 20,756,000 9%

Missouri 253 7% 16,254,000 7%

Texas 189 5% 13,468,000 6%

United States 3,636 243,014,000



### The following environmental hazards statement is included on the proposed label:

“This pesticide is toxic to fish and aquatic invertebrates. Drift and runoff may be hazardous to aquatic organisms in wa ter adjacent to treated areas. The active ingredient in this product can be persistent for several months or longer. Do not apply direct ly to water or to areas where surface water is present or to intertidal areas below the mean high water mark, or other sensitive areas that may be exposed to spray drift. Do not contaminate water when disposing of equipment
washwater or rinsate.”

E nviro nmental Fate Summary

Based on laboratory studies, fluoxastrobin persists in soils for several months to more than a year , and is slightly to moderately mobile in soils. As for aquatic environments, fluoxastrobin has been shown to be stable to hydrolysis. Fluoxastrobin is slightly susceptible to microbial degradation in aquatic environments. A queous photolysis of fluoxastrobin has been shown to be a major route of
fluoxastrobin transformation in sterile water. However, a n additional photolysis study perform ed in natural water/sediment systems indicates that the majo rity of applied fluoxastrobin sorbs to
sediment and no transformation occurs under pseudo environmental conditions. Thus, the dissipation of fluoxastrobin in water is expected to depend on physica l characteristics of the water ( e.g. , sediment loading, depth, etc.) which have an effect on sunlight penetration as well as the rate of fluoxastrobin sediment partitioning

. Partitioning of fluoxastrobin between water and sediment
was variable between subm itted studies. Based on the log K
ow 

### fluoxastrobin is not expected to bio concentrate. This is supported by the fish bioaccumulation study. E nvironmental fate properties of
fluoxastrobin are summarized in Table 4

.

Table 4

. Environmental Fate and Transport Characteristics of Fluoxastrobin

Parameter Data Study ID Study Status

Hydrolysis Half

- life (t 1/2 ) pH 4 : Stable pH 7: Stable pH 9 : Stable 45865304 Acceptable

Aquatic Photolysis
Half

- life (t 1/2 ) pH 7: 4.1, 20.1, and 28.3 days 45865306 &
45865403 Acceptable

Soil Photolysis
Half

- life (t 1/2 ) Stable 45865308 Acceptable

### 7 Parameter Data Study ID Study Status

Aerobic Soil
Metabolism
Half

- life (t 1/2 ) 29.4, 26.2, 30.1, 46.6, 323 and 393 days 1 45865309 &
45865310 Acceptable

Aerobic Aquatic
Metabolism Half

- life (t 1/2 ) 29 and 51 days (water) 363 and 271 (sediment) 190 and 150 days (total system) 45865313
46925806 2 Acceptable

Anaerobic Soil
Metabolism half

- life (t 1/2 ) No data

Anaerobic Aquatic
Metabolism half

- life (t 1/2 ) 147 days (water) 211 days (sediment) 187 (total system) 45865312
46925806 2 Acceptable

Adsorption Coefficient (K d ) 26.26, 12.70, 16.21, and 3.35 mL/g

45865315 Supplemental Soil Partition Coefficient (K

oc ) 1580, 629, 758, and 424 mL/g

Terrestrial Field Dissipation 578, 533, 347, and 239 days 45865318, 45865320, 45865323, &
45865324 Acceptable

Aquatic Field Dissipation Application 1: 6 days (water) 3 and 20 days 3 (total system)
Application 2: 10 days (water) 3 and 135

days 4 (total system) 48532004 Upgradable 5

Fish BCF 18 45865421 Supplemental

1. There is a direct correlation with the level of soil microbial activity and the rate of degradation observed
in the aerobic soil metabolism studies for fluoxastrobin.
2. On February 1, 2006, the registrant responded (MRID 46925806) to the deficiencies in the data evaluation report and the acceptability of the aerobic and anaer obic aquatic studies submitted in support
of t he fluoxastrobin registration ( MRIDs 45865313 and 45865312, respectively). T he se studies were

r eevaluated and determined to be acceptable as EFED does not expect fluox a strobin to sorb to the glass
test apparatu s to a sufficient degree to affect the study results, as demonstrated by the material balance.
3. Guidance for Evaluating and Calculating Degradation Kinetics in Environmental Media ( final dr aft
document December 21 , 2011) ; Nth

- Order Rate Model or Indetermin ate Order Rate Equation Model (IORE) Representative half

- life ( T R IORE )
4. Guidance for Evaluating and Calculating Degradation Kinetics in Environmental Media ( final dr aft
document December 21 , 2011) ; Double First

- Order in Parallel (DFOP) second (“slow”) half

- life (t 1/2 )
5. Data can only be used qualitatively for risk assessment purposes and should not be used as a rational e for additional refinements.



### The two major soil metabolites of fluoxastrobin identified are HEC5725

- E

- des

- chlorophenyl (HEC 7155) and HEC5725

- carboxylic acid (HEC 7180). The chemical identification as well as chemical structures of these transformation products are shown in Table 5

. The only major degradate found in aqueous studies is HEC5725

- oxazepine, which forms through direct photolysis in sterile water. An additional photolysis study performed in natural water/sediment systems indicates that the majority of applied fluoxastrobin adsorbs to sediment and no oxazepine form s under pseudo
environmental conditions. This indicates aquatic photolysis of fluoxastrobin in the environment may be minimal as sediment p a r ti tioning reduces the available fluoxastrobin that may undergo photolysis. An aquatic field dissipation study (discussed in more detail below) does not report

### 8

transformation products, a study deficiency; therefore, the formation of fluoxastrobin transformation products in the environment cannot be corroborated. Transformation is likely to be
minimal based on the half

- life of fluoxastrobin in the total system (water and sediment).

Table 5

. Physical

- Chemical Characteristics of Fluoxastrobin Transformation Products HEC
7155 and HEC 7 1 80

HEC7155

Chemical Name (5,6

- dihydro

- [1,4,2]dioxazin

- 3

- yl)

- [2

- (5

- fluoro

- 6

- hydroxy

- pyrimidin

- 4

- yloxy)

- phenyl]

- methanone O methyl

- oxime

Chemical Structure

Molecular Formula C 16 H 15 FN 4 O 5 Smiles Notation O(C1=C(C(=NC=N1)OC2=C(C=CC=C2) \ C(=N/OC)C3=NOCCO3)F)C Molecular Weight 362.32 g/mol 

### HEC 7180

Chemical Name {2

- [6

- (2

- chlorophenoxy)

- 5

- fluoropyrimidin

- 4

- yloxy]

- phenyl}

- methoxyimino acetic
acid

Chemical Structure

Molecular Formula C 19 H 13 Cl FN 3 O 5 Smiles Notation ClC1=C(C=CC=C1)OC2=C(C(=NC=N2)OC3=C(C=CC=C3) \ C(=N/OC)C(=O)O[H])F Molecular Weight 417.78 g/mol



### Terrestrial f

ield dissipation studies indicate that fluoxastrobin persists for over a year. However, it was not observed to leach through soil. Out of the three major metabolites mentioned above, only
HEC5725

- E

- des

- chlorophenyl was detected in the terrestrial field studies. The observe d
concentration of HEC5725

- E

- des

- chlorophenyl is below 10% of the tota l applied. This metabolite is also observed in the deeper soil layers, but at less than 1% of the total applied. A recently submitted aquatic field dissipation study conducted on rice ha s several deficiencies that limit its use for risk assessment purposes at this time; however, the study suggests fluoxastrobin readily dissipates from the water column but may persist in sediment. The rapid dissipation of
fluoxastrobin from the water colum n is due to partitioning to sediment; however, the role of transformation was not investigated. The route of fluoxastrobin dissipation under aquatic field
conditions could not be determined as soil and water samples were not analyzed for transformation

pro ducts . The total system (water and soil/sediment) half

- life as well as residual residues indicate fluoxastrobin persists beyond the study duration. This suggests that accumulation (carry over) of

### 9

fluoxastrobin in rice paddies is possible. T he mobility of fluoxastrobin in the soil profile could not
be assessed based on the data included in this study.

