UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, DC 20460

 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

PC Code: 006329

DP Barcode: 389520

Date: September 7, 2011

MEMORANDUM

Subject: Acequinocyl: Drinking Water Assessment to Support Proposed New IR-4 Uses 

(Succulent Soybean Vegetable, Low Growing Berry, Small Fruit Vine Climbing -

Except Fuzzy Kiwifruit, Succulent Shelled Beans, Cowpea Forage, Caneberry, 

Melon, Cucumber, and Cherry)

To: Dana Vogel, Branch Chief, RAB1

Health Effects Division (7509P)

Barbara Madden, Risk Manager

Laura Nollen, Risk Manager Reviewer

Insecticide Branch

Registration Division (7505P)

From: Michael B. Lowit, Ph.D., Ecologist

Nancy Andrews, Ph.D., Branch Chief

Environmental Risk Branch 1

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

Office of Pesticide Programs

This memorandum summarizes the drinking water assessment for numerous proposed IR-4 uses

of the miticide Acequinocyl. This assessment considers use of the product KanemiteTM15SC, 

alternatively named ShuttleTM 15SC or ShuttleTM O, on succulent soybean vegetable, low 

growing berry, small fruit vine climbing (except fuzzy kiwifruit), succulent shelled beans, 

cowpea forage, caneberry, melon, cucumber, and cherry.

Foliar applications (ground) are proposed up to 0.3 lb ai/A for a single maximum application 

with an annual maximum of two applications allowed at a minimum interval of 14 or 21 days 

depending on the use. The maximum seasonal rate is 0.6 lb ai/A for all proposed uses. 
2

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A Tier II screening-level drinking water assessment was conducted for the proposed IR-4 uses of 

the miticide Acequinocyl (2-(acetyloxy)-3-dodecyl-1,4-naphthalenedione). Assessed uses were 

succulent soybean vegetable, low growing berry, small fruit vine climbing (except fuzzy 

kiwifruit), succulent shelled beans, cowpea forage, caneberry, melon, cucumber, and cherry. 

The assessment is based on a single maximum application rate of 0.3 lb ai/A, applied by ground 

foliar spray with an annual maximum of two applications allowed at a minimum interval of 14 or 

21 days depending on the use. The maximum seasonal rate is 0.6 lb ai/A for all proposed uses.

Similar to previous drinking water assessments, two approaches were used in performing the 

drinking water assessment for the proposed acequinocyl uses. In Approach 1, acequinocyl was 

conservatively assumed to be stable to all routes of degradation because of the uncertainties 

associated with the environmental fate data, mainly the lack of validation of the analytical 

methods and the lack of storage stability data. In Approach 2, it was assumed that the half-lives 

of acequinocyl and the degradation product R1 were valid and the total toxic residues 

(acequinocyl + R1) were modeled to address toxicity concerns with R1. According to the HED 

Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC) the residues of concern in the dietary 

exposure and risk assessment are acequinocyl and the hydroxylated degradate, that is, R1 (US 

EPA, 2007b). 

Surface water estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) were generated for acequinocyl 

using the Pesticide Root Zone Model/Exposure Analysis Modeling System (PRZM/EXAMS) 

model for all proposed uses except cranberry. Cranberry use is included on the proposed label

as part of the low growing berries subgroup, 13-07G. Cranberry harvesting may involve field 

flooding and PRZM/EXAMS are not currently parameterized to assess this type of scenario; 

therefore, cranberry was assessed using the provisional cranberry model. Exposure in ground 

water due to leaching was assessed with the screening model SCI-GROW.

The recommended EDWCs for the human health risk assessment are provided in Table 1. The 

EDWCs derived via Approach 1 represent upper bound values while those derived via Approach 

2 represent the lower bound values. Surface water EDWCs from the proposed uses supersede 

those previously estimated for acequinocyl (US EPA, 2010). EDWCs for the proposed uses are 

higher than those previously reported for both Approach 1 and Approach 2. The acute EDWC 

for cherry (25.89 μg/L – Approach 1, 5.59 μg/L – Approach 2) is greater than the previously 

reported acute EDWC (12.22 μg/L – Approach 1, 5.14 μg/L – Approach 2). The annual mean 

(chronic) concentration for cherry (17.84 μg/L – Approach 1) and cranberry (1.36 μg/L –

Approach 2) are higher than the previously reported EDWC (2.45 μg/L – Approach 1, 0.29 μg/L 

– Approach 2). Since the provisional cranberry model only uses a one year simulation, the 

highest 30-year annual average concentration is not available for the cranberry scenario. The 

highest 30-year annual average concentration (10.19 μg/L – Approach 1, 0.27 μg/L – Approach 

2) was higher than the previously reported EDWC (2.02 μg/L – Approach 1, 0.20 μg/L –

Approach 2). The upper bound EDWCs (Approach 1) exceed the solubility limit of acequinocyl 
3

(6.69 μg/L at 20°C); therefore, the recommended acute, annual mean (chronic), and 30-year 

annual average EDWC is 6.69 μg/L for Approach 1.

The ground water concentration of 3.6 x 10-3 μg/L for the current assessment is the same as in 

previous assessments (US EPA, 2010). This concentration can be considered as both the acute 

and chronic values.

Table 1. Recommended Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs) of 

Acequinocyl Derived from the Following Proposed New Uses

Drinking water 

source (model)

Proposed Use/

Scenario3

Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations

from Surface Water Sources (μg/L)1,2

Approach 1: Total Toxic Residues 

(no acequinocyl degradation)

Approach 2: Total Toxic Residues 

(combined acequinocyl and R1)

1-in-10 

year 

acute

1-in-10 

year 

chronic

30-year 

mean

1-in-10 

year 

acute

1-in-10 

year 

chronic

30-year 

mean

Surface water 

(PRZM/EXAMS)

Cherry/ 

MI cherry

6.69 

(25.89)4

6.69 

(17.84)4

6.69 

(10.19)4 5.59 0.42 0.26

Surface water 

(PRZM/EXAMS)

Small fruit 

(vine 

climbing, 

except fuzzy 

kiwifruit, 13-

07F)/ NY 

grape

6.69 

(23.12)4

6.69 

(15.34)4

6.69 

(9.57)4 4.22 0.38 0.27

Surface water 

(Provisional 

Cranberry 

Model)

Cranberry/

Provisional 

Cranberry 

Model

4.245 3.755-- 3.815 1.365--

Groundwater 

(SCIGROW)

All proposed 

uses

3.6 x 10-3 ≤3.6 x 10-3 ≤3.6 x 10-3 3.6 x 10-3 ≤3.6 x 10-3 ≤3.6 x 10-3

1 BOLDED values are recommended EDWCs

2 A default PCA of 0.87 was applied

3 Maximum of 2 applications of 0.3 lb ai/A for all proposed uses

4 EDWC (shown in parentheses) exceeds the solubility limit of acequinocyl (6.69 μg/L at 20°C); therefore, the 

recommended EDWC is 6.69 μg/L. EDWCs exceeded the solubility limit for multiple proposed uses (see Table 6).

