Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemistry an d R es idu e Data DP Barcode 0423321 

### UN I TE D STATES EN VIRO N M EN TAL PROTE C TION AGENCY WASHINGTON , D C 20460 OFF I CE OF C H EM I CAL SA F E TY AND P O LL U TIO N PR EVEN TIO N


### MEMORANDUM DATE : 2 Se pte mb e r 2015 SUB J EC T: Acc t a miprid. Propo se d Lab e l Amendments for Use of Tw o End-Use Product s on Various Crops; Petition Proposing Label Ame ndments. and Revi sed Permanent Tolerances , for Use of the Insecticide on Clover with a D ecreased Pre

H arvest Interval (Reg ion al Registration). 

### S umm ary of 

### A nal y tical C h e mi s try a nd Re s idue Data. PC 

### Code: 099050 DP Bar co cl es : 0423321. 04261 1 5. 0 4261 1 7 Re g i s tratio n N umb e r s: 8033-23. 803 3 -36 R eg ulatory Action : Section 3 Decision Numbers: 494790
. 500022. 500044 Petition: 4E8307 Ri sk Assess m e n t T y p e: A TXR N umb e r : A C a se N umb e r : 76 1 7 CAS N um ber: 1354 1 0-20-7 40 C FR: § 180.578 MRID N umb ers : 4944380 I. 49443802 

### F R OM:

THRU: and

TO:
and**~** - William 

### T. Drew , Che mi st**W~ ~**  Risk Assessment Branch II (RAB2) Health Effects Di vision ( HED) , 7509P Douglas A. D otso n , PhD. Senior Chem ist 

## ,J. 

# J;t:i:nv RAB2 / HED. 7509 P Sarah Lev y . Chemist

# ~( [..v./ 

# H

# ~o\ 5 " r'lh 

## Le v 1 RABl/HEO , 7509P. C hem istry

## Se**enccfXi~sory** Counc il (ChemSAC) Katelynn King, Biologist 

# r WMv..11**\~** RAB7 / HED, 7509P, ChemSAC-

### r~ 

# . - 0 Barbara Madden and Sidney Jackson , RM Team 5 Minor Use and Emergency Response Branc h (MU 

### ERB) Re g istration Division (RD), 7505 P Venus Eagle and Jacquelyn Ma rchese. RM Team I l nvcrtebrate

- Vertebrate Branch 3 ( I VB3) RD, 7505P 

### Page I of"27Acctam iprid Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP Barcode 0423321 

### Tab l e of Contents 1.0 

### Executive Sumn1ary
. ..... .. ... .... ... .. .......... ................................................. .... ... . ..... .. ... .... ... .. .... 4 2.0 

### Regulatory Recommendations
. . .. ..... .. ... .. ...... .. .. .................................................................... 5 2.1 

### Data Deficiencies/ Data Needs
..... .. ... ..... .. ... .. ........................................................ ... ......... 6 2.2 

### Tolerance Considerations
. .. ...... . ... ... ..... .. .. ... ..... .. ... ... .... .. .. ............................... .. .... .. .......... 6 2.2.1 

### Enforceme nt Analytical Method/ Multi-Residue Methods
........................................ 6 2.2.2 

### Recommended Tolerances
.. ..... ... ......... ... .......... .. .......... .. .............................. .. .......... 7 2
. 2.3 

### Revisions to Petitioned-For Tolerances
. ..... .. ... .. ....................................................... 7 2.2.4 

### I nternational Harmon ization
..................................................................................... 7 2.3 

### Labe l Recomn1endations
.... . ...... .. .. .. ........... .. ........................................... .. ....................... 7 2.4 

### Submittal of /\nalytical Reference Standard s (860.1650)
............................................... 8 3.0 

### Chen1 ic al Identit y . ..... .. .. ...... . ... ..... . ............ . .... .. .................................................................... 8 3.1 

### No menc lature ...... . ... .. ..... .. ...... .. .. ..... ... .. ... ..... ... .. ......... ... .. ................................................. 9 3.2 3.3 4.0 4.1 

### Physicochemical Characteristics
...................................................................................... 9 P

est ic ide Use Pattern/ Directions for Use (860.1200)
.... ... ............................................. 10



## . Metabolite/ Oegradate Residue Profile
.. ................................................ .. ........................... 13 

### Nature of the Residue
..................................................................................................... 13 4.1.1 

### Summary of Pl ant and/ or Livestock Metabolism (860.1300)
................................. 14 4.1.2 

### Summary of Confined Rotational Crops (860.1850)
..... .. ........................................ 14 4.1.3 

### S umm ary of Rat Metabolism
............................................... .. .......... . ...................... 14 4 .1 .4 

### Summary of Environmental Degradation
......... .. .......... . ......................................... 15 5
. 0 

### Residue Profi le ................................................................................................................... 15 5. 1 

### Residue Analytical Methods (860.1340)
...................................................................... 15 5.1.1 

### Data Collection Methods
........................................................................................ 15 5.1.2 

### Multi-Residue Methods (860.1360)
........................................................................ 17 5.1.3 

### Tolerance Enforcement Methods
............................................................................ 17 5.2 

### Storage Stability (860. 1 380)
... .. ..................................................................................... 18 5.3 

### Residue Data
.................................................................................................................. 19 5.3.1 

### Crop Field Trials (860 .1 500)
.. .. .......... .. ........... . ...... .. .......... . ................................... 19 5.3.2 

### Field Rotational Crops (860.1900)
......................................................................... 20 5.3.3 

### Processed Food and reed (860 .1 520)
..................................................................... 20 Page 2of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemist ry and R es idu e Data DP Barcode 0423321 

### 5.3.4 M eat, 

### Milk. Po ultry and Eggs (860.1480)
.............................................................. 20 5
. 3.5
. 

### Food I f an dlin g (860. 1460)
.......................................................... .. .... .. .... .. .... .. ..... . .. 

### 22 5.3.6 

### Wa ter , Fish and Irri gate d Crops (860.1400)
................... . ........... .. ..... .. .... .. .... .. .... .. . 

### 22 5.4 

### Food Res idu e Profile
...... . .............................................................. . ..... .. .... .. .... .. .... .. ..... . . 22 6.0 

### Tolera nc e De ri va ti on . ............ ... ........................ .. ........... .. ... ... ... .... .... .. .... .. .... ... .... . ..... .. .... .. 22 7.0 C hen1 SAC Refere nc e ... . ..... .. ..... .. ...................................................................... . ..... ... ........ 23 

### References
. .... .. .... .. ..... .. .... .. .... .. ..... .. ..... .. .... ... .. ... .... .. .... ... ......... .... .. .... .. .. .... .. . .. .. . . .. .. .... .. .... .. .... .. ... . 23 

### Attachme nt I : Internationa l R esidue Limit Status
... .... .. ......... .... .. ..... .. ... .. ... .... .. .... .. .... .... .. ..... .. ... 25 Attach me nt 2: 

### OECD MRL (T olerance) Assessme nt Calculations
.............................................. 26



### P

age 3of27Acetamiprid S ummary of Analytica l Chemi s try and Re s idue Data DP Barcode D42332 I 1 .0 Exec u tive S umm ary J\cctamiprid (with CAS name ( I E)-N -[ ( 6-chloro-3-pyridin y l) m e th y l]- '

- cyan o - - methyl e thanimidamid e) is a se lec ti ve in secticid e inte nd e d for u se against vari ous sucki n g a nd c h ewi n g in sec t p ests th at feed upon fruit and vegeta bl e c rop s . It i s a member of th e c hl o r o nicotin y l ( ne o nic o tinoid) c lass of in sectic id es, which function b y bindin g to nicotinic acetylcho lin e receptors in the p os t- sy n a ptic neuron s of th e in sect's ce ntral nervous sys te m . This binding re s ult s in th e opening of ion p o r es , caus in g a s ub seq uent overload o f so dium io ns in the neurons w hich leads to ne r vo u s syste m h ype r- exc ita ti o n. and th e eventua l death o f the ins ec t. Acetam iprid is regi s tere d fo r u se on a vari e ty of crops. a nd permanent tolerances h ave been es tabli s h e d ranging from 0.0 10 ppm to 50 ppm in plant commodit ies (40 C FR § 18 0 .578[aj[l]). and from 0.010 ppm to 0.70 ppm in li vestock commodit ie s ( 40 CFR §180.578[a)[2])
. Th e re a r e a lso permanent tolerances (w ith re g ional r eg i st rati ons) es tabli s hed in clover forage a t 0.10 ppm. a nd clover hay a t 0.01 ppm (40C FR § 180 .578lc]). Th e r es idu e d efi niti o n for risk assess m ent and tole ran ce enfo r ce m e nt i s th e parent compound in plant co mm o diti es, and co mbin e d re s idu es of th e parent compound a nd Metabolite IM- 2 -1 in li vestock commoditie s (p lu s M e tab o lite IM-2

- 1-amid e in ruminant mu s cl e for ri s k a ssess ment purpo ses only). Acce ptabl e analytical met h ods a re ava ilabl e to e n fo rc e tolerances fo r res idue s of acetamiprid in plant a nd li vestock commod iti es. Int e rre g ion a l R esea rch Proj ec t #4 ( lR -4) h as submitted a petition (4E 8 307) requesting a n amended use p attern, a nd rev i sed tolerance s in c love r forage and h ay . for use o f the in sec ticid e acetamip rid o n clover grow n fo r seed in ID
. OR and WA only. The propo se d pre-harves t inte rva l ( PHI) i s 30 da ys for cl ov er , compared to the currently regi stered 

### PHI of 56 days. The e nd-us e product s (E Ps ) proposed fo r regio nal reg i s trati o n are Assai l 70WP In sectic id e (EPA Re g i st rat ion # 8033-23), a wettab le p owder ( WP ) formulation co nt a inin g 70 % o f th e active in gre di e nt (ai) by we ig ht , a nd Assail 30SG In sec ticide (E PA R eg i s tration # 8033-36) , a so lubl e granul e ( SG ) formulation containing 30% o f th e ai by we i g ht. IR-4 subm itte d field tri a l d ata fo r ace t am iprid on cl ove r g ro wn for seed in respo n se to a n Age nc y request for two additiona l c lover field trial s as confirn1atory data (0364 83 3; 

### D. Mc e ill y; 14 October 2009). In conjunction with th e p e titi on, IR-4 has proposed the revision of estab li s hed tol eran ces for res idu es of acetam iprid in o r o n clover forage (from 0.10 to 0.3 ppm) and clover hay (fro m 0.0 I to 1. 5 ppm). with r eg ional reg i s tration ( in 

### ID , OR and WA only). The proposed tol era n ce in clover forage i s suppot1ed a dequate l y by th e current s ubmitted field tri a l residue data , in conjunction with prev io u s ly submitted field tri a l data ( 0 364 8 33; 0. Mc e ill y: 14 October 2009). The current subm itted field tri a l res idu e d a ta s upp o rt the r eco mm e nded toleranc e in clover h ay of 2 .0 ppm . N ippon Soda Company Limited (ca re of i sso A m e ri ca In co rp orated) ha s a lso proposed multipl e labe l amendments ( 04 26 11 5 and 042 6 11 7) for re v ised u se p atte rn s of th e sam e acetamiprid E P s
Pa ge 4 o f 27Ace1amiprid Summ ary of Analytica l Ch emistry and R es idue Data DP Barcode 04 23321 

### (Assa il 70W P a nd Assa il 30SG) o n various crops. T hese amendmen t s do not require the revi si on of any ex ist ing acetamiprid tolerance s . Pending submissio n of a revised Sec tion F (to propose tol eran ces in clover forage and hay in accordance with HE D's recommendations). there are no res idue chemis try is s ues that would preclude increasing the establis h ed to le ran ces in cl over forage a nd h ay to the leve ls recommended by HED. The spec i fic residue che m istry find in gs are s ummari ze d below. Additiona ll y. H E D ha s no objectio n regard in g the proposed label amendments for r ev i sed us e patterns of th e ace tamiprid E Ps. Assai l 70WP and Assail 30SG. o n vari ous crops. 

### Crop field trials: Two pairs of fie ld trials we re conducted in the 

### US in No rth Ame ri can Free Trade Agree ment (NAFTA) Grow in g Zo ne 11 during the 20 1 0 (MRID #4 9443801) and 20 1 2 (M RID #49443802) g rowing seasons. H ED ha s determined that the 2010 trials, wh ich we re separated by less than 20 mile s , are rep li cate tri a ls. Fo ll ow in g a si ng l e fol iar broadcast appl ic atio n of the 30% SG formulation at 0.075 -0
. 080 pound s of ai per acre (lb ai/ A), re si due s of acetamiprid (and per-trial averages) were 0.0496 -0
. I 

### 69 (0.08 1 2 -0. I 

### 63) ppm and 0.200

- 0.763 (0.450-0
. 753) ppm in clove r forage and hay, re s pecti ve ly. harv este d at a PHI of27-32 days. Residue decline was not eva lu ated. 

