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

## OCT 19 2015

MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

SUBJECT: 

### BEAD Chemical Profile (BCP) for Registration Review: Prothioconazole (113961) FROM: 

### Carl Chen, Biologist
Claire Paisley-Jones, Biologist

## l-~t"'-, 

# ,,, . .**~** Science Information and Analysis Branch 

# I Andrew Lee, 

### Economist 

# tJ..L C 

# k, Economic Analysis.Branch 

# f Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) THRU: 

### Arnet Jones, Chief Biological Aiialysis B Diann Sims,

# Chief~ . 

# rJ. J._,itvJ...- Science Information and An 

### ysis Branch Timothy Kiely, Chief 

# f'>r--**\μ\_~** Economic Analysis Branchu 

# J Biological and Economic Analysis Divisi 03P) TO: 

### Margaret Hathaway, Chemical Review Manager Risk Management and Implementation Branch 2 Pesticide Re-evalua#on Division (7508P)
Product Review Panel date: September 9, 2015

1SUMMARY Prothioconazole is currently the sole fungicide in triazolinthiones, which was added in 2012 to the Group 3 ofDMI (DeMethylation Inhibitor) fungicides classified by the Fungicide Resistance Action Committee. It has**b~en** used to control or suppress some important crop diseases such as anthracnose leafblight on com, Ascochyta blight on dry beans/peas, white mold on peanuts, frog eye leafspot on soybeans, Rhizoctonia solani on sugar beets, and Fusarium head blight (scab) on wheat. Prothioconazole is also registered for use on nursery stock such as nursery seedlings of loblolly pine to control pitch canker and other diseases. The agricultural use ofprothioconazole in the United States has been**incre~sing** since its registration in 2007, treating a total of approximately 11,000,000 acres in 2013 for all crops combined.
INTRODUCTION The Biological and Economic Analysis Division (BEAD) Chemical Profile (BCP) provides an overview ofthe pest management roles and quantitative usage information for prothioconazole. The BCP includes summaries ofprevious BEAD products and available public and/or private use and usage data for prothioconazole to describe the role ofthis chemical inpest management. Additional information on use is available in the prothioconazole Label Data Reports. Information provided in this BCP may be used by stakeholders (e.g., users and registrants), OPP risk and benefit assessors, OPP risk managers, and the general public during the Registration Review process ofthis pesticide.
HISTORY OF PROTHIOCONAZOLE AND BEAD PRODUCTS There are no benefits assessment or review ofrecent Section 18 emergency exemption requests by BEAD for this chemical. An emergency exemption may indicate that there is a need for a particular chemical that is not registered for use on a particular site. An emergency exemption request may yield information about a particular chemical' s importance or value that is not found in other EPA records. However, a lack ofSection 18 assessments by BEAD does not specifically indicate the relative importance ofthe chemical. A recent BEAD work that might be ofrelevance is noted below
. In May 2015 , BEAD reviewed and concluded that the criteria have been met by the nine minor uses (listed below) to extend the exclusive use period for the maximum three years allowed by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). When pesticides are registered, the original data submitter has a 10-year exclusive use period from the date of registration for the data submitted in support ofthe original registration
. FIFRA allows for an extension ofthat exclusive use period ifcertain criteria are met. An extension ofone year is provided for every three qualifying minor uses, for a maximum ofthree years. Bayer submitted a petition to EPA requesting that, under FIFRA Section 3(c)(l )(F)(ii), the exclusive use period be ex tended for thr ee years with supporting information on 17 crops. BEAD reviewed nine crops and found that the use ofprothioconazole on buckwheat, cantaloupe, chickpea, cucumber,
2loblolly pine (nursery), lowbush blueberry, popcorn, summer squash, and watermelon met at least one ofthe criteria for extension ofthe exclusive use period: that is, prothioconazole plays a significant part in integrated pest management or resistance management or there are insufficient efficacious alternative registered fungicides available.
USE SITES Agricultural Use Sites Prothioconazole is registered for use on alfalfa, beans, bushberries, rice, corn, small grains, crambe, cucurbits, mustard, peanuts, peas, potatoes, small fruit, sugar beets, soypeans, and nursery stock (for specific sites, see the Label Data Report). Non-Agricultural Use Sites Prothioconazole is not registered for use on any non-agricultural sites.
FORMULATIONS Prothioconazole is formulated as a liquid soluble concentrate, emulsifiable concentrate, and flowable concentrate.
APPLICATION METHODS Prothioconazole is applied using broadcast, banded, chemigation, and seed treatment methods
.

3USAGE Agricultural Usage Since it was first registered in 2007, usage ofprothioconazole has increased steadily. In 2013, nearly 500,000 pounds were applied to nearly 11,000,000 acres (Figure 1).
11,000,000 500,000

"C Q)

..... 

