### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 2 of 95 1.0 Executive Summary

Acute probabilistic, chronic

, and cancer dietary risk assessments were conducted using the

Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM

- FCIDTM), Version 2.03, which uses food

consumption data from the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Continuing

Surveys of Food Intakes by I ndividuals (CSFII) from 1994

– 1996 and 1998. These analyses

were performed in order to determine the exposure and risk estimates that result from existing

uses of iprodione and the newly proposed Section 3 uses on cucurbits (crop group 9) and fruiting

ve getables (crop group 8

- 10 ) as well as to support the establishment of a tolerance without U.S.

registration for imported canola . These dietary risk assessments incorporated updated percent

crop treated (P CT) and the most recent USDA Pesticide Data Program (PDP) mon itoring

information (2004

– 2010 ) for the existing uses. Field trial residues and percent crop treated for

new uses (PCTn) information were incorporated for the proposed uses on cucurbits and fruiting

vegetables

. Field trail residues and percen t imported estimates were used for the proposed use

on imported canola. Monitoring data on processed commodities, empirical processing factors

, and default DEEMTM processing factors were incorporated into the assessment.

Highly refined a cute probabilistic , chronic

, and cancer dietary (food and drinking water) risk

assessments were conducted for the parent compound and its regulated metabolites.

Additionally, a separate aggregate (food and drinking water) cancer risk assessment was

conducted for the iprodi one metabolite, 3,5

- dichloroaniline (3,5

- DCA) , which is a common

metabolite of iprodione, vinclozolin

, and procymidone.

Iprodione Acute Dietary Assessment Results and Characterizatio n

The Agency conducted a highly refined, probabilistic acute dietary exposure and risk assessment

which included both food and drinking water and incorporated all established and newly

proposed uses of iprodione. Acute dietary (food and drinking water) exposure from the existing

and newly proposed uses results in an estimated risk of 24% of the acute population adjusted

dose (aPAD) at the 99.9 th 

### percen tile of exposure for females 13

– 49 , the population subgroup of

concern for this risk assessment. Acute dietary ris ks do not exceed HED’s level of concern

(< 100% of the aPAD).

Iprodione Chronic Dietary Assessment Results and Characterization

The Agency conducted a highly refined chronic dietary exposure and risk assessment which

included both food and drinking water a nd incorporated all established and newly proposed uses

of iprodione. Chronic dietary (food and drinking water) exposure from the existing and newly

proposed uses results in an estimated risk of 1.8% of the chronic populatio n adjusted dose

(cPAD) for the g en eral U.S. p opulation and 4.8% of the cPAD for all infants (<1 year old) , the

most highly exposed population subgroup

. Chronic dietary risks do not exceed HED’s level of

concern (< 100% of the cPAD).

Iprodione Cancer Assessment Results and Characterization

The Agency conducted highly refined c ancer dietary exposure and risk assessments for

iprodione. Iprodione estimated cancer risk from drinking water alone is 1.7 x 10

- 5 

### . Iprodione

estimated cancer risk from the existing food uses is 7.8 x 10

- 6 

### . The greatest contributors are

kiwifruit , milk water , dry bulb onion, and fresh peaches. Monitoring data are not available for

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 3 of 95 kiwifruit, milk

, and dry bulb onion. If monitoring data were available, it’s likely that exposure

from these commodities would be reduced; however, monitoring data are available for peaches;

therefore no additional refinement for that commodity can be made. Iprodione estimated cancer

risk for combined drinking water and existing food is 2.5 x 10

- 5



### . Iprodione estimated can cer risk

from drinking water and all existing and newly proposed uses is 2.7 x 10

- 5 

### . The greatest

contributors aside from water are those listed above as well as tomatoes from the proposed new

uses.

3,5

- DCA Cancer Assessment Results and Characterization

The Agency conducted a refined cancer exposure and risk assessment for 3,5

- DCA , a common

metabolite/degradate of iprodione, vinclozolin and procymidone

. The estimated 3,5

- DCA cancer

risk for water alone from the registered turf use is 3.9 x 10

- 5 

### . The estimated 3,5

- DCA cancer risk

from food (imported wine grapes only) is 5.6 x 10

- 7 

### . The estimated 3,5

- DCA cancer risk from

food and drinking water combined is 3.9 x 10

- 5 

### . The proposed new uses of iprodione on canola,

fruiting vegetables, and cucurbits do not have an impact on the 3,5

- DCA cancer risks since 3,5

- DCA is not an iprodione plant metabolite and the already established turf use produces higher

estimated drinking water concentrations than do these new uses. Further refinement of the food

component of this assessment may be possible by incorporating information on the percent of

imported wines that are treated. However since the food exposure is minor compared to the

drinking water exposure and no additional refinements to the drinkin g water estimate are

available at this time, no further refinement has been undertaken.

2.0 Introduction

Dietary risk assessment incorporates both exposure and toxicity of a given pesticide. For acute

and chronic assessments, the risk is expressed as a percentage of a maximum acceptable dose

(i.e., the dose which HED has concluded will result in no unreasona ble adverse health effects).

This dose is referred to as the population adjusted dose (PAD). The PAD is equivalent to the

point of departure (POD, NOAEL, LOAEL, e.g.) divided by the required uncertainty or safety

factors.

For acute and non

- cancer chroni c exposures, HED is concerned when estimated dietary risk

exceeds 100% of the PAD. References which discuss the acute and chronic risk assessments in

more detail are available on the EPA/pesticides web site: “Available Information on Assessing

Exposure f

rom Pesticides, A User’s Guide,” 21

- JUN

- 2000, web link:

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA

- PEST/2000/July/Day

- 12/6061.pdf ; or see SOP 99.6 (20

- AUG

1999).

The most recent dietary risk assessment for iprodione was conducted by Toiya Goodlow (6/7/07,

D291983) to support new uses on canola, pistachios and almonds. Due to concerns identified in

th at risk assessment, th ose uses were never registered. Subsequen tly, the pistachio

, and almond

petitions were withdrawn and the canola use was resubmitted as a use on imported canola only

. This updated assessment was conducted in conjunction with a new petition to establish

tolerances to support use of iprodione on fr uiting vegetables, cucurbits and to address the revised

canola petition.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 4 of 95 II. Residue Information

Iprodione Use

Tolerance s for iprodione are established under 40 CFR § 180.399 for the combined residues of

iprodione, its isomer RP30228 (3

- 1

- methylethyl)

- N

- (3,5

- dichlorophenyl)

- 2,4

- dioxo

- 1

-

imidazolidine

- carboxamide) and its metabolite RP32490 (3

- (3,5

- dichlorophenyl)

- 2,4

- dioxo

- 1

-

imidazolidi ne

- carboxamide) in/on a variety of plant commodities ranging from 0.1 ppm in garlic

to 150 ppm in peanut hay. Tolerance s for livestock commodities are established for the

combined residues of iprodione, its isomer RP30228, and its metabolites RP32490 and RP36114

([ N

- (3,5

- dichloro

- 4

- hydroxyphenyl)

- ureido

- carboxamide]) ranging from 0.5 ppm in ruminant fat

and meat to 3.0 ppm in ruminant kidney and liver.

The residues of concern in plants and animals for risk assessment purposes are the same as those

included in the tolerance expression above. The residues of concern in drinking water are

iprodione, RP30228, RP32490

, and the metabolit e RP35606 ([dichloro

- 3,5

- phenyl

- 1

- isopropylcarbamoyl

- 3]

- 2

- acetic acid).

T he metabolite, 3,5

- DCA

, poses a potential c ancer hazard. 3 ,5

- DCA is a common metabolite of

iprodione, vinclozolin

, and procymidone; therefore

, a separate aggregate cancer risk assessment

considering this metabolite is required. The structures of iprodione and its regulated metabolites

are shown in Attachment 1.

Mitigation measures were negotiated for iprodione and tolerances for several crop s were

reassessed in conjunction with the 1998 RED; however, the Pesticide Reevaluation Division

(PRD) has indicated that subsequent to issuance of the RED, request s to maintain pre

- RED use

patterns and tolerances were received. Additionally, risks of con cern were identified at the time

of the RED and additional data were required on residues of the parent compound and its 3,5

- DCA metabolite in water; therefore, mitigation measures were not finalized. PRD has requested

that this risk assessment include cu rrently labeled uses and current tolerances which reflect pre

RED applicatio n patterns, rates

, and tolerances

.

DeVGen has proposed new Section 3 registrations and tolerances to support uses on cucurbits

(crop group 9) and fruiting vegetables (crop group 8

- 10). Bayer CropScience has proposed the

establishment of a tolerance without U.S. registration for iprodione on imported canola. A

summary of the recommended tolerances are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Summary of Recommended Tolerances

Commodity Recommended Tolerance (ppm)

Vegetable, fruiting, group 8

- 10 2.0

Vegetable, cucurbit, group 9 0.50

Canola, seed 1.0



### Residue Data Used for Iprodione Acute, Chronic, and Cancer Assessments

The Biological and Economic Analysis Division (BEAD) has provided an updated Screening

Level Usage Analysis (SLUA) for iprodione (D389852, A. Grube, 6/1/11) which includes both

an average and maximum P CT for the established uses. Additionally, BEAD has provided PCTn

for the proposed uses of iprodione on fruiting vegeta bles and cucurbits and has provided an

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 5 of 95 estimate of percent imported canola (D389852, J. Alsadek/C.Chen, 12/6/11)

. The BEAD PCT

and PCTn tables are included in this memorandum as Attachments 2 and 3

.

The most recent PDP monitoring data (2004

– 2010 ) were incorporated into the dietary risk

assessment. As previously noted, the i prodione residues of concern in plants include the parent

compound, RP30228 (isomer)

, and RP32490 (metabolite). PDP data are available f or the parent

compound. Some monitori ng data is available for the iprodione isomer, R30228, however, the

data is limited because all samples analyzed for the parent compound were not also analyzed for

the isomer. The available data, though limited

, do show a very low level of detects of the isomer

(most commodities have no detectable residues of the RP30228 isomer) . T he commodity with

the most isomer detects w as 2007 blueberries, where the isomer was present in 2 out of 339

samples. PDP did not monitor for residues of the metabolite RP32490

.

Metabolism data in plants shows that the residue should be mainly parent compound. Since the

data on the isomer cannot be well corre lated to the data on the parent , and there is no data for the

RP32490 metabolite

, an alternate approach to account for residues of the isomer and the

RP32490 metabolite in plants was taken. Metabolite ratios were derived from the metabolism

studies and these ratios were applied to the parent compound to derive total iprodione residues of

concern in plant commodities. Ta ble 2 shows the metabolism data translations that were made

f or each of the plant commodities included in the assessment.

Table 2. Metabolism Data Translations for Iprodione

Metabolism Study Translation

Peach Peach, Apricot, Cherry, Nectarine, Plum, Blueberries, Almond,

Grape, Grape Juice, Strawberries

Peanut Carrots, Potato, Lettuce, Broccoli, Succulent Beans, Peanut Butter

Rice Rice



### Table 3, below is a summary of the metabolite ratios calculated from the plant metabolism

studies (D291983, T. Goodlow, 6/7/07).

Table 3 . Iprodione Metabolism Adjustment Factors Used for PDP Data

Residue % TRR 1 Ratio

Peach metabolism data

Iprodione 94.0 NA 2

Isomer 0.8 0.01x

Metabolite 1 0.5 0.01x

Peanut metabolism data

Iprodione 54.0 NA

Isomer 15.0 0.28x

Metabolite 1 9.0 0.17x

Rice metabolism data

Iprodione 35.9 NA

Isomer 21.1 0.59x

Metabolite 1 5.6 0.16x

1 TRR= Total Radioactive Residues

2 NA= Not Applicable

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 6 of 95 For those plant commodities with established uses, but without PDP monitoring data, translations

were made from the available monitoring data consistent in the principles outlined in the HED

SOP 99.3 (3/26/99, M. Stasikowski) and SOP 2000.1 (9/12/ 00, M. Stasikowski). For those

registered uses where there was no monitoring data and an appro priate translation could not be

made, either field trial data or tolerance levels were used in the risk assessment

. For the

proposed new uses, fiel d trial data were used in the dietary assessment. Empirical processing

factors derived from processing studies were used for the new commodities

.

Tolerances are established for residues of iprodione in livestock commodities as the result of

consumption of treated feedstuffs. As previously noted, the residues of concern for risk

assessment purposes in livestock include parent compound, RP30228 (isomer) and two

metabolites, the plant metabolite RP32490

, and an additional metabolite, RP36114. PDP

monitoring data are available for the parent compound only in livestock commodities. Previous

iterations of the iprodione dietary risk assessment relied on the PDP parent compound

monitoring data and the use of metabolite ratios to determine residues in livestock commodities.

However, the Agency has reconsidered this approach. In contrast to plants where the major

residue is the parent iprodione, the major residue in animals fed iprodione treated feedstuffs

consists primarily of metabolite s, while re sidues of the parent compound are expected to be non

detectable. (P P#2F2828, M. Kovacs, 10/25/82, dairy cattle metabolism study; l actat ing goat

metabolism study; and d airy cattle feeding study) and (MRID No. 43958201, 1996, m agnitude of

the residue in mea t and eggs of laying hens). Since PDP monitoring samples were analyzed only

for residues of the parent compound and since residues of the regulated animal metabolites are

seen in the ruminant and poultry metabolism studies at 10X or greater the concentrat ions of the

parent compound, the Agency concludes that the available monitoring data are not adequate to

assess the potential for residues in livestock commodities. For the purpose of this refined dietary

assessment, livestock residues will be calculated based on the findings in the ruminant and

poultry feeding studies and the construct of a reasonably balanced diet

.

A detailed description of the iprodione anticipated residues for both plant and livestock

commodities used in this assessment is included as Attachment 4. A summary of the anticipated

residues and % CT informa tion by crop is shown in Table 4 and the residue distribution files

used in the acute assessment are shown in Attachment 5.

Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Crop Group 1: Root and Tuber vegetable

Carrots All 5.0 Carrots PDP 0.0139 RDF #1 NB/PB 30 45

Carrots

- baby food All 5.0 Carrots PDP 0.0 139 RDF #1 PB 30 45

Carrot

- juice All 5.0 Carrots PDP 0.0 139 RDF #1 PB 30 45

Ginseng, dried All 4.0 Tolerance 4.0 4.0 B 100 100

Potato, chips All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.0117 0.0117 B 100 100 5

Potato, dry (granules/flakes) All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.0117 0.0117 B 100 100 5

Potato, dry (granules/flakes)

- babyfood All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.0117 0.0117 B 100 100 5

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 7 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Potato, flour All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.0117 0.0117 B 100 100 5

Potato, flour

– baby food All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.0117 0.0117 B 100 100 5

Potato, tuber w/peel All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.0003 RDF # 2 NB/PB 2.5 5

Potato, tuber w/peel

- baby

food All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.0003 RDF # 2 PB 2.5 5

Potato, tuber w/o peel All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.000 3 RDF #2 NB/PB 2.5 5

Potato, tuber w/o peel

- baby

food All 0.5 Potato PDP 0.000 3 RDF #2 PB 2.5 5

Crop Group 3: Bulb Vegetables

Garlic All 0.1 Tolerance and

%CT 0. 01 RDF # 3 NB /PB 10 25

Garlic, dried All 0.1 Tolerance and

%CT 0. 0 1 0.025 B 10 25

Garlic, dried

- babyfood All 0.1 Tolerance and

%CT 0. 0 1 0.025 B 10 25

Onion, dry bulb All 0.5 Tolerance and

%CT 0.1 RDF # 4 NB/ PB 20 30

Onion, dry bulb

- babyfood All 0.5 Tolerance and

%CT 0. 1 RDF # 4 NB/ PB 20 30

Onion, dry bulb, dried All 0.5 Tolerance and

%CT 0. 1 0.1 5 B 20 30

Onion, dry bulb, dried

babyfood All 0.5 Tolerance and

%CT 0. 1 0.1 5 B 20 30

Crop Group 4: Leafy Vegetables (except Brassica Vegetables)

Lettuce

- head All 25 Lettuce PDP 0.00 4 4 RDF # 5 NB /PB 2 0 3 5

Lettuce

- leaf All 25 Lettuce PDP 0.00 4 4 RDF # 5 NB /PB 2 0 3 5

Crop Group 5: Brassica Leafy V egetables

Broccoli All 25 Broccoli PDP 0.000 1 RDF # 6 NB /PB 1 2.5

Broccoli

- babyfood All 2 5 Broccoli PDP 0.000 1 RDF # 6 PB 1 2.5

Broccoli, Chinese All 25 Broccoli PDP 0.000 1 RDF # 6 NB 1 2.5

Mustard Greens All 15 Tolerance and

%CT 0.15 RDF # 7 P B 1 2.5

Crop Group 6: Legume Vegetables (Succulent or Dried)

Beans

- black, seed All, except

canned 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Canned 2.0 Canned Kidney

Bean PDP 0.0119 0.0119 B 100 100 5

Beans

- broad, succulent All 2.0 Fresh Green

Bean PDP 0.0046 RDF # 8 PB 5 15

Bean, broad, seed All 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Bean, cowpea, succulent Fresh 2.0 Fresh Green

Bean PDP 0.0046 RDF # 8 PB 5 15

Canned 2.0 Canned Green

Bean PDP 0.0006 RDF # 9 PB 5 15

Frozen 2.0 Frozen Green

Bean PDP 0.0032 RDF #1 0 PB 5 15

Bean, cowpea, seed Fresh 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 8 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Bean, great northern, seed All, except

canned 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Canned 2.0 Canned Kidney

Bean PDP 0.0119 0.0119 B 100 100 5

Bean, kidney, seed All, except

canned 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Canned 2.0 Canned Kidney

Bean PDP 0.0119 0.0119 B 100 100 5

Bean, lima, succulent Fresh 2.0 Fresh Green

Bean PDP 0.0046 RDF # 8 PB 5 15

Canned 2.0 Canned Green

Bean PDP 0.0006 RDF # 9 PB 5 15

Frozen 2.0 Frozen Green

Bean PDP 0.0032 RDF #1 0 PB 5 15

Bean, lima, seed All 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Bean, mung, seed All, except

canned 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Canned 2.0 Canned Kidney

Bean PDP 0.0119 0.0119 B 100 100 5

Bean, navy, seed All, except

canned 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Canned 2.0 Canned Kidney

Bean PDP 0.0119 0.0119 B 100 100 5

Bean, pink, seed All 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Bean, pinto, seed All 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Bean, snap, succulent Fresh 2.0 Fresh Green

Bean PDP 0.0046 RDF # 8 PB 5 15

Canned 2.0 Canned Green

Bean PDP 0.0006 RDF # 9 PB 5 15

Frozen 2.0 Frozen Green

Bean PDP 0.0032 RDF #1 0 PB 5 15

Bean, snap, succulent

- baby

food All, except

canned 2.0 Fresh Green

Bean PDP 0.0046 RDF # 8 PB 5 15

Canned 2.0 Canned Green

Bean PDP 0.0006 RDF # 9 PB 5 15

Chickpea (Garbanzo bean),

seed Al l 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Chickpea,seed

- babyfood Canned 2.0 Canned

Garbanzo Bean

PDP 0.0144 0.0144 B 100 100 5

Chickpea, flour All 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Guar, seed All, except

canned 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Canned 2.0 Canned Kidney

Bean PDP 0.0119 0.0119 B 100 100 5

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 9 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Guar, seed

- babyfood All 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Lentil, seed All 2.0 Tolerance and

%CT 0.02 0.05 B 1 2.5

Crop Group 8

- 10: Fruiting Vegetables (Except Cucurbits)

Eggplant All 2.0 Bell Pepper

FT and

Egg p lant %CT 0.0 497 RDF #1 1 NB/PB 34 4 8

Okra All 2.0 Bell Pepper

FT and Okra

%CT 0. 14 91 RDF #12 NB/PB 100 100

Pepper, bell All 2.0 Bell Pepper

FT and %CT 0.0362 RDF #1 3 NB/PB 24 42

Pepper, bell

- baby food All 2.0 Bell Pepper

FT and %CT 0.0362 RDF #1 3 PB 24 42

Pepper, bell, dried All 2.0 Bell Pepper

FT and %CT 0.0362 0.0628 B 24 42

Pepper, bell, dried

- baby food All 2.0 Bell Pepper

FT and %CT 0.0362 0.0628 B 24 42

Pepper, nonbell All 2.0 NonBell Pepper

FT and %CT 0.0912 RDF #1 4 NB/PB 24 42

Pepper, nonbell

- baby food All 2.0 NonBell Pepper

FT and %CT 0.0912 RDF #1 4 PB 24 42

Pepper, nonbell, dried All 2.0 NonBell Pepper

FT and %CT 0.0912 0.155 0 B 24 42

Tomatillo All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.3616 RDF #1 5 NB/PB 100 100

Tomato All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.1231 RDF #1 6 NB/PB 34 48

Tomato

– baby food All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.0289 0.0435 B 8 12

Tomato , dried All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.0289 0.0435 B 8 12

Tomato, dried

– baby food All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.0289 0.0435 B 8 12

Tomato, juice All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.0367 RDF #17 PB 8 12

Tomato, paste All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.0367 0.0552 B 8 12

Tomato, paste

- baby food All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.0367 0.0552 B 8 12

Tomato, puree All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.0121 0.0183 B 8 12

Tomato, puree

- baby food All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0.0121 0.0183 B 8 12

Tomato, tree All 2.0 Tomato

FT and %CT 0. 3616 RDF #1 5 NB 100 100

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 10 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Crop Group 9: Cucurbit Vegetables

Balsam Pear All 0.50 Cucumber FT

and % CT 0.0461 RDF #18 NB 100 100

Cantaloupe All 0.50 Melon FT and

%CT 0.0024 RDF # 20 NB/PB 16 30

Casaba All 0.50 Melon FT and

%CT 0.015 RDF #21 NB 100 100

Chayote, fruit All 0.50 Squash FT and

%CT 0.015 RDF #23 NB 100 100

Chinese Wax Gourd All 0.50 Cucumber FT

and % CT 0.0461 RDF #18 NB 100 100

Cucumber All 0.50 Cucumber FT

and %CT 0.0051 RDF #19 NB/PB 11 20

Honeydew melon All 0.50 Melon FT and

%CT 0.0024 RDF #20 NB/PB 16 30

Pumpkin All 0.50 Squash FT and

%CT 0.0003 RDF #24 NB/PB 2 4

Pumpkin, seed All 0.50 Squash FT and

%CT 0.0003 0.0006 B 2 4

Squash, summer All 0.50 Squash FT and

%CT 0.0013 RDF #25 NB/PB 9 20

Squash, summer

- baby food All 0.50 Squash FT and

%CT 0.0013 RDF #25 PB 9 20

Squash, winter All 0.50 Squash FT and

%CT 0.0013 RDF #25 NB/PB 9 20

Squash, winter

- baby food All 0.50 Squash FT and

%CT 0.0013 RDF #25 PB 9 20

Watermelon All 0.50 Melon FT and

%CT 0.0012 RDF #22 NB 8 9

Watermelon, juice All 0.50 Melon FT and

%CT 0.0012 RDF #22 PB 8 9

Crop Group 12: Stone Fruits Group

Apricot Fresh 20 Fresh Peach

PDP 0.5399 RDF #2 6 NB/PB 50 75

Canned 20 Canned Peach

PDP 0.0087 RDF # 28 PB 50 75

Apricot

- baby food All 20 Canned Peach

PDP 0.0087 RDF # 28 PB 50 75

Apricot, dried All 20 Fresh Peach

PDP 0.5436 0.5436 B 100 100 5

Apricot, juice All 20 Canned Peach

PDP 0.0087 RDF # 28 PB 50 75

Apricot, juice

– baby food All 20 Canned Peach

PDP 0.0087 RDF # 28 PB 50 75

Cherry All 20 Cherry PDP 0.01 42 RDF #30 PB 15 20

Cherry

- baby food All 20 Cherry PDP 0.01 42 RDF #30 PB 15 20

Cherry, juice All 20 Cherry PDP 0.01 42 RDF # 30 PB 15 20

Cherry, juice

- baby food All 20 Cherry PDP 0.01 42 RDF #30 PB 15 20

Nectarines All 20 Nectarine PDP 0.7195 RDF # 31 PB 25 35

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 11 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Peach Fresh 20 Fresh Peach

PDP 0.5385 RDF # 27 NB/PB 20 25

Canned 20 Canned Peach

PDP 0.0035 RDF # 29 PB 20 25

Peach

- baby food All 20 Canned Peach

PDP 0.0035 RDF # 29 PB 20 25

Peach, dried All 20 Fresh Peach

PDP 0.5436 0.5436 B 100 100 5

Peach, dried

- baby food All 20 Fresh Peach

PDP 0.5436 0.5436 B 100 100 5

Peach, juice All 20 Canned Peach

PDP 0.0035 RDF #2 9 PB 20 25

Peach, juice

- baby food All 20 Canned Peach

PDP 0.0035 RDF # 29 PB 20 25

Plum All 20 Plum PDP 0.4827 RDF # 32 NB/PB 10 25

Plum

- babyfood All 20 Plum PDP 0.4827 RDF # 32 PB 10 25

Plum, prune, fresh All 20 Plum PDP 0.4827 RDF # 32 NB 10 25

Plum, prune, fresh

- babyfood All 20 Plum PDP 0.4827 RDF # 32 PB 10 25

Plums, prune, dried All 20 Prune (Dried

Plum) PDP 0.0030 RDF # 33 PB 10 25

Plums, prune, dried

- babyfood All 20 Prune (Dried

Plum) PDP 0.0030 RDF # 33 PB 10 25

Plum, prune, juice All 20 Plum PDP 0.0030 RDF # 33 PB 10 25

Plum, prune, juice

- babyfood All 20 Plum PDP 0.0030 RDF # 33 PB 10 25

Crop Group 13: Berries Group

Blackberry All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 4 PB 5 20

Blackberry, juice All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 4 PB 5 20

Blackberry, juice

- baby food All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF # 3 4 PB 5 20

Blueberry All 15 Blueberry PDP

and % CT Data 0.0360 RDF # 3 6 PB 10 15

Blueberry

- baby food All 15 Blueberry PDP

and % CT Data 0.0360 RDF # 3 6 PB 10 15

Boysenberry All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 4 PB 5 20

Currant All 15 Blueberry PDP

and % CT Data 0.0360 RDF # 3 6 PB 10 15

Currant, dried All 15 Blueberry PDP

and % CT Data 0.0360 RDF # 3 6 PB 10 15

Dewberry All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 4 PB 5 20

Loganberry All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 4 PB 5 20

Raspberry All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 5 PB 5 20

Raspberry

- baby food All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 5 PB 5 20

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 12 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Raspberry, juice All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 5 PB 5 20

Raspberry, juice

- baby food All 25 Blackberry FT

and % CT Data 0.7028 RDF #3 5 PB 5 20

Crop Group 14: Tree Nuts

Almond All 0.30 Almond PDP 0.0024 RDF #38 PB 45 55

Almond

- babyfood All 0.30 Almond PDP 0.00 24 RDF #38 PB 45 55

Almond, oil All 0.30 Almond PDP 0.0052 0.0052 B 100 100 5

Almond, oil

- babyfood All 0.30 Almond PDP 0.0052 0.0052 B 100 100 5

Crop Group 15: Cereal Grains

Rice, white All 10.0 Rice PDP 0.0026 0.0026 B 100 100 5

Rice, white

- babyfood All 10.0 Rice PDP 0.0026 0.0026 B 100 100 5

Rice, brown All 10.0 Rice PDP 0.0026 0.0026 B 100 100 5

Rice, brown

- babyfood All 10.0 Rice PDP 0.0026 0.0026 B 100 100 5

Rice, flour All 10.0 Rice PDP 0.0078 0.0078 B 100 100 5

Rice, flour

- babyfood All 10.0 Rice PDP 0.0078 0.0078 B 100 100 5

Rice, bran All 30.0 Rice PDP 0.0078 0.0078 B 100 100 5

Rice, bran

- babyfood All 30.0 Rice PDP 0.0078 0.0078 B 100 100 5

Crop Group 20: Oilseeds

Rapeseed, oil All 1.0 FT Data and %

imported 0.1772 0.1923 B 87 93

Rapeseed, oil

- babyfood All 1.0 FT Data and %

imported 0.1772 0.1923 B 87 93

Miscellaneous Commodities

Grape All 10.0 Grape PDP 0.02 63 RDF # 39 PB 2.5 5

Grape, juice All 10.0 Grape juice

PDP 0.0003 RDF #40 PB 2.5 5

Grape, juice

- babyfood All 10.0 Grape juice

PDP 0.0003 RDF #40 PB 2.5 5

Grape, leaves All 10.0 Grape PDP 0.02 63 RDF # 39 PB 2.5 5

Grape, raisins All 15.0 Grape PDP 0.02 63 RDF # 39 PB 2.5 5

Grape, wine and sherry All 10.0 Grape PDP 0.0003 RDF # 39 PB 2.5 5

Kiwi fruit All 10.0 FT Data 2.6456 RDF # 41 NB 100 100

Peanut All 0.5 Tolerance and

%CT 0.5 0.5 B 100 100

Peanut

- butter All 0.5 Peanut butter

PDP 0.0362 0.0362 B 100 100

Peanut

- oil All 0.5 Tolerance and

%CT 0.5 0.5 B 100 100

Strawberry All 0.5 Fresh

strawberry PDP 0.0042 RDF # 42 PB 5 20

Strawberry

- babyfood All 0.5 Fresh

strawberry PDP 0.0042 RDF # 42 PB 5 20

Strawberry

-

juice All 0.5 Fresh

strawberry PDP 0.0042 RDF # 42 PB 5 20

Strawberry

-

juice

- babyfood All 0.5 Fresh

strawberry PDP 0.0042 RDF # 42 PB 5 20

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 13 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Meat