### Pro cesse d food and f eed: There are no processed commod it ies associated with clo ve r forage and hay. 

### R es idu e analytical m et h ods and s torage s tabilit y: Validated methods a r e availabl e for th e enforcement of acetami prid tolerances. An adequate me thod was u se d for th e quantitation of acetamiprid residues in samp les from the c lover field trial s . ba se d on acceptable m et hod validat ion and concurrent recovery data. Adequate data a re available to s upp o rt sample s torage durations and conditions
. 

### Meat , milk, poultr y and eggs: The current action fo r the proposed PHI red uction (a nd increa se d tolerances in c love r forage a nd hay) fo llo wing u se on clover does not req uire r ev i sions to the existing tolerances in li ves tock commodities. 

### M RL '1arm o 11i zatio11: Codex ha s not estab li s h ed m axi mum r es idue limit s (M RL s) for aeetamiprid in c love r fo rage or hay. Canada's Pest Management Re g ulatory Agency ( PMRA ) does not estab li s h M R Ls in live s tock feed ite m s. Ergo, the re a re no iss ues with int e rnational harmonization that ne ed to be addressed.


### 2.0 Regulato1 1' Recommendations I-J E D h as examined th e re s idue c hemistry database for acecamiprid. Pending s ubmi ss ion of a re v ised Sectio n 

### F (to propose tole r ances in clover forage a nd hay in acco rd anc e w ith H ED's Page 5of27Acctamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP Barcode D.t2332 I
recommendat ions), th e r e are no residue c hemi s tr y is s ues that wou ld pre clude the es tabli s hment of th e r ecom m e nd ed tol era nce s . The r ecom m ended tolerances are listed in Table 2.2.2, below. H ED has no objection regardin g th e proposed l abel amendments for rev i sed u se pattern s of the acetamiprid E P s, Assail 70WP a nd Assa il 30SG, on various crops. Notes to RD: An erro r h as been id e ntifi e d w ith a comm o dit y deiiniti o n in th e e xi s tin g 40CFR e ntry for acetamiprid, which currently lists "'Vegetable, tuberous and co1m, group I '' under 40CFR § I 80.578ra][l). This listing s h ou ld be revised to read "Vegetable. tuberous and corm. subgroup IC'' when the tolerances for clover forage a nd hay a re revised
. The a n alytica l reference standard for acetamiprid metabolite IM-1-4 (having exp ired on l Ap ril 2015) is currently unavailable in E PA's Nat ional Pes ticide Standards Repo s ito r y (N P SR), per E m a il communication from Theresa Co le of th e Biological and Economic Ana lysis Di vision · s Ana lyt ic al C h e mi stry Branch (BEAD/ ACB) on 1June2015. RD s h ou ld n otify the re gistrant (Nisso Ame ri ca In corporated) r ega rdin g this l ac k of a r efe ren ce st andard fo r m e tab o lite IM-1-4 , a nd req ue s t th a t the re g i s trant provide a new reference standard, o r updated certificate of ana lysis (CO/\), as soon as possible. 2.1 D a t a D e fi c ie ncie s/Da ta Needs

one. 2.2 Tolerance Co n s id erati o n s 

### 2.2.1 E nforceme nt A n a lyt ic a l Method/Mu l ti-Residue Methods Approved tolerance enforcement methods for acetamiprid res idu es in crops are available. including gas c hromat og raph y with e lectron capture detection (GC / ECD) fo r vegetables and n o n- c itru s fruits, high performance liquid c hrom atography with ultraviolet detection ( HP LC/UV) for citrus fruits only, and HPLC wi th tandem m ass s p ectro m etric detection (LC / M S / MS) for vegetab les and n o n-citru s fruits ( D 394779; E
. ll o lman ; 6 March 20 1 2). Data concerning the recovery of res idu es of aceta miprid u s in g Food a nd Drug A dmini s trati o n (F D A) multi-res idue m e thod protocols from 

### Pesticide Analy ti cal Manual (PAM) Volume 1 were sub mitted in co njuncti o n wi th the or iginal acetami prid petition (PP# OF6082). Based on the results of the testing. the multi-residue methods are not appropria te for detern1ining acetamiprid residues of concern. BEAD/ AC B i s currently wo rking on a multi-residue method fo r the n co ni cot in o id s ( D 264 1 54; M . D oherty; 3 1 D ecembe r 200 l ).

Page 6 of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemistr y and R esidue D a

ta DP Barcode D-123321 

### 2.2.2 R ecomme nd ed Tolera nc es TABLE 2.2 .2 To le r a n ce S umma ry for Acetamiprid (40CFR**80.5781cl).**

Com m od ity Existing Propo se d R ecomm e nd e d Co rrect Comm odity Defi 11it io11; T o l eran ce (Dpm) To le ran ce ( ppm ) Tole r ance ( pp m)' Co mm e nts Clover
. fora ge 0
. 10 2 0.3 0.30 Based on current and previous clover field trial dat a submitted by I R-4. Clover. hay 0 .0 1 2 1. 5 2.0 Bas e d on current clover fi e ld trial data s ubmitt ed by IR-4. I. Tolerance level as recommended by HED
. 2. A tolerance is currently establis hed a t the li s ted tolerance level in th e corresponding commodity. The currently established tolerance expressions for acetamiprid (40CFR § 180.578) are adequate, a nd includ e both coverage and compliance s tat e ments for e nforc ement purposes. 

### 2.2.3 Revisio n s to Petitioned-For To lerances The submitted clover field trial data s upport a tolera nce of2.0 ppm , instead o f the proposed tolerance of 1. 5 ppm , in clover h ay. The petitioner used r es idues in clover h ay from all field trials to calculate the tolerance level (PH i s of 27-63 days). The draft labe ls s tipulate a PHI of 30 days (decreased from 56 days on th e current lab els). Therefore, only residues from those trial s w here hay was collected at PH l s of 2 7- 32 day s were u se d to calculate the tolerance ; residu es from those trials where hay was co llected at PH l s of 50-63 da ys were not u se d. HED utili zed residue data for hay co ll ected at P Hi s of 27-32 as the input dataset 

### for th e Organi z ation for E

conomic Cooperation and Development (OECD) tolerance calc ulation procedure , y ielding a different res ult (2.0 ppm ). In clover forage, the recommended toleranc e l evel include s an additional sign ifi c ant figure (0.30 ppm rather than 0.3 ppm). This is in order to avoid the situation where round in g of a re s idu e result to the level o f precision of the tolerance expression would be considered non-violative (such as 0.34 ppm being rounded to 0.3 ppm). 

### 2 .2 .4 International Harmonizati o n Codex has not estab li shed 

### MRLs for acetamiprid in cl over fo rage or hay. Canada's 

### PMRA does not estab li sh MRLs in li ves to ck reed ite m s. E rgo, there are no i ssues with internati o nal harmoni zation that ne e d to b e addressed. 

### 2.3 Labe l Recommendat ion s No n e.



### Page 7o f 27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP Barcode 0423321 2.4 S ubmitta l of A n a lytical Reference Sta ndard s (86 0.16 50) The analytical reference standard for parent acetamiprid (exp iration date of2 October 2016) is currently available in EPA "s NPSR, per Email communication from Theresa Cole of BEAD/ A C B on I June 20 1 5. The registrant i s required to maintain reasonable amounts of the reference standards for acetamiprid and it s m e tabolite IM-2-1 in th e NPSR as long as tolerances remain pub li s hed in 40CFR 

### § 180.578
. When ne cessary, new reference standards. or updated COAs, should be sent to the AC B , which is located at Fort Meade. MD. They s h ould be se nt to the attention of either Theresa Co le or Thuy guyen at the address listed below. along with a letter of transmittal. Plea se note that th e full 9-d i g i t ZIP Code is requir e d , or the mail w ill be re turned to the registrant. USE PA Na tional P esticide Sta nd ards R eposito ry A na lyti ca l C h e mi stry Branch/ B EAD/O PP 70 1 Mapes Road Fort Geo r ge G. Meade , MD 20755-5350 The letter of transmittal s hould include the assay of the s tandard , name of the analytical meth od used, a stateme nt of principal impuritie s, purification procedure s employed, storage require m e nt s. and specia l precautions for safe handling. Replac eme nt of standards
. or updated CO As, may be r equ ired periodicall y if supp li es are exhausted , if the sta nd ards expire. or if decomposition occurs during storage. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) must accompany all analytical standards as spec ifi ed by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in 29CFR 

### § 1910.1200. In ad dition to the parent compound, various acctamiprid metabolites are cun-ent l y available in th e NPSR, as li sted below with their respective expiration dates. Acetamiprid metabolite IC-0: 18 September 2023. Acetamiprid metabolite IM-1-2: 14 April 2024. Acetamiprid metabolite IM-1-4: I Apr il 20 15 (**Expired**). Acetamiprid m e tabolite IM- 2- 1: 14 Ap ril 2020. Acetamiprid m etabolite lM- 2

- 2: 6 December 2024.
3.0 C he mic a l Id entity Acetamiprid is a se lective insecticide intended for use against various sucking and chewing insect pests that feed upon fruit and vegetab le crops. It i s a member of the chloronicot in yl (neonicotinoid) class of insecticides, which function by binding to nicotini c acetylcholine receptors in the post-synaptic neurons of the insect 's central nervous system . T hi s binding r esu lt s in the opening of ion pores, causing a s ub seque nt overload or sodium ions in the neurons wh ich leads to nervous system hyper-excitation, and the eventual death of the ins ect. The chemical structu re and nomenclature of acctamiprid are listed in Tabl e 3. 1 , and its physicochem ical properties arc presented in Tabl e 3.2 (below). Page 8of27Acetami pri d Su mm ary of An alyti cal Che mi s try and Re s idu e Data DP B arcode D 42332 I


### 3 .1 N omenclature TABLE 3. 1 Acetam iprid No me nc l ature . Che mi ca l S tru ctu r e

# Cl~ I**~** CH
. 

## I**~** N ,,,,.;;;. N l( Cl
... 1 1 N 'cN C ommo n Name Ace ta miprid Molecular Formu la**Cio 11** **CIN ~**  Molecular W e i

g ht 222.68 C ompan y Experimental Name EX P- 6 I 842A , AEF 1 24370
. NI-25 IUPAC Name (£) -. N 1 -[ (6-chloro-3- p yridy l)meth y l]- N 1

- c ya n o- N 1 -methylacetamid in e C AS Name ( I£)

-N-[ (6-c hloro -3- pyr idin y l) methyl]-N'

- cy a no-N

- meth y lcthanimidamide C AS Regi s try Number 1354 1 0

-20-7 E

nd-u se Products (EPs) Assail 70WP (70% WP: E P

A R eg istration # 8033-23) Assai l 30SG (30% SG: EPA R eg i s tration # 8033-36) 

### 3.2 Ph ys icoc he mic a l C ha rac te ri s tic s TABLE3.2 Phvs icoc hemica l P ro perties of Technica l-G rad e Aceta miprid. Param e te r V a lu e Refe ren ce Melting Po in t/Ra nge ( ° C) 98.9 D328216: W.T. D rew: 23 October2007 pH 6.08 (A que o us so luti on at 20 ° C) Den s ity (g/ cm ' ) 1.33 (at 20 ° C) Water So lubilit y ( g/ L) 4.25 (at 25 ° C) Solve nt So lubility (at 25 ° C) Acetone > 20 g/ 100 g Me th anol > 20 g/ 1 00 g Ethanol > 20 g/ 100 g Di c hl oro methan e > 20g/ 1 00g Chloroform > 20 g/ 100 g Aceto nitrile > 20 g/ 1 00g Te trahyd r ofuran > 20g/ 100 g Benzene 2.44 g/ 100 g Xylene 4.01 g/ I OOg n-1 lexane 6.54 ppm Carb on disulfide 507 ppm Vapor Pre ss ure (mm H g) 7.5 X 1 0· 9 (at 25 ° C) D264 I 54 : M
. Do herty: 31 D ece mb e r 2001 Di s soc iation Co nsta nt. pK a 0.7 (at 25 ° C) D32 82 16: W.T. Drew: 23 October2007 Octan o l /Water Partition 0.8 (at 25 °C ) C oefficient. Log K o w UV N isiblc Ab s orp tion Spec trum Not ava ilab l e

Page 9 of27Acetamiprid S ummary of Ana ly ti ca l Chem is try a nd R es idu e Data DP Barcode D42332 I Acetamiprid i s a so l id under amb i e nt conditions, and has a low vo latili ty. The compou nd has a relati ve ly l ow solubility in water, and low to hi gh so lubility in var io u s o rgani c so lve nt s . It s octanol/water partition coef fici e nt s ug ges t s that accumulation of acetamiprid in fatty tissu es i s un l ikel y. 