5 Based on a one-year simulation; 1-10 year calculation is not applicable

Although the fate and transport database is complete, most of the environmental fate studies 

submitted prior to the initial registration were classified ‘supplemental’ due to numerous 

deficiencies identified in the fate studies such as poor chromatographic separation of acequinocyl 

and R1, use of chloroform:methanol solvent system, lack of LOD and LOQ data, un-eluted 

radioactive residues in the solid phase extraction process, and lack of storage stability data. 

These issues need to be addressed by the registrant to upgrade the fate studies. Submitted studies 

are presented in Appendix D.
4

2. PROBLEM FORMULATION

2.1. Background

The most recent regulatory actions for acequinocyl include the following:

• Section 3 Request for Uses of Acequinocyl (PC Code: 006329) on Greenhouse, Shade 

house, Ornamental, Floral, Foliage and Nursery Crops. August 7, 2003 

• Section 3 Request for Uses of Acequinocyl (PC Code: 006329) on Pome Fruits, Citrus, 

Almonds, Pistachios, Strawberries and Outdoor Ornamentals. February 3, 2004 

• Tier II Drinking Water Assessment for Acequinocyl. June 27, 2007 

• Ecological Risk Assessment for Use of Acequinocyl (PC 006329) on Grapes, Pome 

Fruits, Citrus, Nuts, and Outdoor Non-Food Uses. August 17, 2007 

• Acequinocyl and its Degradate, Acequinocyl-OH (R1), Drinking Water Assessment in 

Support of IR-4 New Uses Registration for Fruiting Vegetables (Crop Group 8), Okra, 

Edible Podded Beans, and Hops. April 29, 2010

• Ecological Risk Assessment for Use of Acequinocyl on Fruiting Vegetables (Except 

Cucurbits) to include Eggplant, Groundcherry, Pepino, Peppers (Bell, Chili, Cooking, 

Pimento, And Sweet) Tomatillo, and Tomato; Okra; Edible Podded Beans; and Hops.

July 29, 2010

The previously recommended PRZM-EXAMS EDWC estimates (US EPA, 2010) were based on 

the PA apple, PA tomato, and GA pecan crop scenarios. The 1-in-10-year annual peak (acute) 

concentration of parent acequinocyl was 12.22 μg/L, the 1-in-10-year annual daily mean 

(chronic) concentration was 2.45 μg/L, and the 30-year annual mean was 2.02 μg/L based on 

model Approach 1. Based on Approach 2, the acute, chronic, and 30-year annual mean 

concentrations were 5.14 μg/L, 0.29 μg/L, and 0.20 μg/L, respectively, for acequinocyl and its 

R1 degradate.

In previous assessments, the ground water EDWC for acequinocyl and acequinocyl-OH (R1) in 

shallow ground water sources was 0.0036 μg/L for acequinocyl applied twice at a concentration 

of 0.3 lb ai/A regardless of using Approach 1 or 2. EDWC from shallow ground water sources 

are expected remain the same for the proposed uses as acequinocyl proposed use rates are the 

same as the currently registered food use rates.

2.2. Mode of Action

Acequinocyl is a miticide. Its mode of action is mediated by both the parent chemical and its 

primary degradate, 2-dodecyl-3-hydroxy-1,4-napthoquinone (also referred to as R1, deacetylated 
5

acequinocyl, acequinocyl-OH, OH-AKD 2023, or AKM-05) through the inhibition of electron 

transfer in mitochondria.

2.3. Use Characteristics

KANEMITE 15 SC is a miticide for the control of Citrus red mite (Panonychus citri), European

red mite (Panonychus ulmi), Pacific spider mite (Tetranychus pacificus), Texas citrus mite

(Eutetranychus banskl) and Spruce spider mite (Oligonychus ununquis), Strawberry spider mite

(Tetranychus turkestam), Willamette spider mite (Eotetranychus willamettel), Two spotted 

spider mite (Tetranychus urticae and Tetranychus cinnabarinus), and Broad mite 

(Polyphagotarsonamus latus). According to the registrant, when applied to the foliage,

KANEMITE 15 SC provides quick knockdown and long residual control. Due to its unique 

mode of action, the label states that KANEMITE 15 SC is not expected to have cross-resistance 

to existing miticides and is reportedly very effective against various species of resistant and 

susceptible mites. 

Acequinocyl initial food use registration was for pome fruits, citrus, almonds, pistachios, 

strawberries, and outdoor ornamentals (US EPA, 2004). The proposed new uses for acequinocyl 

are succulent soybean vegetable, low growing berry, small fruit vine climbing (except fuzzy 

kiwifruit), succulent shelled beans, cowpea forage, caneberry, melon, cucumber, and cherry. The 

maximum application rates for the proposed uses are not to exceed 0.3 lb ai/A for a single 

application rate and 0.6 lb ai/A for a seasonal application rate, with a minimum reapplication 

interval of 14 or 21 days depending on the use. The maximum proposed application rates are the 

same as the application rates for currently registered acequinocyl agricultural uses (see previous 

assessments listed in the Background section above). Table 2 summarizes the application rates 

and application methods for the proposed uses. This information is obtained from the label and is 

used in the exposure assessment.

Table 2. Proposed Use Rates for Acequinocyl (Kanemite 15 SC)

Use

Maximum 

Individual

Application 

Rate

(lb ai/A)

Annual 

Maximum 

Number of

Applications

Minimum

Application 

Interval 

(days)

Max 

Seasonal 

Rate

(lb ai/A)1

Application 

Method

Succulent soybean 

vegetable 

(edamame)

0.3 2 21 0.6 Ground 

spray

Low growing 

berry (subgroup 

13-07G)

0.3 2 21 0.6 Ground 

spray

Small fruit (vine 

climbing, except 

fuzzy kiwifruit, 

subgroup 13-07F)

0.3 2 21 0.6 Ground 

spray

Bean, succulent 

shelled 0.3 2 14 0.6 Ground spray
6

Use

Maximum 

Individual

Application 

Rate

(lb ai/A)

Annual 

Maximum 

Number of

Applications

Minimum

Application 

Interval 

(days)

Max 

Seasonal 

Rate

(lb ai/A)1

Application 

Method

Cowpea forage 0.3 2 14 0.6 Ground 

spray

Caneberry 

(subgroup 13-

07A)

0.3 2 21 0.6 Ground 

spray

Melon (subgroup 

9A) 0.3 2 21 0.6 Ground spray

Cucumber 0.3 2 21 0.6 Ground 

spray

Cherry 0.3 2 14 0.6 Ground 

spray

1The proposed label states the maximum application rate on a seasonal basis. This rate is inferred to be an annual 

maximum given the restriction of two applications per year not to exceed 0.3 lb ai/A in a single application.

The product label use restrictions specify that the product is not to be applied via irrigation, via 

aerial application, or within 75 feet of aquatic areas. In addition, it is not intended for indoor 

residential use.