EXPOSURE MODELING

Aquatic

For fluoxastrobin use on rice, applications may lead to direct surface water contamination as a result of direct spraying of a f looded rice paddy, spray drift or indirect contamination through discharge of the paddy water containing soil sorbed fluoxastrobin and dissolved fluoxastrobin. Based on the fate properties of fluoxastrobin it may be persistent in the environment for severa l months to more than a year post

- application and may accumulate in soil and sediment. There is no required water holding period specified on the proposed fluoxastrobin label.

Fluoxastrobin is stable to hydrolysis and microbial mediated degradation in aq uatic environments; however, aqueous photolysis is a major route of degradation. The phototransformation of fluoxastrobin in water depends on physical characteristics of the water ( e.g. , sediment loading, depth, etc.) which have an effect on sunlight penet ration. In general, paddy water is shallow; therefore, aquatic photolysis may be a dissipation route for fluoxastrobin. The relatively short water
column half

- life values in both the aquatic field dissipation study and the aqueous photolysis study
indicate fluoxastrobin may dissipate rapidly from shallow paddy water. Dissipation is primarily due to water:sediment partitioning; however, studies have shown that fluoxastrobin water:sediment partitioning is variable. Thus, photolysis may play a role in fluoxast robin dissipation when water:sediment partitioning is not rapid. Both laboratory as well as field studies indicate that fluoxastrobin may remain in the sediment for more than a year and has the potential to accumulate
in the sediment.

Analysis Plan

The E FED Tier 1 Rice Model (v1.0, May 8, 2007) 6 

### was used to estimate aquatic exposures for applications directly to water (flooded field). The model estimates exposure in a water body holding a 10 cm water depth. When a pesticide is applied to a water body, the model assumes that it will instantaneously partition between a water phase and a sediment phase based on the partitio n coefficient of the chemical. The formula of the Tier I Rice Model v1.0 is as follows:

and, if appropriate:

K d 

### = 0.01K
oc



### w here
C
w 

### water concentration (μg/L)

6 USEPA 2007. G uidance for Tier I Estimation of Aqueous Pesticide Concentrations in Rice Paddies . Memo from S. Bradbury to Environmental Fate and Effects Division; May 8, 2007

. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Washington, DC. Available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm#rice (accessed September 27, 2010).

### 10 m ai 

### ’ mass applied per unit area (kg/ha)

K d 

### water

- sediment partitioning coefficient (L/kg)

K oc 

### organic carbon partitioning coefficient (L/kg)

The Tier I Rice Model was calibrated to generate estimates that ar e similar to or greater than dissolved concentrations measured within rice paddies and in discharged paddy water. The calibration involved determination of the sediment interaction depth by calibrating the model to maximum residues measured in paddy water in dissipation studies. The model does not account for pesticide degradation, volatilization, dilution, foliar interception, o r other dissipation processes. The
model was not evaluated or calibrated for concentrations measured in sediment.

Detailed descr iptions and documentation for the Tier I Rice model can be found on the Office of Pesticide Program‟s models website. 7



### Selecting Input Parameters

The input parameters used in this assessment were selected from the environmental fate data submitted to support fluoxastrobin registration in accordance with US EPA

- OPP EFED water model parameter guidance. 8 

### The input values used in the Tier I rice model are provided in Table 6

.

Table 6

. Input Parameters Used in the Rice Model to Estimate Environmental
Concentrations of Fluoxastrobin

Parameter Values Source

Soil Adsorption
Coefficient K

oc Rice Model: 848 mL/g mean K

oc value MRID 45865315



### Surface Water Exposure Estimates

Modeling Data

The proposed use of fluoxastrobin on rice may result in a surface water peak concentration of 93 μg/L

. 9 

### The Tier I Rice Model only provides a single output value; therefore, this value should be used for all exposure durations ( i.e.

, peak, 96

- hours, 21

- day, and 60

- day average concentrations ).
The EE C of 93 μg/L for rice is higher than previously reported EDWCs for other fluoxastrobin

uses. Previous reported estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) were based on Tier II
surface water modeling (PRZM

- EXAMS)

.

The Tier I rice model does not consider transformation ( i.e. , anaerobic and aerobic aquatic
metabolis m and aquatic photolysis) ; fluoxastrobin is only slightly susceptible to metabolism (aquatic metabolism total system half

- life values 150

- 190 days) and photolysis in the environment

7 http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm

8 Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides , Version 2.1, October 22, 2009.

9 Calculation: 93 μg/L = 0.20 kg a.i./h/[0.00105+0.00013(0.01 x 848)]

### 11

is assumed to be minimal. A quatic photolysis may be a major route of fluox astrobin dissipation in the environment; however, aquatic photolysis is assumed to only occur in a small fraction of the water column (top few centimeters) and is heavily affected by physical characteristics of the water ( e.g. , sediment loading, depth, etc .) as well as the canopy coverage and water:sediment partitioning. A laboratory aquatic photolysis study conducted with natural water indicates fluoxastrobin partitions to sediment, limiting photolysis. A erobic and anaerobic aquatic metabolism studies sho w that fluoxastrobin readily sorbs to sediment in aquatic environments, reducing the water concentration rapidly; however, sorption is considered in the Tier I Rice M odel; therefore, sorption of fluoxastrobin to sediment is reflected in the reported concen tration. Therefore, the reported EECs are expected to provide a reasonable upper bound concentration for the potential exposure to
fluoxastrobin in surface water.

M onitoring Data

F luoxastrobin is a fairly new chemical so monitoring data is limited. The National Water

- Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) database indicates that surface water and bed sediment samples were analyzed for fluoxastrobin at two Georgia sites. The fluoxastrobin concentrations were below the limits of detections(4.2 ng/L for water a nd 1.8 μg/kg for sediment). There is no evidence that other monitoring sites or programs are looking for or detecting fluoxastrobin in surface water or
sediment.

Terrestrial

Terrestrial exposure estimates for avian and mammalian risk assessments were de rived using the T

REX model (version 1.3.1, December 22, 2006). The EEC values used for terrestrial animal exposure are derived from the Kenaga nomograph, as modified by Fletcher et al. (1994), based on a large set of actual field re sidue data. The upper limit values from the nomograph represent the 95th percentile of residue values from actual field measurements (Hoerger and Kenaga, 1972). Risk quotients are based on the most sensitive LC 50 

### and NOAEC for birds and LD 50 

### for mammals.

We derive terrestrial EECs for fluoxastrobin using the maximum proposed single and annual application rates ( i.e ., 2 applications of 0.18 lb a.i./acre made 27 days apart)

. The default 35

- day
foliar half

- life value was used for modeling EECs on terrestri al food items. A complete description of the input parameters and output is contained in APPENDIX A

.

ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT S

Assessment of risk is based on the most sensitive species tested for terr estrial and aquatic organisms. The acute and chronic toxicity values for the most sensitive terrestrial and aquatic organisms tested are presented in

### 12

Table 7

. These endpoints are based on those present ed in the most recent assessment conduct ed for fluoxastrobin (USEPA 2011

, D379112+ )

.

### 13

Table 7

. Toxicity Values Used to Assess Risks from Fluoxastrobin Use

TAXON/SPECIES ACUTE TOXICITY CHRONIC TOXICITY

Acute Endpoint MRID/

Classification NOAEC Affected Endpoints /
MRID /
Classification

Freshwater fish /
Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) 96

- hr LC 50 = 0.435 mg a.i./L 458654

- 14/

Acceptable 0.0557 mg a.i./L N o effects at any concentration
tested / 458654

- 20/ Supplemental (no
LOAEC was established)

Freshwater invertebrate / Amphipod ( Gammarus pulex ) 48

- hr EC 50 = 0.12 mg a.i./L 460804

- 02 /

Supplemental (the study was conducted
with a non

- guideline species) 0.045 mg a.i./L The NOAEC is b ased

on an acute

- to

chronic ratio using
acute/chronic data on daphnids

Estuarine/marine fish / Sheepshead minnow ( Cyprinodon variegates ) 96

- hr LC 50 > 1.374 mg a.i./L 458654

- 17/

Supplemental 1

-- --

Estuarine/marine
mollusk / Eastern oyster ( Crassostrea virginica ) 96

- hr EC 50 = 0.83 mg a.i./L 458654

- 10/

Supplemental (new shell growth did not
meet minimum requirements of 2.0 mm) – --

Estuarine/marine
invertebrate / Mysid shrimp ( Americamysis bahia ) 96

- hr LC 50 = 0.0516 mg a.i./L 458654

- 11/

Acceptable 0.00061 mg a.i./L Based on reduced

s urvival and growth / 458654

- 19/ Supplemental 2

Birds/ Northern bobwhite quail ( Colinus virginianus ) LD 50 > 2,000 mg a.i./kg

- bw

LC 50 > 4845 mg a.i./kg

- diet 458654

- 22/

Acceptable

458654

- 23/ Acceptable 1029 mg a.i./kg

diet N o effects noted at

any concentration
tested/458654

- 25/ Acceptable

Mammals/ Laboratory rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) LD 50 > 2,000 mg a.i./kg

- bw 458656

- 12/

Acceptable 70 mg a.i./kg

- bw Based on reduced body weight in adult
males/458656

- 34/Acceptable

Terrestrial invertebrate / Honey bee ( Apis mellifera ) LD 50 > 200 μg a.i./bee (contact) 458654

- 27/ Acceptable
--

--

Aquatic vascular plant /
Duckweed ( Lemna gibba ) EC 50 = 1.2 mg a.i./L 458654

- 30/ Acceptable 0.16 mg a.i./L Based on reduced
frond
number/458654

- 30/ Acceptable

### 14

TAXON/SPECIES ACUTE TOXICITY CHRONIC TOXICITY

Acute Endpoint MRID/

Classification NOAEC Affected Endpoints /
MRID /
Classification

Aquatic non

- vascular plant / Green alga ( Selenastrum capricornutum ) EC 50 = 0.26 mg a.i./L 458654

- 31/ Acceptable 0.076 mg a.i./L Based on reduced cell density/458654

- 31/ Acceptable

Terrestrial plants

– seedling emergence/ Various species EC 25 > 0.54 lb
a.i./acre 458654

- 28/

Acceptable 0.54 lb a.i./acre No effects noted at the highest
concentration tested (Tier I)/ 458654

- 28/ Acceptable

Terrestrial plants

– vegetative vigor/ Various species EC 25 > 0.54 lb
a.i./acre 458654

- 28/

Acceptable 0.54 lb a.i./acre No effects noted at the highest
concentration tested (Tier I)/ 458654

- 28/ Acceptable

1 Inadequate documentation on solubility of the test substance in the system. The registrant requested that this study be upgraded to acceptable; however, the request was denied (see D 334233, 2008). No mortality or sublethal effects were observed in any control or test group during 96 hours of exposure.

2 Following pairing, male su rvival data should have been reported; second

- generation mysids should have been monitored daily for at least 4 days for survival development, and behavior; and terminal growth measurements should have been provided in terms of gender.



### Aquatic Animals

Fluoxastrobin is highly toxic to freshwater fish and invertebrates; moderately toxic to estuarine/marine fish; and very highly toxic to estuarine/marine invertebrates on an acute exposure basis.

No treatment

- related effects on hatchability, survival, an d/or terminal growth parameters were
observed in a freshwater fish life

- cycle study using fluoxastrobin TGAI and rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) (MRID 458654

- 20). The NOAEC was 0.0557 mg a.i./L (the highest concentration tested) ; however, a LOAEC value was not established. Although this study is scientifically sound, it was classified as supplemental because a LOAEC value was not determined.

A chronic endpoint is not available for the most acutely sensitive freshwater inverte brate ( the amphipod

, Gammar us pulex ). Therefore, a chronic endpoint for freshwater invertebrates is based on an ACR using data from daphnids ( Daphnia magna ). An acute study with TGAI and daphnids
resulted in an EC 50 

### value of 0.4 8 mg a.i./L (MRID 458654

- 06). A life

- cycle test using T GAI and daphnids (MRID 458654

- 18) resulted in NOAEC and LOAEC values of 0.18 mg a.i./L and 0.33 mg a.i./L , respectively, based on reduced reproduction

. Therefore, the ACR for daphni ds is 2.67 (0.48/0.18 = 2.67). Applying this ACR to the amphipod acute data , results in a NOAEC of 0.045 mg a.i./L (0.12/x = 2.67; x = 0.12/2.67 = 0.045)

.

### 15

The chronic indoor microcosm study (MRID 464049

- 01) with the amphipod, G. pulex L., resulted in a more sensitive endpoint (15 μg/L) for aquatic invertebrates than that used in this assessment ( i.e., 45 μg a.i./L). However, the results of a microcosm study are not comparable to submitted chronic freshwater invertebrate studies because reproductive endpoints were not me asured in the microcosm study. A qualitative description of the microcosm study acute endpoints and study
deficiencies is provided in an EFED Memorandum (USEPA, 2005, D312642) and corresponding
Data Evaluation Record.

No data a re available to assess the chronic toxicity of fluoxastrobi n to estuarine/marine fish. Because a definitive acute endpoint is not available for estuarine/marine fish, an ACR was not used
to estimate a NOAEC for this taxon.

One estuarine/marine invertebrate 28

- day life cycle test using the TGAI was submitted for fluoxastrobin using the mysid shrimp ( Americamysis bahia ) (MRID 458654

- 19). All endpoints (including survival of first

- generation mysids, number of young /female, wet weight, and length of surviving first

- generation mysids) were affected at all treatment co ncentrations w ith the exception
of the lowest treatment level (0.61 μg a.i./L)

. The NOAEC and LOAEC values were 0.61 μg a.i./L
and 1.19 μg a.i./L , respectively. This study, although scientifically valid, is classified as supplemental because of several def iciencies in monitoring and repo rting that are documented in a previous risk assessment (USEPA, 2004, D289104 )

.