Beef, meat All 0.5 Beef Muscle FS

and % CT 0.0001 RDF # 4 3

- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, meat

- babyfood All 0.5 Beef Muscle FS

and % CT 0.0001 RDF # 4 3

- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, meat, dried All 0.5 Beef Muscle FS

and % CT 0.0002 RDF # 43

- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, meat, byproducts All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, meat byproducts

babyfood All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, fat All 0.5 Beef Fat FS and

% CT 0.0002 RDF # 45

- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, fat

- babyfood All 0.5 Beef Fat FS and

% CT 0.0002 RDF # 45

- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, kidney All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, liver All 3.0 Beef Liver FS

and %CT 0.0008 RDF # 46

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Beef, liver

- babyfood All 3.0 Beef Liver FS

and %CT 0.0008 RDF # 46

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Goat, meat All 0.5 Beef Muscle FS

and % CT 0.0001 RDF # 43

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Goat, meat byproducts All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Goat, fat All 0.5 Beef Fat FS and

% CT 0.0002 RDF # 45

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Goat, kidney All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Goat, liver All 3.0 Beef Liver FS

and %CT 0.0008 RDF # 46

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Horse, meat All 0.5 Beef Muscle FS

and % CT 0.0001 RDF # 43

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Pork, meat All 0.5 Beef Muscle FS

and % CT 0.0001 RDF # 43

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Pork, meat

- babyfood All 0.5 Beef Muscle FS

and % CT 0.0001 RDF # 43

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Pork, skin All 0.5 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Pork, meat byproducts All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Pork, meat byproducts

babyfood All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Pork, fat All 0.5 Beef Fat FS and

% CT 0.0002 RDF # 45

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Pork, fat

- babyfood All 0.5 Beef Fat FS and

% CT 0.0002 RDF # 45

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Pork, kidney All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 14 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Pork, liver All 3.0 Beef Liver FS

and %CT 0.0008 RDF # 46

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Sheep, meat All 0.5 Beef Muscle FS

and % CT 0.0001 RDF # 43

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Sheep, meat byproducts All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Sheep, fat All 0.5 Beef Fat FS and

% CT 0.0002 RDF # 45

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Sheep, fat

- babyfood All 0.5 Beef Fat FS and

% CT 0.0002 RDF # 45

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Sheep, kidney All 3.0 Beef Kidney FS

and % CT 0.0011 RDF # 44

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Sheep, liver All 3.0 Beef Liver FS

and %CT 0.0008 RDF # 46

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Poultry

Chicken, meat All 1.0 Poultry Muscle

FS and % CT 0.0056 RDF # 47

-- 100 4 100 4

Chicken, meat

- babyfood All 1.0 Poultry Muscle

FS and % CT 0.0056 RDF # 47

-- 100 4 100 4

Chicken, liver All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Chicken, meat byproducts All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Chicken, meat byproducts

babyfood All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Chicken, fat All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Chicken, fat

- babyfood All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Chicken, skin All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Chicken, skin

- babyfood All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Poultry, other, meat All 1.0 Poultry Muscle

FS and % CT 0.0056 RDF # 47

-- 100 4 100 4

Poultry, other, liver All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Poultry, other, meat

byproducts All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Poultry, other, fat All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Poultry, other, skin All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Turkey, meat All 1.0 Poultry Muscle

FS and % CT 0.0056 RDF # 47

-- 100 4 100 4

Turkey, meat

- babyfood All 1.0 Poultry Muscle

FS and % CT 0.0056 RDF # 47

-- 100 4 100 4

Turkey, liver All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 15 of 95 Table 4 . Iprodione Residue Summary Table

Commodity DEEM Food

Form Tolerance

ppm Data Source 1 Anticipated Residue

(ppm) or RDF #

Blended

Classification % CT

Chronic/

Cancer Acute Avg Max

Turkey, liver

- babyfood All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Turkey, meat byproducts All 7.0 Poultry Liver

FS and %CT 0.0686 RDF #48

-- 100 4 100 4

Egg, whole All 1.5 Poultry Egg FS

and % CT 0.0103 RDF # 49

-- 100 4 100 4

Egg, whole

- babyfood All 1.5 Poultry Egg FS

and % CT 0.0103 RDF # 49

-- 100 4 100 4

Egg, white All 1.5 Poultry Egg FS

and % CT 0.0103 RDF # 49

-- 100 4 100 4

Egg, white (solids)

- babyfood All 1.5 Poultry Egg FS

and % CT 0.0103 RDF # 49

-- 100 4 100 4

Egg, yolk All 1.5 Poultry Egg FS

and % CT 0.0103 RDF # 49

-- 100 4 100 4

Egg, yolk

- babyfood All 1.5 Poultry Egg FS

and % CT 0.0103 RDF # 49

-- 100 4 100 4

Dairy Products

Milk, fat All 0.5 Dairy Cattle

Milk FS and

%CT 0.0035 RDF # 50

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Milk, fat

- babyfood/ infant

formula All 0.5 Dairy Cattle

Milk FS and

%CT 0.0035 RDF # 50

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Milk, nonfat solids All 0.5 Dairy Cattle

Milk FS and

%CT 0.0035 RDF # 50

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Milk, nonfat, solids

babyfood/ infant formula All 0.5 Dairy Cattle

Milk FS and

%CT 0.0035 RDF # 50

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Milk, water All 0.5 Dairy Cattle

Milk FS and

%CT 0.0035 RDF # 50

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Milk, water

- babyfood/ infant

formula All 0.5 Dairy Cattle

Milk FS and

%CT 0.0035 RDF # 50

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

Milk, sugar (lactose)

- babyfood/infant formula All 0.5 Dairy Cattle

Milk FS and

%CT 0.0035 RDF # 50

-- 87 2 ,3 93 3

1 PDP = USDA Pesticide Data Program; %CT = Percent Crop Treated; FT Data = Field Trial Data; F S = Livestock

Feeding Study.

2 Average percent crop treated is the highest % CT for all feedstuffs; however, each feedstuff in the chronic

anticipated residue calcul ation was adjusted for its respective individual percent crop treated.

3 Cattle feed item with the highest %CT is canola

– maximum and average percent import indicated.

4 Poultry feed item with the highest %CT is peanut

– no %CT provided; therefore 100% CT assumed.

5 Since these are blended commodities and monitoring data are used, the monitoring data already takes into account

percent crop treated; therefore, no further correcti on is permitted and the % CT is noted as 100% in the table for

both the acute and chronic assessments.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 16 of 95 Residue Data Used for the 3,5

- DCA Cancer Assessment

3,5

- DCA is a common metabolite of iprodione, vinclozolin and procymidone. A tolerance for

the combined residues of vinclozolin and its metabolites containing the 3,5

- dichloroaniline

moiety in or on wine grapes at 6.0 ppm is established under 40 CFR § 180.380. A tolerance for

residues of procymidone in or on wine grapes at 5.0 pp m is established under 40 CFR § 180.455.

3,5

- DCA is a water degradate of iprodione; it is not a plant/animal metabolite; therefor e, there is

no contribution to 3,5

- DCA exposure from the food uses of iprodione. 3,5

- DCA is a common

plant metabolite of vinclozolin and procymidone. The only tolerances for vinclozolin and

iprodione are for imported wine grapes; therefore, residues of 3,5

- DCA in wine are the only food

residues to be included in the 3,5

- DCA risk assessment (D261993, F. Fort, 2/9/2000). Sin ce

residues of 3,5

- DCA are highest from vinclozolin (as compared to procymidone), residue values

from vinclozolin will be used. Data are not available on direct residues of 3,5

- DCA in wine. In

the F. Fort memo cited above, a metabolite ratio of 0.1x was determined for 3,5

- DCA.

Therefore, average residues of the parent compound were multiplied by 0.1x to determine a

residue for 3,5

- DCA in wine and sherry.

BEAD has indicated that imported wines account for 31% of all wines sold in the U.S. (3/5/12,

S. H addad, Percent Import of Wines in 2010). Therefore, the percent import was used to further

refine the 3,5

- DCA average residue value.

The vinclozolin residue data and the anticipated residue for 3,5

- DCA in wine are shown in Table

5, below. The average vinclozolin residue value is multiplied by 0.10 since 3,5

- DCA residues

are 10% of vinclozolin residues. The average 3,5

- DCA residue is then further multiplied by

0.31, since 31% of wines are imported yielding an anticipated residue for 3,5

- DCA in wine of

0.0648 ppm.

Table 5. Anticipated Residues for 3,5

- DCA in Wine

Vinclozolin Residue Values 3,5

- DCA

Average

Residue 1



### (ppm) 3,5

- DCA Average

Residue Corrected for %

Imported

(ppm) 2

0.2092 0.0648

Avg = 2.09 ppm

1 3,5

- DCA average residue is derived by taking 10% of the average vinclozolin residue

. 2 3,5

- DCA average residue is corrected for 31% of wine imported.

AR value used in assessment shown in BOLD

.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 17 of 95 III. Drinking Water Data

The drinking water residues used in the dietary risk assessment were p rovided by the

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) in the memorandum entitl ed Refined iprodione

drinking water assessment for label amendments and proposed new uses on fruiting vegetables

and cucurbits (D359480 and D357471, 2/28/12 , C. Peck)

. These values were incorporated

directly into this dietary assessment. Water residues were incorporated in the DEEM

- FCID into

the food categories “water, direct, all sources” and “water, indirect, all sources.”

Monitoring data for iprodione and 3,5

- DCA have been submitted to the Agency and reviewed by

EFED (D385307, April 5, 2011, C. Peck). EFED has used the monitoring data for

characterization purposes, but has found that there is too much uncertainty in the data to permit

its quantitative use. T herefore, EFED has provided modeled estimated drinking water

concentrations (EDWCs) for use in the dietary risk assessments for iprodione and 3,5

- DCA. The

coupled models PRZM (Pesticide Root Zone Model, v 3.12.2, May 2005) and EXAMS

(Exposure Analysis Mod eling System, V2.98.4.6, April 2005) were used to assess exposure in

surface water due to runoff and drift from the proposed iprod ione uses. Exposure in groundwater

due to leaching was assessed with the screening model SCI

- GROW (Screening Concentration in

Ground Water, V2.3, July 29, 2003)

.

As previously noted, the residues of concern in drinking water are iprodione, RP30228,

RP32490

, and RP35606. Additionally, the water degradate, 3,5

- DCA poses a potential

carcinogenicity hazard; therefore

, a separate cancer risk assessment is required for this degradate

. EFED provided modeled estimates for the parent and its regulated metabolites, expressed as total

residues, and separately for the 3,5

- DCA degradate. In modeling water concentrations, EFED

assumed th at 75% of the applied iprodione is converted to 3,5

- DCA with 25% available for

runoff. EFED also provided a distribution of daily water concentrations from the existing turf

use for input into the refined acute dietary assessment for the parent.

EFED has provided EDWCs for all existing and newly proposed domestic uses of iprodione

which are detailed in the memorandum cited above. Surface and ground water scenarios which

provide the highest EDWCs are shown in the table below

. For the highly refin ed probabilistic

assessment, EFED also provided the time course for the turf use. The full distribution of acute

estimated drinking water residues was incorporated into the acute assessment. The values used

in the chronic and cancer risk assessments show n in bold in the tables below.

Table 6. Selected Estimated Drinking Water C oncentrations for I prodione

Drinking

water source Use Seasonal

application

rate (lbs ai/A) 1

- in

- 10

year

acute

( μg/L ) 1

- in

- 10

year

chronic

( μg/L ) 30

- year

average

(μg/L)

Surface Water Fruiting vegetables ( new use ) 3 x 1 lb ai/A 25 3.3 2.2

Surface Water Cucurbits ( new use ) 3 x 1 lb ai/A 36 3.5 1.7

Surface Water Peanuts (label revision) 2 x 1.5 lb ai/A 23 5.5 2.5

Surface Water Turf 6 x 4 lb ai/A 92 31 18

Groundwater Turf 24 lb ai/A 0.29 0.29 0.29

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 18 of 95 Table 7. Selected Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs) for 3,5

- DCA

Drinking

water source Use Seasonal

application

rate (lbs ai/A) 30

- year

average

(μg/L)

Surface Water Fruiting vegetables (new use) 3 x 1 lb ai/A 3.8

Surface Water Cucurbits (new use) 3 x 1 lb ai/A 2.3

Surface Water Peanuts (label revision) 2 x 1.5 lb ai/A 4.0

Surface Water Turf 6 x 4 lb ai/A 27

Groundwater Turf 24 lb ai/A 0.81



### IV. DEEM

- FCIDTM Program and Consumption Information

Iprodione acute, chronic, and cancer, and 3,5

- DCA cancer dietary exposure assessments were

conducted using the Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity

Intake Database DEEM

- FCIDTM, Version 2.03

, which incorporates consumption data from

USDA’s Cont inuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII), 1994

- 1996 and 1998. The

1994

- 96, 98 data are based on the reported consumption of more than 20,000 individuals over

two non

- consecutive survey days. Foods “as consumed” (e.g., apple pie) are linked t o EPA

defined food commodities (e.g. apples, peeled fruit

- cooked; fresh or N/S; baked; or wheat flour

- cooked; fresh or N/S, baked) using publicly available recipe translation files developed jointly

by USDA/ARS and EPA. For chronic exposure assessment , consumption data are averaged for

the entire U.S. population and within population subgroups, but for acute exposure assessment

are retained as individual consumption events. Based on analysis of the 1994

- 96, 98 CSFII

consumption data, which took into a ccount dietary patterns and survey respondents, HED

concluded that it is most appropriate to report risk for the following population subgroups: the

general U.S. population, all infants (<1 year old), children 1

- 2, children 3

- 5, children 6

- 12, youth

13

- 19, adults 20

- 49, females 13

- 49, and adults 50+ years old.

For chronic dietary exposure assessment, an estimate of the residue level in each food or food

form (e.g., orange or orange juice) on the food commodity residue list is multiplied by the

average dail y consumption estimate for that food/food form to produce a residue intake estimate.

The resulting residue intake estimate for each food/food form is summed with the residue intake

estimates for all other food/food forms on the commodity residue list to a rrive at the total

average estimated exposure. Exposure is expressed in mg/kg body weight/day and as a percent

of the cPAD. This procedure is performed for each population subgroup.

For acute exposure assessments, individual one

- day food consumption dat a are used on an

individual

- by

- individual basis. The reported consumption amounts of each food item can be

multiplied by a residue point estimate and summed to obtain a total daily pesticide exposure for a

deterministic exposure assessment, or “matched” i n multiple random pairings with residue values

and then summed in a probabilistic assessment. The resulting distribution of exposures is

expressed as a percentage of the aPAD on both a user (i.e., only those who reported eating

relevant commodities/food f orms) and a per

- capita (i.e., those who reported eating the relevant

commodities as well as those who did not) basis. In accordance with HED policy, per capita

exposure and risk are reported for all tiers of analysis. However, for tiers 1 and 2, any sign ificant

differences in user vs. per capita exposure and risk are specifically identified and noted in the

risk assessment.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 19 of 95 V. Toxicological Information

Non

- Cancer Assessment

The Agency has recently reevaluated the non

- cancer dietary endpoints for iprodio ne in

conjuncti on with the proposed new uses. A summary of the revised non

- cancer endpoints, points

of departure and safety factors are contained in Table 8.