Currently, the label includes the following surface water statement:

“This product may contaminate water through drift of spray in wind. This product has a potential

for runoff for several days after application. Poorly draining soils and soils with shallow water

tables are more prone to produce runoff that contains this product. A level, well maintained

vegetative buffer strip between areas to which this product is applied and surface water features

such as ponds, streams, and springs will reduce the potential for contamination of water from

rainfall-runoff. Runoff of this product will be reduced by avoiding applications when rainfall is

forecasted to occur within 48 hours. Sound erosion control practices will reduce this product's

contribution to surface water contamination.”

2.4. Monitoring Data

Acequinocyl and its major degradate, hydroxy-acequinocyl (R1), were not monitored in surface 

or groundwater under the USGS National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program. 

2.5. Conceptual Model

A. Risk Hypothesis

For acequinocyl, the following risk hypothesis is being employed for this national-scale drinking 

water assessment:
7

Acequinocyl, when used in accordance with proposed labels, can result in off-site 

movement of the compound product via runoff and spray drift, leading to human 

exposure to acequinocyl and its degradate acequinocyl-OH (R1) through consumption of 

contaminated drinking water. 

B. Conceptual Model

Submitted fate and transport data indicate that acequinocyl is highly reactive, with breakdown 

potentially occurring quickly via both photolysis and hydrolysis. Acequinocyl can reach surface 

water via spray drift (foliar ground spray) and less likely via runoff. Once acequinocyl has 

entered surface water, it is not likely to persist as it will hydrolyze to form acequinocyl-OH (also 

known as R1, OH-AKD 2023, AKM-05, deacetylated acequinocyl, and 2-dodecyl-3-hydroxy1,4-napthoquinone). Surface water runoff from the areas of application is assumed to follow 

topography. Spray drift will follow wind direction. 

Leaching into groundwater is not expected to be a major route of transport based on submitted 

laboratory studies that indicated a very low mobility potential. 

Potential emission of volatile compounds is not considered as a viable release mechanism for 

acequinocyl because of the low vapor pressure of the compound.

2.6. Analysis Plan

Similar to previous drinking water assessments, two approaches were used in performing the 

drinking water assessment for the proposed acequinocyl uses. In Approach 1, acequinocyl was 

conservatively assumed to be stable to all routes of degradation because of the uncertainties 

associated with the environmental fate data, mainly the lack of validation of the analytical 

methods and the lack of storage stability data. In Approach 2, it was assumed that the half-lives 

of acequinocyl and the degradation product R1 were valid and the total toxic residues 

(acequinocyl + R1) were modeled to address toxicity concerns with R1. According to the HED 

Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC) the residues of concern in the dietary 

exposure and risk assessment are acequinocyl and the hydroxylated degradate, that is, R1 (US 

EPA, 2007b). 

Acequinocyl ground water EDWCs are the same as assessed in the previous drinking water 

assessment since the proposed application rates and number of applications are the same as 

currently registered food uses.

3. ANALYSIS

3.1. Fate and Transport Characterization

Acequinocyl appears to undergo fairly rapid transformation in most aquatic and terrestrial 

environments based on the environmental fate data of uncertain quality reviewed for the initial 

registration. Acequinocyl hydrolyzed with a half-life of a few hours to less than 2 days under 

neutral and alkaline pH conditions (MRID 45434908). However, it was stable under acidic pH 
8

conditions. Photodegradation in water appeared to be the main route of degradation in aquatic 

environments, with half-lives of less than 15 minutes in sterile lab and river water. In soil, the 

half-lives for aerobic biotransformation were less than 2 days under laboratory conditions 

(MRID 45434911). Under field conditions, acequinocyl applied to bare plots dissipated with 

half-lives ranging from 2 hrs in California to 14 hours in New York (MRID 45651601). In 

contrast, the residue decline data submitted for the Magnitude of Residue studies on apples, 

pears, oranges, grapefruit, lemon and almonds indicated a mean half-life of 20 days (US EPA, 

2004). 

Acequinocyl presented very low mobility in soil. The soil adsorption Kd for acequinocyl ranged

from 678 ml/g in sandy loam soil to 1,620 ml/g in silty clay loam soil (MRID 45531902) based 

on a study with one test concentration instead of four test concentrations as Subdivision N 

guidelines specify. In the field studies, the parent was not detected below 0-15 cm soil depth 

(MRID 45651601). The major transformation products detected in the field included R1 (2-

dodecyl-3-hydroxy-1, 4-napthoquinone) and AKM-18 (2-(1,2-dioxotetradecyl) benzoic acid).

Based on acequinocyl bioconcentration factor in fish (BCF ranged from 307 to 387 (MRID 

45434923) and its rather high octanol/water partition coefficient (Log Kow ≥ 6.2), acequinocyl

can expect to bioconcentrate in fish if found in water. Since acequinocyl has low vapor pressure

of 1.69 x 10-6 PA (at 25 oC) and very low water solubility of 0.006 mg/L, any losses due to 

volatilization are expected to be minimal. Further details on fate studies and other fate properties 

of acequinocyl can be found in the original risk assessment document (US EPA, 2004). Table 3

provides summary of physical and chemical properties of acequinocyl. Appendix A provides a 

summary of acequinocyl major degradates and their maximum percent formation observed in the 

laboratory and field studies.

Table 3. Physical and Chemical Properties of Acequinocyl

Common Name: Acequinocyl

CAS Chemical Name: 2-(acetyloxy)-3-dodecyl-1,4-naphthalenedione

CAS Registry No.: 57960-19-7

PC Code: 006329

Pesticide Type: Miticide

Chemical Family: Quinoline

Registrant: Arysta LifeScience North America, LLC

Trade Names: Kanemite 15 SC (EPA Reg. #66330-38)

Target Pests: Tetranychus, Panonychus, Eutetranychus, 

Oligonychus, Eotetranychus, and 

Polyphagotarsonamus spp of mites

Formulation: KanemiteTM 15 SC; 1.25 lb ai/gal; (15.8% ai)

Empirical Formula: C24H32O4

Structural Formula of Acequinocyl

O

O

CH2(CH2)10CH3 OCOCH3
9

Common Name: Acequinocyl

Structural Formula of Acequinocyl Major 

Degradate:

Acequinocyl-OH (also known as R1, 

OH-AKD 2023, AKM-05, deacetylated 

acequinocyl, and 2-dodecyl-3-hydroxy1,4-naphthoquinone )

PC Code: 606329; CAS # 57960-31-3

Vapor Pressure: 1.69 x 10-6pascals at 250C (technical)

Water Solubility: 6.69 μg/L at 200C (technical)

Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient (Log 

Kow):

6.2 (technical)

Molecular Weight: 384.5 (technical)

Melting Point: 59.6C (technical)

3.2. Drinking Water Exposure Modeling

Two approaches were used in performing the drinking water assessment for the proposed 

acequinocyl uses. In Approach 1, acequinocyl was conservatively assumed to be stable to all 

routes of degradation because of the uncertainties associated with the environmental fate data, 

mainly the lack of validation of the analytical methods and the lack of storage stability data. In

Approach 2, it was assumed that the half-lives of acequinocyl and the degradation product R1 

were valid and the total toxic residues (acequinocyl + R1) were modeled to address toxicity 

concerns with R1. According to the HED Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC) 

the residues of concern in the dietary exposure and risk assessment are acequinocyl and the 

hydroxylated degradate, that is, R1 (US EPA, 2007b). All half-lives used were calculated based 

on the total toxic residues (acequinocyl + R1). Additionally, the adsorption coefficient (Kd) for 

R1 was used in the modeling (Approach 2) because R1 is more mobile than acequinocyl. 