Terrestrial Animal s

Fluoxastrobin is practically non

- toxic to birds, mammals, and honeybees on an acute basis.

The acute oral toxicity of fluoxastrobin to 6

- month old bobwhite quail ( Colinus virginianus ) was
assessed over 14 days (MRID458654

- 22). The acute oral LD 50 

### exceeded the highest dose tested (>2000 mg a.i./kg bw). There was no mortality or treatment

- related effects noted in the study. A dietary study with bobwhite quail (MRID 458654

- 23 ) resulted in an LC 50 

### greater than the highest
concentration tested , 4845 mg a.i./kg

- diet (there were no mortalities at any test concentration)

. During the 5

- day exposure period, treatment

- r elated reductions in percent body weight changes
were observed at the 2498 and 4845 mg a.i./kg

- diet levels, and a treatment

- related reduction in food consumption was observed at the 4845 mg a.i./kg

- diet level. The subsequent NOAEC (based on body weight) wa s 1167 mg a.i./kg

- diet for the quail.

In a mallard duck (

Anas platyrhynchos ) reproduction study (MRID 458654

- 26), the NO AEC was determined to be 461 mg a.i./kg

- diet, based on reduction in female body weight and egg production; the L OAEC was 1394 mg a.i. /kg

- diet. Female body weights, the number of eggs laid/hen, and the number of eggs set/hen were all statistically

- reduced at the 1,394 mg a.i./kg

- diet treatment level as compared to the control group.

Rats exposed to technical grade fluoxastrobin showed no mortality at the highest doses tested. The

LD 50 

### value for the TGAI is >2000 mg a.i. /kg

- bw (MRIDs 458656

- 12).

The NOAEL for rats is 1,000 mg a.i./kg

- diet (70 mg a.i./kg

- bw) based on decreasing premat ing body weight gain of the P

- generation males and females and decreased absolute body weight of the

### 16

F 1 

### males and females. The reproductive toxicity NOAEL is 10,000 mg a.i./kg

- diet and the reproductive toxicity LOAEL is not identified.

Plants

Two Tier II studies of the freshwater aquatic vascular plant, duckweed ( Lemna gibba ), were completed using the TGAI. In both studies (MRIDs 458654

- 29 and 458654

- 30), frond number was the most sensitive endpoint with EC 50 

### values ranging from 1.2 to 2.9 mg a.i./L. In the study with
the lowest EC 50 

### value (MRID 458654

- 30), frond number was significantly reduced at > 0.39 mg a.i./L treatment levels; the NOAEC and EC 05 

### values were 0.16 and 0.019 mg a.i./L, respectively.

Regarding non

- vascular aquatic plants, in a Tier II test with freshwater green alga ( Selenastrum capricornutum ) (MRID 458654

- 31) and the parent form of fluoxastrobin

, there were significant differences in the cell densities, growth rates, and biomass at all but the lowest treatment levels.
The EC 50 

### , bas ed on cell density, was 0.26 mg a.i./L, and the NOAEC was 0.076 mg a.i./L for all endpoints.

Seedling emergence and vegetative vigor were studied on 10 different species of plants after application of the formulated product of fluoxastrobin (HEC 5725 SC 480), at a single concentration of 0.54 lb a.i./A (600 g a.i./ha) (MRID 458654

- 28). No monocot or dicot species was significantly affected by the treatment in either study, and no effects exceeded 25%. The respective
NOAEC and EC 25 

### values are 0.54 and >0.54 lb a.i./A for all test ed species.

Two additional Tier I terrestrial plant studies were r ecently submitted (MRIDs 48520001 and 48520002). These studies resulted in EC 25 

### values for seedling emergence and vegetative vigor that were greater than the concentration tested ( i.e ., >2.18 lb a.i./acre). The vegetative vigor study (MRID 48520002 ) is cla ssified as acceptable. The seedling emergence study (MRID 48520001) is classified as acceptable except for the results for lettuce, onion, and ryegrass which were invalidated due to poor emergence in the study controls (10%, 66%, and 52% emergence,
respect ively).

RISK CHARACTERIZATIO N

Aquatic Organisms

The EECs in surface water generated from the Tier I R ice M odel represent acute and chronic exposure to fish, aquatic invertebrates, and aquatic plants. As shown in Table 8 , the acute RQs
exceed the EPA ‟s acute risk LOC of 0.5 for fre shwater invertebrates (RQ = 0.78 ) and
estuarin e/marine invertebrates (RQ = 1.8 ) ( Table 8 ). The acute restricted use LOC of 0.10 and the acute listed species LOC of 0.05 are exceede d for freshwater fish (RQ = 0.21 ), freshwater
inverteb rates, and estuarine/marine invertebrates

. Additionally, the chronic R Qs for freshwater fish (RQ = 1.7 ), freshwater invertebrates (RQ = 2.1 ), and estuarin e/marine invertebrates (RQ = 152 )
exceed the EPA ‟s chronic risk LOC of 1. For aquatic plants, the only RQ that exceeds an EPA LOC
is for listed non

- vascu lar aquatic plants (RQ = 1.2 ). Therefore, based on this screening level risk

assessment, there is a potential risk for freshwater fish and aquatic invertebrates from acute and

c hronic exposure s to fluoxastr obin from the new proposed use on rice

. Additionally, there is a

### 17

potential risk to listed non

- vascular aquatic plants (and those listed species that have an obligate relationship with non

- vascular aquatic plants).

Table 8 . RQs for Aquatic Organisms Exposed to Fluoxastrobin from the Proposed New Use
on Rice

Taxa EECs

(μg a.i./L) Acute Endpoint

( LC 50 in μg a.i./L) Chronic

Endpoint (NOAEC in μg a.i./L) Acute RQ Chronic RQ

Animals
Freshwater Fish

93 435 55.7 0. 21 1. 7
Freshwater Invertebrate 120 45 0.7 8 2.1

Estuarine/Marine
Invertebrate 51.6 0.61 1. 8 152

Plants

Taxa EECs (μg

a.i./L) Non

- listed

Species Endpoint ( EC 50 in μg a.i./L) Listed Species

Endpoint ( NOAEC in μg a.i./L) Non

- listed

Species RQ Listed

Species RQ

Vascular Aquatic Plants
93 1,200 160 0.0 8 0.5 8

Non

- vascular Aquatic
Plants 260 76 0.3 6 1. 2

Bolded numbers exceed an EPA LOC.



### In the estuarine/marine fish acute toxicity study submitted, there were no mortality or sublethal
effects at the highest treatment levels tested ( i.e ., the LC 50, 

### value is a „greater than‟ value), therefore, this endpoint is not used to calculate RQ values. In order to gain a bett er understanding
of how the EEC from the proposed fluoxastrobin use on rice relate s to the toxicity data currently available for estuarine/marine fish, a RQ was calculated using the conservative assumption that the highest concentration tested in the study represents the endpoint [ i.e ., fish LC 50 

### = 1,374 μ g a.i./L (sheepshead minnow)]. In this exercise, the acute RQ calculated just exceeds the EPA‟s acute LOC
for listed fish (RQ = 0.07 ). The actual RQ would be lower than this because no effects were
observed at the highest treatment levels. There are no chronic toxicity data available fo r estuarine/marine fish, so chronic RQs for this taxon could not be calculated.