### <t ro Q) II) 

## ... "C I- c: ro ::J Q) 0 

## ... c... <(**~** ..... 0I0 0 2007 2008
. 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

- Total Area Treated - Pounds Al Figure 1. Prothioconazole Total Acres Treated and Total Pounds A.I. Applied (2007-2013). Source: Proprietary Data, 1998-2013
The vast majority ofprothioconazole is used to treat wheat, nearly 50 percent oftotal pounds applied or approximately 140,000 ibs. A.I. per year. The remaining 50 percent of prothioconazole, is used on nine other crops, including peanuts, sugar beets, and com (Table 1 ). While soybeans account for·only seven percent ofpounds A.I. applied annually, they account for over a quarter ofthe total acres treated per year, due to the low rate at which prothioconazole is applied to soy as a seed treatment (Table 1). While sugar beets and peanuts account for a small portion ofpounds applied and total acres treated, a relatively large percent ofthese crops are treated with prothioconazole. According to the most recent SLUA covering the years 2009-2013, an average of 15 percent (maximum 30 percent) of sugar beets are treated, and an average of 15 percent (maximum 20 percent) ofpeanuts are treated annually (BEAD 2015). It should be noted that the data presented in this section may be an underestimate ofactual usage, as not all seed treatment uses may be capttired.

4\ 

### T 

### bl 1 P 

### th" l 

# u I 

### T C I I 

### 2009 2013



## -

!Spring Wheat 5 30 88,000 1,090,000 0
.080 !Winter Wheat < 2.5 18 52,000 703,000 0.074 !Peanuts 15 13 39,000 432,000 0
.090 ISugar Beets 15 12
. 36,000 211 ,000 0
. 169 Com < 2.5 10 30,000 963,000 0
.031 

### DrY Beans/Peas 5 8 24,000 150,000 0.160 !Soybeans < 1 7 22,000 1,204,000 0.018 bther** 2 708 2,000• 0.104b *Total Acres Treated sums all acres treated for a crop, including those acres that receive multiple treatments. ** Other crops : Sweet Com, Lima Beans, Pumpkins •Other average pounds and average total acres treated are the sum ofthe average values for "other" crops. b Other Avg. AI Rate is the average ofthe average rates used on "other " crops . Source: Proprietary Data, 2009-2013
. In terms ofpounds A
.I. applied, North Dakota uses the most prothioconazole annually, at double the rate ofthe state with the next highest usage, Minnesota (Table 2). The high usage in North Dakota corresponds with the high acreage ofwheat grown in the state during this time period. Approximately 33 million acres ofwheat are grown annually in North Dakota, accounting for a quarter ofall wheat production in the United States (proprietary data). The remaining 55 percent ofprothioconazole usage is spread
.over 31 other states (Table 2). 

### Table 2. Comparison of States with Highest Use ofProthioconazole

- Percent ofTotal Pounds 1\..1. A lied between 2009-2013.

North Dakota 30

Minnesota 15 Michi an 7

Illinois 6 Geor ia 6 Other* 36 *Other states: NE, SD, FL, OH, ID, IO, MT, KS, NC, AL, SC, VA, KT, TN, AK, CO, WI, MO, TX, OK, ID, OR, WA, LA, MI, PA, MD, NM. Source: Proprietary Data, 2009-2013
. BEAD does not have any usage information on nursery stock usage.

5

### CHEMICAL AND USE CHARACTERISTICS Prothioconazole is currently the sole fungicide in triazolinthiones, which was added in 2012 to the Group 3 ofDMI (DeMethylation Inhibitor) fungicides classified by the Fungicide Resistance Action Committee (FRAC). In general, Group 3 fungicides have a medium risk ofresistance development and FRAC guidelines are available for resistance management (FRAC, 2015). Prothioconazole can be used as a rotationalpartner in a resistance management program. For example, resistance to strobilurin fungicides has been identified in the 

### Ascochyta rabiei pathogen in Canada and North Dakota, and prothioconazole is the sole recommended Group 3 fungicide in the resistance management program in North Dakota providing an excellent control ofAscochyta blight ofchickpeas (WFPM, 2014; Wurisch, 2014).


### ROLE OF PROTHIOCONAZOLE IN PEST MANAGEMENT Prothioconazole is registered under Section 3 ofFIFRA for control or suppression of some important diseases including anthracnose leafblight, gray leafspot, and rust on com, Ascochyta blight and white mold on dry beans/peas, early leafspot and white mold on peanuts, frog eye leaf spot and white mold on soybeans, Cercospora leaf spot and 