3.2.1. Surface Water Modeling

All Proposed Uses Except Cranberries

Tier II surface water EDWCs were calculated using PRZM (Pesticide Root Zone Model, v3.12.2; 

May 12, 2005) and EXAMS (EXposure Analysis Modeling System, version 2.98.04.06, April 

2005) models in the PE5 shell. All Tier II modeling was corrected for percent cropped area 

(PCA), using the default value of 0.87 (87%). Standard crop scenarios were selected for each 

proposed use. Table 4 lists the input parameters used for the PRZM/EXAMS modeling of 

acequinocyl and the R1 degradate. A representative PRZM/EXAMS output file is provided in 

Appendix B. Table 6 presents EDWCs of acequinocyl and R1 in surface water sources from 

the proposed uses. 

O

O

CH2(CH2)

10CH3

OH
10

Table 4. PRZM/EXAMS Input Parameter Values.

Parameter (Units) Input Value and Unit Source/Comments Approach 11 Approach 22

Maximum Application Rate 0.3 lb ai/acre (all uses) Proposed label

Maximum Number of Applications 2 Proposed label

Minimum Reapplications Interval 21 days (succulent soybean vegetable, low 

growing berry, small fruit, caneberry, 

melon, cucumber)

14 days (succulent shelled bean, cowpea 

forage, cherry)

Proposed label

Modeling Scenarios Succulent soybean vegetable (edamame):

 MS soybean

Low growing berry (13-07G):

 FL strawberry (not applicable for 

cranberry)

Small fruit (vine climbing, except fuzzy 

kiwifruit, 13-07F):

 CA grape 

 NY grape

Bean, succulent shelled and cowpea 

forage:

 MI bean

 OR snbean

Caneberry (13-07A):

 CA grape

 NY grape

Melon (9A):

 MI melon

 MO melon

 NJ melon

Cucumber:

 FL cucumber

Cherry:

 MI cherry

EFED standard 

PRZM/EXAMS scenarios

In the absence of a standard 

caneberry scenario, grape 

scenarios are used as surrogate 

scenarios

Initial Application Dates (dd-mm) Succulent soybean vegetable (edamame):

 MS soybean (12-09)

Low growing berry (13-07G):

 FL strawberry (24-01)

Small fruit (vine climbing, except fuzzy 

kiwifruit, 13-07F):

 CA grape (03-08)

 NY grape (17-09)

Bean, succulent shelled and cowpea 

forage:

 MI bean (14-08)

 OR snbean (12-08)

Caneberry (13-07A):

 CA grape (09-08)

 NY grape (23-09)

Melon (9A):

 MI melon (24-07)

 MO melon (09-07)

 NJ melon (29-06)

The date of initial application 

was calculated from the PreHarvest Interval (PHI) and 

application interval as written 

on the proposed labels.
11

Parameter (Units) Input Value and Unit Source/Comments Approach 11 Approach 22

Cucumber:

 FL cucumber (18-11)

Cherry:

 MI cherry (30-06)

Application Method Ground, Foliar (CAM = 2) Acequinocyl is a foliar 

application

Application Efficiency Fraction 0.99 EFED standard default for 

ground applications

Spray Drift Loading Fraction 0.064 EFED standard default for 

ground applications

Incorporation depth (cm) 0 Default for foliar applications

Molecular Weight (g/mole) 384.5 Product Chemistry

IPSCND Input 1 (succulent soybean vegetable)

3 (low growing berry, small fruit, 

succulent shelled bean, cowpea forage, 

caneberry, melon, cucumber, cherry)

1 = remaining pesticide on 

foliage is converted to surface 

application to the top soil layer

2 = remaining pesticide on 

foliage is completely removed 

after harvest

3 = remaining pesticide on 

foliage is retained as surface 

residue and continues to 

undergo decay. 

Water Solubility (mg/L) 0.0067 MRID 45434906

Vapor Pressure (torr) 1.268 × 10-8 MRID 45434905

Henry’s Law Constant (atm-m3/mol) 9.59× 10-7 Calculated

Kd (ml/g) 10273 9704 MRID 45531902; 45434907

Hydrolysis Half-life (days) stable 9.6 MRID 45434908

Aqueous Photolysis Half-life (days) stable 0.19 MRID 45434909

Aerobic Soil Metabolism (days) stable 48.5 MRID 45434911

90th percentile confidence 

interval on the mean (EFED 

guidance)5

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism (days) stable 97 Twice the aerobic soil 

metabolism t1/2 (EFED 

guidance)5

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism (days) stable 649.8 MRID 45434913

Three times the aquatic 

metabolism t1/2 (EFED 

guidance)5

1 Acequinocyl was assumed to be stable in the environment

2 Combined half-life values for acequinocyl and acequinocyl-OH (R1) degradate

3 Mean Kd of four values was used because the study was conducted on only one test concentration

4 Mean Kd of four values was used because binding was not correlated with organic carbon content. 

5

Input Parameter Guidance Manual, Pesticides (Version 2.1; Oct. 22, 2009)

Cranberries

The Provisional Cranberry Model (v2, December 8, 2010) is a provisional refinement to the Tier 

I Rice Model (v1.0, May 8, 2007). Refinements include the addition of simple degradation 
12

processes in dry and flooded conditions and a water depth of twelve inches rather than the water 

depth of four inches used in the rice model. These modifications allow estimation of screeninglevel peak and annual mean EDWCs of acequinocyl residues of concern that may occur in 

untreated surface water used as drinking water following use on cranberries.

The model assumes that degradation on dry cranberry bog soil occurs predominantly via aerobic 

microbial metabolism. Additionally, residue degradation in flooded bogs is assumed to occur via 

aerobic microbial metabolism in the water column and via anaerobic microbial metabolism in the 

sediment.

Acequinocyl use on cranberries is proposed for an annual maximum of two applications of 0.3 lb 

ai/A each. The minimum interval between applications is 21 days and the preharvest interval is 

one day. The proposed applications were first aged on dry soils because cranberry bogs are not 

typically flooded until the night before harvesting. The resulting residues (in lb ai/A) were then 

summed and used as input for the flooded component of the model to estimate peak and annual 

mean EDWCs in bog tailwater following harvest.

Table 5 lists that input parameters used for the Provisional Cranberry Model. The equations 

used in the Provisional Cranberry Model are briefly described in Appendix C. Table 6 presents

estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) of acequinocyl and R1 in surface water 

sources from use on cranberry. 

Table 5. Provisional Tier 1 Cranberry Model Input Parameters. 