Fluoxastrobin has a borderline high K
ow 

### and it is not expected to rapidly degrade via aerobic or
anaerobic metabolism . Therefore, although it is not expected to bioaccumulate, fluoxastrobin is expected to partition to the sediment where it may persist. Accumulation of fluox astrobin in sediment is also possible. Due to the toxicity of fluoxastrobin to other aquatic animals, benthic organisms may also be at risk fro m the new proposed use and use patterns. However, toxicity data

are not av ailable to assess exposure and potential risk to benthic organisms

.

Terrestrial Organisms

None of the RQs for terrestrial animals, based on the results of T

- REX (see APPENDIX A ), exceed any EPA level of concern (LOC) for the new proposed use of fluoxastrobin on rice

. Because no mortality or sublethal effects were observed at the highest treatment levels tested in the
avian and mammalian acute studies, standard RQ values for acute exposure could not be calculated

### 18

using T

- REX . In order to gain a better understanding of how the EECs from the proposed
fluoxastrobin foliar use on rice relate to the toxicity data currently available for birds and mammals

, the T

- REX model was used to cal culate RQs using the conservative assumption that the highest values tested in the studies represent endpoints [ i.e ., avian acute LD 50 

### = 2, 000 mg a.i./kg

- bw (bobwhite quail); avian sub

- acute LC 50 

### = 4,845 mg a.i./kg diet (bobwhite quail) ; mammalian acute
LD 50 

### = 2,000 mg a.i./kg

- bw (rat) ]. In this exercise, all of the acute and sub

- acute RQs calculated using upper bound Kenaga values are below EPA‟s LOCs for all size and dietary classes. The actual RQs would be lower than these because no effects were observed at the highest treatment
levels

.

Risk to non

- target insects is not typically estimated in screening

- level assessments; however, fluoxastrobin is practically non

- toxic to adult honeybees, with an LD 50 

### value greater than 200 μg/bee ( acute contac t toxicity test )

.

Risks to terrestrial plants are not expected because there were no effects noted in any of the species tested in the seedling emergence and vegetative vigor studies at a concentration higher than those being proposed for use here [ i.e

., the NOAEC values (0.54 lb a.i./acre) are higher than the maximum single application rate being proposed for rice (0.18 lb a.i./acre)].

Incidents

A search of the Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS, version 2.1), the Avian Incident Monitoring Sys tem (AIMS) 10 

### , and the Incident Data System (IDS) (for aggregate reports) for
fluoxastrobin was conducted on February 2, 2012

. There are currently no reported fluoxastrobin
incidents in these databases.

Uncertainties and Data Gaps

The following data gaps and uncertainties were identified in this risk assessment:

Environmental Fate:

The route of fluoxastrobin dissipation under aquatic field conditions could not be determined as soil and water samples were not analyzed for transformation products. The to tal system (water and soil/sediment) half

- life indicate s that fluoxastrobin is relatively persistent. In addition, residual residues indicate fluoxastrobin persists beyond the study duration. This suggests that accumulation (carry over) of fluoxastrobin in rice paddies or other aquatic systems where fluoxastrobin may sorb
to sediment is possible.

Ecological Effects:

The endpoint used to assess acute effects to estuarine/marine fish (OCSPP 850.1075) from exposure to fluoxastrobin is based on a study that is classified as supplemental because the solubility limit in saltwater (under study conditions) was not determined; therefore, the endpoints from the study are potentially based on 'total' concentrat ions and not necessarily bioavailable

10 http://www.abcbirds.org/abcprograms/policy/pesticides/aims/aim s/index.cfm

### 19

concentrations (MRID 458654

- 17). Therefore, there is some uncertainty regarding the results of this study . H owever, new data are not expected to alter our risk conclusions. Therefore, we do not recommend requesting a dditional data at this time

.

A chronic endpoint is not available for the most acutely sensitive freshwater invertebrate (the amphipod, Gammarus pulex). Therefore, a chronic endpoint for freshwater invertebrates is based on an ACR using data from daphnids ( Daphnia magna ).

No data are available to assess the chronic toxicity of fluoxastrobin to estuarine/marine fish. Because a definitive acute endpoint is not available for estuarine/marine fish, an ACR could not be
used to estimate a NOAEC for this taxo n. Estuarine/marine fish, based on available data, appear less sensitive to fluoxastrobin than freshwater fish (at least on an acute exposure basis). Therefore, additional data on estuarine/marine fish are not expected to alter our risk conclusions, and we do not recommend requesting these data at this time.

Fluoxastrobin has a borderline high K
ow 

### and is not expected to rapidly deg rade via anaerobic
metabolism. Therefore, fluoxastrobin is expected to partition to the sediment where it may persist.

Due to the toxicity of fluoxastrobin to other aquatic animals, benthic organisms may also be at risk
from the new proposed use and use patterns. T oxicity data are not available to assess such a risk. Therefore, EFED recommends requesting sediment toxicity studie s for fluoxastrobin [ i.e

., Whole Sediment: Acute Freshwater Invertebrates (OPPTS 850.1735) ; Whole Sediment: Acute Marine Invertebrates ( OCSPP 850.1740) ; and Whole Sediment: Chronic Invertebrates Freshwater and Marine ( OCSPP 850.1770; OCSPP 850.1760 or OECD 218 ]

.

FEDERALLY

- LISTED SPECIES

Based on this screening

- level assessment, there are potential risks from direct effects to listed and

non

- listed freshwater fish, freshwater invertebrates and estuarine/marine invertebrates and listed

non

- vascular aquatic plants from the new proposed fluoxastrobin rice use

. Because of the potential
risk from direct effects to the listed and non

- listed taxa described above, should exposure occur, listed species in all taxa may potentially be affected indirectly due to alter ations in their habitat ( e.g ., food sources).

To help determine whether sites of pesticide use are geographically associated with known locations of listed species [following the convention of the Services, the word „species‟ in this assessment may actually apply to a „species‟, „subspecies‟, or an Evolutionary Signif icant Unit (ESU)] a co

- l ocation analysis is conducted. At the screening level, this analysis is accomplished using the LOCATES (ve rsion 2.10.4 ) database. The database uses location information for listed species at the county level and compares it to agric ultural census data (from 2002) for crop production at the same county level of resolution. The product is a listing of federally

- listed species that are located within counties known to produce rice . For direct and indirect effects, no taxa could
be exclu ded from potential risk ( i.e ., all taxa are included).

LOCATES identified a total of 89 listed species that overlapped at the county

- level with areas
where rice is grown (see APPENDIX B for a complete species list). Therefore, at the county

- level, there is the potential for a total of 89 listed species to be directly and/or indirectly affected by the

### 20

proposed fluoxastrobin use on rice

.

This preliminary analysis indicates that there is a potential for the new propos ed fluoxastrobin use on rice to overlap with listed species and that a more re fined assessment is warranted. The more refined assessment should involve clear delineation of the action area associated with proposed and
current uses of fluoxastrobin and best available information on the temporal and spatial co

- location of listed species with respect to the action area

. This analysis has not been conducted for this

assessment.

### 21

References

USEPA, (2004). New Chemical, Environmental Fate and Effects Science Chapter, Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment for Fluoxatrobin (PC 028869), and End Use Product: HEC 480 SC (40.3% active ingredient). Office of Pesticide Programs, United State Environme ntal Protection Agency, Washington, DC. July 27, 2004. D289104. Attached

USEPA, (200 5 ). EFED Review of Fluoxastrobin (EC 100) Chronic Indoor Microcosm Study with the Amphipod, Gammarus pulex L. . Office of Pesticide Programs, United State Environmenta l Protection Agency, Washington, DC. September 6, 2005

. D312642

.