### 3 .3 Pesticid e U s e Patte rn/Directi o n s for Use (8 6 0.12 00) IR- 4 ha s pro po sed a n ame nd ed use pattern, and revised tol erances in clover forage and hay. for fo li ar broadcast use of the insecticide acetam ip ri d o n c l over grown fo r seed in ID
. O R and WA o nl y. The proposed PH I is 30 day s fo r c l over , co mpared to the c urre ntl y reg iste r ed Pl ll of 56 day s . The E P s proposed fo r r eg ional reg i s trati o n are Assa il 70WP In sect ic id e (E PA R eg ist ration # 8033-23), a WP fo rmul at ion contai nin g 70 % of the ai by weight, and Assail 30SG In sec ticid e (E PA Regi stration # 8033

- 36), an SG formu lation co ntaining 30% of the ai by weig ht. Exa mpl es of the proposed labels were provided , a nd th e proposed u se d irec ti o n s th e re in are su mm arized in Tab l e 3.3. 1 , b e low. is so A m erica ha s also proposed multiple lab e l ame ndm e nts fo r revised u se patterns of th e same acetam iprid EP s (Assa il 70WP a nd Assa i l 3 0 SG) o n various cro p s. Th e requested revisions in c rease s i n g le ( but not seaso n a l ) u se ra tes, a dd pe s t s, and make additional minor changes to the EP lab e ls. These label revi s i ons do not change the amount of a i app li ed per acre per crop, and no revisions to to l erances were proposed by the registrant. Examp le s of the proposed labe l s were prov id ed, a nd th e prop osed u se pattern r ev is ion s therein are summarized in T able 3.3.2, below
. T A BLE 3
. 3. l S ummar y of Pro p osed Labe l Dir ect io n s fo r Use o f A ceta miprid o n C love r . Ap pli cat i o n U s e R ate M ax. Uses M a ximum PHl 2 U se Dir ec ti o n s a nd Limitati on s Timin g; T yp e; (lb ai/A) pe r Sea s o n Sea s o n a l Use (D a ys)

Eq ui p me nt • Ra t e (l b ai/A) Ass ail 7 0WP Po s t-emergence; 0.05- I J 0.075 30 Minimum spray volume of 5**GPA~** by foliar broadcast: 0.075 a ir , o r 20 GPA by gro und. Begin g round
. ae rial applications when treatment thre shold s have been reached. Thorough coverage is imp ortant to obtain optimum control. Assa il 30SG Po st-emergence; 0.047- ]l 0.075 30 Minimum spray vo lume of5 GPA by foliar broadcast; 0.075 air , or 20 GPA by ground
. Begin g ro und , aerial applications when treatment thre s holds have been reached. Th oro ugh coverage is important to obtain optimum control. I. Not to be applied via chemigat ion. 2. PH I = Pre-Harvest I nterval. 3. Impli ed; mo re than 1 application at the minimum s in gle use rate would exceed the maximum seasonal use rate. 4. GPA

- Gallons Per Acre
.

Page 10 of27Acetamiprid Summary of A n a lytica l Chemis try and Resid ue Data DP Barcode 0423321 

### Co nclusions : 

### T he use directions for application to clover are sufficient to allow for eval uation of the sub mitted r es idue data r e lative to the propose d use pattern. TABLE 3
. 3. 2 Summary of Propo s ed Am e ndm e nts to Labe l Dir ection s for Us e of Acetamiprid
. C rop P es t C urrent Pro p os ed Am e ndm e nts to Us e Di r e c tion s a nd U se R a te Use Rat e Limitati o n s (lb a i/ A) ( l b ai/ A) A ssa il 7 0WP ( EPA R e gi s t r ation # 8033- 23 ) Cotton Whitefly 0.075- 0.075- To "Do not make more than 4 applications per 0.10 0.15 season: · add "o r more than 2 applications p er seaso n if 2 applications of the hi ghest labe led rate is applied for both applications." Leafy Aphid 0.035

- 0.035- To "Do not make more than 5 applications per Vegetables 0.075 0. 10 season . " add "or more tha n 3 applications per (wi thin Crop Whitefly 0.05- 0.05-0.10 seaso n if 3 applications of th e highest labeled rate Gro up 4) 0.075 is applied for all 3 applications:· I lead and Stem NA 1 NA NA C han g e " I lead and Stem Cole Crops (w ithin Co le Crops Crop Subgroup 5A)'" to "Head and Stem Brassica (w ithin C rop (w ithin Crop Subgroup 5A)." Subgroup SA) Leafy Co le NA NA A C han ge "Leafy Cole Crops (w ithin Crop Crops (wi thin Subgroup 5 8)" to "Leafy Bra ssica (wi thin C rop Crop Subgroup Subgroup S B)." ' 58) Fruiting Lea fhoppcr 2 NA 0.05- Add "Begin application s when treatment Vegetables 0.075 threshol d s have been reached
. Thorou g h (within Cro p coverage is important to obtain optimum Group 8

- 10) control:· to the u se directions fo r the new targe t pest. lea fh o pp er. Citrus (withi n Asian Citrus Psy llid NA NA Add "(s uoo re ss ion)" not e to this target pest. Crop Group I 0- App le Maggot. Plum Re move "(su ppres s ion)" not e from the se target JO) Curculio. San Jose pests. Scale Grapes (within A 11 t arget pests A A Re mo ve ··For ASSAIL WSP Insecticid e Only ( I Crop Sub- to 2 p ac ket s) " from dosage per acre. C han ge Group I 3-07F) ··WSP" to "7 0WP" in mealybugs use directions. Re move ··Do not use adjuvants.· · from re s triction s. Cucurbits Whitefly 0.05-0.10 0.05-0.15 To ' ·D o not make more than 5 applications per (wit hin C rop season:· add "or more th an 3 applicati ons per Group 9) seaso n if 3 applica tions of the h i ghest l abeled rate is applied for all 3 applications:· To · ·oo no t apply less than 0 da ys b efo r e harv es t (PHI = O days):· add ··with application rate of2.3 oil A or less." Add " D o not app ly less than 5 days before harve s t (PH1 = 5 davs) with app lication rate of3.5 o iJ A:· to restrictions.

Page 11 of 27Acetamiprid S ummary of Analytical C he mi s t ry and Re s idu e Data DP Barcode D42332 l TABLE 3.3.2 Summa ry o f Proposed Ame n dments to Labe l Dir ectio ns for Use of Acetamipri d
. C r o p Pest C urrent Propo sed Amendments to Use Dir ec ti o n s and Use Rate Use Rate Limi tati o n s (1b ai/A) (lb ai/A) Legume Colo rado Potato NA 0
.044- Add " Co l o rado Potato Beetle: Use hi g her rates Vegetables Bectl e2 0.10 when population s are hi g h. dense foliage ex is ts. (w ithin Cro p or when large larvae or adu lt s ar e pre se nt. Sub-Groups 6A Thorough coverage is important to obtain and 68) optimum con trol. " to use dir ec ti ons. Berries (w ithin EAST o f R oc ky NA 0.085- Add "Spotted Win ge d Dro so phila (larvae): Be g in Crop Sub- M o unt a in s O nl y. 0.10 applications when a dult s arc prese nt and fruit i s Groups 13

-07 A Spo iled Winged ripening or already rip e. It is re co mmend ed to and 13-078 ) Dro so phila ( larvae ) 2 tankmix w ith a n aduhicide. " to u se directi ons. Assa il 30SG (E PA Regi s tr atio n #8033-36) Co tt o n Whitefly 0.075- 0.075- To " Do not make more t han 4 applications per 0
. 10 0
. 15 s ea so n. " add ··or mor e than 2 application s pe r seaso n if 2 applica tion s o f th e hi g he s t lab e led rate is aoo li ed for both applicati ons." Leaf y Aphid 0.038- 0.038- To ··Do not make more than 5 applications per Vegetables 0.075 0.10 seaso n. " add "or more than 3 applications per (wi thin Crop Whitefl y 0.0 5 6- 0
.056- s ea so n if 3 appl ication s of th e hi g he s t lab e led rate Group 4) 0.075 0.10 is applied for all 3 applicati ons." H

ead and Stem NA NA NA C han ge " I lead and Stem Co l e Crops ( within Co l e Crops Crop Subg roup 5A)'" to "H ea d and Stem Brassica (withi n C rop (w ithin Crop ub gro up 5A).'' Subgroup 5A) Leaf y Co le NA NA NA C han g e · 'Leafy Cole Crops (wi thin Crop Crops ( within Subgroup 58)" t o "Leafy Brassica ( within Crop Crop Subgroup S ub g roup 58) .'' 58) Fruiting Le afho pper A 0.047- Add " Be g in applications when treatmen t V

ege table s 0.075 thre s hold s have been reached. T hor o ugh (within Cro p coverage is important to obtain op timum Group 8-10 ) control." to the use directions for th e new targe t pest, leafhopp e r. C itru s ( within Asian C itru s Ps y llid NA NA Add "(suppression)" no te t o thi s targe t pe s t. Crop Gro up I 0

- I 0) Grapes (wi thin AII target pests NA NA Remove "Do not use adjuvan ts." from Crop Sub- restriction s. Gr oup I 3 -0 7F) C ucu rbit s Whitefl y 0 .04 7- 0
. 047- To "Do not make more than 5 applications p er (wi thin C rop 0.10 0.15 seaso n , " acid ··or more th an 3 applications per Group 9) seaso n if 3 applications of th e hi g he s t lab e l ed rate is applied for all 3 applications." T o "Do not appl y less than 0 days before harvest ( PH I 0 day s), " add ··with application rate of 5 .3 ovA or le ss: · Add "Do not apply less th an 5 days before har ves t ( PH1 = 5 d avs) wi th application rate of8
.0 ovA.'. to re s trictions. Page 12 of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Re s idue Data DP Barcode 0423321 TABLE3.3.2 Summary of Propo sed Ame ndments to Labe l Di r ections for Use of Acetamiprid. Crop Pest C urrent Pro p osed Amendments to Use Direction s and Use R ate Use Rat e Limitations ( l

b ai/A) ( lb ai/A) Legume Colorado Potato NA 0.047

- Add "Co lorado Potaro Beetle: Use higher rares Vegetables Beerle 2 0.10 when populations are high. dense foliage exists. (within Crop or when large larvae or adults are present. Sub-Groups 6A Thorou g h coverage is important to obtain and 6B optimum con trol." to use directions. Berrie s (within EAST o f R oc k y NA 0.085- Add "Sponed Winged Drosophila ( larvae): Begin Crop Sub- Mountains On ly. 0.10 app lic ations when adults are present and fruir is Groups 13-07A Sponed Winged ripening or already ripe. Ir is recommended to and I 3-07B) Drosophila (larvae) 2 rankmix with an adulticide.'" to use directions. I. NA = Not Applicable. 2. New pcsr added to the list of target pests. 

### Conclusions: HED has no objection regarding the proposed amendments to the labels· use direc tions.


### 4.0 Metabo lite/ De gra date Residue Profile 4.J Na ture of the Re s idue Residue C hem ist r y S ummary Docu ment 0264 1 54; M. Doherty; 3 1 December 2001 Re s idue C he mi st r y Sum mary Document 0328216; W.T. Drew; 23 October 2007 Radiolabeled metabolism stud ie s are ava i !abl e for canot, cabbage. cotton. apple, eggplant lactating goat, laying hen , and rat. In plants , there appears to be little translocation of acetamip rid following foliar app lic at ion. In cabbage. there was uptake and translocation of acetamiprid to the above-ground po 1 1ions of the plant follow ing a so il app licati on. Du e to the rapid dissipation of acetamiprid in the field , root uptake is not cons idered to be a I ike ly so urce of re s idue s in plants. Parent acctamiprid is the predominant residue , at >90% of total radioactive residues (TRR) in three of the five metabolism st udi es. Confined rota tional crop studi es showed no residues of acetamiprid at the 30-day plant-back interval (PB I ). Acctamiprid and metabolite IM- 2- 1 a re the major residues in a ll ruminant tissues except muscle. where IM-2- l-amide accounts for nearly 50% of the TRR. IM- 2- 1-amide was not fo und in a ny other ruminant tissue. Metabolite IM-2-1 is the major residue in poultr y ti ss ue s and eggs (50

- 80% TRR). lM -2-5 is also a major residue in eggs (a t roughly 20% TRR). Parent acetamiprid
" ·as not detected in poultry tissues or eggs. The metaboli s m of acetamiprid in lactatin g goat was similar to the profile observed in laying hen and rat. T he initial transformation appears to be demethylation of th e parent co mpound. Th e mo s t abundant metabolite identified (in both sexes) resulted from the removal of the cyanoacetam ide g roup from demethylated parent. This remov a l (and direct removal of the group from the parent) resulted in cyan oacetamide metabolites.
Page 13 of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical C hemistry and Re s idue Data DP Barcode 0423321 

### Co nclusions: Th e nature of the residue for acetamiprid is considered to be adequately und e rstood for target crops, rotat ional crops. and li vestock. 