### Rhizoctonia solani on sugar beets, Fusarium head blight (scab), and rusts on wheat, and pitch canker and fusiform rust on nursery stock such as nursery seedlings ofloblolly pine. A FIFRA Section 2(ee) recommendation for prothioconazole (Proline® 480 SC) was issued to control blackleg on canola, a disease that is not labeled (PPLS, 2015), in Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and South Dakota (CDMS, 2015). The agricultural use ofprothiocomizole is mainly on field crops including com, dry beans/peas, peanuts, soybeans, sugar beets, and wheat. In particular recently, its seed treatment use increased significantly, from approximately 60,000 acres in 2012 to 3,500,000 acres in 2013 (Proprietary Data, 2012-2013). Soybeans and wheat accounted for approximately 99% and 1 % ofits 2013 seed treatment acreage, respectively. The seed treatment played a significant role in the 2012-2013 increase ofthe total acreage treated
. by prothioconazole depicted in Figure 1. Prothioconazole is also needed for .control ofa new invasive disease, Valdensinia leafspot 

### (Valdensinia heterodoxa), on lowbush blueberries spreading to Maine from Canada in 2009. No fungicides were recommended when this disease was first reported in Maine (Annis 

### et al., 2009; Mack, 2009). Prothioconazole is the only registered and recommended fungicide against Valdensinia leafspot (Annis and Yarborough, 2015).


### DATA NEEDS The Agency currently does not have complete information on prothioconazole. Quantitative usage information is not available for certain registered crops such as canola, nursery stock, seed treatment uses, and many other sites. Obtaining the following information, including total pounds active ingredient applied per year on a national or regional basis, percent crop/site

6treated, application rates (typical and maximum), frequency and intervals ofapplication, and target or niche pest species, may improve future assessments conducted by the Agency related to the use and importance ofprothioconazole.


### REFERENCES Annis S, Yarborough D
. 2015. Disease Control Guide for Wild Blueberries
. Fact Sheet No. 219, UMaine Extension No. 2000 219
. University ofMaine. Revised April 2015. Accessed June 2015 at http://umaine.edu/blueberries/factsheets/disease/219-disease-control-guide-for-wildblueberries/
. Annis S, Yarborough D, Hildebrand P. 2009. Valdensinia leafspot, New Disease in Maine Blueberry Fields. University ofMaine. Cooperative Extension: Main,e' s native wild blueberries. Accessed June 2015 at http://umaine.edu/blueberries/factsheets/disease/valdensinia-leaf-spotdisease/. BEAD 2015. Prothioconazole Screening Level Usage Analysis. Biological and Economic Analysis Division, Office ofPestic,ide Programs, US Environmental Protection Agency. · BEAD 2006. "Public Interest Finding for Prothioconazole (DP 327796)." Richard Michell, Biological and Economic Analysis Division, Office ofPesticide Programs, US Environmental Protection Agency. October 26, 2006. BEAD 2015. "Review ofJustification for Extension ofExclusive Use Period for Prothioconazole (DP#421072)." Carl Chen, Biological and Economic Analysis Division, Office ofPesticide Programs, US Environmental Protection Agency. May 4, 2015. CDMS. 2015. Crop Data Management Systems Label Search. CDMS, Inc. Accessed June 2015 at https://premier.cdms.net/webapls/FormsLogin.asp?/webapls/
. EPA. 2007. Pesticide Fact Sheet Prothioconazole. Office ofPrevention Pesticides and Toxic Substances, US Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/oppOOOOl/chein search/reg actions/registration/fs PC-113961 14- Mar-07.pdf EPA
. Pesticide Chemical Search Prothioconazole. Online: URL FRAC
. 2015. Fungicide Resistance Action Committee (FRAC)- FRAC Code List©2015
. Accessed June 2015 at http://www.frac.info/docs/default-source/publications/frac-code-list/fraccode-list-2015-finalC2AD7 AA36764.pdf?sfvrsn=4
. Kline and Company, Inc., 2002, 2004, 2006

7Mack SK. 2009. Maine's wild blueberry crop imperiled by leaf spot fungus. Bangor Daily News. July 27, 2009
. Accessed March 2015 at http://bangordailvnews.com/2009/07 /27/news/mainersguos-wild-blueberrv-crop-imperiled-byleaf-spot-fungus/
. PPLS. 2015. EPA-approved technical and end-use products/labels, The Pesticide Product Label System (PPLS). Accessed June 2015 for Proline® 480 SC at http://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem search/ppls/000264-00825-20150113.pdf
. Proprietary Data
. 1998-2013. (pesticide usage data) WFPM. 2014. Diseases ofspecial field crops-Chickpea. Chapter 8. Western Forum on Pest Management (WFPM). Accessed June 2015 at http://www.westemforum.org/Documents/WCPD/WCPD documents/Current%20Guideline%20 Files/Ch%208%20Diseases%20ot°lo20Special%20Field%20Crops.pdf Wunsch M. 2014. Management ofAscochyta blight ofchickpea. NDSU Carrington Research Extension Center. North Dakota State University. Accessed June 2015 at http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/ carringtonrec/ documents/plantpathologvrd/noyeardocs/CHICKPEAAsc ochytamwt.pdf
.



### 8