Input Parameter Value Source/Comments

Approach 11 Approach 22

Application Rate (lbs ai/A) 0.3 Proposed label

Applications per Year 2 Proposed label

Kd (ml/g) 1027 970 MRID 45531902; 45434907

Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half-life 

(days)

stable3 48.5 MRID 45434911

90th percentile confidence 

interval on the mean (EFED 

guidance)

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half-life 

(days)

stable3 97 Twice the aerobic soil 

metabolism t1/2 (EFED guidance)

1 Acequinocyl was assumed to be stable in the environment

2 Combined half-life values for acequinocyl and acequinocyl-OH (R1) degradate

3 Since Provisional Cranberry model requires a half-life value, 1000 days was used to represent stable conditions.
13

Table 6. Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs) for Acequinocyl Total Toxic 

Residues Based on Approachs #1 and #2 Using PRZM/EXAMS and Provisional Cranberry 

Model

Proposed 

Use Scenario

Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations

from Surface Water Sources (μg/L)1,2

Approach #1: Total Toxic Residues 

(no acequinocyl degradation)

Approach #2: Total Toxic Residues 

(combined acequinocyl and R1)

1-in-10 

year acute

1-in-10 

year 

chronic

30-year 

mean

1-in-10 

year acute

1-in-10 

year 

chronic

30-year 

mean

Soybean MS soybean 15.99* 8.88* 6.03 2.49 0.23 0.16

Low 

growing 

berry 

(13-07G)

FL strawberry 

(not applicable 

to cranberry)

16.22* 7.36* 5.02 0.76 0.08 0.06

Provisional 

Cranberry 

Model 

(applicable to 

cranberry)

4.243 3.753-- 3.813 1.363--

Small fruit

(vine 

climbing, 

except 

fuzzy 

kiwifruit, 

13-07F)

CA grape4 3.87 2.80 1.60 0.70 0.05 0.04

NY grape4 23.12* 15.34* 9.57* 4.22 0.38 0.27

Succulent 

shelled 

bean and 

cowpea 

forage

MI bean 14.13* 9.62* 5.74 1.22 0.12 0.09

OR bean 14.63* 9.71* 6.71* 1.16 0.21 0.17

Caneberry 

(13-07A)

CA grape4 3.89 2.80 1.61 0.70 0.05 0.04

NY grape4 23.19* 15.31* 9.57* 4.57 0.38 0.26

Melon 

(9A)

MI melon 5.90 3.77 1.93 0.71 0.05 0.04

MO melon 14.38* 7.74* 5.02 2.46 0.16 0.11

NJ melon 9.16* 5.36 3.46 1.14 0.10 0.07

Cucumber FL cucumber 13.32* 5.85 3.90 0.88 0.08 0.06

Cherry MI cherry 25.89* 17.84* 10.19* 5.59 0.42 0.26

1 A default PCA of 0.87 was applied

2 BOLD indicates highest EDWC for the proposed uses

3 Based on a one-year simulation; 1-10 year calculation is not applicable

4 Grape scenarios were used to represent the proposed small fruit and caneberry uses; different initial application 

dates were used that reflect labeled treatment and preharvest intervals specific to each crop

* Value exceeds solubility limit of acequinocyl (6.69 μg/L at 20°C)

3.2.2. Ground Water Modeling

Estimated concentrations of acequinocyl total toxic residues in drinking water from shallow 

ground water sources are the same as for currently registered uses because the application rates 
14

and number of applications are the same (0.3 lb ai/A, 2 applications). Therefore, the estimated 

environmental concentrations are not expected to exceed 3.6 x 10-3 μg/L for the proposed uses. 

This concentration can be considered as both the acute and chronic value. Details regarding SCIGROW modeling at this application rate can be found in US EPA, 2007a. 

3.2.3. Assumptions and Uncertainties

The following uncertainties have been identified in the environmental fate properties and 

drinking water assessment for acequinocyl:

• Most of the environmental fate studies submitted prior to the initial registration were 

classified ‘supplemental’ due to deficiencies identified in the fate studies such as poor 

chromatographic separation of acequinocyl and R1, use of chloroform : methanol solvent 

system, lack of LOD and LOQ data, un-eluted radioactive residues in the solid phase 

extraction process, and lack of storage stability data.

• In PRZM/EXAMS modeling, Approach 1, acequinocyl was conservatively assumed 

stable to all routes of degradation to account for the uncertainties associated with the 

environmental fate data. This approach generated conservative, upper bound, EDWCs 

for acequinocyl. Therefore, exposure to acequinocyl may be overestimated by Approach 

1. 

• The impact of spray drift buffers was not considered in this drinking water assessment. 

With a 75 ft. spray drift buffer (spray drift fraction = 0.006), the effective drift to a water 

body from a ground application would be smaller than without the buffer (0.064). 

However, based on comparison of EDWCs (not corrected for PCA) derived for the MI 

cherry scenario (Approach 1) the impact of spray drift on the EDWCs is minimal with 

and without the 75 ft spray drift buffer.

Buffer Spray Drift 

Fraction

1-in-10 year acute 

(μg/L)

1-in-10 year 

chronic (μg/L)

30-year mean 

(μg/L)

None 0.064 29.75 20.50 11.71

75 feet 0.006 28.74 19.67 11.17

• SCI-GROW estimated a concentration of <0.0036 μg/L for acequinocyl (Approach 1) 

and total residue (acequinocyl+R1; Approach 2) in shallow ground water sources. The 

ground water EDWCs were obtained using the median Koc value of 37,550 ml/g for 

acequinocyl, and the median Koc value of 36,000 ml/g for the total (acequinocyl+R1) 

residues. Estimated concentrations of chemicals with Koc values greater than 9,995 ml/g

are beyond the scope of the regression data used in SCI GROW development. If there 

are concerns for such chemicals, a higher tier groundwater exposure assessment should 

be considered, regardless of the concentration returned by SCI-GROW.

• Two method validation studies (MRID 46182601 and 46182602) submitted by the 

registrant to determine the concentrations of acequinocyl and its metabolite(s) in soil and 

water extracts were reviewed by the EPA’s Environmental Chemistry Laboratory. The 
15

registrant was informed of the suggested amendments and request for new calibration 

data in a memo dated 27 June, 2007. Recently, the registrant submitted the amended 

analytical method for determination of residues of acequinocyl and its major metabolite 

R1 (hydroxy-acequinocyl) in drinking water, ground water and surface water (MRID 

48016602), and the amended analytical method for the determination of acequinocyl, 

hydroxy-acequinocyl, and AKM-18 in soil (MRID 48016601). The Agency is in the 

process of reviewing these submitted studies.

 3.3. Drinking Water Treatment

No specific information was available for the behavior of acequinocyl during drinking water 

treatment.

4. DATA REQUIREMENTS

Most of the environmental fate studies submitted prior to the initial registration were classified 

‘supplemental’ due to deficiencies such as poor chromatographic separation of acequinocyl and 

R1, use of chloroform: methanol solvent system, lack of LOD and LOQ data, un-eluted 

radioactive residues in the solid phase extraction process, and lack of storage stability data. 

These issues need to be addressed by the registrant to upgrade the fate studies.