### 4.1. l S u m mary of P l ant a nd/ or Livestock Metabo li sm (860
. 1300) MA R C De c i s io n M e m o D 278652; M. Do he rt y; 13 Novemb e r 200 1 Data have been subm itted and rev iewed depicting the metabolism of acetamiprid in livestock and numerous crops , and its degradation in the e nvironment. HED has determined the residues of concern ( ROCs ) plants and li vestock for purposes of tolerance e nforcement and risk assessment (see Table 4. l .1, below)
. TABL E 4
. 1. 1 S umm a r y of Ace t a mi prid M etabo lites a n d D eg r a d ates to b e in clu d e d in the Ri s k As sess me n t an d To l era n ce Exoression. Matri x R es idu es In clud e d in Ri s k A ss ess m e nt R es idu es In c lud e d in Tolerance Exp r essio n Plants Primary Crop Acctamiprid Ac ctamiprid Rotational Crop NA * None at this time Livestock Ruminant Acetamiprid + IM- 2

- 1 + IM-2-1 -amide (muscle only) Acctamiprid + IM-2-1 Poultry Acetamiprid and IM- 2- 1 Acetamiprid + IM-2-1 Drinkin g Water Acctamiprid NA • NA = Not Applicable
. 

### Concl usions : The nature of the residue in plants and livestock has been adequately delineated.



### - U.2 S umm ary o f Co nfined Rotationa l C rop s (8 60 .1 850) R es idu e C hemi s try S u m m a r y Doc u m e nt 0 3282 16 ; W.T
. Dr ew; 23 October 2007 The available confined rotational crop data indicate that no field rotational crop stud i es or lab el restrictions for rotational crops are required to s upport the proposed use. 

### 4.1.3 S ummar y of Rat M e t a bo l is m Ri s k Assess m e nt Document 0 394322 ; E
. Holm a n ; 19 A pril 2012 ( P P# l E79 1 9) Several studies hav e examined the 

### in vivo metabolism and distribution of acetamiprid in th e rat. includ in g single dose, 15-day repeated dose, biliar y excretion , and metabolite characte ri zat ion s tudies. Acetamiprid is rapidly absorbed and eliminated. Metaboli s m s tudies indicate 

### 96

- 99% absorption following an oral administration. Peak blood concentrations in th e rat occur within 

### 1-2 hours , with nearly complete clearance from the blood by 

### 48 hours. Acetamiprid distributes widely in the body, but ti ss ue burdens rare ly exceed 1 % of the administered dose. Acetamip ri d i s exte nsi ve ly metabolized, with metabolites accounting for 

### 79-86% of the adm ini ste r ed radioactivity. 6-Chloron icotinic acid is the m ost abundant metabolite, accounting for 

### 24 -28 % of the dose in s ingle-dose s tudies , and 

### 8-10 % in repeated-dos e studies. Urinary excretion was the 

### Page 14 of27Ace tam iprid Summary of Analytical Chemi s rry and Residue Data DP Barcode 0423321 major route of elimination. accounting for 79-97% of the administered dose w ithin 24 h o urs in single oral do se groups. Fecal excre ti on accounted for 2 1- 35% of the administered radioactivit y, w ith excret ion i n mal es being slightly higher. Excretion rat es for the 

### IV and repeated dose stu di es were si milar. Biliar y excretion did not vary between genders and, by 48 hours , a ccounted for about 19 % of the admin is tere d radioactivity
. As a result of the rapid absorption, me taboli s m , and clearance of acetamiprid in the rat , the pharmacokinetic parameters derived from th e 15-day repeated dose s tud y were s imilar to those derived from the s in gle dose s tud y . The refore, the potential for acetam ipri d to bioaccumulate is minimal. 

### 4 .1. 4 S umma ry of E nvironm e ntal Degra dati on EFED Memo ; 0423299 ; K. White ; 25 March 20 1 5 J\cetamiprid may be transported to su rfa ce water and ground wa te r v ia runoff, leac hing a nd spray dri ft. J\cetamiprid is classified as moderately mobile u s in g th e Food a nd Ag riculture Organization 

### (FA O) classification system (Koes 

## = 157 to 298 L/kg OC). The primary route of degradation i s aerobic so il m et ab o li s m. U nex tracted re s idue s made up a significant amount of r ad io ac tivity. and th e identity of the residue s was unkno w n in m e tab o li s m s tudi es . Therefore, degradation rates were estimated both for th e pare nt a lone and ass umin g that un e xtrac ted residues were the parent. Aerobic soil metaboli s m rates for the parent ranged from < I day to six days for the parent, an d 2 to 99 days for the parent plus une x tra c ted residue s in nine s oil s. Aerob ic a quatic metaboli s m rate s were s lowe r at 23 to 32 d ays fo r the parent alone. a nd 38 to 74 days for parent plus unextracted res idu es in three sediments. Anaerobic aquatic metabolism was much slower , wi th a half-life of 325 days in a loamy sand sedime nt. Acetam iprid is s table to hydrolysis at 25 ° C , but d oes und e rgo aqueous ph oto l ys i s ( h a lf-life = 34 days). Based on th e low oc tan o l-water partition coefficient (log K o w 

## = 0.08 a t 25 ° C), acc tan1iprid is not expected to bioconcen tratc . 

### 5.0 Residue Profile 5
. 1 Residue A n a lyti ca l Method s (860 .1 340) 5.1.1 Data Co ll ec tion Method s M RID s #49.t4380 I a nd .t9443802 (Clover field tria ls) C love r forage and h ay samp l es we re a n alyzed for re s idu es of acetamiprid u s ing a n LC/ MS / MS method w ith min o r m o dification s, ba se d on the Cerexagri M e thod 

### #KP- 2 I 6R I , titled 

### Preliminmy LC /

MS /

MS Anal y ti cal Method for De1erminalion of Assa ilTM 7 0WP Ins ec ti c id e (Ace ta mi prid ) in Crop Matrices. A complete de sc ription of the method, including a li st of minor modifications, was includ e d in the sub mi ss ion. Modifications included the e limination of a solid-pha s e extraction c le a n-up s tep , a nd c hanges to the LC/ MS / MS sys tem. 

### Page 15 of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP Barcode 0423321
Briefl y, sa mple s were extracted u s in g methanol/water (1: I, 

### v/ v), and vacuum filtered. The extract was diluted with methanol/ water (I :1 , v / v), and the vo lume of the final extract was adjusted to be within the calibration range for LC/ MS/MS ana lys is. The limit of quantitation (LOQ), determined as the lowest limit of method validation (LLMV) , was 0.010 ppm. l t was noted that the regi strant a lso presented calculated values for the limit of detection (LO O ) and LOQ, based on the recoveries obtained from samp les fortified with acetamiprid at 0.010 ppm. The LOO was calcu l ated by multipl ying the sta ndard deviation of recovery measurements at the LLMY by the o ne-tailed t- s tati s ti c (co nfiden ce level not reported) for 6 to 8 r ep lic ates, and th e LOQ was defined as 3X the LOO. The calculated LODs and LOQs were. respectively, 0
. 0023 a nd 0
. 0069 ppm in clover forage, and 0.0012 and 0.0035 ppm in clover hay from the 2010 trials. They we re, respectively. 0.0025 and 0.0075 ppm in forage , and 0.0035 and 0.0104 ppm in hay from the 2012 trials. Method per fo1mance was eva luated durin g m eth od validat ion, and by use of concurrent recovery samp les run with sample sets . For method validation. samples of untreated forage and hay were fortified with acetamiprid at 0.0 I 0, 0.100 and 1.00 ppm. For concurrent recovery, sa mpl es of forage and hay were fortified at 0.0 I 0-0.200 and 0.010-1.00 ppm, respectively. Recoveries were within the generally recognized acceptable r a ng e of 70

- 120%, except for a concurrent recovery from forage of 67%. Therefore, the method was considered valid for the analysis of acetamiprid residues in c love r matrices. The fort ifi cation levels bracketed the measured residues. Concurrent recoveries were not corrected for apparent residues in controls. The detector response was r epo rt ed to be lin ear . Coeffic ie nt s of determination 

### (r2) were**0.9956** within th e range of0.050- 1. 00 ng / mL from the 20 1 0 study, and**0.9993** within the range of 0.050-2
. 00 ng/ mL from the 2012 study. Representative chromatograms of control , fortified and treated samples were provided. The co nt ro l c hromat ograms ge nerall y had no peaks of interest above the chromatographic background. The fortified samp l e clu-omatog rams con tained on l y the analyte of interest, a nd peaks were sym m etr ical and well defined. Residues in controls were below the LOQ ( < 0.010 ppm). The reported residue va lu es were not corrected for apparent residues in controls. Method validation and co ncu rr en t recovery res ult s are summar ized in Table 5.1.1, below. TABLE 5.1.l S u mm a r y of M e t h o d Va li d a ti o n and Proce dural/Co n c u rre nt R ecoveries of Acetamiprid from Clover Fora2e a nd Ha y . Matr ix Study Forti ficati o n L eve l (pp m) Samp le Size (n) Recoverie s'(%) Mean ± Std. Dev . (%) Meth o d Va l idati o n Forage 2012 0
. 010-1.00 9 77-96 89 ± 6.7 Hay 2010 1.00 3 81-83 82 ± 1.0 2012 0.010- 1. 00 9 84-100 93 ± 5.3



### P

age 16of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemist ry and Res idu e Data DP Barcode 0 42332 1 TABL E 5.1.1 S ummar y of Method Va lid ation and Proced ura l / Co ncurr e nt R ecove rie s of Aceta miprid fro m C l ove r Fora2e and Hay
. Matrix Stud y Fortification Leve l (p pm ) Samp le S ize ( n ) Recoveries 1 (%) M ea n ± St d
. Dev.(%) Co n c urr e nt Reco v erv 1 Forage 20 10 0.0 1 0 6 71-88 80 :l: 6.9 20 12 0.0 1 0

-0. 200 4 67: 82- 101 86 ± 15 Hay 20 10 0.0 1 0 6 73-82 78 ± 3
. 7 20 12 0.010

- 1 .00 4 72- 1 00 82 ± 13 1. Concu rrent recove ri e s were no t corrected fo r ap pare nt res idu es in co ntro ls . 2. Fo r concurrent recovery . a ll values are th e mean of duplicate analy s es. 

### Conclusions: A d e quate m e thod va lidati o n a nd concu rre nt r ecovery data h ave been s ubmitte d fo r the LC / MS / MS method used for the de term ination of ace t arniprid res idue s in clover forage a nd hay. No add iti o nal dat a ar e r eq uired in s uppo rt of thi s dat a co ll ection meth o d. w hi c h i s a lso the tol e ran ce enforce m e nt method fo r res idu es in vege ta b les a nd non-citru s fru its. 

### 5.1.2 Multi-Residue Method s (860.136 0) Re s idu e C hemi s tr y S ummar y Doc um en t D264 1 54; M
. Do h e rt y; 3 1 Dece m ber 20 0 1 D ata co nc e rnin g the r ecovery of res idu es of ace tamiprid u s ing FDA multi-res idue meth o d pro tocols 

### (PAAlf Volume I) were s ubmitted in conjunctio n w i th the o ri g inal acetamiprid petit ion 

### ( PP #OF608 2). B ase d on th e results of th e te s tin g. the multi-res idu e m e th ods are n o t appropriate for determin in g acetam iprid residue s of co nc e rn. BEA D/ ACB i s cu rrent ly work in g o n a multiresidue m e thod fo r the neonicotinoids. 

### 5.1.3 To le ran ce E nforce ment Method s Re s id ue C h e mi s tr y S u m m ar y Doc um e nt 0 39 477 9; E. H o lm an ; 6 Mar c h 20 1 2 Adeq u ate res idu e a n alyt ica l method s (GC / ECD a nd I IP L C/ U Y ) are avai labl e for the e n fo rc ement of es t ab li s h e d tolerance s on plant commodities
. T h e method LOQs are 

### 0.0 I 

### 0 ppm in vege tabl es and n o n-citru s fruit s ( GC / EC D )
. and 0.05 ppm in citrus fru it s ( HP LC / UV)
. These method s h ave undergo n e s u ccessfu l petition method va lid at io n ( PMY ) tri a ls . 