USEPA, (200 8 ). Section 3 Registration for Proposed New Use of Fluoxastrobin on Ornamental Plants

. Office of Pesticide Programs, United State Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D C. August 29,

2008

. D349270, D349282.

USEPA, (200 8 ). Response to Comments Concerning the Acceptability of Environmental Fate Studies Supporting the Conditions of Registration of Fluoxastrobin (HEC5725), and a Tier I Drinking Water

Assessment for Uses on Ornamental Plants . Office of Pesticide Programs, United State Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. April 2, 2008

. D334233, D349285

.

USEPA, (200 9 ). Ecological Risk Assessment for the Section 3 New Use Registration of Fluoxastrobin on

New Fo od Uses (Berry Subgroup; Field Corn and Soybean; and Sweet Corn and Wheat) . Office of Pesticide Programs, United State Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. July 1 7, 2004.
D356983, D357729, D366187

.

USEPA, (2010 ). Drinking Water Assessment for Fluoxastrobin Use on Squash/Cucumber (Crop Subgroup 9B) and New In

- Furrow and Banded Uses on Tuberous and Corm Vegetables (Crop Subgroup 1C) as Well

as Peanut . Office of Pesticide Programs, United State Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
December 15, 2010 . D 379114, 384377

.

### 22

Fate MRIDs Cited:

45865304 Hellpointner, E. (1999) Hydrolysis of (Methoxyiminotolyl

- Ring

- UL

- (Carbon 14)) HEC 5725 in

Sterile Aqueous Buffer Solutions: Lab Project Number: M 1110904

- 6: MR

- 058

- 99: PF

- E/MR. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer AG. 44 p.

45865306 Stupp, H. (2001) Photolysis of HEC 5725 in Aqueous Solution: Lab Project Number: MR 072

-

00: M 1120905

- 8. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer AG. 81 p.

45865403 Schafer, H. (2001) Calculation of a DT

- 50 Value of HEC5725 Metabolite Oxazepine Generated

by Photolysis in Aqueous Solution: Lab Project Number: MR

- 262/0 1: MR262

- 01: P 668 01 6521. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 16 p.

45865308 Hellpointner, E. (2001) Photolysis of HEC5725 on Soil Surface: Lab Project Number: M1

130939

- 6: MR 347/00. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer AG. 92 p.

45865309 Brumhard, B.; Eberhardt, R. (2001) Aerobic Degradation of (Methoxyiminotolyl

- Ring

- UL

-

(Carbon 14)) HEC5725 in Soil Laacher Hof AXXa: Lab Project Number: M 125 0886

- O: MR 230/01: THS 4727. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer AG. 58 p.

45865310 Brumhard, B.; Eberhardt, R. (2001) Aerobic Degradation and Metabolism of

(Methoxyiminotolyl

- Ring

- UL

- (Carbon 14)

- and (Pyri midine

- 2

- (Carbon 14) HEC5725 in Thre Soils: Lab Project Number: M 125 0894

- 9: MR

- 231/01: MR

- 23 1

- O 1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 124 p.

45865313 Brumhard, B.; Oi, M. (2002) Aerobic Degradation and Metabolism of (Methoxyiminotolyl

Ring

- UL

- (Ca rbon 14)) HEC 5725 in the Water/Sediment System: Lab Project Number: M15 1
0903

- 9: MR

- 396/01: M151 0903

- 9. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 75 p.

45865312 Hellpointner , E. (2002) Anaerobic Aquatic Degradation and Metabolism of HEC5725: Lab

Project Number: M152006

- 3: MR

- 406/01: HPO

- 225. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 76 p.

45865315 Fent, G. (1998) Adsorption/Desorption of (Methoxyiminotolyl

- Ring

- UL

- (Carbon 14) )

HEC5725 on Four Different Soils: Lab Project Number: BAY27: FM767. Unpublished study prepared by Staatliche Lehr

- und Forschungsanstalt fuer Landwirtschaft. 46 p.

45865318 Bauer, M.; Andre, J.; Zielinski, C. (2002) Terrestrial Field Dissipation of HEC 5 725 in

California Soil, 1999: Final Report: Lab Project Number: AG990009: F99568

- 001: 99.109. Unpublished study prepared by Battelle Memorial Institute and Plant Services, Inc. 236 p.

45865320 Bauer, M.; Andre, J.; Zielinski, C. (2002) Terrestrial Field Dissipation of HEC 5725 in New

York Soil, 1999: Final Report: Lab Project Number: AG990011: F99565

- 001: AR99352. Unpublished study prepared by Battelle Memorial Institute and A.C.D.S. Research, Inc. 241 p.

45865323 Bauer, M.; Andre, J.; Zielinski, C. (20 02) Terrestrial Field Dissipation of HEC 5725 in

California Turf, 1999: Final Report: Lab Project Number: AG990014: HC022701: 200219. Unpublished study prepared by Battelle Memorial Institute and Plant Sciences, Inc. 253 p.

45865324 Bauer, M.; Andre, J.; Zielinski, C. (2002) Terrestrial Field Dissipation of HEC 5725 in New

York Turf, 1999: Final Report: Lab Project Number: AG990015: F99565

- 001: HC022702. Unpublished study prepared by Battelle Memorial Institute and A.C.D.S. Research, Inc. 261 p.

### 23

48532004 Culligan, J.F. 2009. Aquatic field soil dissipation of Evito 480 SC fungicide following

application to flooded rice field in Arkansas. Unpublished study performed by G & H Associates, Stuttgart, Arkansas; Ag Research Associates, LLC, Sycamore, Geo rgia and ALS Laboratory Group, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada (pp. 1, 7); sponsored and submitted by Arysta LifeScience North America, LLC, Cary, North Carolina. Study Number: ARAP

- 07A

- 004. Experiment initiation June, 2007 (Appendix IV, p. 132) and completion O ctober 8, 2009 (Appendix III, p. 62). Final report issued October 12, 2009.

Effects MRIDs Cited:

45865422 Barfknecht, R. (2000) HEC 5725 Techn . Ai: Acute Oral Toxicity for Bobwhite Quail: Lab

Project Number: E 292 1560

- 5: BAR/LD032. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 38 p. {OPPTS 850.2100}

45865423 Barfknecht, R. (2001) HEC 5725 Techn.: 5

- Day Dietary LC50 for Bobwhite Quail (Colinus

virginianus): Lab Project Number: E 295 1558

- 5: BAR/LC007. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 34 p. {OPPTS 850.2200}

45865425 Frieling, W. (2001) Reproduction Study in Bobwhite Quail with HEC 5725 Techn.: (By Dietary

Admixture): Lab Project Number: 259774. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 211 p. {OPPTS 850.2300}

45865414 Dorgerloh, M. (1999) HEC 5725 Acute Toxicity (96 Hours) to Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus

mykiss) in a Static Test: Lab Project Number: E 250 1605

- 9: DOMA 99065: 00579. Unpubl ished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 48 p. {OPPTS 850.1075}

45865406 Heimbach, F. (1999) Acute Toxicity of HEC 5725 (tech.) to Water Fleas (Daphnia magna): Lab

Project Number: HBF/DM 211: E 320 1674

- 3. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 47 p. {OPPTS 85 0.1010}

45865410 Ward, T.; Wyskiel, D.; Boeri, R. (2002) HEC 5725: A 96

- Hour Shell Deposition Test with the

Eastern Oyster (Crassostrea virginica): Lab Project Number: 99

- B

- 133: HC831501: 2357

- BR. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 30 p.