Table 8. Summary of Non

- Cancer Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Iprodione for Use in Dietary Human

Health Risk Assessments

Exposure/

Scenario Point of

Departure Uncertainty/

FQPA Safety

Factors RfD/PAD,

Level of

Concern for

Risk

Assessment Study and Toxicological Effects

Acute Dietary

(General Population,

including Infants and

Children) No hazard or appropriate acute endpoint was identified in the database.

Acute Dietary

(Females 13

- 49

years of age) LOAEL = 50

mg/kg/day UF A 10x

UF H 10x

FQPA SF/ UF L =

10x

Total UF: 1000 aRfD = 0.05

mg/kg

aPAD = 0.05

mg/kg Male pubertal toxicity (rat)

MRID 48279201

LOAEL = 50 mg/kg/day, based on significant,

dose

- related reductions in serum testosterone

levels ;

(males dosed PND 23 to PND 51/52)

Developmental toxicity (rat)

MRID 44365001

LOAEL = 120 mg/kg, based on decreased

anogenital distance in male pups

(dams dosed on GD 6

- 19)

Chronic Dietary

(All Populations) LOAEL = 50

mg/kg/day UF A 10x

UF H 10x

FQPA/ UF L =

10x

Total: 1000 cRfD = 0.05

mg/kg/day

cPAD = 0.05

mg/kg/day Co

- critical studies: Chronic oral toxicity (rat)

and Male pubertal toxicity study (rat)

Chronic Oral Toxicity: MRID

42637801/42787001

NOAEL = 6.1 mg/kg/day. LOAEL = 12.4

mg/kg/day, based on increases in generalized

enlargement of the cells of the zona

glomerulosa in males and females, in fine

vacuolation of the zona fasc iculata and in

generalized fine vacuolation of the zone

reticularis in males in the adrenal cortex, an

increased incidence of interstitial cell

hyperplasia, reduced spermatozoa in the

epididymides, reduced secretion of the seminal

vesicles, increased hemos iderosis in the spleen

in females, and increased liver weight.

Male pubertal toxicity (rat)

MRID 48279201

LOAEL = 50 mg/kg/day, based on significant,

dose

- related reductions in serum testosterone

levels

Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose

- response data and used to mark the beginning

of extrapolation to determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed adver se effect level.

LOAEL = lowest o bserved adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor. UF A = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UF H = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). UF L = use of a LOAEL to extrapolate a NOAEL.

FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 20 of 95 Cancer Assessment

I prodione has been classified as a “Likely” human carcinogen, based on the increa sed incidence

of liver tumors in both sexes of the mouse and the increased incidence of L eydig cell tumors in

male rats. The registrant previously submitted mode of action (MOA) data; however, the Cancer

Assessment Review Committee (CARC) determined that the MOA data do not provide a

sufficient basis for establishing an MOA for iprodione fo r either tumor type. Therefore t he

Agency has determined that it is appropriate to quantify cancer dose response using the

linearized low dose extrapolation model (Q 1 

### * ap proach), and the Leydig cell tumor Q 1 

### * of

4.39 x 10

- 2 

### was c hosen for human health risk assessment as the most sensitive endpoint.

The only concern identified for 3,5

- DCA is a potential carcinogenicity concern. A surrogate Q 1 

### *

was used to obtain the carcinogenic risk estimate for 3,5

- DCA. Since 3,5

- DCA is not a

registered pesticide, there are no toxicology data for this compound. Consequently, the

established Q 1 

### * of 6.38 x 10

- 2 

### (mg/kg/day)

- 1 

### for p

- chloroaniline (PCA) was used in this

assessment bec ause of the structural similarities between 3,5

- DCA and PCA. HED believes that

the use of the PCA Q 1 

### * represents a reasonable upper bound risk estimate.

VI. Results/Discussion

As stated above, for acute and chronic assessments, HED is concerned when dietary risk exceeds

100% of the PAD. The DEEM

- FCIDTM analyses estimate the dietary exposure of the U.S.

population and various population subgroups. The acute results are reported for females 13

- 49

only since no endpoint for acute risk assessment was selected for the general population. The

results reported in the chronic dietary assessment tables below are for the general U.S.

Population, all infants (<1 year old), children 1

- 2, c hildren 3

- 5, children 6

- 12, youth 13

- 19,

females 13

- 49, adults 20

- 49, and adults 50+ years. Cancer risk is determined for the general

U.S. population only.

Results of the Iprodione Acute Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Analysis

The results of the highly refined, acute dietary probabilistic exposure assessment at the 95 th 

### , 99 th



### , and 99.9 th 

### percentiles of exposure are reported in Table 9

. Acute dietary (food and drinking

water) exposure from the existing and newly proposed uses results in an est imated risk of 24% of

the acute population adjusted dose (aPAD) at the 99.9 th 

### percentile of exposure for females 13

–

49 , the population subgroup of concern for this risk assessment. Acute dietary risks do not

exceed HED’s level of concern (< 100% aPAD)

. The input and results files from the DEEM

FCIDTM analysis are shown in Attachment s 6 and 7, respectively.

Table 9 . Results of Iprodione Acute Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Analysis Using DEEM FCID

Population Subgroup aPAD

(mg/kg/day) 95 th Percentile 99 th Percentile 99.9 th Percentile

Exposure

(mg/kg/day) %

aPAD Exposure

(mg/kg/day) %

aPAD Exposure

(mg/kg/day) %

aPAD

Females 13

- 49 years old 0.05 0.00174 2 3.5 0.00392 6 7.8 0.011 997 24

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 21 of 95 Results of the Iprodione Chronic Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Analysis

The results of the highly refined chronic dietary assessment are shown in Table 10. Chronic

dietary (food and drinking water) exposure from the existing and newly proposed uses results in

an estimated risk of 1.8% of the chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD) for the general U.S.

p opulation and 4.8% of the cPAD for all infants (<1 year old) , the most highly exposed

population s ubgroup

. Chronic dietary risks do not exceed HED’s level of concern (< 100%

cPAD). The input and results files from the DEEM

- FCIDTM analysis are shown in Attachment s 8

and 9, respectively.

Table 10. Results of the Iprodione Chronic Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure

Analysis Using DEEM FCID

Population Subgroup cPAD

(mg/kg/day) Exposure

(mg/kg/day) % cPAD

General U.S. Population

0.05 0.00089 3 1.8

All Infants (< 1 year old) 0.0024 14 4.8

Children 1

- 2 years old 0.00157 4 3.1

Children 3

- 5 years old 0.001387 2.8

Children 6

- 12 years old 0.00094 9 1.9

Youth 13

- 19 years old 0.00066 3 1.3

Adults 20

- 49 years old 0.00080 5 1.6

Adults 50+ years old 0.0008 56 1.7

Females 13

- 49 years old 0.00080 5 1.6

Most highly exposed population subgroup is shown in BOLD

.



### Results of the Iprodione Cancer Dietary ( Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Analysis

The results of the highly refined cancer dietary assessments are shown in Table 11 . Iprodione

estimated cancer risk from drinking water alone is 1.7 x 10

- 5 

### . Iprodione estimated cancer risk

from the existing food uses only is 7.8 x 10

- 6 

### . The greatest contributors to food exposure are

kiwifruit, m ilk water dry bulb onion, and fresh pea ches. Monitoring data are not available for

kiwifruit, milk

, and dry bulb onion. If monitoring data were available, it’s likely that exposure

from these commodities would be reduced. H owever, monitoring data are available for peaches;

therefore no addit ional refinement for that commodity can be made. Iprodione estimated cancer

risk for combined drinking water and existing food is 2.5 x 10

- 5



### .

Iprodione estimated cancer risk from drinking water and all existing and newly proposed uses is

2.7 x 10

- 5 

### . The greatest contributors to exposure, aside from water, are those listed above as well

as tomatoes. The results files from the DEEM

- FCIDTM cancer analysis are shown in

Attachment s 10.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 22 of 95 Table 11 . Results of the Iprodione C ancer Dietary (Food and Drin king Water) Exposure

Analysis for the General U.S. Population Using DEEM FCID

Scenario Q 1 * Exposure

(mg/kg/day) Estimated Cancer

Risk

Water Only From Turf Use

0.0439 0.000379 1.7 x 10

- 5

Existing Food Uses Only 0.00017 9 7.8 x 10

- 6

Combined Water and Existing

Food Uses 0.00055 8 2.5 x 10

- 5

Combined Water and Existing and

Newly Proposed Uses 0.0006 19 2.7 x 10

- 5



### Results of the 3,5

- DCA Cancer Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Analysis

The results of the refined cancer dietary (food and drinking water) exposure and risk assessment

for 3,5

- DCA are shown in Table 12. The estimated 3,5

- DCA cancer risk for water alone from

the registered turf use is 3.9 x 10

- 5 

### . The estimated 3,5

- DCA cancer risk from food (imported

wine grapes only) is 5.6 x 10

- 7 

### . The estimated 3,5

- DCA cancer risk from food and drinking

water is 3.9 x 10

- 5 

### . The proposed new uses of iprodione on canola, fruiting vegetables

, and

cucurbits do not have an impact on the 3,5

- DCA cancer risks since 3,5

- DCA is not a n iprodione

plan t metabolite and the already established turf use produces higher estimated drinking water

concentrations than do these new uses. Further refinement of the food component of this

assessment may be possible by incorporating information on the percent of im ported wines that

are treated. However since the food exposure is minor compared to the drinking water exposure

and no additional refinements to the drinking water estimate are available at this time, no further

refinement has been undertaken. The input files and output from the DEEM

- FCIDTM ana lysis

are shown in Attachment 11 and 12 , respectively.

Table 12 . Results of the 3,5

- DCA Cancer Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure

Analysis for the General Population Using DEEM FCID

Scenario Q 1 * Exposure

(mg/kg/day) Estimated Cancer

Risk

Water Only From Turf Use

0.0683 0.000569 3.9 x 10

- 5

Food Only (Imported Wine

Grapes) 0.000008 5.7 x 10

- 7

Food and Water Combined 0.000 577 3.9 x 10

- 5



### VII

. Characterization of Inputs/Outputs

HED has conducted highly refined acute, chronic

, and cancer dietary risk assessments for

iprodione and a refined dietary risk assessment for the metabolite 3,5

- DCA. The iprodione

dietary assessment us ed all available monitoring data , PCT and PCTn information, as well as

em pirical processing data. Additional refinements which would significantly impact the

calculated exposures and risks are not available at this time. Acute and chronic non

- cancer risk

assessments do not exceed HED’s level of concern for the existing and pr oposed new uses.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 23 of 95 E stimated iprodione dietary (food and drinking water) cancer risks for the existing and new uses

are 2.7 x 10

- 5

. 

### E stimated 3,5

- DCA dietary (food and drinking water) cancer risks are 3.9 x10

- 5



### . For both the parent compound and for 3,5

- DC A, drinking water is the major contributor to

exposure in the cancer risk assessments.

VIII. Conclusions

The Agency has conducted a highly refined acute probabilistic dietary risk assessment and a

highly refined chronic (cancer and non

- cancer) assessment for iprodione. These assessments

incorporated available monitoring data, PCT and PCTn information, as wel l as empirical

processing data and modeled water values. Additionally , the Agency conducted a refined cancer

dietary risk assessment for the metabolite, 3,5

- DCA. While these assessments have been refined,

they are still considered to be health protective and are not likely to underestimate dietary risk.

IX. List of Attachments

Attachment 1: Iprodione and Metabolite Structures

Attachment 2: BEAD SLUA

Attachment 3: PCTn

Attachment 4: Iprodione Anticipated Residue Calculations

Attachment 5: RDFs

Attachment 6: Iprodione Acute Dietary Input File

Attachment 7: Iprodione Acute Dietary Results File

Attachment 8: Iprodione Chronic Dietary Input File

Attachment 9: Iprodione Chronic Dietary Results File

Attachment 1 0 : Iprodione Cancer Dietary Results Files

Attachment 1 1 : 3,5

- DCA Cancer Dietary Input File

Attachment 1 2 : 3,5

- DCA Cancer Dietary Results Files

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 24 of 95 Attachment 1. Iprodione and Metabolite Structures

Table A1. Iprodione and Metabolite Structures

Iprodione

Plant, Livestock , Water

RP

- 30228; isoiprodione;

3

- (1

- methylethyl)

- N

- (3,5

- dichlorophenyl)

- 2,4

- dioxo

- 1

-

imidazolidinecarboxamide

Plant, Livestock , Water

RP

- 32490; iprodione amide;

3

- (3,5

- dichlorophenyl)

- 2,4

- dioxo

1

- imidazolidine

- carboxamide

Plant, Livestock , Water

RP

- 36114; N

- (3,5

- dichloro

- 4

- hydroxyphenyl)

- ureido

carboxamide

Livestock

RP 35606; [(dichloro

- 3,5

- phenyl)

- 1

- isopropylcarbamoyl

3]

- 2

- acetic acid

W ater

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 25 of 95 Table A1. Iprodione and Metabolite Structures

3,5

- DCA; 3,5

- dichloroaniline

Water

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 26 of 95 Attachment 2. BEAD SLUA

Attachment 3. PCT for New Uses

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 27 of 95

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 28 of 95

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 29 of 95 Attachment 4. Iprodione Anticipated Residue Calculations

Plant Commodities

Iprodione residues of concern in plants include the parent compound, RP30228 (isomer) and RP32490

(metabolite). PDP data are available for the parent compound; however, PDP has limited data for the

isomer from 2004, 2006 and 2007. The data is not well pa ired with the data on the parent residues and all

samples analyzed for parent were not also analyzed for the isomer. The available data, though limited do

show a very low level of detects of the isomer (most commodities has no detectable residues of the

R P30228 isomer), the most isomer detects were seen in 2007 blueberries, where the isomer was present in

2 out of 339 samples. Since the data on the isomer cannot be correlated to the data on the parent, a more

conservative approach to account for residues of the isomer and the RP32490 metabolite in plants was

taken. Metabolite ratios were derived from the metabolism studies and these ratios were applied to the

parent compound to derive total iprodione residues of concern.

For those commodities without mon itoring data, translations were made consistent with Agency policy.

Where no monitoring data were available, or an appropriate translation could not be made, either field

trial data or tolerance levels were used in the risk assessment. When FT data were used, the reported

residue is total iprodione (parent, RP30228 and RP32490 ) so no correction for metabolite ratios was

required to address all residues of concern. Further, the tolerance expression for iprodione includes the

same residues of concern as th e risk assessment, so no correction to tolerance levels is required when

using them in the dietary risk assessment.

Also note

– while ARs are shown below by “ crop group ”, this is meant to provide some structure to the

presentation and is not meant to imply that crop group tolerances are established. In fact, all commodities

in the group are not always included. If there is not a tolerance or a newly proposed use for th e

commodity, it is not included in its relevant crop group.