### ln PP# 4F683 3
. isso Ame rica proposed that th e LC/MS/MS method utili zed fo r data co ll ec ti on and confi rm a tory ana lys i s (Me th o d 

### #KP- 2 I 

### 6RO o r it s modific a ti on , Method 

### #KP- 2 I 

### 6RI) be designated a n a lt ernative to the es tabli s h ed GC / ECD tolerance e n fo rc emen t method. With submi ss ion of acceptable independent laboratory validation ( I LY) data , and the ability to analyze two dau g hter io n s spec ifi c to acetamiprid , th e LC / MS / MS m e th od was dete rmined to be s uitabl e fo r tolerance e nforc e m e nt and confirmatory anal ys i s of v ege table s and non-citru s fruit s . A su mmary of the ava ilable m e th ods i s prese nted in Table 5.1.3 ( bel ow)
.

Page I 7 o f 27Acetamip ri d Summary of Ana l ytica l Chemistry a nd Re s idue Data DP Barcode D42332 I TABLE 5.l.3 S umm ary of Va l idate d Ana lyti cal Method s for Acetamiprid
. Target Matrices M e t h o d De sc ripti o n LOQ Met h od Val i d ation ( ppm ) Fo rt i fi catio n Recovery Level s (pp m ) R a n 2e (%) Vegetables and Methanol ex traction , residues partitioned into 0.010 0.0 I0, 0.020 72-80 Non

-C itru s Fruits dichlorometh anc. Florisil/ s ilica ge l co lumn c lean up , and LC/ MS/ MS determi n ati on. Vegetables and Methanol ex tra c tion
. residues partitioned into 0.0 10 0.0 I0, 0.050 68-112 Non-Citrus Fruit s dich lo ro me th a ne. Florisil/ s ilica ge l col umn cleanup. and GC/ ECD d e termination. Ci tru s Fruits Acetonitri l e ex tr ac ti o n , co-ex trac tiv es 0.050 0.050. 0.250 77-100 partitioned into hex ane , residues partitioned into dich loro methane, Floris il/ C1g co lumn c lean up , and H PLC / UV detem1ination. An approved I l PL C/U V to lera nc e e nforc e m e nt meth o d fo r liv es toc k matrices is available. The LOQ i s 0.0 I 0 ppm in meat , fat , milk a nd eggs , a nd 0.050 ppm in liver and kidney. 

### 5.2 S t o r age Sta bili ty (86 0
. 1380) MR ID s # 494.&3801 and 49443802 (C love r fie l d t ri a ls) A ll sa mpl es were maintain e d froze n at the tes tin g faci l iti es, durin g s hippin g, a nd were stored frozen at th e ana lytical lab orato ry until analysis. Sam pl es of clo ve r forage a n d ha y were stored for maximum duration s of 5 1 9 and 5 1 6 days (17. 1 and 17.0 months) , r es p ect ive ly, from h a rvest to ex tractio n . Sa mpl es we r e ana lyze d within I d ay of extraction. To s upp o rt the sampl e storage durati o n s, a concurrent s tora ge s tability s tud y was conducted a long with the field trial s tud y . The r es ult s are presented in T ables 5.2. 1 and 5.2.2, below. The data demonstrate that r es idu es of acetam iprid we r e s tabl e in fortified s ample s of clover forage a nd hay s to r ed frozen for interval s of up to 509-510 days ( 1 6. 7- 1 6 .8 m o nth s); n o 0-day data were provided
. These data are acceptable to s upport the storage conditions and duration s of samp les from the s ubmitted fi e ld trials. H oweve r , s torage s tab ility s tudi es s h o uld always include a 0 -d ay sa mplin g inte rval to establish th e res idue leve ls present at the tim e sampl es are placed into storage (see OCSPP R es idue C hemistry Te s t Guideline 860. I 380[ d][ 6][ i]). TABLE 5
. 2
. l S umma ry o f Stora2e Co nditio n s. Matrix Sto r age Temperature Ac tu a l Storage D ura t ion 1 I n terva l of De m o n s tra ted (O

C) Sto r ae:e Sta bili ty C lover forage

- -20 245

- 519 days (8.0 -1 7.0 months) 509 days ( 16
.7 month s) 2 Clover ha y 2 1 7-5 1 6 days (7. 1-1 6.9 m o nth s) 510 d ays ( 16 .7 month s) 2 I
. Interva l from harve s t to ex traction. Samples were ana lyzed withi n I day of ex tra c tion
. 2. Based on the concu rrent storage s tab ility s tud y. See Tab l e 5.2. 1 .2 (be l ow).

Page 18 of27Acetamiprid Summary of Ana lyti cal Che mi s try and Residue Data DP Barcode D42332 I TABL E 5.2.2 S tabili ty of Acetam iprid Residues in C l ove r Forage a nd H ay (<- 20 °C). C love r Sp ike S to ra ge Co n c urr e nt Stored Sa mpl e Mean Co rr ected Matrix Leve l (p pm ) In terval (Day s) Recoveries (%) Recove ri es (%) Recovery( %) Recovery (%) * Forage 0. 100 509 92 96.95. 99 97 105 Ha y 510 67 72. 71. 75 73 108 *Corrected for recovery in freshly fortified concurrent recovery samples. 

### Conclusions: Alth ough the ac tu a l s torage durations fo r so m e of the fie ld trial samples were slig htl y lon ger than the s torage interva ls o f fort ified sampl es in th e concurrent stabi lity s tud ies, the storage s tability data are considered adequate. because the duration/i nterval diff erences are relatively small (<2%), a nd ace ta miprid res idues were demon strated to be s table during longterm frozen storage (17.0 months). Th erefore. there are no storage stab ility issues, a nd no co rr ec ti o n s for pote ntial decline durin g s tora ge are nee d ed in reviewing th e residue data submitted for c love r forage a nd hay. 

### 5.3 Res idu e Data 5.3.1 Cro p F ie ld Tri a ls (86 0
. l 

### 500 ) MR ID s # 4944380 1 and 4 94438 0 2 (C l over fi eld trial s} Th e clover field trial re s idu e results are summari zed in Table 5.3 .1. below. In response to an Agency memorandum (D364833; D
. McNeilly; 14 October 2009). JR -4 h as submitted field trial data for acetam i pr id on clover grown fo r seed. The Age ncy had reque s ted two additional c lov e r fie ld trials as confirmatory data. refl ec tin g a use pattern co mpri sed of a single foliar broadcast applicat ion of a 30% SG formulati o n of accta mi prid (Assa il 30SG Insecticide) at a target rate of 0.075 l b a i / A, with a 28-day PHI for forage, and a roughly 56-day PHI for hay. Two pair s of fie ld trial s were conducted in the US in NAF T A Growing Zone 11 during the 2010 (MR ID # 49443801) a nd 20 1 2 ( MRl D #49443 802) growing seasons. The registrant noted that the 2012 trials were conducted to provide bridging data between the origina l clover field trials and the 20 I 0 trials. because forage and h ay samp les from the 2010 trials we re either sampled sooner or dried faster than those in the o ri g in a l s tud y fo r which th e confirmatory data were required. HED has detem1ined that the 20 I 0 tri als, which were separated by less than 

### 20 miles, are rep lic a te trials. Each trial consisted of one untreated p lot and one treated plot. At eac h trial location, th e treated plot r ece ived a si n g l e foliar broadcast app licati on of Assail 30SG at 0.075-0.080 lb ai / A. Applications were made using gro und e quipm e nt , in spray vo l umes of 1 6.6

- 29.7 ga ll o n s per ac re 

### ( GPA). A non-ionic surfactant (N I S) or crop o il conce ntrate (COC) was added to th e spray mixture for a ll applications. Samples of clover forage and hay were harvested from all trial sites at PH l s of27

- 32 days
. Add itional sa mple s of hay were harve s ted from th e 2012 tri a ls at PH ls of 50-53 days. H ay samples were allowed to dry at th e field trial s ites for 3

- 6 days prior to collection. Pa ge 19of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemist ry and Residue Data DP Barcode 0423 32 1
Follow in g a s ingle fo li ar broadcast application of the 30% SG formu lation at 0.075-0.080 lb a i

/ A, residues of acetam i prid (a nd per-tri al averages) were 0
. 0496-0
. 169 (0.08 12

- 0.163) ppm and 0 .20 0 -0.76 3 (0.450-0.753) ppm in clover forage and hay, respectively, harvested at a 

### PHI of 27- 

### 32 days. ln clover hay harvested 50-53 days following application at 0.077-0.080 lb ai / A, residues of acetamiprid (and per-trial averages) were 0.0592-0.116 (0.0648-0.1 11 ) ppm. Residue dec lin e was not evaluated. TABLE 5.3. 1 Summary o f R esi du e Data from C l over Field Tri als with Acetamiprid. Crop M a trix Total Use PHI n • Re s id u es (oo m) R a te (lb ai/ A) (Days) M in
. 1 M ax . 2 LAFT3 HAFT3 M e dian 3 Mean 3 S D 3 Clover forage 0.075-0.080 27-32 ... .} 0.0496 0.169 0.0812 0.163 0.102 0.115 0.0425 Clover hay 0.075-0.080 27-32 3 0.200 0.763 0.450 0.753 0.462 0.555 0.172 0.077-0.080 50-53 2 0.0592 0.116 0.0648 0.111 0.0879 0.0879**NA~** 1. n 

### = number of field trials. 2. Values based on individu a l samples. 3. Values based on per-trial averages. LAFT = Lowest Average Field Trial: HAFT = Hi ghes t Average Field Tria l : D 

## = Standard Deviation. 4. NA = Not Applicabl e (s tandard deviation is not calculated for sampl e sets where n < 3). 

### Conclusions: The s ubmitted c lover field trial data (in conjunct ion with the previously s ubmitt ed data) are adequate, and s upp ort increas ing the permanent tolerances in clover forage from 0.10 to 0.30 ppm , and in clover hay from 0.0 I to 2.0 ppm. 

### 5.3.2 Field Rotati onal Crops (860.1900) R es id u e C h e mi s tr y S ummar y Doc um e nt 0 3282 1 6; W.T. Drew; 23 Octo ber 2007
o field rotational crop data have been submitted, and no r ota ti ona l crop res trictions are estab li shed o n th e subject labels. The avail able confined rotational crop data indicate that no field rotational crop studi es or label restrictions for rotational crops are required to support the proposed u se . 

### 5.3.3 Proce sse d Food a n d Fee d (860 .1 520) There are no proce ssed commodities associated with clover forage and hay. 

### 5
. 3
. 4 Meat , M il k, Pou ltry and Eggs (860
. 1480) In the cattle feeding study and pou ltry feeding study, the lowest dietary feed in g leve ls were 

### 6 ppm and 1.2 ppm , respectively. Th e current li vestock tolerances are based on the residue s observed at those lowest feed i ng levels. Inclusion of acetamiprid residues at the recommended tolerance le ve l s in clover forage (0.30 ppm) and hay (2.0 ppm) results in livestock dietary burdens that are at or be low the lowest feedi ng leve ls used in the catt le and poultry feeding 

### Page 20of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP Barcode 0423321 stud ies (see Table 5.3.4, below). Therefore, the exist i ng tolerances assoc iated with li vestock a re a dequate to cover the higher clover to lerances resulting from the decreased clover PHI. TABL E S .3. 4 Es t i mate d R ea s on a b l y B a l a n ced Li ves to ck Di e tary B urd e n s for Ace tamiprid
. C r o p Fee d s tuff Ty p e 1 Re s idu e % Dry % of D ieta r y C o ntribution (ppm ) M a tt er Di et 2 ( ppm) l Bee f Cattle Clover Hay R 2.0 89 10 0.225 Co tt on Gin byproducts R 20 90 5 I. I 11 Cotton Undel inted seed p 0.60 88 5 0.034 Field com Milled byproducts 

## c 0.01 85 50 0.006 Sugar beet Molasses 

## c 0.01 75 10 0.001 Sugarcane Mola sses 

## c 0.01 75 10 0.001 T urnip Root 

## c 0.0 1 15 10 0.007 T O T A L B URD EN 1 0 0 1. 38 5 Da ir y C attle Clover Ha y R 2.0 89 30 0.674 Almond Hull s R 5.0 90 10 0.556 Clover Forage R 0.30 30 5 0.050 Cotton Undelinted seed p 0.60 88 10 0.068 Field com Milled byproducts 

## c 0.01 85 15 0.002 Sugar beet Molasses 

## c 0.01 75 JO 0.001 Sugarcane Molasses 

## c 0.01 75 10 0.001 Turnip R oot 

## c 0.01 15 10 0.007 TOTAL B U RDE N 1 0 0 1 .359 Poultry Cotto n Meal p 0.60**NA~** 20 0.120 Soybean Meal p 0.03 NA 5 0.002 Barley Grain 

## c 0.01 

### NA 70 0.007 Field com Grain 

## c 0.01 NA 5 0.001 T O T AL BU RDE N 10 0 0. 1 30 Sw i n e Cotton Meal p 0 .6 0 NA 15 0.090 Fie l d com Grain 

## c 0.01 NA 65 0.007 Barle y Grain 

## c 0.01 NA 20 0.002 T OT AL B U RD EN 100 0.0 99 I. R = Roughage ; CC = Carbohyd rate Conce ntrate; PC = Protein Co ncentrate. 2. Revisions of Feedstuffs in Table I of OPPTS Test Guidelin e 860
. I 000 and Guidance 0 11 Constructing Ala.ximum R easonahly Balanced Die ts (AIRBD).; ChemSAC memorandum; 30 June 20 08. 3. Contribution = ([ Re sidue + %DM) x %d iet ) for beef and dairy cattle. Contribution = (Residue x % diet) for poultry and swine. 4. NA = Not Applicable. 