45865411 Boeri, R.; Wyskiel, D.; Ward, T. (2002) HEC 5725: A 96

- Hour Flow

- Through Acute Toxicity

Test with the Saltwater Mysid, (Americamysis bahia): Lab Project Number: 99

- B

- 131:
HC833101: 2358

- BR. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury L aboratories, Inc. 31 p.

45865417 Kern, M.; Woodard, D.; Mattern, G. (2002) Acute Toxicity of HEC 5725 (Technical) to the

Sheepshead Minnow (Cyprinodon variegatus ) Under Static Conditions: Lab Project Number: HC830901: 110322. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer CropScience. 30 p.

45865418 Hendel, B. (2000) Influence of HEC 5725 (tech.) on the Reproduction Rate of Water Fleas

(Daphnia magna): Lab Project Number: E 321 1798

- 1: HDB/RDM 64. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 80 p. {OPPTS 850.1300}

45865419 Ward, T.; Wyskiel, D.; Boeri, R. (2002) HEC 5725: A Flow

- Through Life Cycle Toxicity Test

with the Saltwater Mysid (Americamysis bahia): Lab Project Number: 99

- B

- 132: HC843101:
2359

- BR. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 48 p.

45865420 Scheerbaum, D. (2001) HEC 5725

-- Fish (Rainbow Trout), Early

- Life Stage Toxicity Test, Under

Flow

- Through Conditions: (Final Report): Lab Project Nu mber: 991028BD: FSR69122. Unpublished study prepared by Dr. U. Noack

- Laboratorium. 84 p. {OPPTS 850.1400}

### 24

45865612 Krotlinger, F. (1996) HEC 5725: Study for Acute Oral Toxicity in Rats: Lab Project Number:

25231: T8060660: 109158. Unpublished study prepa red by Bayer Ag. 29 p. {OPPTS 870.1100}

45865634 Young, A.; Christenson, W. (2001) A Two

- Generation Reproductive Toxicity Study with HEC

5725 in the Wistar Rat: Lab Project Number: 99

- R72

- BW: 110249. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Corporation and Pa thology Associates International. 1473 p. {OPPTS 870.3800}

45865428 Bowers, L. (2003) Tier 1 Seedling Emergence and Vegetative Vigor Nontarget Phytotoxicity

Study Using HEC 5725 SC 480: Lab Project Number: 200313: HC451601: HC451602. Unpublished study pr epared by Bayer CropScience. 97 p.

45865430 Kern, M.; Lam, C. (2002) Toxicity of HEC 5725 Technical to Duckweed (Lemna gibba G3):

Lab Project Number: HC883701: 200340. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer CropScience. 36 p. {OPPTS 850.4400}

45865431 Dorgerloh, M. (2000) HEC 5725

-- Influence on the Growth of the Green Alga, Selenastrum

capricornutum: Lab Project Number: E 323 1609

- 4: DOM 99061. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag. 38 p. {OPPTS 850.5400}

45865427 Bruhnke, C. (2000) HEC 5725 A.I.

-- Ac ute Effects on the Honeybee Apis mellifera

(Hymenoptera, Apidae); Limit Test: Lab Project Number: 990222BN: IBA64041. Unpublished study prepared by Noack

- Laboratorium. 30 p. {OPPTS 850.3020}

46080402 van Wijngaarden, R.; (2003) Acute Toxicity of Fluoxast robin to Freshwater Invertebrates: Final

Report. Project Number: ALT/RW/2003/1, ALTERRA/RW/2003/1. Unpublished study prepared by Alterra, Green World Research. 93 p.

46404901 Liebig, M. (2003) A Long

- Term Indoor Microcosm Study on the Toxicity of Fluoxastrobin (EC

100) to the Amphipod Gammarus pulex L. in a Natural Water

- Sediment System. Project Number: P1MG. Unpublished study prepared by ECT Oekotoxikologie Gmbh. 135 p.

### 25 APPENDIX A

T

- REX Input and Output Parameters for the Proposed New Use of Fluoxastrobin on Rice

.

Input Parameters

Chemical Name: Fluoxastrobin

Use Rice

Application Rate 0.1 8 lb a.i./acre

Half

- life 35 days

Application Interval 2 7 days

Maximum # Apps./Year 2

Length of Simulation 1 year

Endpoints

Avian Mallard duck LD50 (mg/kg

- bw) 2000.00

Bobwhite quail LC50 (mg/kg

- diet) 4845.00

Mallard duck NOAEL(mg/kg

- bw) 0.00

Bobwhite quail NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) 1029.00

Mammals LD50 (mg/kg

- bw) 2000.00 LC50 (mg/kg

- diet) 0.00 NOAEL (mg/kg

- bw) 70.00
NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) 1000.00



### Output Parameters

Dietary

- based EECs (ppm) Kenaga

Values

Short Grass 6 9

Tall Grass 31 Broadleaf plants/sm Insects 39 Fruits/pods/seeds/lg insects 4.3

### 26

Summary of Risk Quotient Calculations Based on Upper Bound Kenaga EECs

Upper Bound Kenaga, Acute Avian Dose

- Based Risk Quotients

Size
Class (grams) Adjusted

LD50 EECs and RQs

Short Grass Tall Grass Broadleaf Plants/
Small Insects Fruits/Pods/
Seeds/ Large Insects Granivore

EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ

20 2000.00 78.02 0.04 35.76 0.02 43.89 0.02 4.88 0.00 1.08 0.00

100 2000.00 44.49 0.02 20.39 0.01 25.03 0.01 2.78 0.00 0.62 0.00

1000 2000.00 19.92 0.01 9.13 0.00 11.20 0.01 1.24 0.00 0.28 0.00

Upper Bound Kenaga, Subacute Avian Dietary Based Risk Quotients

LC50 EECs and RQs

Short Grass Tall Grass Broadleaf
Plants/
Small Insects Fruits/Pods/

Seeds/ Large Insects

EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ

4845 68.51 0.01 31.40 0.01 38.54 0.01 4.28 0.00 Size class not used for dietary risk quotients

Upper Bound Kenaga, Chronic Avian Dietary Based Risk Quotients

NOAEC (ppm) EECs and RQs

Short Grass Tall Grass Broadleaf
Plants/
Small Insects Fruits/Pods/

Seeds/ Large Insects

EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ

1029 68.51 0.07 31.40 0.03 38.54 0.04 4.28 0.00 Size class not used for dietary risk quotients

Upper Bound Kenaga, Acute Mammalian Dose

- Based Risk Quotients

Size
Class (grams) Adjusted

LD50 EECs and RQs

Short Grass Tall Grass Broadleaf Plants/
Small Insects Fruits/Pods/
Seeds/ Large Insects Granivore

EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ

15 4395.66 65.32 0.01 29.94 0.01 36.74 0.01 4.08 0.00 0.91 0.00

35 3556.56 45.14 0.01 20.69 0.01 25.39 0.01 2.82 0.00 0.63 0.00

1000 1538.32 10.47 0.01 4.80 0.00 5.89 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.15 0.00