### Root and Tuber Vegetables (Crop Group 1)

Carrots

PDP monitoring data from 2006, 2007 for fresh carrots

Total # of samples = 1487

Total # <LOD = 1277; Total # <LOD of 0.015 ppm = 276; Total # < LOD of 0.035 = 1001

Total # of detectable residues = 210

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP 32490 were

0.17x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individual sample:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.28) (parent residue) + (0.17) (parent residue)]

Calculations were perfor med in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residue values for

each individual detectable residue are shown in the RDF

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(276) + (0.035)(1001)] ÷ 1277 = 0.0307 ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0. 0153 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0153 + (0.28) (0.0153) + (0.17) (0.0153)] = 0.0222 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 30 of 95 Carrots, Carrot Juice, Carrot Baby Food (Fresh Carrot PDP Data and Carrot %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #1

1487 Total samples; Max %CT = 45%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0222 ppm

Total # of detects = 210

Treated samples = (1487) (0.45) = 669

669

– 210 = 459

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0222 ppm

1487

– 669 = 818 Total Zeros

210 detects from PDP data corrected for metabolite

ratio Chronic AR

1487 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 30 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0222 ppm

Total # of detects = 210

(1487) (0.30) = 446 treated samples

446

– 210 = 236

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0222 ppm

Chronic AR = (15.3918 total of all detects + (236)

(0.0222)]/1487 = 0.0139 ppm

Ginseng, dried

No monitoring data. Since this commodity is not likely to be a driver, used tolerance level residue of 4.0

ppm and assumed 100% crop treated. Ginseng, dried is a “blended” commodity.

Acute AR = Chronic AR= (4.0)(1.0) = 4.0 ppm

Potato, Fre sh

PDP monitoring data from 200 8 , 200 9 for fresh potatoes

Total # of samples = 1488

Total # <LOD = 1488; Total # <LOD of 0.0099 ppm = 220; Total # < LOD of 0.015 = 734; Total #

<LOD of 0.0206 = 534

Total # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total res idue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as fo llows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.0099)(220) + (0.015)(734) + (0.0206)(534)] ÷ 1488 = 0.0162ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0081 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0081 + (0.28) (0.0081) + (0.17) (0.0081)] = 0.0117 ppm

Note: No detectable res idues were found in either fresh or frozen potatoes (2006, 2007 data); therefore

more recent fresh potato data was used for all potato commodities.

Potato Dry, Potato Flour, Potato flour

– baby food (Fresh Potato PDP Data; DEEM Default PF of

6.5 to be applied as correction factor #1 in R98)

Blended Classification: B

This is a blended commodity and monitoring data is used. Since monitoring data already accounts for

%CT, no further adjustment for %CT is permitted.

Acute AR

Since there are no detecta ble residues, the acute AR

is a point value and is equal to 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0117

ppm Chronic AR

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0117 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Therefore the chronic AR = 0.0117 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 31 of 95 Potato Tubers with and w/out peel, Potato Tubers w/out peel baby food (Fresh Potato PDP Data

and Potato %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #2

1488 Total samples; Max %CT = 5%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0117 ppm

Total # of detects = 0

Treated samples = (1488) (0.05) = 74

74

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0117 ppm

1488

– 74 = 1414 Total Zeros

210 detects from PDP data corrected for metabolite

ratio Chronic AR

1488 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 2.5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0117 ppm

Total # of detects = 0

(1488) (0.025) = 37 treated sample s

37

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0117 ppm

Chronic AR = [(0.0117)(37)]/1488 = 0.0003 ppm



### Bulb Vegetables (Crop Group 3)

Garlic

No monitoring data. Since this commodity is not likely to be a driver, used tolerance level residue of 0.1

ppm and 25% maximum percent crop treated or 10% average percent crop treated.

Garlic (Tolerance and Garlic %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #3

Tolerance = 0.1 ppm

Max %CT = 25%

Total Zeros = 15

Total @ tolerance of 0.1 ppm = 5 Chronic AR

Tolerance = 0.1 ppm

Avg %CT = 10%

Chronic AR = (0.1)(0.1) = 0.01 ppm

Garlic Dried, Garlic dried

– baby food (Tolerance and Garlic %CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

Tolerance = 0.1 ppm

Max %CT = 25%

Acute AR = (0.1)(0.25) = 0.025 ppm Chronic AR

Tolerance = 0.1 ppm

Avg %CT = 10%

Chronic AR = (0.1)(0.1) = 0.01 ppm

Onion, dry bulb

No monitoring data. Since this commodity is not likely to be a driver, used tolerance level residue of 0.5

ppm and 30% maximum percent crop treated or 20% average percent crop treated.

Onion dry

- bu lb (Tolerance and Onion %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #4

Tolerance = 0.5 ppm

Max %CT = 30%

Total Zeros = 70

Total @ tolerance of 0.5 ppm = 30 Chronic AR

Tolerance = 0.5 ppm

Avg %CT = 20%

Chronic AR = (0.5)(0.2) = 0.10 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 32 of 95 Onion dry

- bulb, dried, Onion dry

- bulb,dried

– baby food (Tolerance and Onion %CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

Tolerance = 0.5 ppm

Max %CT = 30%

Acute AR = (0.5)(0.30) = 0.15 ppm Chronic AR

Tolerance = 0.5 ppm

Avg %CT = 20%

Chronic AR = (0.5)(0.2) = 0.10 ppm



### Leafy Vegetables (except Brassica Vegetables) (Crop Group 4)

Lettuce

PDP monitoring data from 200 4 , 200 5 and 2010 for fresh lettuce

Total # of samples = 2229

Total # <LOD = 2203; Total # <LOD of 0.0084 ppm = 1022; Total # < LOD of 0.015 = 108; Total # <

LOD of 0.0206 = 489; Total # <LOD of 0.021 = 323; Total # < LOD of 0.0216 = 247; Total # < LOD of

0.056 = 14

Total # of detectable residues = 19

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism s tudy.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.28) (parent residue) + (0.17) (parent residue)]

Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.0084)(1022) + (0.015)(108) + (0.0206)(489) + (0.021)(323) + (0.0216)(247) + (0.056)(14)] ÷

2203 = 0.0151 ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0075 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0075 + (0.28) (0.0075) + (0.17) (0.0075)] = 0.0109 ppm

Lettuce Leaf and Lettuce Head (Fresh Lettuce PDP Data and Lettuce %CT )

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #5

1486 total PDP samples; Max %CT = 35 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0109 ppm

Total # detects = 19

(1486) (0.35) = 520 treated samples

520

– 19 = 501

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0109 ppm

1486

– 520 = 966 Total Zeros

19 detects from PDP data corrected for metaboli te

ratio Chronic AR

1486 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 20 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0109 ppm

Total # detects = 19

(1486) (0.20) = 297 treated samples

297

– 19 = 278

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0109 ppm

Chronic AR = [(3.4655 total of all detects + (278)

(0.0109)]/1486 = 0.0044 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 33 of 95 Brassica Vegetables (Crop Group 5)

Broccoli

PDP monitoring data from 200 6 , 200 7, and 2008 for broccoli

Total # of samples = 1459

Total # <LOD = 1459; Total # <LOD of 0.0084 ppm = 1443; Total # < LOD of 0.117 = 16

Total # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

A total weighted LO D was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.0084)(11443) + (0.117)(16)] ÷ 1459 = 0.0096 ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0048 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0048 + (0.28) (0.0048) + (0.17) (0.0048)] = 0.007 ppm

Broccoli and Chinese Broccoli (Broccoli PDP Data and Broccoli %CT )

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF # 6

1459 total PDP samples; Max %CT = 2.5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.007 ppm

Total # detects = 0

(1459) (0.025) = 36 treated samples

36

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.007 ppm

1459

– 36 = 1423 Total Zeros Chronic AR

1459 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 1 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.007 ppm

Total # detects = 0

(1459) (0.01) = 15 treated samples

15

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.007 ppm

Chronic AR = [(15) (0.007)]/1459 = 0.0001 ppm

Note: Broccoli r aab removed from assessment since tolerance for Broccoli only includes broccoli and

Chines e broccoli , not broccoli raab per conversation with B. Schne i der. There is no tolerance for broccoli

raab, so it was removed.

Mustard Greens

Monitoring data are not available for mustard greens. Used tolerance level residue of 15 ppm and 2.5%

maximum percent crop treated or 1% average percent crop treated from highest brassica treated.

Mustard Greens (Tolerance and Highest Brassica %CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #7

Tolerance = 15 ppm

Max %CT = 2.5%

Total Zeros = 195

Total @ tolerance of 15 ppm = 5 Chronic AR

Tolerance = 15 ppm

Avg %CT = 1%

Chronic AR = (15)(0.01) = 0.15 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 34 of 95 Legume Vegetables (Succulent or Dried)

Note: Tolerances ONLY for beans, dry and succulent; therefore pea commodities and soybeans not

included.

Green Beans, Fresh

PDP monitoring data from 2004, 2005, 2007, and 2008

Total # of samples = 1155

Total # <LOD = 1123; Total # <LOD of 0.015 ppm = 909; Total # < LOD of 0.021 = 214

Total # of detectable residues = 32

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of p arent.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(909) + (0.021)(214)] ÷ 1123 = 0.0161 ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0081 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0081 + (0.28) (0.0081) + (0.17) (0.0081)] = 0.0117 ppm

All Succulent Beans, Fresh (Green Bean Fresh PDP Data, Green Bean %CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF # 8

1155 total PDP samples; Max %CT = 15 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0117 ppm

Total # detects = 32

(1155) (0.15) = 173 treated samples

173

– 32 = 141

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0117 ppm

1155

– 173 = 982 Total Zeros

32 detects from PDP data corrected for metabolite

ratio Chronic AR

1155 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0117 ppm

Total # detects = 32

(1155 ) (0.05) = 58 treated samples

58

– 32 = 26

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0117 ppm

Chronic AR = [(5.0489 total of all detects + (26)

(0.0117)]/1155 = 0.0046 ppm

Green Beans, Canned

PDP monitoring data from 2004

Total # of samples = 185

Total # <LOD = 185; Total # < LOD of 0.015 ppm = 131; Total # < LOD of 0.021 = 54

Total # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(131) + (0.021)(54)] ÷ 185 = 0.0167 ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0084 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0084 + (0.28) (0.0084) + (0.17) (0.0084)] = 0.0122 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 35 of 95 All Succulent Beans, Canned (Green Bean Canned PDP Data, Green Bean %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF # 9

185 total PDP samples; Max %CT = 15 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0122 ppm

Total # detects = 0

(185) (0.15) = 28 treated samples

28

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0122 ppm

185

– 28 = 157 Total Zeros Chronic AR

185 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0122 ppm

Total # detects = 0

(185) (0.05) = 9 treated samples

9

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0122 ppm

Chronic AR = [(9) (0.0122)]/185 = 0.0006 ppm

Green Beans, Frozen

PDP monitoring data from 2005

Total # of samples = 555

Total # <LOD = 545; Total # <LOD of 0.015 ppm = 491; Total # < LOD of 0.021 = 54

Total # of detectable residues = 10

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

A total weighted LO D was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(491) + (0.021)(54)] ÷ 545 = 0.0156 ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0078 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0078 + (0.28) (0.0078) + (0.17) (0.0078)] = 0.0113 ppm

All Succulent Beans, Frozen (Green Bean Frozen PDP Data, Green Bean %CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF # 10

555 total PDP samples; Max %CT = 15 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0113 ppm

Total # detects = 10

(555) (0.15) = 83 treated samples

83

– 10 = 73

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0113 ppm

555

- 83 = 472 Total Zeros

10 detects from PDP data corrected for metabolite

ratio Chronic AR

555 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0113 ppm

Total # detects = 10

(555) (0.05) = 28 treated samples

28

– 10 = 18

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0113 ppm

Chronic AR = [(1.5965 t otal of all detects + (18)

(0.0113)]/555 = 0.0032 ppm

Dried Beans, All except Canned

No monitoring data available. Use tolerance level and % CT

Beans, Dried, All forms except Canned (Tolerance and % CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

Tolerance = 2.0 ppm; Max %CT =2.5%

(2.0) (0.025) = 0.05 ppm Chronic AR

Tolerance = 2.0 ppm; Avg %CT = 1%

(2.0) (0.01) = 0.02 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 36 of 95 Kidney Beans, Canned

PDP monitoring data from 2008, 2009

Total # of samples = 372

Total # <LOD = 372; Total # <LOD of 0.0099 ppm = 88; Total # <LOD of 0.015 = 108; Total # < LOD

of 0.0206 = 176

Total # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residue s of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.0099)(88) + (0.015)(108) + (0.0206)(176) ] ÷ 372 = 0.0164 ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0082 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0082 + (0.28) (0.0082) + (0.17) (0.0082)] = 0.0119 ppm

Beans, Dried, Cann ed (Kidney Bean Canned PDP Data )

Blended Classification: B

Since this is a blended commodity and monitoring data which already account for % CT are used; no

further refinement for %CT is permitted.

Acute AR

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0119 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Since there are no detects, the acute AR is a point

value and is equal to 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0119 ppm Chronic AR

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0119 ppm

To tal # detects = 0

Chronic AR = 0.0119 ppm

Pinto Beans, Canned

PDP monitoring data from 200 9 for canned pinto beans

Total # of samples = 372

Total # <LOD = 372; Total # < LOD of 0.015 = 105; Total # <LOD of 0.0206 = 267

Total # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(105) + (0.0206)(267)] ÷ 372 = 0.019ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0095 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0095 + (0.28) (0.0095) + (0.17) (0.0095)] = 0.0138 ppm

Pinto Beans, Cann ed (Canned Pinto Bean PDP Data and Dry Bean % CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

372 total PDP samples; Max %CT = 2.5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0138 ppm

Total # detectable residues = 0

(372) (0.025) = 9 treated samples

9

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0138 ppm

Acute AR = [(0.0138)(9)]/372 = 0.0003 ppm Chronic AR

372 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 1 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0138 ppm

Total # detectable residues = 0

(372) (0.01) = 4 treated samples

4

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0138 ppm

Chronic AR = [(0.0138)(4)]/372 = 0.0001 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 37 of 95 Garbanzo Beans, Canned PDP Data

PDP monitoring data from 200 9 and 2010 for canned garbanzo beans

Total # of samples = 372

Total # <LOD = 186; Total # < LOD of 0.015 = 51; Total # <LOD of 0.0206 = 321

Total # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

A total weighted LO D was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(51) + (0.0206)(321)] ÷ 372 = 0.0198ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0099 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0099 + (0.28) (0.0099) + (0.17) (0.0099)] = 0.0144 ppm

Chickpea (Garbanzo B ean) Seed

– baby food, (Canned Garbanzo Bean PDP Data)

Blended Classification: B

This is a blended commodity and since monitoring data were used which account for %CT, no further

adjustment for %CT is permitted.