### Co nclusion: Re vis ions to the currently established live s tock tolerances are not required for this petition.

Page 21 of 27Acetam ipri d Summary of Analytical Che mistry and Residue Data DP Barcode D42332 I 

### 5 . 3.5 Foo d Handlin g ( 8 6 0 . 14 6 0 ) There are no proposed use s that arc releva nt to this guidel ine topic. 

### 5.3 . 6 W a te r , F is h and Irri ga te d C rop s (8 60 . 1400 ) There are no proposed uses th at are relevant to this g uid e lin e topic 

### 5 .4 Foo d Res idu e Pro fil e The data su bmitted in s upp ort of the current action (PP#4E8307) along with pre v iously reviewed data, are adequate for purposes of risk assessment a nd tolerance assessment fo r the proposed revised use pattern under rev iew. M axim um re s idu es of ace ta miprid are expected to occ ur at relatively lo w levels ( < 0.30 ppm in clover forage, and <2 .0 ppm in clove r hay) from the revised u se pattern on clover grown for seed proposed in the curre nt petition. Acetam iprid res idu es ge nera ll y tend to decline or remain stab le with increasing PHI, and do not increa se to any s ignificant degree
. Follo\ving foliar applicatio n s. acetamiprid is present primarily as surface residues: translocation does not app ea r to be exte n s ive. In cabb age, there was uptak e and translocation of acetamiprid to the above

- grou nd portion s of the plant following a so il applicatio n. In general, acetamiprid residues do not tend to co ncentrate in processed fractions, other than via dehydration or from surface residues. Residues of acetamiprid are not expected to accu mul ate above the LOQ in rotational crops. I IE D previous ly conc lud ed that rotat ional cro p tolerances and res tri c ti o n s a r e not req uired fo r ace tam iprid.


### 6. 0 To l e ra nc e De riv a ti o n The OECD tolerance calcu lation procedure was used fo r setti ng tolerance s in clover fo rage and in clover hay, using re s idu e data from the sub mitted clover field trial studies. The s ubmitted clove r field trial data support a tolerance of 2
. 0 ppm, instead of the propo se d tolerance of 1.5 ppm , in clover h ay. The petitioner used residue s in c l over h ay from a ll field trials to calc u la t e the tolerance ( PI-l l s of27-63 days). The draft labe l s st ipulate a PHI of 30 days (decreased from 56 days on the current labels). Th erefore, only residues from those trials where hay was collected at PI !ls of 27-32 da ys (current subm itt ed data) were u sed to calculate the tolerance; residues from tho se tri a l s whe re ha y was collected at PH l s of 50-63 days (previously submitted data) were not used. HED utili zed the residue data for hay collected at Pl lls of 27-32 as the input data se t for the OECD tolerance ca lculation procedure, yie ldin g a different r es ult (2.0 ppm). The proposed tolerance increa se in clover forage (from 0.10 to 0.30 ppm) is supported adequately by the current s ubmitted field trial res idue data , in conju nct ion w ith previously Page 22of27Acetamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Re sidue Data DP Barcode 04 23321 sub mitted field trial data (D364833; D. McNeilly ; 14 October 2009). The current submitted field trial residue data support the rec o mmended tolerance increase in clover hay (from 0.0 I to 2.0 ppm). The proposed revised use pattern (decreased PHI ) on clover grown for seed is for regional re g istration in ID , OR and WA only (40CFR §180.578[c]). HED has identified an error with a commodity definition in the existing 40CFR entry for acetamiprid. which currently l ist s "Vegetab le. tuberous and corm , group 1 ··under 40CFR 

### § 180.578[a][l]. This li s ting should be r evised to read ''Vegetable, tuberous and corm , subgroup 1

## c· when the to lerance s fo r clover forage and hay are revi sed. An Inte rnational Re s idu e Limit Status sheet is appended a s Attachment I. Data sets and re s ults from the OECD tolerance calculation procedure for c lover forage and hay are appended as Attachment 2.


### 7. 0 C hcm SAC Ref e rence This memorandum was reviewed by C hemSAC designated reviewe rs, and has been revised to refl ect the r ecom mendation s of those reviewers.


### Refere n ces Acelamipricl. Requesl for Label Amendmenlsfor New Uses on Clover: Small Vine Climbing Fruils. e xcepl Kiwifruil. Subgroup 13-0 7 F (a mending grape use): Greenhouse-grown Tomaloes: and a Regional Regis lrationfor Tea. Summary of Anafylical Chemist1 y and R esidue Da1a.; 0 364833, D366269; 0. McNeilly; 14 October 2009. 

### Acelamiprid. Petition fo r th e Establishment of Pe rmanent Tolerances and Regis lralionfor U se on Asparagus: Brassica. Leafy Greens. Subgroup 5B. and Turnip Greens: and Sweet Corn: and Updale of Crop Group Definitions for Established Tolerances fo r Vege1able. Frniling, Group 8- 10: Fruit. C itrus. Group 10-10: and Fruit. Pom e. Group I 1-10. SwnnWIJ ' of Ana f y li ca/ Chemislly and Residue Data.; 0394779; E
. I J o iman; 6 March 2012. 

### OF6082. Seclion 3 Registrationj(Jr Use ofAcetamiprid on Cotton. Leq/y Vegetables. Cole Vegetables. Fruiting Vege1ables. C itrus Frnils, Pome Fruits, Grapes. and Cano/a and M11s1ard Seed. Summcay of Ana/y1ical Me 1hod s and Residue Che111is11y DERs.; D264154: M. Doherty ; 31 December 200 I. 

### Acelamiprid. Pel itions Requesling 1he Es1ablishmenl of Pe rmanenl Tolerances (Assoc ialed wilh Section J 

### Registration) for New Food /Feed Uses of !h e In secticide on Berries (Crop Group 13). Page 23of27Acetamiprid S ummary of Anal ytical Chemistr y and R esid ue Data DP Barcode 0423321 

### Bulb Vegetables (Crop G roup 3), Edible Podd ed Leg um e Vegetables (Crop Subgroup 6A) , Succ ulen t Shelled P eer and Bean (Crop Subgroup 6B). and Strawbeny and Other low-grow ing Be rries. Summcuy of Analytica l Chemistry and R esidu e Data. Petition Numb e r s 6F705 J 

### (V arious Crops) and 6£ 7163 (.'Strawh e n y).; 0 32 8 2 1 6; W
. T. Dre w; 23 Octo b er 2007. 

### Acetamiprid. R es ults of th e HED Metabol ism Assessm ent R ev i ew Commill ee Mee ting He ld on October 16
. 200 I.; 02786 52; M. D o he rty; 13 Nove mb e r 200 I. 

### Ace tamiprid: Human Ilea/th Ris k Assessm e nt.for New**U~·es** 

### on Asparagus: Brass ica. leafy Greens , Subgroup 5B. and Turnip Gre e ns : and Swee t Corn: and Upda ted Crop Group De .f

lnitionsfor Fruiting Vege ta b les, C itrus. and Pom e Fruit.; D39432 2; E. Holman: 19 April 20 1 2 (P P# ! E7919). 

### Tier I Drinking Water Ex posure Assessment for A ce tamiprid in R egard<; to a Propo sed Reducti on in th e Pre harvest Int e rval for C love r and Ha y; 0 423299; K. White; 25 March 20 15.
Attac hm e nts 

### Attachment I: International R es idu e Limi t Status. Attachment 2: OEC D MRL (To le ranc e) A ssess me nt Ca lculations.

Page 24of27Acetamiprid S umm ary of Analytica l Che mi s try and Res idu e Data DP 13arcodc D42332 I


### Attac hm e nt 1: Int ern a ti o n a l R es idu e Limit S tatu s . Ace t a miprid (P C Co de 0 99 050) S umm ary o f US To le r a nces a nd Inte rn atio n a l Ma ximum R es idu e Limits . Res idu e D e fi n iti o n s U

S (40CF R**.578)** Ca n ada Co d ex Crop s: [a)[I] and [c] Acetamiprid. (1£)

- N-[(6

-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N'-cyano-Nmethylethanimidamide. Li ves to c k : [a][2] Acetamiprid and IM-2-1. (1£)- N-[ (6

- ch loro-3-pyridinyl)methy 1)-N'-cyano-Nmethylethanimidamide and (I £)-N-[(6-ch loro-3- pyridinyl)methyl]-N'-cyano-N-ethanimidamide. Co mm o di ty 2 Tol e ran ce Co mm o di ty M RL Co mm o dit y MRL ( ppm ) J ( mg/kg) ( mg/kg) C lover. forage 0.30 Clover, hay 2.0

Co mp le te d : W.T. Drew: 3 June 2015. I
. Mexico adopts US tolerances. and/or Codex MRLs. for its export purposes. 2. Includes only commodi t ies of intere s t for this actio n . 3. Tolerance values arc tho se recommended by HED. not those propo se d by the petitioner.

P

age 25 of27Acctamiprid Summary of Analytical Chemi s try and Re s idue Data


### Attachme nt 2: OE C D MRL {To lerance) Assessment Calcu l ations. Clo ver 

### hay Residues (mg/kg) 0.450 0.753 0.462 Acetarniprid Clover hay USA (ID, OR, WA) 0
. 075 lb ai/A, 30-day PHI Total number of data (n) Percentage of censored data Number of non-censored da ta Lowest residue Highest residue Median residue Mean Standard deviation (SD) Correction factor for censoring (CF) Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest re s idue

- Mean + 4 SD

- CF x 3 Mean Unrounded MRL Rounded MRL

High uncertainty of MRL estimate. [Small dataset]

Page 26of27 DP B arcod e D4 233 2 I

3 0% 3 0
. 450 0
. 753 0
. 462 0
. 55 5 0
. 1 72 1. 000

0
. 753 1. 241 1
. 66 5 1
. 66 5
2Ace r a miprid S umm a r y of An a l yt i ca l Ch emistry and R es idu e D at

a


### C lover fo rage Residues (mg/kg) 0
. 0 4 5 0
. 0 5 0 0
. 010 0
. 0 8 1 0. 1 63 0
. 102 Acetamiprid Clover forage USA (ID, OR, WA) 0.075 lb ai/A, 30-day PHI Total number of data {n) Percentage of censored data Number of non-censored data Lowest residue Highest residue Median residue Mean Standard deviation {SD) Correction factor for censoring (CF) Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue

- Mean + 4 SD

- CF x 3 Mean Unrounded MRL Rounded MRL

High uncertainty of MRL estimate
. [Small dataset]

P age 27of27 6 17% DP Barcode 042332 I

5 0
. 010 0.163 0.066 0.075 0.053 0.889

0.163 0.289 0
. 201 0
. 289

0
. 3Acetamiprid ( PC Code 099050)/ lnterregiona l Project #4 (IR-4) 

### B.7.6
B.7 . 6.1 

### B.7.6.1.1 Document ID : Report:

G u ide lin e s : R es idu es Resulting from S up erv i se d Trial s (A nnex IIA 

### 6.3 ; Annex IH A 8 .3) Residue s in Target C rop s C lo ver Grow n for See d MR ! Ds #49443801 and 49443 80 2 M RID #494 4380 I. R. Leonard (2013) 

### Acetamiprid: lvfagnitude of the Residue on Clove r. Re- am ende d Re p o rt. Re port Numbers : A9600 and A9600. I 0-M l R 12. Unpubli s hed study prepa r ed by Inte rregio nal Re sea rch Project #4. 11 6 p ages. MRfD # 49443802. R. Leonard (20 1 3) 

### Acelamiprid: Magn itude of th e 

### R es idue on Clove r. Report N umb e rs: 89600 a nd 89600. 12-M IR 12
. Unpub li s hed study p rep ared by Interreg io n a l Researc h Projec t #4. 1 07 pages. EPA OCSP P H armon ized T est Guideline 860. 1500 Crop Fi e ld Trial s (A ugust 1996). P MRA Reg ulatory Di rect ive DIR 98 -0 2 - Resi du e C he mi stry Gu idelines. Section 9

- Crop Fi eld Tria ls. PMRA Reg ulat o ry Direct i ve DIR2010-05

- R ev is ions to th e Residue Chemistry Crop Fi e ld Trial Re quirem e nt s. OECD Guideline 509 Crop Fi e ld Trial (S eptember 2009). 