REFERENCES

Orr, Gary R. 2009. Determination of Acequinocyl, Acequinocyl-OH, and AKM-18 in Soil 

Minor Analytical Revision of Method-136, Revision #2. Performing Laboratory: Arysta 

LifeScience North America, LLC. Laboratory Project ID: ARY-0413-2455153. Completion 

Date: November 18, 2009. (MRID 48016601) 

Orr, Gary R. 2009. Determination of Residues of AKD 2023 and Its Major Metabolite R1 

(Hydroxy AKD'2023) in Drinking Water, Ground Water and Surface Water. Minor Analytical 

Revision of Method-AGK/076. Arysta LifeScience North America, LLC. Laboratory Project ID: 

ARY-0413- 2455183. Completion Date: December 18, 2009. (MRID 48016602) 

US EPA. 2004. Section 3 Request for Uses of Acequinocyl (P.C. Code: 006329) on Pome 

Fruits, Citrus, Almonds, Pistachios, Strawberries and Outdoor Ornamentals submitted under 

DP Barcodes: D285811, D286428, D289153, D290010, D287269, D290009, D291174. 

February 3, 2004.

US EPA. 2007a. Tier II Drinking Water Assessment for Acequinocyl. June 27, 2007

US EPA. 2007b. PP#s 6F7040 and #7F7176. Human-Health Risk Assessment for the Proposed 

Uses of Acequinocyl on Grapes, the Tree Nut Crop Group, and Residential Sites (Ornamentals). 

September 6, 2007
16

US EPA. 2010. Acequinocyl and its Degradate, Acequinocyl-OH (R1), Drinking Water 

Assessment in Support of IR-4 New Uses Registration for Fruiting Vegetables (Crop Group 8), 

Okra, Edible Podded Beans, and Hops. April 29, 2010
17

APPENDIX A

Table A.1. Summary of Acequinocyl Major Degradates and Maximum Percent Formation Observed in the Laboratory and Field Studies

Degradate 

Maximum Degradate Concentration (% of applied) and Time to Max Concentration

Hydrolysis Aqueous 

Photolysis

Soil 

Photolysis

Aerobic Soil 

Metabolism

Anaerobic 

Aquatic

Aerobic 

Aquatic

TFD

R1 (2-dodecyl-3-hydroxy1,4-naphthaledione) 

pH 7: 

54.7% (96 hr)

River water:

11.6% (30 min)

--

33.8% (2 days) Water:

18% (0 days)

Sediment:

41.5% (3 days)

12.2% (0 days) NY: 37.8% (3 hr)

GA: 37.8% 1

CA: 26.4% 1

AKM 18 [2-(1,2-

dioxotetradecyl)benzoic 

acid]

pH 7: 

7.1% (48 hr)

--

23.7% (6 days) 9.2% (2 days) Water:

2.7% (7 days)

Sediment:

34.3% (269

days)

19.5% (1 day) NY: 16.5% (3 hr)

AKM-08 [2-(2-oxododecyl)-3-hydroxy-1,4-

naphthoquinone]

--

Buffer solution:

12.9% (2 hr) -- -- -- -- --

O-Phthalic acid --

Buffer solution:

12.7% (24 hr)

River water:

11.9% (24 hr)

-- -- -- -- --

Phenol --

River water:

10% (24 hr)

-- -- -- -- --

CBAA (2-carboxy-α-oxobenzene acetic acid)

-- -- -- -- --

11.3% (2 days)

--

1 Formed immediately after application.
18

APPENDIX B

PRZM/EXAMS Modeling Output

Approach 1

stored as MIcherry ap1.out

Chemical: acequinocyl

PRZM environment: 

MICherriesSTD.txt modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:16:40

EXAMS environment: 

ir298.exv modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:14:08

Metfile: w14850.dvf modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:15:10

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 11.12 8.134 3.336 1.948 1.691 0.5269

1962 2.28 1.943 1.554 1.468 1.442 1.3

1963 5.479 4.05 2.407 2.016 1.975 1.725

1964 7.691 6.081 3.522 2.938 2.848 2.316

1965 11.25 8.519 5.948 4.832 4.627 3.443

1966 9.729 7.799 5.573 5.124 5.083 4.521

1967 7.432 6.674 5.9 5.691 5.626 5.313

1968 8.277 7.357 6.302 6.005 5.946 5.643

1969 13.14 10.94 8.779 8.16 8.012 7.025

1970 16.32 13.51 10.26 9.802 9.507 8.295

1971 17.03 14.13 10.79 9.889 9.711 9.2

1972 19.27 15.77 12.06 11.15 11.02 10.15

1973 13.45 12.39 11.19 10.92 10.85 10.69

1974 13.69 12.62 11.53 11.33 11.33 11

1975 26.81 21.25 17.16 14.41 13.89 12.03

1976 16.23 14.94 13.44 13.02 12.92 12.79

1977 18.41 16.52 14.33 13.9 13.77 13.21

1978 24.58 20.75 16.93 15.42 15.11 14.01

1979 24.52 20.97 16.88 15.75 15.55 14.96

1980 16.88 16.2 15.43 15.11 15.1 15.02

1981 23.46 20.67 17.26 16.25 16.26 15.5

1982 29.9 25.24 19.27 17.64 17.33 16.47

1983 22.55 20.63 19.18 18.33 18.14 17.27

1984 28.65 24.63 20.01 18.82 18.65 17.88

1985 28.54 24.77 21.1 20.22 19.93 18.81

1986 30.96 26.88 22.52 21.1 20.79 19.78

1987 29.88 26.72 23.55 21.99 21.63 20.51

1988 22.47 22.07 21.16 20.87 20.84 20.61

1989 24.16 22.79 21.37 21 20.84 20.49

1990 26.6 24.48 22.24 21.82 21.6 20.94
19

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258 30.96 26.88 23.55 21.99 21.63 20.94

0.064516 29.9 26.72 22.52 21.82 21.6 20.61

0.096774 29.88 25.24 22.24 21.1 20.84 20.51

0.129032 28.65 24.77 21.37 21 20.84 20.49

0.16129 28.54 24.63 21.16 20.87 20.79 19.78

0.193548 26.81 24.48 21.1 20.22 19.93 18.81

0.225806 26.6 22.79 20.01 18.82 18.65 17.88

0.258065 24.58 22.07 19.27 18.33 18.14 17.27

0.290323 24.52 21.25 19.18 17.64 17.33 16.47

0.322581 24.16 20.97 17.26 16.25 16.26 15.5

0.354839 23.46 20.75 17.16 15.75 15.55 15.02

0.387097 22.55 20.67 16.93 15.42 15.11 14.96

0.419355 22.47 20.63 16.88 15.11 15.1 14.01

0.451613 19.27 16.52 15.43 14.41 13.89 13.21

0.483871 18.41 16.2 14.33 13.9 13.77 12.79

0.516129 17.03 15.77 13.44 13.02 12.92 12.03

0.548387 16.88 14.94 12.06 11.33 11.33 11

0.580645 16.32 14.13 11.53 11.15 11.02 10.69

0.612903 16.23 13.51 11.19 10.92 10.85 10.15

0.645161 13.69 12.62 10.79 9.889 9.711 9.2

0.677419 13.45 12.39 10.26 9.802 9.507 8.295

0.709677 13.14 10.94 8.779 8.16 8.012 7.025

0.741935 11.25 8.519 6.302 6.005 5.946 5.643

0.774194 11.12 8.134 5.948 5.691 5.626 5.313

0.806452 9.729 7.799 5.9 5.124 5.083 4.521

0.83871 8.277 7.357 5.573 4.832 4.627 3.443

0.870968 7.691 6.674 3.522 2.938 2.848 2.316

0.903226 7.432 6.081 3.336 2.016 1.975 1.725

0.935484 5.479 4.05 2.407 1.948 1.691 1.3

0.967742 2.28 1.943 1.554 1.468 1.442 0.5269

0.1 29.757 25.193 22.153 21.09 20.84 20.508

Average of yearly 

averages: 11.71426
20

Inputs generated by pe5.pl - Novemeber 2006

Data used for this run:

Output File: MIcherry ap1

Metfile: w14850.dvf

PRZM scenario: MICherriesSTD.txt

EXAMS environment file: ir298.exv

Chemical Name: acequinocyl

Description

Variable 

Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 384.5 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 9.59E-07 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 1.27E-08 torr

Solubility sol 0.0067 mg/L

Kd Kd 1027 mg/L

Koc Koc mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 0 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 0 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.336 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 30-06 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

app. rate 1 apprate 0.336 kg/ha

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 3

UPTKF

Record 18: PLVKRT

PLDKRT

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Reservoir

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF total none, monthly or total(average of entire run)
21

Approach 2

stored as MIcherry ap2.out

Chemical: acequinocyl

PRZM environment:

MICherriesSTD.txt modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:16:40

EXAMS environment: 

ir298.exv modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:14:08

Metfile: w14850.dvf modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 06:15:10

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 4.525 3.122 1.118 0.6104 0.5081 0.1698

1962 0.9362 0.5987 0.3765 0.2836 0.2663 0.2179

1963 0.8695 0.5407 0.3134 0.1934 0.1638 0.124

1964 2.106 1.443 0.5232 0.3249 0.2743 0.138

1965 2.076 1.294 0.6581 0.4552 0.4006 0.2146

1966 1.923 1.183 0.4934 0.347 0.3203 0.244

1967 0.9068 0.5694 0.3468 0.244 0.2257 0.1909

1968 1.347 0.8181 0.4031 0.2632 0.23 0.1582

1969 4.117 2.439 0.8879 0.5837 0.5271 0.2808

1970 3.162 1.911 0.8676 0.6661 0.5737 0.3425

1971 3.605 2.164 0.8351 0.5167 0.4487 0.3294

1972 6.552 3.843 1.492 0.8882 0.7888 0.4248

1973 1.085 0.7146 0.4704 0.3945 0.3752 0.3015

1974 1.029 0.6892 0.4763 0.3206 0.2855 0.1961

1975 5.285 3.092 1.596 0.8703 0.7234 0.3104

1976 2.218 1.365 0.5759 0.416 0.3731 0.3008

1977 1.911 1.197 0.6012 0.446 0.3925 0.2477

1978 2.789 1.711 0.8798 0.5348 0.4605 0.2715

1979 5.342 3.161 1.138 0.6576 0.5629 0.3363

1980 0.9552 0.6175 0.3961 0.2926 0.2816 0.2327

1981 4.627 2.794 1.012 0.5691 0.5084 0.2594

1982 8.311 5.03 1.744 0.9656 0.8083 0.4162

1983 2.827 1.772 0.8035 0.661 0.6482 0.4256

1984 4.188 2.516 0.968 0.6017 0.5282 0.3718

1985 6.704 3.944 1.4 1.061 0.915 0.4855

1986 4.627 2.785 1.225 0.9365 0.8414 0.539

1987 5.076 3.416 2.083 1.264 1.079 0.6063

1988 1.348 0.9113 0.5907 0.5491 0.5286 0.3978

1989 0.924 0.5857 0.3641 0.2347 0.227 0.1845

1990 2.58 1.543 0.6426 0.464 0.3995 0.2164
22

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258 8.311 5.03 2.083 1.264 1.079 0.6063

0.064516 6.704 3.944 1.744 1.061 0.915 0.539

0.096774 6.552 3.843 1.596 0.9656 0.8414 0.4855

0.129032 5.342 3.416 1.492 0.9365 0.8083 0.4256

0.16129 5.285 3.161 1.4 0.8882 0.7888 0.4248

0.193548 5.076 3.122 1.225 0.8703 0.7234 0.4162

0.225806 4.627 3.092 1.138 0.6661 0.6482 0.3978

0.258065 4.627 2.794 1.118 0.661 0.5737 0.3718

0.290323 4.525 2.785 1.012 0.6576 0.5629 0.3425

0.322581 4.188 2.516 0.968 0.6104 0.5286 0.3363

0.354839 4.117 2.439 0.8879 0.6017 0.5282 0.3294

0.387097 3.605 2.164 0.8798 0.5837 0.5271 0.3104

0.419355 3.162 1.911 0.8676 0.5691 0.5084 0.3015

0.451613 2.827 1.772 0.8351 0.5491 0.5081 0.3008

0.483871 2.789 1.711 0.8035 0.5348 0.4605 0.2808

0.516129 2.58 1.543 0.6581 0.5167 0.4487 0.2715

0.548387 2.218 1.443 0.6426 0.464 0.4006 0.2594

0.580645 2.106 1.365 0.6012 0.4552 0.3995 0.2477

0.612903 2.076 1.294 0.5907 0.446 0.3925 0.244

0.645161 1.923 1.197 0.5759 0.416 0.3752 0.2327

0.677419 1.911 1.183 0.5232 0.3945 0.3731 0.2179

0.709677 1.348 0.9113 0.4934 0.347 0.3203 0.2164

0.741935 1.347 0.8181 0.4763 0.3249 0.2855 0.2146

0.774194 1.085 0.7146 0.4704 0.3206 0.2816 0.1961

0.806452 1.029 0.6892 0.4031 0.2926 0.2743 0.1909

0.83871 0.9552 0.6175 0.3961 0.2836 0.2663 0.1845

0.870968 0.9362 0.5987 0.3765 0.2632 0.23 0.1698

0.903226 0.924 0.5857 0.3641 0.244 0.227 0.1582

0.935484 0.9068 0.5694 0.3468 0.2347 0.2257 0.138

0.967742 0.8695 0.5407 0.3134 0.1934 0.1638 0.124

0.1 6.431 3.8003 1.5856 0.96269 0.83809 0.47951

Average of 

yearly averages: 0.297813
23

Inputs generated by pe5.pl - Novemeber 2006

Data used for this run:

Output File: MIcherry ap2

Metfile: w14850.dvf

PRZM scenario: MICherriesSTD.txt

EXAMS environment 

file: ir298.exv

Chemical Name: acequinocyl

Description

Variable 

Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 384.5 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 9.59E-07 atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 1.27E-08 torr

Solubility sol 0.0067 mg/L

Kd Kd 970 mg/L

Koc Koc mg/L

Photolysis half-life kdp 0.19 days Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism kbacw 97 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic 

Metabolism kbacs 649.8 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 48.5 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 9.6 days Half-life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.336 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 30-06 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Interval 1 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.

app. rate 1 apprate 0.336 kg/ha

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 3

UPTKF

Record 18: PLVKRT

PLDKRT

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Reservoir

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF total none, monthly or total(average of entire run)
24

Appendix C

I. Provisional Cranberry Model Equations

The Provisional Cranberry Model is a refinement of the Tier I Rice Model v1.0 (Equations 1 and 

2), which is a simple equilibrium partitioning equation that calculates a single, screening-level 

concentration in rice paddy water and released tailwater based on a compound’s application rate 

and soil mobility.