Acute AR

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0144 ppm

Total # detectable residues = 0

Since there are no detectable residues, the acute AR

is a point value equal to 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0144 ppm Chronic AR

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0144 ppm

Total # detectable residues = 0

Chronic AR = 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0144 ppm



### Fruiting Vegetables ( Crop Group 8

- 10)

Peppers

Bell Pepper Field Trial Data

Source of residue data: field trial data on bell peppers from MRID No. 47747102

8 FT values; 6 detectable residues and 2 <LOQ (0.03 ppm); 1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 ppm

FT data include parent and two regulated metab olites

Non

- Bell Pepper Field Trial Data

Source of residue data: field trial data on non

- bell peppers from MRID No. 47747102

4 FT values; 3 detectable residues and 1 <LOQ (0.03 ppm); 1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 ppm

FT data include parent and two regulated metabolites

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 38 of 95 Egg Plant (Bell Pepper FT Data and Eggplant % CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #11

8 FT samples; Max %CT = 48%

(X) (0.48) = 8

X = 17 = T otal number of samples

17

– 8 = 9 zeros (untreated)

6

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

2

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

8 FT samples; Avg %CT = 34 %

(X) (0.34) = 8

X = 24 = Total number of samples

[1.163 + (2) (0.015)] ÷ 24 = 0.0497 ppm

Okra (Bell Pepper FT Data and Okra % CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #12

8 FT samples; Max %CT = 100%

(X) (1) = 8

X = 8 = T otal number of samples

8

– 8 = 0 zeros (untreated)

6

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

2

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

8 FT samples; Avg %CT = 100 %

(X) (1) = 8

X = 8 = Total number of samples

[1.163 + (2) (0.015)] ÷ 8 = 0.1491 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 39 of 95 Pepper, Bell Fresh and Pepper, Bell

– Baby Food (Bell Pepper FT Data and Bell Pepper % CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #1 3

8 FT samples; Max %CT = 42%

(X) (0.42) = 8

X = 19 = T otal number of samples

19

– 8 = 11 zeros (untreated)

6

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

2

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

8 FT samples; Avg %CT = 24 %

(X) (0.24) = 8

X = 33 = Total number of samples

[1.163 + (2) (0.015)] ÷ 33 = 0.0362 ppm

Pepper, Bell, Dried and pepper, Bell, Dried

– Baby Food (No DEEM default PF, use bell pepper FT

data)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

8 FT samples; Max %CT = 42%

(X) (0.42) = 8

X = 19 = T otal number of samples

[1.163 + (2) (0.015)] ÷ 19 = 0.0628 ppm Chronic AR

8 FT samples; Avg %CT = 24 %

(X) (0.24) = 8

X = 33 = Total number of samples

[1.163 + (2) (0.015)] ÷ 33 = 0.0362 ppm

Pepper, Non

- Bell (Non

- Bell Pepper FT Data and non

- bell %CT)

Blended Classification: N B/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #14

4 FT samples; Max %CT = 42%

(X) (0.42) = 4

X = 10 = T otal number of samples

10

– 4 = 6 zeros (untreated)

3

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

1

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

4 FT samples; Avg %CT = 24 %

(X) (0.24) = 4

X = 17 = Total number of samples

[1.535 + (1) (0.015)] ÷ 17 = 0.0912 ppm

Pepper, Non

- Bell, Dried (No DEEM default PF, use non

- bell pepper FT data and non

- bell %CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

4 FT samples; Max %CT = 42%

(X) (0.42) = 4

X = 10 = T otal number of samples

[1.535 + (1) (0.015)] ÷ 10 = 0.155 ppm Chronic AR

4 FT samples; Avg %CT = 24 %

(X) (0.24) = 4

X = 17 = Total number of samples

[1.535 + (1) (0.015)] ÷ 17 = 0.0912 ppm

Tomatoes

Tomato Field Trial Data

Source of residue data: field trial data on fresh tomatoes from MRID No. 47747102

16 FT values; 12 detectable residues and 4 <LOQ (0.03 ppm); 1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 ppm

F T data include parent and two regulated metabolites

Processing factors from MRID No. 47747102 used to correct t omato FT data for paste and puree

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 40 of 95 Tomatillo and Tree tomato (Tomato FT data and Tomatillo %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #15

16 FT samples; Max %CT = 100%

(X) (1) = 16 T otal number of samples

16

– 16 = 0 zeros (untreated)

12

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

4

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

16 FT samples; Avg %CT = 100 %

(X) (1) = 16 Total number of samples

[5.725 + (4) (0.015)] ÷ 16 = 0.3616 ppm

Tomato, fresh ( Tomato FT data and fresh tomato %CT )

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #1 6

16 FT samples; Max %CT = 48%

(X) (0.48) = 16

X = 33 = T otal number of samples

33

– 16 = 17 zeros (untreated)

12

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

4

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

16 FT samples; Avg %CT = 34 %

(X) (0.34) = 16

X = 47 = Total number of samples

[5.725 + (4) (0.015)] ÷ 47 = 0.1231 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 41 of 95 Tomato

– baby food, Tomato, dried and Tomato, dried

– baby food (Fresh Tomato FT Data and

Processed Tomato % CT; DEEM Default PF of 14.3 to be applied to dried tomato as correction

factor #1 in R98 )

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

16 FT samples; Max %CT =12%

(X) (0.12) = 16

X = 133 = T otal number of samples

12

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

4

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[5.725 + (4) (0.015)] ÷ 133 = 0.0435 ppm Chronic AR

16 FT samples; Avg %CT =8%

(X) (0.08) = 16

X = 200 = Total number of samples

12

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

4

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[5.725 + (4) (0.015)] ÷ 200 = 0.0289 ppm

Tomato Juice (Used Tomato paste data for juice; Corrected Fresh Tomato Individual HAFT

Values for Paste PF of 1.27x; Processed Tomato %CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #17

16 FT samples; Max %CT =12%

(X) (0.12) = 16

X = 133 = T otal number of samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 x 1.27 (PF) = 0.019 ppm

133

- 16 = 117 zeros (untreated samples)

12

– tomato paste residues

4

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.019 ppm Chronic AR

16 FT samples; Avg %CT =8%

(X) (0.08) = 16

X = 200 = Total number of samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 x 1.27 = 0.0191 ppm

[7.2708 + (4) (0.019)] ÷ 200 = 0.0367 ppm

Tomato Paste and Tomato Paste

– baby food (Corrected Fresh Tomato Individual HAFT Values

for Paste PF of 1.27x; Processed Tomato %CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

16 FT samples; Max %CT =12%

(X) (0.12) = 16

X = 133 = T otal number of samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 x 1.27 (PF) = 0.0191 ppm

12

– tomato paste residues

4

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.0191 ppm

[7.2708 + (4) (0.0191)] ÷ 133 = 0.0552 ppm Chronic AR

16 FT samples; Avg %CT =8%

(X) (0.08) = 16

X = 200 = Total number of samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 x 1.27 = 0.0191 ppm

[7.2708 + (4) (0.0191)] ÷ 200 = 0.0367 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 42 of 95 Tomato Puree and Tomato Puree

– baby food (Fresh Tomato Data corrected with empirical PF =

0.42x; Processed Tomato %CT))

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

16 FT samples; Max %CT =12%

(X) (0.12) = 16

X = 133 = T otal number of samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 x 0.42 (PF) = 0.0063 ppm

[2.4045 + (4) (0.0063)] ÷ 133 = 0.0183 ppm Chronic AR

16 FT samples; Avg %CT =8%

(X) (0.08) = 16

X = 200 = Total number of samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 x 0.42 = 0.0063 ppm

[2.4045 + (4) (0.0063)] ÷ 200 = 0.0121 ppm



### Cucurbits (Crop Group 9)

Cucumber

Source of residue data: field trial data on cucumbers from MRID No. 47747101

9 FT values; 5 detectable residues and 4 <LOQ (0.03 ppm); 1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 ppm

F T data include parent and two regulated metabolites

Balsam Pear (Cucumber FT data and 100 %CT)

Blended Classification: NB

Acute AR

– RDF #18

9 FT samples; Max %CT = 100%

(X) (1) = 9 T otal number of samples

9

– 9 = 0 zeros (untreated)

5

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

4

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

9 FT samples; Avg %CT = 100 %

(X) (1) = 9 Total number of samples

[0.355 + (4) (0.015)] ÷ 9 = 0.0461 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 43 of 95 Cucumbers (Cucumber FT data and Cucumber %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #19

9 FT samples; Max %CT = 20%

(X) (0.20) = 9

X = 45 = T otal number of samples

45

– 9 = 36 zeros (untreated)

5

– detectable residues from FT uncorrected

4

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

9 FT samples; Avg %CT = 11 %

(X) (0.11) = 9

X = 82 = Total number of samples

[0.355 + (4) (0.015)] ÷ 82 = 0.0051 ppm

Melon

Source of residue data: field trial data on melons from MRID No. 47747101

11 FT values; all <LOQ (0.03 ppm); 1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 ppm

F T data include parent and two regulated metabolites

Cantaloupe and Honeydew Melon (Used all Melon Data and 30%CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #20

11 FT samples all <LOQ; Max %CT = 30%

(x) (0.30) = 11

X = 37 total samples

37

- 11 = 26 Total zeros (untreated)

11

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

11 FT samples all <LOQ; Avg %CT = 16 %

(x) (0.16) = 11

X = 69 total samples

11

- 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[(11) (0.015)] ÷ 69 = 0.0024 ppm

Casaba and Chinese Waxgourd (Used all Melon Data and 100%CT)

Blended Classification: NB

Acute AR

– RDF #21

11 FT samples all <LOQ; Max %CT = 100%

(x) (1) = 11 total samples

11

- 11 = 0 Total zeros (untreated)

11

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

11 FT samples all <LOQ; Avg %CT = 100 %

(x) (1) = 11 total samples

11

- 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[(11) (0.015)] ÷ 11 = 0.015 ppm

Watermelon and Watermelon Juice (Used all Melon Data w/ Watermelon %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #22

11 FT samples all <LOQ; Max %CT = 9%

(X) (0.09) = 11

X = 122 Total Samples

122

– 11 = 111 Total zeros (untreated)

11

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

11 FT samples all <LOQ; Avg %CT = 8 %

(X) (0.08) = 11

X = 138 Total Samples

11

- 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[(11) (0.015)] ÷ 138 = 0.0012 ppm

Squash

Source of residue data: field trial data on squash from MRID No. 47747101

7 FT values; all <LOQ (0.03 ppm); 1⁄2 LOD = 0.015 ppm

F T data include parent and two regulated metabolites

Chayote Fruit (Squash FT Data and 100%CT)

Blended Classification: NB

Acut e AR

– RDF #23

7 FT samples all <LOQ; Max %CT = 100% Chronic AR

7 FT samples all <LOQ; Avg %CT = 100 %

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 44 of 95 (x) (1) = 7 total samples

7

– 7 = 0 Total zeros (untreated)

7

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm (x) (1) = 7 total samples

7

- 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[(7) (0.015)] ÷ 7 = 0.015 ppm

Pumpkin (Squash FT data and pumpkin %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #24

7 FT samples all <LOQ; Max %CT = 4%

(x) (0.04) = 7

X = 175 total samples

175

– 7 = 168 Total zeros (untreated)

7

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

7 FT samples all <LOQ; Avg %CT = 2 %

(x) (0.02) = 7

X = 350 total samples

7

- 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[(7) (0.015)] ÷ 350 = 0.0003 ppm

Pumpkin Seed (Squash Data with Pumpkin %CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

7FT samples; Max %CT =4%

(x) (0.04) = 7

X = 175 total samples

7

- 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[(7) (0.015)] ÷ 175 = 0.0006 ppm Chronic AR

7 FT samples all <LOQ; Avg %CT = 2 %

(x) (0.02) = 7

X = 350 total samples

7

- 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[(7) (0.015)] ÷ 350 = 0.0003 ppm

Squash, winter and summer and baby food (Used Squash Data with Squash %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #25

7 FT samples all <LOQ; Max %CT = 20%

(x) (0.20) = 7

X = 35 total samples

35

– 7 = 28 Total zeros (untreated)

7

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm Chronic AR

7 FT samples all <LOQ; Avg %CT = 9 %

(x) (0.09) = 7

X = 78 total samples

7

– 1⁄2 LOQ @ 0.015 ppm

[(7) (0.015)] ÷ 78 = 0.0013 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 45 of 95 Stone Fruits (Crop Group 12)

Peach, Fresh

PDP Monitoring data from 2006, 2007 and 2008 for fresh peaches

Total # of samples = 1261

Total # < LOD of 0.015 ppm = 847; 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0075 ppm

Total # of detectable residues = 414

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP3 0228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individual sample:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.01) (pare nt residue) + (0.01) (parent residue)]

Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

The LOD was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1/2LOD T 

### = [0.0075 + (0.01) (0.007 5) + (0.01) (0.0075)] = 0.0076 ppm

Apricot, Fresh (Fresh Peach PDP Data and Apricot %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #26

1261 Total samples; Max %CT = 75%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0076 ppm

Total # of detects = 414

Treated samples = (1261) (0.75) = 946

946

– 414 = 532

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0076 ppm

1261

– 946 = 315 Total Zeros

414 detects from PDP data corrected for metabolite

ratio Chronic AR

1261 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 50 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0076 ppm

Total # of detects = 414

(1261) (0.50) = 630 treated sample s

630

– 414 = 216

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0076 ppm

Chronic AR = [(679.063 total of all detects + (216)

(0.0076)]/1261 = 0.5399 ppm

Apricot, Dried ( DEEM Default PF of 6.0 to be applied as correction factor #1 in R98 ; Fresh Peach

PDP Data )

Blended Classification: B

Since this is a blended commodity and monitoring data are used; no further correction for %CT permitted.

Acute AR

1261 total PDP samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0076 ppm

Total # detects = 414

No zeros assumed for blended; therefore 1261

– 414 = 847 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0076 pp m

Acute AR = [(679 .063 total of all detects + ( 847)

(0.0076)]/1261 = 0.5436 ppm Chronic AR

1261 total PDP samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0076 ppm

Total # detects = 414

No zeros assumed for blended; therefore 1261

– 414 = 847 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0076 ppm

Chronic AR = [(679.063 total of all detects + (847)

(0.0076)]/1261 = 0.5436 ppm

Peach (Fresh Peach PDP Data and Peach %CT)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #27

1261 Total samples; Max %CT = 25%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0076 ppm Chronic AR

1261 Total samples; Avg %CT = 20 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0076 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 46 of 95 Total # of detects = 414

Treated samples = (1261) (0.25) = 315

Since 315 < 414, no 1⁄2 LODs

1261

– 414 = 847 Total Zeros

414 detects from PDP data corrected for metabolite

ratio Total # of detects = 414

Treated samples = (1261) (0.20) = 252

Since 252 < 414, no 1⁄2 LODs

Chronic AR = 679.063 total of all detects/1261 =

0.5385 ppm

Peach, Dried , Dried

- Baby food ( DEEM Default PF of 7.0 to be applied as correction factor #1 in

R98 ; Fresh Peach PDP Data )

Blended Classification: B

Since this is a blended commodity and monitoring data are used; no further correction for %CT permitted.

Acute AR

1261 total PDP samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0076 ppm

Total # detects = 414

No zeros assumed for blended; therefore 1261

– 414 = 847 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0076 ppm

Acute AR = [(679.063 total of all detects + (847)

(0.0076)]/1261 = 0.5436 ppm Chronic AR

1261 total PDP samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0076 ppm

Total # detects = 414

No zeros assumed for blended; therefore 1261

– 414 = 847 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0076 ppm

Chronic AR = [(679.063 total of all detects + (847)

(0.0076)]/1261 = 0.5436 ppm

Peach, Canned

PDP Monitoring data from 2004

Total # of samples = 743; all non

- detects <LOD = 0.034; 1⁄2 LOD = 0.017 ppm

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent.