### GL P Co mplian ce: No deviations from reg ul ato r y require ment s we re reporte d w hich wo uld have an im pac t o n th e va lidit y of th e s tud y. 

### Acce ptabili ty :
Eva lu ator : Date: The s tud y is considered scie ntifi ca ll y accep ta bl e. Th e accept ab ilit y of this s tud y fo r regu lato r y purp oses is ad dresse d in the forthcom ing USE PA R esidue C he mi stry Sum mary D ocument, 0 42332 1.**I'~** 

### . William 

### T. Drew, C he mi s t , Ri sk Assess me nt Branch Il ( RAB 2) 

## lAJ &**~** 

### 2 Sep t ember 20 

### l 5 ote: This Data Evalua tion Record (DE R ) was origi na ll y prepared und e r co ntrac t by Versar. I ncorporated (6850 Versar Center. Springfield VA 22151: sub mitted 27 February 20 15 ). The DER has been reviewed by the I lea Ith Eff ec ts Division ( HED) , a nd revised to r efiec t c urre nt Office of P es ti c id e Programs (O PP ) policies. 

### EXECU TIVE SUMMA RY In r esponse to an Agency memorandum ( 0 364833: D. McNeilly; 14 October 2009) , the Inter regional R esea rc h Proj ect # 4 ( lR-4 ) has s ubmitte d field trial data fo r the active in g red ie nt (ai) acetamipri d o n clove r grown fo r seed
. The Agency had requested two add ition a l clover field trials as co nfirmato ry data, re fl ect in g a u se pattern co mpri sed of a s in g le fo li ar broadcas t app lication of a 30% so lu ble granul e (SG) formulation o f acetam iprid (Assa il 3 0SG In sec ticid e) at a target rate of 0.075 po u nd of a i per acre (lb ai / A), 

### wi th a 2 8-day pre-harves t interval ( PH I) E PA MRID s # 49443801 and 49443802 Page I of8Acetamiprid ( PC Code 099050)/ lnt er regiona l Project #4 (IR-4) for forage , and a r o ughly 56 -d ay PHI for ha y . Two pair s of field trial s were conducted in the US in o rth American Free Trade Agreement (NA f- T A) Growing Zone 11 during the 20 10 (M RID # 4944380 1) and 20 1 2 (M RID #49443802) grow in g sea so ns . Th e re g is trant n o ted that the 2 01 2 trials we re conducted to provid e b r idgin g data betw ee n the original clover field trials a nd the 20 I 0 trial s, b ecau se forage and ha y sample s from th e 20 I 0 trials we re e ith e r samp led sooner or d ri ed fas t e r th an th ose in th e o ri g in a l s tud y for w hi c h the conlinnatory data w e re req uired. HED h as determined th a t th e 20 I 0 trials , which were se parated by les s than 20 mil es, arc replicate tri a ls. Eac h trial consisted of o ne untreated pl o t and one treated plot. At each trial l ocati o n , th e treated plot rece iv e d a s in g le foliar broadca s t application of a 30% SG fo rmulati on of acetam iprid (Assa il 30SG In secticide) a t 0.075-0.080 lb a i / A. Applications we r e mad e us in g gro und equ ipment. in s pr ay vo lum es of 1 6.6-29.7 ga ll ons p e r acre (GPA). A non-ionic s urfact a nt (N I S) o r crop oil concentrate ( COC ) was a dd e d to the s pray mi x ture fo r all app licati ons . Samples of c love r forage a nd h ay we re h arves te d from all trial s ites a t PHl s of 27-32 da ys. Additional sa mpl es of h ay we re h a rv es ted from th e 20 1 2 trials at PHi s of 50-53 days. H ay samples were allowed to dry at the fi e ld trial s ite s for 3 -6 days pri o r to collection. A ll sample s were maintain e d froz e n at the t es tin g facilities, durin g shipp in g, and were s tored fro ze n at the analytical lab o ratory until analysis. Samples of clover forage and ha y were sto red fo r maximum duration s of 5 1 9 and 5 1 6 days ( 17
. 1 a nd 17.0 m o nth s), re s p ec ti ve l y, from h arves t to ex tra c ti o n . Samples we re analyzed within 1 day of extract ion. To s upport the sa mple s tora ge durations, a concurrent s torage s tabil i t y study was conducted along w ith the field trial s tudy. T he data demonstrate that residues o f ace tamiprid were s tabl e in fortified sam ple s of clover forage a nd hay stored frozen for int e rvals of up to 509-5 1 0 days (16.7- 1 6.8 month s); n o 0-day d a ta we r e provid e d. The se dat a are acceptable to support th e s tora ge co nditi ons and durations of sampl es fro m the s ubmitted field tri a l s. H oweve r, s to ra ge stability s tudi es s h o uld a lways include a 0 -d ay sa mplin g interva l to establish the r es idue levels pres e nt at th e time samples arc p laced into s tora ge (see OCSPP Residue C hemistry T es t Guid e lin e 860. I 380[d](6](i]). Sa m p le s \
. ve r e a n a lyzed for re s idue s of ace r a miprid via hi g h performance liquid chromatography with tandem mas s s pectrometric d e tecti o n (LC/ MS / MS ), u s ing a m ethod based on Cerexagri Method # KP- 2 I 6Rl. Ac ce pt ab le m ethod va lid ation and concurrent r ecove ri es we re reported fo r sample s o f cl over forage and h ay fo rtified with acetamiprid at 0
. 0 I 0- I .00 ppm , thu s va li datin g the m e th o d. The limit of quantitation (LOQ), de termin ed as th e lowes t leve l of m e th od va lid a ti o n ( L LMY), was 0
. 0 l 0 ppm. The fo rtificati o n leve ls used in co n c urrent m eth o d recove ry were adequa t e to bracket expected r es idue l eve ls . Co ncurrent recoverie s a nd residue s in treated sa mples we re not cor r ec ted for apparent re s idue s in controls. Fo ll ow in g a s in gle foliar broad cas t app li cation of th e 30% SO fonnu lat ion at 0.075 -0 .080 lb 

### ai l A , re s idue s of aceta miprid (and p e r-trial averages) w e re 0.0496-0 .1 69 (0 .08 I 2-0.163) ppm a nd 0
. 200 -0.76 3 (0.450 -0 .753) ppm in clover forage and hay, re spec ti ve ly . h a rves ted at a PH I o f 27

- 32 d ays. ln clo ve r h ay harves te d 50-53 da ys following app li c ati o n at 0
. 077-0.080 lb ai / A, EPA MRIDs #49443801and49443802 P age 2 of8Acetamiprid (PC Code 099050)/ lnterregio nal Project # 4 ( IR-4) 

### residues of acetamiprid (and per-trial averages) were 0.0592-0.116 (0.0648

- 0. 111 ) ppm. Residue de c lin e was n ot eva lu ate d
. 

### I. MATEIUALS AND MET H ODS A. MATEIUALS TABLE B . 7. 6.1 . l - J Nomenclature for Acetam i prid . Common name Acetamiprid CAS name ( I £)-N-[(6

- c hl oro - 3- pyridinyl)met hyl]- N '-c yano-Nmethylethan im idam ide CAS number 135410-20-7 Company experimental name None Other synonyms (ifa oolicable) None Empirical formula C1 0 H11CIN4 Molecular weigh t 222.7 amu

# Cl~ I THJ h- 1 

# l(CH 3 

# 'cN B. S tud y Des i g n 1. 

### Test Procedu r e Three residue tri a ls we re co nducted o n c lo ver grown fo r seed during the 2010 an d 20 12 grow in g seasons . reflecting a sing le fo l iar broadcast appl ication with a 30% SG formulation of acetamip rid (Assai l 30SG Insecticide). Fi e ld trial locat ions 

### by NAFTA grow in g zone are s ummari zed in Table B.7.6. 

### l. l- 2 (below). The trials separated by <20 miles ha ve been assessed for independence as de tailed in the table below. H E D ha s dete rmin e d that o ne pair of trial s (20 I 0 tria ls; MRIO #49443801) consti lute a si ngle trial wit h replicate samp les for purposes of OCSPP 860. 1 500 data requirement s . Independent Tria l Determ i nation

MRID# Crop T rial N umbers Differences Decis ion 49443801 Clover OR36 and O R37 Same variety Replic ates *No oth e r diffe r ences in criteria
• All asses s ments are based on the replicate trial guidance presented in draft memo 568

_ Criteria for Ind ependence of Trials 23 April 2013 (EPA and PMRA ). A separate tank mi x was use d fo r a ll application s.

EPA MRI Os # 49443801 and 49443802 Pa ge 3 of8Acetamiprid (PC Code 099050)/lnterregional Project #4 ( IR-4 ) TABLE B.7.6.1.1-2 Tria l Numbers and Geo2t"apbica l Locations. Crop #o f Trials NAF'l'A Growi n g Zone T o tal 1 2 3 4 

## s 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 C l

over Submitted ' .., .) 3 Required 2 Ill 1 / 1 1/1 3/ 2 11 1 Il l 11 1 I I I I ' Il l ' 12/9 I. Data were submitted in re sponse to 0364833; D. McNeilly; 14 October 2009. 2. As per Table 5 of OCSPP 860.1500 for clover: the second number re nect s a 25% re duction in the number of field trials a ll owed for th e crop a s a r epresen tati ve commodity in support of a crop group / s ub gro up toleranc e o r when application re s ult s in no quantifiabl e residues. 3. Either Zo ne is acceptable. Locations of , and detailed use patterns at, the trials are provided in Table B. 7 .6.1.1-3 (below). TABLE 8 .7. 6.1.1-3 Stud 1 Use P attern. Location: C i ty, EP 1 Meth od ; T i ming of Vo l ume Sing le

State; Year App li cation (GPA) Use Rate

!Trial ID I**~** (lb ai/A) 2010 Trial s (MRID #49 443801) Aurora, OR: 20 I 0 30% I. Foliar broadcast 23.4 0.077 fA9600. IO-OR 36 ]**SG~** vcg.etative. St. Paul , OR: 20 I0 30% I. Foliar broadcast: 25.3 0.075 IA9600. JO-OR371 SG vegetati ve. 2012 Tria ls (M R LD # 49443802) Woodburn , OR ; 2012 30 % I. Fo li a r broadcast; 29.7 [B9600 .12 -0R 34] SG vegeta ti ve. Hillsboro , OR; 2 012 30 % I. foliar broadca s t ; 1 6.6 [B9600. I2 -0R 35l SG vege tati ve. I. E P = End-use Product. 2. RTI = Re -Treatment 1 nterv a l. 3. N I S = Nonionic surfactant; C OC = Crop oi l concentrate. 4. Assail 30SG Insecticide. a 30% SG formulation ofacetamiprid. 5. A = Not Applicabl e. 0.080 0.077 RTr Total Use Ta nk M i x (Days) Rate Adj u vant3 Ob ai/A)**NA~** 0.077 I S A 0.075 IS
NA 0.080 

## coc NA 0.077 NIS

Clover was grown and maintained accord in g to typical agricultural practice s . o 1rn gation was used. No unu s ual weather conditions we re repo rted to hav e adversely affected crop producti on or y ield during the s tudy. 