Upper Bound Kenaga, Chronic Mammalian Dietary Based Risk Quotients

NOAEC (ppm) EECs and RQs

Short Grass Tall Grass Broadleaf
Plants/
Small Insects Fruits/Pods/

Seeds/ Large Insects

EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ

1000 68.51 0.07 31.40 0.03 38.54 0.04 4.28 0.00 Size class not used for dietary risk quotients

### 27

Upper Bound Kenaga, Chronic Mammalian Dose

- Based Risk Quotients

Size
Class (grams) Adjusted

NOAEL EECs and RQs

Short Grass Tall Grass Broadleaf Plants/
Small Insects Fruits/Pods/
Seeds/ Large Insects Granivore

EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ EEC RQ

15 153.85 65.32 0.42 29.94 0.19 36.74 0.24 4.08 0.03 0.91 0.01

35 124.48 45.14 0.36 20.69 0.17 25.39 0.20 2.82 0.02 0.63 0.01

1000 53.84 10.47 0.19 4.80 0.09 5.89 0.11 0.65 0.01 0.15 0.00

### 28 APPENDIX B

List of Listed Species that Overlap at the County Level with Rice

Inverse Name Species Taxon Frog, California Red

- legged Rana aurora draytonii Amphibian
Salamander, California Tiger Ambystoma californiense Amphibian
Toad, Houston Bufo houstonensis Amphibian
Crane, Whooping Grus americana Bird Mucket, Pink (Pearlymussel) Lampsilis abrupta Bivalve
Mussel, Scaleshell Leptodea leptodon Bivalve
Mussel, snuffbox Epioblasma triquetra Bivalve
Mussel, Winged Mapleleaf Quadrula fragosa Bivalve
Pearlshell, Louisiana Margaritifera hembeli Bivalve
Pearlymussel, Curtis' Epioblasma florentina curtisii Bivalve
Pearlymussel, Fat Pocketbook Potamilus capax Bivalve

Rock

- pocketbook, Ouachita (=Wheeler's pm) Arkansia wheeleri Bivalve
Crayfish, Shasta Pacifastacus fortis Crustacean Fairy Shrimp, Conservancy Fairy Branchinecta conservatio Crustacean Fairy Shrimp, Longhorn Branchinecta longiantenna Crustacean Fairy Shrimp, Vernal Pool Branchinecta lynchi Crustacean Shrimp, California Freshwater Syncaris pacifica Crustacean Tadpole Shrimp, Vernal Pool Lepidurus packardi Crustacean Adobe Sunburst, San Joaquin Pseudobahia peirsonii Dicot Allocarya, Calistoga Plagiobothrys strictus Dicot
Aster, Decurrent False Boltonia decurrens Dicot

Bird's

- beak, Palmate

- bracted Cordylanthus palmatus Dicot

Bird's

- beak, Soft Cordylanthus mollis ssp. mollis Dicot Butterweed, Layne's Senecio layneae Dicot Catchfly, Spalding's Silene spaldingii Dicot
Chaffseed, American Schwalbea americana Dicot

Checker

- mallow, Keck's Sidalcea keckii Dicot Clover, Fleshy Owl's Castilleja campestris ssp. succulenta Dicot Clover, Running Buffalo Trifolium stoloniferum Dicot

Dawn

- flower, Texas Prairie (=Texas Bitterweed) Hymenoxys texana Dicot
Evening

- primrose, Antioch Dunes Oenothera deltoides ssp. howellii Dicot
Evening

- primrose, San Benito Camissonia benitensis Dicot Fiddleneck, Large

- flowered Amsinckia grandiflora Dicot Fruit, Earth (=geocarpon) Geocarpon minimum Dicot Golden Sunburst, Hartweg's Pseudobahia bahiifolia Dicot
Goldfields, Contra Costa Lasthenia conjugens Dicot
Gourd, Okeechobee Cucurbita okeechobeensis ssp. Dicot

### 29

Inverse Name Species Taxon
Grass, Hairy Orcutt Orcuttia pilosa Dicot

Grass, Sacramento Orcutt Orcuttia viscida Dicot
Grass, Slender Orcutt Orcuttia tenuis Dicot Jacquemontia, Beach Jacquemontia reclinata Dicot
Jewelflower, California Caulanthus californicus Dicot Meadowfoam, Butte County Limnanthes floccosa ssp. californica Dicot

Milk

- vetch, Clara Hunt's Astragalus clarianus Dicot
Navarretia, Few

- flowered Pauciflora Navarretia leucocephala ssp. Dicot
Paintbrush, Tiburon Castilleja affinis ssp. neglecta Dicot
Pawpaw, Four

- petal Asimina tetramera Dicot Phlox, Texas Trailing Phlox nivalis ssp. texensis Dicot Polygala, Tiny Polygala smallii Dicot Pondberry Lindera melissifolia Dicot

Potato

- bean, Price's Apios priceana Dicot
Pussypaws , Mariposa Calyptridium pulchellum Dicot

Sand

- verbena, Large

- fruited Abronia macrocarpa Dicot Spurge, Hoover's Chamaesyce hooveri Dicot
Thistle, Suisun Cirsium hydrophilum var. Dicot
Tuctoria, Green's Tuctoria greenei Dicot Woolly

- threads, San Joaquin Monolopia (=Lembertia) congdonii Dicot Goby, Tidewater Eucyclogobius newberryi Fish
Salmon, Chinook Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) tshawytscha Fish
Salmon, Coho Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) kisutch Fish
Sawfish, Smalltooth Pristis pectinata Fish
Smelt, Delta Hypomesus transpacificus Fish

Steelhead Oncorhynchus (=Salmo) mykiss Fish
Sturgeon, Gulf Acipenser oxyrinchus desotoi Fish
Sturgeon, North American green Acipenser medirostris Fish
Sturgeon, Pallid Scaphirhynchus albus Fish
Sucker, Modoc Catostomus microps Fish
Trout, Bull Salvelinus confluentus Fish
Trout, Lahontan Cutthroat Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi Fish
Trout, Paiute Cutthroat Oncorhynchus clarki seleniris Fish
Beetle, Delta Green Ground Elaphrus viridis Insect Dragonfly, Hine's Emerald Somatochlora hineana Insect
Cladonia, Florida Perforata Cladonia perforata Lichen
Bat, Gray Myotis grisescens Mammal
Bat, Indiana Myotis sodalis Mammal

Bat, Ozark Big

- eared Corynorhinus (=Plecotus) townsendii ingens Mammal
Manatee, West Indian Trichechus manatus Mammal
Mouse, Southeastern Beach Peromyscus polionotus niveiventris Mammal

### 30

Inverse Name Species Taxon Whale, Gray Eschrichtius robustus Mammal
Bluegrass, Napa Poa napensis Monocot
Grass, Colusa Neostapfia colusana Monocot Grass, San Joaquin Valley Orcutt Orcuttia inaequalis Monocot
Grass, Solano Tuctoria mucronata Monocot

Ladies'

- tresses, Navasota Spiranthes parksii Monocot

Ladies'

- tresses, Ute Spiranthes diluvialis Monocot Seagrass, Johnson's Halophila johnsonii Monocot Alligator, American Alligator mississippiensis Reptile
Crocodile, American Crocodylus acutus Reptile
Snake, Giant Garter Thamnophis gigas Reptile