The LOD was correcte d to reflect total residue as follows:

1/2LOD T 

### = [0.017 + (0.01) (0.017) + (0.01) (0.017)] = 0.0173 ppm

Apricot, Canned, Baby food, Juice, and Juice

– baby food (Canned Peach PDP Data and Apricot

%CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #28

743 Total samples; Max %CT = 75%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0173 ppm

Treated samples = (743) (0.75) = 557

557

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0173 ppm

743

- 557 = 186 Total zeros Chronic AR

743 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 50 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0173 ppm

(743) (0.50) = 372 treated samples

372

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0173 ppm

Chronic AR = (372) (0.0173)/743 = 0.0087 ppm

Peach, Canned, Baby food, Juice, and Juice

– baby food (Canned Peach PDP Data and Peach

%CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #29

743 Total samples; Max %CT = 25%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0173 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Treated samples = (743) (0.25) = 186

186

– 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0173 ppm Chronic AR

743 total PDP samples; Avg %CT = 20 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0173 ppm

Total # detects = 0

(743) (0.20) = 149 treated samples

149

– 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0173

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 47 of 95 743

– 186 = 557 Total zeros (untreated samples) Chronic AR = [(149) (0.0173)] ÷ 743 = 0.0035

ppm

Cherry

PDP Monitoring data from 2007

Total # of samples = 419

Total # < LOD = 402; 289 @ LOD = 0.0062 ppm and 113 @ LOD = 0.015

Total # of detectable residues = 17

T o determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total resi dues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individual sample:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.01) (parent residue) + (0.01) (parent residue)]

Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

A weighted average of the LOD was taken and then that LOD was corrected for metabolite ratio as

follows:

LOD

w 

### = [(289) (0.0062) + (113) (0.015)] ÷ 402 = 0.0087 ppm

1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0087/2 = 0.0043 ppm

1⁄2 LOD W,T 

### = [0.0043 + (0.0043) (0.01) + (0.0043) (0.01)] = 0.0044 ppm

Cherry, Fresh, Baby food, juice, juice

– baby food (Fresh Cherry PDP Data and Cherry %CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #30

419 Total samples; Max %CT = 20%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0044 ppm

Total # detects = 17

Treated samples = (419) (0.20) = 84

84

- 17 = 67

- 1⁄2 LODS

419

– 84 = 335 Total zeros

17 detects reflecting total residue corrected by

metabolite ratios Chronic AR

419 Total samples; Avg %CT = 15 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0044 ppm

Total # detects = 17

Treated samples = (419) (0.15) = 63

63

– 17 detects = 46 1⁄2 LODs

Chronic AR = [5.7554 (total of all detects) + (46)

(0.0044)] ÷ 419 = 0.0142 ppm

Nectarine

PDP Monitoring data from 2007, 2008

Total # of samples = 1235

Total # < LOD = 810; LOD = 0.039 ppm; 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0195 ppm

Total # of detectable residues = 425

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; r esidues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individual sample:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.01) (parent residue) + (0.01) (parent residue) ]

Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 48 of 95 The LOD was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1/2LOD T 

### = [0.0195 + (0.01) (0.0195) + (0.01) (0.0195)] = 0.0199 ppm

N ectarine

Blended Classification: NB

Acute AR

– RDF #31

1235 Total samples; Max %CT = 35%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0199 ppm

Total # detects = 425

Treated samples = (1235) (0.35) = 432

432

– 425 = 7

- 1⁄2 LODs @ 0.0199

1235

– 432 = 803 Total zeros

425 detects reflecting total residue corrected by

metabolite ratios Chronic AR

1235 Total samples; Avg %CT = 25 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0199 ppm

Total # detects = 425

Treated samples = (1235) (0.25) = 309

Since 309 < 425, no 1⁄2 LODs

Chronic AR = 888.5526 (total of all detects)/12 35

= 0.7195 ppm

Plum

PDP Monitoring data from 2005, 2006

Total # of samples = 1088

Total # < LOD = 674; LOD = 0.039; 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0195 ppm

Total # of detectable residues = 414

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individual sa mple:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.01) (parent residue) + (0.01) (parent residue)]

Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

The LOD was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1/2LOD T 

### = [0.0195 + (0.01) (0.0195) + (0.01) (0.0195)] = 0.0199 ppm

Plum, fresh, baby food, fresh prune, fresh prune

– babyfood, PDP Plum data and % CT for

prunes (Note

– DEEM default to be used as correction factor #1 in RDF for juice)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #32

1088 Total samples; Max %CT = 25%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0199 ppm

Total # detects = 414

Treated samples = (1088) (0.25) = 272

Since 272 < 414, no 1⁄2 LODs

1088

– 414 = 674 Total zeros

415 detects reflecting total residue corrected by

metabolite ratios Chronic AR

1088 Total samples; Avg %CT = 10 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0199 ppm

Total # detects = 414

Treated samples = (1088) (0.10) = 109

Since 109 < 414, no 1⁄2 LODs

Chronic AR = 525.2133 (total of all detects)/1088

= 0.4827 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 49 of 95 Prune (Dried Plum)

PDP Monitoring data from 2005, 2006

Total # of samples = 377

Total # < LOD = 376; LOD = 0.039; 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0195 ppm

Total # of detectable residues = 1

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individua l sample:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.01) (parent residue) + (0.01) (parent residue)]

Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

The LOD was corrected to reflect t otal residue as follows:

1/2LOD T 

### = [0.0195 + (0.01) (0.0195) + (0.01) (0.0195)] = 0.0199 ppm

Prune (dried plum), dried, dried

– baby food, fresh, fresh

– baby food, juice, juice

– baby food

(PDP Prune data and % CT for prunes; DEEM default PFs not used i n RDF since have data on

prunes)

Blended Classification: NB/PB

Acute AR

– RDF #33

377 Total samples; Max %CT = 25%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0199 ppm

Total # detects = 1

Treated samples = (377) (0.25) = 94

94

– 1 = 93

- 1⁄2 LODs @ 0.0199 ppm

377

– 94 = 283 Total zeros

1 detect reflecting total residue corrected by

metabolite ratios Chronic AR

377 Total samples; Avg %CT = 10 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0199 ppm

Total # detects = 1

Treated samples = (377) (0.10) = 38

38

– 1 = 37

- 1⁄2 LODs @ 0.0199 ppm

Chronic AR = [0.3672 (total of all detects) + (38)

(0.0199)] ÷ 377 = 0.0030 ppm



### Berries Group (Crop Group 13)

Blackberry

Blackberry Field Trial Data are summarized in the table below.

Blackberry Field Trial Data (MRID no. 40244001) 4 Field Trials conducted in OR in 1986

Five foliar ap plications of 50% WP formulation at 1.0 lb ai/A; 0

- day PHI with a 7

– 40 day RTI

Location RTI Residues

Iprodione RP

- 30228 RP

- 32490 Combined

OR 12

- 16 15.42 0.35 0.14 15.91

12

– 15 5.82 0.22 0.07 6.11

12

– 15 10.91 0.36 0.12 11.39

7

- 40 21.87 0.74 0.20 22.81

Total 56.22

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 50 of 95 Caneberry Subgroup 13A, except raspberry, which includes blackberry, boysenberry, dewberry,

youngberry, and loganberry) (Blackberry FT Data and caneberry %CT)

Blended Classification: NB

Acute AR

– RDF #34

4 FT samples; Max %CT = 20%

(x) (0.2) = 4; 20 total samples

20

- 4 = 16 Total zeros (untreated)

0

– 1⁄2 LOQ

4 Treated sample values from table above Chronic AR

4 FT samples; Avg %CT = 5 %

(x) (0.05) = 4; 80 total samples

Chronic AR = [56.22 (total of treated samples) ] ÷

80 (total # of samples)= 0.7028 ppm

Raspberry

Raspberry Field Trial Data are summarized in the table below.

Raspberry Field Trial Data (MRID no. 40244001 (1986) and 43262501 (1992) )

Five foliar applications of 50% WP formulation at 1.0 lb ai/A; 0

- day PHI with a 7

– 40 day RTI

Location RTI Residues

Iprodione RP

- 30228 RP

- 32490 Combined

MI

1986 7

- 8 7.27 0.26 0.10 7.63

OH

1986 6

– 14 1.14 0.09 <0.05 1.28

OR

1986 10

- 28 4.19 0.10 0.11 4.40

13

- 20 1.38 0.11 0.07 4.56

WA

1986 5

- 14 11.39 0.26 0.15 11.80

14

- 17 13.44 0.27 0.14 13.85

CA

1992 14

– 17 Method detects combined residues only by

common moiety. 4.2

15

- 21 Method detects combined residues only by

common moiety. 2.9

14

- 15 Method detects combined residues only by

common moiety. 5.5

Total 56.12

Raspberry (Raspberry FT Data and caneberry %CT)

Blended Classification: NB

Acute AR

– RDF #35

9 FT samples; Max %CT = 20%

(x) (0.2) = 9; 45 total samples

45

- 9 = 36 Total zeros (untreated)

0

– 1⁄2 LOQ

9 Treated sample values from table above Chronic AR

9 FT samples; Avg %CT = 5 %

(x) (0.05) = 9; 180 total samples

Chronic AR = [56.12 (total of treated samples)] ÷

180 (total # of samples)= 0.3118 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 51 of 95 Blueberry, fresh

PDP monitoring data from 2007 and 2008 for blueb erry

Total # of samples = 1437

Total # <LOD = 1167; Total # < LOD of 0.0084 = 829; Total # <LOD of 0.015 = 338

Total # of detectable residues = 270

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individual sample:

Total Residues = [par ent residue + (0.01) (parent residue) + (0.01) (parent residue)]

Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.0084)(8 29) + (0.015)(338)] ÷ 1167 = 0.0052ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0095 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0052 + (0.01) (0.0052) + (0.01) (0.0052)] = 0.0053 ppm

Blueberry, Fresh; Currant, and Currant

– dried; All food forms (PDP Fresh Blueberry Data and

Blueberry %CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #36

1437 Total samples; Max %CT = 15%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0053 ppm

Total # detects = 270

Treated samples = (1437) (0.15) = 216

Since 270 > 216; no 1⁄2 LODs

1437

– 270 = 1167 Total zeros

270 detects reflecting total residue corrected by

metabolite ratios Chronic AR

1437 Total samples; Avg %CT = 10 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0053 ppm

Total # detects = 270

Treated samples = (1437) (0.10) = 144

Since 270 > 144; no 1⁄2 LODs

Chronic AR = [51.6620 ( total of all detects)] ÷

1437 = 0.0360 ppm



### Tree Nuts (Crop Group 14)

NOTE: Pistachio included in previous assessment

– proposed use on pistachio was withdrawn, so it is no

longer included in the dietary assessment.

Almond

PDP Monitoring data from 200 7 , 200 8

Total # of samples = 547

Total # <LOD = 543; LOD = 0.01 ppm; 1⁄2 LOD = 0.005 ppm

To tal # of detectable residues = 4

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individual sample:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.01) (p arent residue) + (0.01) (parent residue)]

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 52 of 95 Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

The LOD was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1/2LOD T 

### = [0.005 + (0.01) (0. 005) + (0.101 (0.005)] = 0.0051 ppm

Almond, and Almond

– baby food (Almond PDP Data and Almond % CT)

Blended Classif

ication: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #38

547 Total samples; Max %CT = 55%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0051 ppm

Total # detects = 4

Treated samples = (547) (0.55) = 301

301

– 4 = 297

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0051 ppm

547

- 301 = 246 Total zeros

4 detects reflecting total residue corrected by

metabolite ratios Chronic AR

547 Total samples; Avg %CT = 45 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0051 ppm

Total # detects = 4

Treated samples = (547) (0.45) = 246

246

– 4 = 242

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0051 ppm

Chronic AR = [0.0839 (total of all detects) + (242)

(0.0051)] ÷ 547 = 0.0024 ppm

Almond Oil

Blended Classif

ication: B

Monitoring data used and blended commodity, so no additiona l correction for %CT permitted.

Acute AR

547 Total samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0051 ppm

Total # detects = 4

No zeros allowed for blended commodities;

therefore 547

– 4 = 543 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0051 ppm

Acute AR = [0.08 39 (total of all detects) + (543)

(0.0051)] ÷ 547 = 0.0052 ppm Chronic AR

547 Total samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0051 ppm

Total # detects = 4

No zeros allowed for blended commodities;

therefore 547

– 4 = 543 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0051 ppm

Chronic AR = [0.0839 (total of all detects) + (543)

(0.0051)] ÷ 547 = 0.0052 ppm



### Cereal Grains (Crop Group 15)

Rice

PDP Monitoring data from 200 8 , 200 9

Total # of samples = 599

Total # <LOD = 599; LOD = 0.003 ppm; 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0015 ppm

To tal # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite rat ios were determined from a rice metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.59 x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.16 x residues of parent.

The LOD was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1/2LOD T 

### = [0.0015 + (0.59) (0.0015) + (0.16) (0.0015)] = 0.0026 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 53 of 95 Rice, white, white

– baby food; Rice, brown, brown

– babyfood (Rice PDP Data and Rice %CT)

Blended Classif

ication: B

Monitoring data used which accounts for %CT therefore no additional adjustment for %CT permitted.

Acute AR

599 Total samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0026 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Since no detects, Acute AR = 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0026

ppm Chronic AR

599 Total samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0026 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Since no detects, Chronic AR = 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0026

ppm

Rice, flour, flour

– baby food; Rice, bran, bran

– baby food (Rice PDP Data with 3X concentration

factor applied*and Rice %CT)

Blended Classif

ication: B

Monitoring data used which accounts for %CT therefore no additional adjustment for %CT permitted.

Acute AR

599 Total samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0026 ppm x 3 PF = 0.0078 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Since no detects, Acute AR = 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0078

ppm Chronic AR

599 Total samples

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0026 ppm x 3 PF = 0.0078 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Since no detects, Chronic AR = 1⁄2 LOD = 0.0078

ppm

* 3X concentration factor derived from comparison of rice grain to rice bran tolerance.