Equations 1-2: Tier I Rice Model v1.0 (USEPA, 2007b).

  w sed sed b d

a i

w

d d K

m

C

 

3

2

0

10

10 '



 



(1)

and, if appropriate:

Kd KOC 0.01

(2)

where,

Cw0 = initial water concentration [μg/L]

mai' = mass applied per unit area [kg/ha]

Kd = water-sediment partitioning coefficient [L/kg]

KOC = organic carbon partitioning coefficient [L/kg]

dw = water column depth = 0.10 m

dsed = sediment depth = 0.01 m

θsed = porosity of sediment = 0.509

ρb = bulk density of sediment = 1300 kg/m3

First, the Tier I Rice Model was provisionally modified (Equation 3) to include as inputs 

degradation rate constants in order to estimate single, screening-level concentrations in paddy 

water or tailwater at a given time after application.

Equation 3: Provisional Modified Rice Model (Jones, 2006).

     

 

t

d d K

d k d k d K k

w w

w sed sed b d

w sed sed sed b d

C C e

















 

 







 

3

3

1 2 3

1 0

1 0

0

 

 

(3)

where,

Cw = water concentration [μg/L]

t = interval since last application [d]

k1 = upper 90th percentile rate constant in water column [1/d]

k2 = upper 90th percentile rate constant in pore water [1/d]

k3 = upper 90th percentile rate constant for adsorbed residues [1/d]

Then, the Provisional Modified Rice Model water column depth was lengthened to a 

depth that is used to flood cranberry bogs (i.e., 12 inches; Cape Cod Cranberry Growers 

Association, 2001).

i.e., dw = water column depth = 0.305 m
25

In order to model degradation prior to the flood at harvest, the application rates for n 

number of pre-harvest applications were independently degraded over the interim until flooding 

and then summed (Equation 4).

Equation 4: Degradation in a Dry Bog.





 

n

k t

ai ai n

n m m e

1

4

' '

(4)

where,

mai' = mass per unit area at flood [kg/ha]

mai'n = mass applied per unit area on the nth application [kg/ha]

k4 = upper 90th percentile rate constant on dry bog [1/d]

tn = interval from the nth application to harvest [d]

n = number of pre-harvest applications

The following four equations and parameter sets constitute the Provisional Cranberry 

Model (Equations 1-4).

Equations 1-4: Provisional Cranberry Model.

  w sed sed b d

a i

w

d d K

m

C

 

3

2

0

10

10 '



 



(1)

and, if appropriate:

Kd KOC 0.01

(2)

where,

Cw0 = initial water concentration [μg/L]

Kd = water-sediment partitioning coefficient [L/kg]

KOC = organic carbon partitioning coefficient [L/kg]

dw = water column depth = 0.305 m

dsed = sediment depth = 0.01 m

θsed = porosity of sediment = 0.509

ρb = bulk density of sediment = 1300 kg/m3

and, lastly:

     

 

t

d d K

d k d k d K k

w w

w sed sed b d

w sed sed sed b d

C C e

















 

 







 

3

3

1 2 3

1 0

1 0

0

 

 

(3)

where,

Cw = water concentration [μg/L]

t = interval since flood [d]

k1 = upper 90th percentile rate constant in water column [1/d]

k2 = upper 90th percentile rate constant in pore water [1/d]

k3 = upper 90th percentile rate constant for adsorbed residues [1/d]
26

II. Output of Provisional Cranberry Model

Provisional Cranberry Model v2.0

Equation: EEC = (App rate * 100 / (dw + (dsed * (θ + (ρ * Kd / 1000))))) * exp (-day * kAAM)

*Water column depth is 12 inches (0.305 m) to 18 inches (0.457 m).

Application Inputs

App. rate (lbs/A) Days pre-flood App. rate at flood (lbs/A)

0.3 22 0.30

0.3 1 0.30

0.00

Total residues per area at flood (lbs/A): 0.60

Approach 1

Inputs

Parameter Value

Koc (L/kg)

If no Koc, enter Kd (L/kg) 1027

AAM t1/2 (d) 1000

ASM t1/2 (d) 1000

Model Parameters

Parameter Value

Water column depth (m) 0.305

Sediment depth (m) 0.01

Organic fraction of sediment 0.01

Sediment bulk density (kg/m3) 1300

Sediment porosity 0.509

Calculated Parameters

Parameter Value

Kd input (L/kg) 1027

AAM rate constant 0.000693147

ASM rate constant 0.00069

App. rate (kg/ha) 0.66727756

DW EECs

100% PCA

Holding Time Peak Annual Mean Peak Annual Mean

3-d Tail 4.87 4.31 4.24 3.75

21-d Tail 4.81 4.25 4.19 3.70

Approach 2

Inputs

Parameter Value

Koc (L/kg)

If no Koc, enter Kd (L/kg) 970

AAM t1/2 (d) 97

ASM t1/2 (d) 49

Model Parameters

Parameter Value

Water column depth (m) 0.305

Sediment depth (m) 0.01

Organic fraction of sediment 0.01

Sediment bulk density (kg/m3) 1300

Sediment porosity 0.509

Calculated Parameters

Parameter Value

Kd input (L/kg) 970

AAM rate constant 0.007145847

ASM rate constant 0.01415

App. rate (kg/ha) 0.577936434

DW EECs

100% PCA

Holding Time Peak Annual Mean Peak Annual Mean

3-d Tail 4.38 1.56 3.81 1.36

21-d Tail 3.85 1.37 3.35 1.19

87% PCA

87% PCA
27

APPENDIX D

Table D.1. Environmental Fate and Transport Data Submitted for Acequinocyl

Guideline Laboratory and Field Studies MRID Study 

Classification

161-1 Hydrolysis (dark; pH 5, 7, and 9) 45434908 Supplemental

161-2 Photodegradation in Water (pH 7) 45434909 Supplemental

161-3 Photodegradation on Soil 45434910 Supplemental

162-1 Aerobic Soil Metabolism

Aerobic Soil Metabolism

45434911

45434912

Supplemental

Unacceptable

162-3 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism 45434913 Supplemental

162-4 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism 45434914 Supplemental

163-1 Adsorption/Desorption (Technical)

Adsorption/Desorption (Metabolite, R1)

Leaching in Unaged and Aged Soil Columns

45531902

45434907

45531903

Supplemental

Supplemental

Supplemental

164-1 Terrestrial Field Dissipation 45651601 Acceptable

165-4 Accumulation in Fish 45434923 Supplemental