### Samp le Hand lin g a nd Preparation Duplic ate control and treated samp le s of clover forage and hay we re harvested from all trials at PHi s of27

- 32 da ys; add iti ona l sampl es of hay were h arvested from th e 2012 trials at PHis of 50- 53 days. Hay samples were allowed to dry at the field s ites for 3-6 da ys prior to collection
. Samples were placed in frozen s torage at the field sites within approx imately 2 hours of collection , and were shipped frozen v ia ACDS freeze r truck within 2-28 days of harvest to the ana l ytica l lab oratory, IR -4 No rth Centra l Resea rch Center , M ichigan State U niver s ity ( in Lansing, MI). At the analytical laboratory, samples were s tored frozen (at roughly -20 ° C) pri o r EPA MRID s #49443801 and 49443802 Page 4 of8Acctamiprid (PC Code 099050)/lnterregional Project 11 4 ( IR- 4) 

### to preparation and anal ys i s . The sampl es were prepared for analysis by homogenizing in the presence of dry ice. 

### 2. Desc ription of A n a ly ti ca l Proce dures Samples we re analyzed fo r residues o f acetamiprid using an LC/MS/ MS method wit h minor modifications , based on th e Cerexagri Method # KP-2 I 6R I , t itled 

### Pre liminar y LC /

MS/MS Analytical Method for Dete rmi nation of AssailTM 7 0WP Insecticide (Ace tamiprid) in Crop Matric es. A complete description of the method, in cl udin g a li st of minor m od ification s, was included in the subm iss i on. Modifications included the e limin ation of a so lid -phase extraction clean-up step, and changes to the LC / MS/ M S system. Briefly. samples were extracted using methanol/water (I: I , v / v). and vacuum filtered. The extract was diluted with methanol / water (I: I , v / v) , and the vo lume of the final extract was adjus ted to be within the calibration range for LC/ MS/ MS analysis. The LOQ ( determined as the LLMV ) was 0.010 ppm. It was noted that the reg istrant also presented calculated values for th e limit of detection ( LOD ) and LOQ, based on the recoveries obta ined from samp les fortified with acetam ip rid at 0.010 ppm. The LOD was calculated by multiplying the standard deviation of recovery measurements at the LLMV by the one -tail ed ts tatistic (confidence level not repor ted) for 6 to 8 replicate s. and the LOQ was defined as 3X the LOO. The calculated LODs and LOQs were, respectively, 0.0023 and 0.0069 ppm in clover forage. and 0.0012 and 0.0035 ppm in clover hay from the 20 10 trials. They we re. respectively. 0.0025 and 0.0075 ppm in forage. and 0.0035 and 0.0 I 04 ppm in hay from the 2012 trials. 

### II . RESULTS AND DI SCUSS ION Method performance was evaluated during method va lidati on, and by use of co ncurrent recovery sample s run with sample sets. For method validation, sam ple s of untre a ted forage and hay were fort ifi ed with acetam iprid at 0.0 I 0. 0.100 , and I .00 ppm. For concurrent r ecovery. samples of forage and ha y were fortified at 0
. 0 I 0-0
. 200 and 0.0 I 0 -1. 00 ppm, respectively. R ecoveri es we r e with in the generally rec ogn ized accep table range of 70-120% , except for a concurrent recovery from forage of 67%. Therefore , the method was considered valid for the analysis of aceta mipri d res idue s in c love r matrices (Tab le B.7.6.1.1-4). The fortification levels bracketed the measured residue s . Concurrent rec overies were not corrected for apparent residu es in controls. The detecto r response was reported to be linear. Coe ffi cients of determination (r2) 

### were 2: 0.9956 within the range of 0.050-1.00 ng/ mL from the 20 I 0 st ud y, and 2: 0.9993 within th e rang e of 0.050-2.00 ng/mL from the 20 12 study. Representative chromatograms of control. fortified and treated samples were provided. The cont rol chroma tograms gen e rally had no peaks of int erest above the chromatog raphic background. The fortified samp le chromatograms contained on ly th e analyte of int e rest. and peaks were symmetrical and well defined. Re s idues in controls we re
E PA MRIDs #49443801 and 49443802 Pa ge 5 ofSAcetamiprid (PC Code 099050)/ ln terregional Project #4 ( IR-4) below the LOQ ( <0 .0 l 0 ppm). The reported re s idue values were not co rrected for apparent re s idue s in contro ls. TABLE B.7.6.l.1-4 Summary of Met h od Va lid ation and P r oceduraVConcurr ent Recove ri es of Aceta miprid from C lover Fora2e a nd Ha y. Matrix Study Fo rti fication Level (porn) Samp l e Size ( n ) Recoveries 1 (%) Mean ± St d
. Dev.( %) Method Validatio n Forage 2012 0.0 I0-1.00 9 77-96 Hay 2010 1.00 3 81-83 2012 0.0 10- 1. 00 9 84- 100 Conc urrent R ecoverv 1 Forage 2010 0.0 10 6 7 1-88 2012 0.0 I0-0.200 4 67; 82-101 Hay 2010 0.010 6 73 -82 2012 0.0 I 0-1.00 4 72- 100 I
. Concurrent recoverie s were not corrected fo r apparent residues in controls. 2. For concurrent recov e r y. al l values are the mean of dup licate a naly ses. 89 ± 6.7 82 ± 1.0 93 ± 5.3 80 ± 6.9 86 ± 15 78 ± 3.7 82 ± 13
Samp les of clover forage a nd h ay were s tored fo r a m ax imum of 5 1 9 a nd 5 1 6 da ys (17. 1 and l 7.0 months ), respectively
. from harvest to extraction (Table 

### 8. 7.6. l. l-5a ). Samples were ana l yzed wi thin I day of extractio n . To s upp o rt sample storage durations , a storage stability s tud y was conducted concurrently with th e field tri a l s tud y; the resu lt s are presented in Table 8. 7.6 .1
. 1- Sb (be low). The data demonstrate th a t r esidues of ace tam iprid we re s table in fo 11ifi ed sample s of clover forage and hay store d fr ozen for interval s of up to 509

- 5 10 da ys ( 16.7-16.8 months) ; no 0-day data we re provided. These data arc acceptable to suppo rt th e storage conditions and durations of samples from the submitted clover field trials. H oweve r, s torage stabi lity s tudies s h ou ld a lways include a 0-day sa mp li ng inte r va l to estab li sh the residue leve ls present a t th e tim e san1p lcs are placed into sto ra ge (see OCSPP 860. I 380[d]l6][i]). TABLE B .7.6.1. 1-Sa S umm arv of Stora2e Co nditions . Matrix Storage Temperature Ac t ua l Sto r age Duration 1 Interval of Demon s trated ( O

C) Stora2e Stab ili ty C l

over forage

- -20 245-519 days (8.0- 17.0 month s) 509 days (16.7 months) 2 Clover hay 217-5 1 6 days (7.1

- 16.9 months) 510 days ( 16. 7 months) 2 I
. In terval from harve s t to extrac ti on. Samples were ana lyze d withi n I day of ex traction. 2. Based on the conc urrent storage stabili ty study. See Table B. 7 .6. I. l-5b (be low)
. TABL E B.7.6 .1.1 -Sb Stabili ty of Acetamiprid R es idu es in C lover Forage a nd Hay (<--20 ° C). C love r S pike Storage Conc urrent Stored Sa mpl e Mean Corrected Mat rix Leve l (ppm) Inte rva l (Days) Recoveries( %) R ecove ri es(%) Recovery (%) Recovery( %)* Forage 0.100 509 92 96,95,99 97 105 Hay 510 67 72, 7 1. 75 73 108 • Corrected for r ecovery in freshly fortified co ncurrent recovery samp le s.

EPA MRIDs # 49443801and 49443802 Page 6 of8Ace ta mipri d ( PC Co d e 09 9050)/ lnterrcg io n a l Projec t #4 ( IR-4 ) 

### T he re s ult s from th e s ubmitte d fi e ld tri a ls are pres ente d in T a bl es B.7
. 6.1
. . 1-6 and B
. 7
. 6.1. 1 -7 ( be low)
. F oll ow in g a s in g le foli a r bro ad c a s t a pplic ati o n o f th e 3 0 % S G formulati o n at 0 .075

- 0.080 lb ai / A, res idu es of ace ta miprid (a nd p e r-trial ave ra ges) w ere 0.0 4 96

- 0 .16 9 (0
. 0 81 2

- 0 .1 63) p p m and 0.2 0 0

- 0
. 763 ( 0.450

- 0. 753) ppm in cl ove r fora g e and hay, re s pect i ve ly, h a rv es te d a t a 

### PHI of 27

- 32 d ays. In c lover hay harves te d 50

- 53 days fo ll owin g ap p lic ati o n at 0.07 7- 0.080 lb ai / A, resid ues of acetam iprid (a nd per-trial a ve rage s) we re 0.0592-0
. 116 ( 0
. 0 6 48

- 0. 1 11 ) ppm. Res idu e d e clin e was n o t ev alu a t e d. TABLE B.7
. 6
. 1. 7- 6 Residue Data fro m C love r Fie ld Trials w it h Acetamiprid. Location Zone Variety EP 2 Rate Matrix PUP Res idues 4 (ppm (C ity, State; Year ( lb ai/A) (Days) [Average]) rTrial IDJ) 1 ' 2010 T ri als fMRID #4944380 1) Aurora. OR: 2010 I I Medium 30% 0.075

- Forage "'? 

### _,_ 0.0496. 0.0522, 0. 106, [A9600. I O-O R36 ] R ed SG 0. 0 77 0.11 7 [0. 081 2 ] a n d Hay 29 (6) 0.207. 0.200. 0.689
. 0.703 St. Paul. OR: 20 I0 [0.450] 

### f A9600. I O-O R37 ] 2012 Trials (MRID #49 4438 02) Woodburn. O R : II Med ium 30% 0.0 8 0 Forage 27 0. 15 6
. 0. 169 [0 .1 63 ] 20 12 [ 8 9600. 12

- Red SG H ay 27 (3) 0.742
. 0.763 [0.753] OR34] 50 (6) 0.0703. 0.0592 (0.0648] Hillsboro, OR: II Commo n 30% 0.077 Fo rage 30 0 .0 760, 0 .1 2 8 [0. 102 ] 2012 ( 89600. 12- Red SG Hay 30 (3) 0.502
. 0.422 [0.462 ] OR35) 53 (6) 0. 1 16
. 0. 106 ro.11 11 I. I J ED has de t e rm ined th at tria l s O R36 a nd O R37 a r e re plic ate tri a ls. 2. EP = End- u se Product. 3. Days that hay was allowed to dry at the field si tes arc presented in parentheses. 4. All values are the mea n of dup l icate a na l yses. T he LOQ was 0.0 I0 p pm . TABLE B
. 7
. 6
. 1.1 -7 S ummary of Res idue Data from Clover Fie ld T r ials with Acetam io rid
. C r o p Matrix Total Use PHI 

## n • Res id ues fo n m) Rate ( lb ai/A) (Days) Mi 2 

### n. Max
. 2 LA.Ffl .HAFI'J Media n3 Mean3 SD3 Clover forage 0.075

-0.080 27-32 3 0.0496 0. 169 0.08 12 0. 163 0. 102 0. 11 5 0.0425 C love r hay 0.075 -0. 080 27-32 3 0.2 00 0.763 0 .4 50 0.753 0.462 0.5 5 5 0. 1 72 0.077-0.080 50-53 2 0.0592 0.1 1 6 0.0648 0.1 1 1 0.0879 0.0879**NA~** I. n = n mnbcr of fie l d tr ials. 2. Va lu es based on i nd i v idu a l sa mpl es. 3. Values based on per-rrial averages. LAF T

- Lowest Ave rage Fie ld Trial: HAFT = H ighest Average Field Trial: SD = S tandard Deviation. 4. NA = No t Ap pl icab l e (s ta nda rd d ev i atio n is no t c alc ul ate d fo r sampl e se t s w he r e n < 3). 

### Ill. CONC L US ION S The clover fie ld tri als a re co n s ide red sc ie nt ifi ca ll y acce p tab le. Fo ll ow in g a s in g le fo li ar broadca s t applic a ti o n o f th e 3 0 % S G fo rmulati o n at 0.075-0. 0 80 lb 

### ai lA , res idue s o f ac e tamiprid (and per - tria l ave r ages) were 0
. 049 6- 0. 169 (0
. 08 12

- 0. 163) pp m and 0
. 200

- 0. 763 (0.450

- 0. 753) E PA MRID s # 4944380 1 a nd 49443 8 02 Page 7 of8Acetamiprid ( PC Code 099050)/lntcrregional Project #4 ( IR-4) 

### ppm i n c lover forage an d hay, respectively , harves ted a t a PHI of 27-32 da ys. ln clove r hay ha rvested 50

- 53 days fo ll ow in g applicatio n at 0.077-0
. 0 80 lb a i / A , residu es of acetam iprid (and p e r-trial averages) were 0.0592-0 .11 6 (0
. 0648-0 .111 ) ppm. Residue decline was not evaluated. An acceptable method was u se d fo r re s idu e qua nt i tation. and adequate storage stability data were s ubmitted to suppo rt sample storage durat io n s and co nditi ons. 

### R EFERENCES 

### Ace tamiprid. Request for Label Amendments/or New Uses on Clove r: Small Vine Climbing Frui t s, exce pt Kiwifi ·uit, S ubg roup l 3-07F (a m ending g ra pe use); Greenhouse-grown Tomatoes; and a Reg ional Regis tration/or Tea. Summa r y of Analyti cal Chemist1y and Residue Data. ; 0 364 83 3 and 0 366269; D. McNe ill y; 1 4 Octobe r 2009
.

EPA MR I Os #4944380 1 and49443802 Pa ge 8 of8