### Miscellaneous Commodities

Grape

PDP monitoring data from 2004, 2005, 2009 and 2010 for grape

Total # of samples = 2966

Total # <LOD = 2538; Total # < LOD of 0.015 = 595; Total # <LOD of 0.021 = 270; Total # <LOD of

0.023 = 897; Total # <LOD of 0.025 = 754; Total # <LOD of 0.05 = 22

Total # of detectable residues = 428

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following for mula was applied

to each individual sample:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.01) (parent residue) + (0.01) (parent residue)]

Calculations were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(595) + (0.021)(270) + (0.023)(897) + (0.025)(754) + (0.05)(22)] ÷ 2538 = 0.0217ppm

1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0109 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0109 + (0.01 ) (0.0109) + (0.01) (0.0109)] = 0.0111 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 54 of 95 Grape, Grape leaves, Grape raisins (PDP Grape and Grape %CT; use DEEM default of 4.3X for

raisins as PF #1 in DEEM)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #39

2966 Total samples; Max %CT = 5%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0111 ppm

Total # detects = 428

Treated samples = (2966) (0.05) = 148

Since 428 > 148; no 1⁄2 LODs

2966

– 428 = 2538 Total zeros

428 detects reflecting total residue corrected by

metabolite ratios Chronic AR

2966 Total samples; Avg %CT = 2.5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0 .0111 ppm

Total # detects = 428

Treated samples = (2966) (0.025) = 74

Since 428 > 74; no 1⁄2 LODs

Chronic AR = [78.0550 (total of all detects) ÷

2966] = 0.0263 ppm

Grape Juice

PDP monitoring data from 2008 for grape juice

Total # of samples = 745

Total # <LOD = 745; Total # < LOD of 0.015 = 214; Total # <LOD of 0.025 = 531

Total # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x re sidues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(214) + (0.025)(531)] ÷ 745 = 0.0221ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0111 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total re sidue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.0111 + (0.01) (0.0111) + (0.01) (0.0111)] = 0.0113 ppm

Grape juice, Grape juice

– baby food, Grape

– wine and sherry (Grape Juice PDP Data and Grape

%CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF #40

745 Total samples; Max %CT = 5%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0113 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Treated samples = (745) (0.05) = 37

37

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0113 ppm

745

- 37 = 708 Total zeros Chronic AR

745 Total samples; Avg %CT = 2.5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0113 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Treated samples = (745) (0.025) = 19

19

- 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0113

Chronic AR = [(19)(0.0113)] ÷ 745 = 0.0003 ppm

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 55 of 95 Kiwi Fruit

Kiwi Field Trial Data are summarized in the table below.

Kiwi Field Trial Data (MRID no. 42132801 and 42506601)

Three foliar applications a t 0.668 lb ai/A; 1

- day PHI at 10

sites in New Zealand

Average of three replicates reported below

New Zealand FT ID Combined residues of Iprodione,

RP30228 and RP32490, expressed

as iprodione (ppm)

90

- 270 2.70

90

- 271 2.82

90

- 272 3.08

90

- 273 4.23

90

- 274 0.54

90

- 275 0.57

90

- 276 3.42

90

- 277 2.63

90

- 278 4.10

90

- 278 2.36

Total 26.45

Kiwi fruit(Field Trial Data and 100% CT)

Blended Classification: N B

Acute AR

– RDF #41

10 Total samples; Max %CT = 100%

10 detects from field trial data Chronic AR

10 Total samples; Avg %CT = 100 %

Chronic AR = [26.45 (total of detects)] ÷ 10 =

2.645 ppm

Peanut

Monitoring data are not available for peanuts. Used tolerance level residue of 0.5 ppm and 100% crop

treated (No BEAD %CT info provided for peanuts).

Peanut and Peanut Oil (Tolerance and 100 %CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

Tolerance = 0.5 ppm

Max %CT = 100%

Acute AR = 0.5 ppm Chronic AR

Tolerance = 0.5 ppm

Avg %CT = 100%

Chronic AR = 0.5 ppm

Peanut Butter PDP Data

PDP monitoring data from 2006 for peanut butter

Total # of samples = 739

Total # <LOD = 739; @ 0.05 ppm

Total # of detectable residues = 0

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peanut metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.28x residues of par ent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.17x residues of parent.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 56 of 95 LOD = 0.05 ppm; 1⁄2 LOD = 0.025 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.025 + (0.28) (0.025) + (0.17) (0.025)] = 0.0362 ppm

Peanut, Butter (PDP Pea nut Data and 100 %CT)

Blended Classification: B

Acute AR

739 Total samples; Max %CT = 100%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0362 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Acute AR = (739)(0.0362)/739 = 0.0362 Chronic AR

739 Total samples; Avg %CT = 100 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0362 ppm

Total # detects = 0

Chronic AR = (739)(0.0362)/739 = 0.0362

Strawberry

PDP monitoring data from 2004, 2005, and 2009 for strawberry

Total # of samples = 2953

Total # <LOD = 2907; Total # < LOD of 0.015 = 545; Total # <LOD of 0.021 = 291; Total # <LOD of

0.025 = 1050; Tot al # <LOD of 0.0029 = 1021

Total # of detectable residues = 20

To determine total residue of concern, metabolite ratios were determined from a peach metabolism study.

Residues of the Isomer RP30228 were 0.01x residues of parent; residues of the metabolite RP32490 were

0.01x residues of parent. To determine total residues in each sample, the following formula was applied

to each individual sample:

Total Residues = [parent residue + (0.01) (parent residue) + (0.01) (parent residue)]

Calculation s were performed in Excel for all samples with detectable residues. Total residues are shown

in the RDF file.

A total weighted LOD was calculated as follows:

LOD W 

### = [(0.015)(545) + (0.021)(291) + (0.023)(897) + (0.025)(1050) + (0.0029)(1021)] ÷ 2907 =

0.0220 ppm 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### = 0.0110 ppm

The 1⁄2 LOD

w 

### was corrected to reflect total residue as follows:

1⁄2 LOD T 

### = [0.011 + (0.01) (0.011) + (0.01) (0.011)] = 0.0112 ppm

Strawberries (PDP Strawberry Data and Strawberry %CT)

Blended Classification: PB

Acute AR

– RDF # 42

2953 Total samples; Max %CT = 20%

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0112 ppm

Total # detects = 20

Treated samples = (2953) (0.2) = 591

591

– 20 = 571 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0112 ppm

2953

– 591 = 2362 Total zeros

20 detects reflecting total residue corrected by

metabolite ratios Chronic AR

2953 Total samples; Avg %CT = 5 %

1⁄2 LOD = 0.0112 ppm

Total # detects = 20

Treated samples = (2953) (0.05) = 148

148

– 20 = 128 1⁄2 LOD @ 0.0112 ppm

Chronic AR = [10.8610 (total of all detects) +

(128) (0.0112)] ÷ 2953 = 0.0042ppm



### Livestock Com modities

The residues of concern for risk assessment purposes in livestock include parent compound, RP30228

(isomer) and two metabolites, the plant metabolite RP32490 and an additional metabolite, RP36114 . PDP

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 57 of 95 monitoring data are available for the parent compound only in livestock commodities. Previous iterations

of the iprodione dietary risk assessment relied on the PDP parent compound monitoring data and the use

of metabolite ratios to determine residues in livestock commodities. However, the Agency h as

reconsidered this approach. In contrast to plants where the major residue is the parent iprodione, the

major residue in animals fed iprodione treated feedstuffs consists primarily of metabolite and residues of

the parent compound are expected to be non

- detectable. (PP#2F2828, M. Kovacs, 10/25/82, Dairy Cattle

metabolism study; Lactating goat metabolism study; and Dairy cattle feeding study) and (MRID No.

43958201, 1996, Magnitude of the residue in meat and eggs of laying hens). Since PDP monitoring

sa mples were analyzed only for residues of the parent compound and since residues of the regulated

animal metabolites are seen in the ruminant and poultry metabolism studies at 10X or greater the

concentrations of the parent compound, the Agency concludes th at the available monitoring data are not

adequate to assess the potential for residues in livestock commodities. For the purpose of this refined

dietary assessment, livestock residues will be calculated based on the findings in the ruminant and poultry

fe eding studies and the construct of a reasonably balanced diet, described in detail as follows.

Dairy Cattle Feeding Study

PP#2F2828, M. Kovacs, 10/25/82

A ruminant feeding study was conducted in dairy cattle to determine residues of iprodione, RP 32490 an d

RP36114 in milk and livestock tissues which might result from the ingestion of treated feed. While the

iprodione isomer, RP30228 is a regulated metabolite, ruminant (dairy cattle and lactating goat)

metabolism studies show that it is not a major metaboli te in milk and animal tissues; thus lack of analysis

for this metabolite in the feeding studies is not an issue. Dairy cattle were fed iprodione daily in the diet

at 5 ppm, 15 ppm, 50 ppm and 200 ppm for 29 days. Three lactating dairy cattle were treated per dose

level. Milk was collected twice per day; residues in milk reached a plateau by day 7. Total residues of

iprodione, RP32490 and RP36114, all expressed as iprodione from milk and animal tissues at the

different dosing levels are shown in the tabl e below. Additionally, to determine the anticipated residues

in milk and animal tissues, a residue to tissue ratio has been calculated for each dosing level.

Table A4.1 . Dairy Cattle Feeding Study Results

Matrix Control

Residue

(ppm) 1 5 ppm 15 ppm 50 ppm 200 ppm

Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue to

feed

ratio 2 Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue to

feed

ratio Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue to

feed

ratio Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue to

feed

ratio

Milk <0.01 <0.01 NC 0.099 0.0066 0.196 0.0039 0.389 0.0019

Muscle <0.05 < 0.05 NC <0.05 NC 0.07 0.0014 0.13 0.0006

Kidney <0.05 <0.05 

### NC 0.16 0.011 0.80 0.016 2.87 0.014

Fat <0.05 <0.05 

### NC <0.05 NC 0.21 0.0042 0.52 0.0026

Liver <0.05 <0.05 

### NC 0.13 0.0087 0.66 0.0132 1.95 0.00975

1 Control residue values are also reported method LOQs; All residues reported are the highest residues from the three replicate s.

2 NC = “not calculated”. Tissue to feed ratios cannot be calculated for those feeding levels/matrices without quantifiable res idues.



### Poultry Feeding Study

MRID No. 43958201, 1996, Reviewed in CBRS Memo D230127, J. Abbotts, 2/6/97

A poultry feeding study was conducted in laying hen to determine residues of iprodione, RP

- 32490 and

RP

- 36114, among other degradates in eggs and liv estock tissue which might result from the ingestion of

treated feed. While the iprodione isomer, RP30228 is a regulated metabolite, poultry metabolism studies

show that it is not a major metabolite in eggs and animal tissues; thus lack of analysis for thi s metabolite

in the feeding studies is not an issue. Laying hens were fed iprodione daily in the diet at 10 ppm, 30

ppm, and 100 ppm for 34 days. Ten laying hens were treated per dose level. Egg samples were collected

in the afternoon and the following morning and pooled; residues in the eggs reached a plateau by day 24.

Storage stability data indicated that residues of parent, RP

- 30228 and RP

- 32490 were stable under the

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 58 of 95 storage conditions and for the duration of the study; however, significant degrada tion up to 50% was

noted for RP

- 36114. Since the poultry metabolism study demonstrates that RP

- 36114 is not a significant

metabolite in poultry, the lack of storage stability was not considered to be an issue for this specific

metabolite. Total residues of iprodione and RP

- 32490 are shown in the table below.

Table A4.2 . Laying Hen Feeding Study Results 1

Matrix 10 ppm 30 ppm 100 ppm

Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue

to feed

ratio 2 Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue

to feed

ratio 2 Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue

to feed

ratio 2

Eggs 0.60 0.060 1.90 0.063 6.58 0.066

Liver 3.65 0.365 7.19 0.240 16.03 0.160

Muscle 0.30 0.030 1.06 0.035 3.37 0.034

Skin/Fat 0.73 0.073 1.86 0.062 7.45 0.074

1 Combined residues of iprodione and RP

- 32490. Residue values are the highest residue reported of the ten laying hens at each

dosing level.

2 Tissue to feed ratio calculated by dividing the total residue by the feeding level.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 59 of 95 Table A4.3 . Egg Residue Data for I prodione and RP

- 32490

Day of

Collection 10 ppm 30 ppm 100 ppm

Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue to feed

ratio for AR Total Residue

(ppm) Tissue to feed

ratio for AR Total

Residue

(ppm) Tissue to feed

ratio for AR

0 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05

1 Not analyzed <0.05 0.22

3 0.13 0.57 1.42

7 0.56 1.50 4.54

12 0.50 1.59 5.76

16 0.60 1.56 6.27

20 0.60 1.78 6.32

24 0.56 1.90 6.58

27 0.54 1.72 6.17

30 0.53 1.70 5.25

34 0.56 1.61 6.27

Avg 24

– 34

days 1 0.55 0.055 1.73 0.058 6.07 0.061

1 To calculate the appropriate tissue to feed ratio for the anticipated residue determination, residues after plateau can

be averaged; across the three dosing levels, it appears that the residues reached a platueau after 24 days, so all

samples from day 2 4 on were averaged to get a residue value to be used in the tissue to feed ratio calculation. Note

that the residues reported here are the highest residues from the 10 laying hens, so are still conservative.



### Feedstuff Anticipated Residues for Inclusion in Dietary Burden Calculation s

Table A4.4 . Rice Field Trial Data

PP#6F3443, 4/25/88, R Cook, Accession No. 264228

Use Pattern Location PHI (days) Combined Residues of

Parent, RP

- 30228 and

RP

- 32490 (ppm)

Rice Grain

Two ground applications at 0.5 lb

ai/A/application for a total application rate

of 1.0 lb ai/A LA 32 1.54

MS 32 1.12

LA 33 8.28

TX 34 1.94

TX 35 2.57

LA 36 2.90

AR 38 0.68

AR 42 0.30

AR 43 0.30

MS 43 3.12

MS 58 0.84

Average Residue 1.96

Rice Processing Data were submitted and reviewed (PP6F3443, 3/17/87, R. Cook). The concentration

factor during processing w as the average of t wo determinations. The average processing factor for bran

was 2.14x.

For the purpose of calculating both the ac ute and chronic Maximum Reasonably Balanced Diet (MRBD)

for livestock, the average residue of 1.96 ppm will be used for the grain since rice grain is a blended

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 60 of 95 commodity. The bran processing factor of 2.14x is applied to the grain residue to yield a rice bran residue

value of 4.19 ppm.

Table A4.5 . Carrot Field Trial Data

PP#7E3473, 4/6/87, R Cook, Accession No. 26 5922

Use Pattern Location PHI

(days) Combined Residues of

Parent, RP

- 30228 and RP

32490 (ppm)

Eight foliar applications were made at 1.0

lbs ai/A for a total seasonal application

rate of 8 lbs ai/A. Initial application was

made at onset of early leaf and continued

on a weekly basis with the last spray

occurring on the day of harvest. TX

0 0.49

FL 0.61

CA 0.73

MI 0.64

OR 1.67

NJ 2.13

CA 2.57

AZ 2.90

CA 3.18

Average Residue 1.66

Carrot culls are only fed to dairy cattle. Carrots are considered NB/PB (non

- blended, partially

- blended)

commodities. However, since they are only fed to dairy cattle, the average residue value from the field

trials can be used for both the acute and chronic MRBD calculation; therefore the residue value of 1.66

ppm is used below.

Maximum Reasonably Balanced Diet Calculations

The MRBD to be use d in the acute assessment is calculated as shown in the table below. The average

residue values for rice and carrots have been incorporated into the calculation. For the acute assessment,

100% crop treated is assumed in calculating the MRBD. Additionall y, since peanut meal is an animal

feed item and no %CT data to refine it are provided, no further refinement of the acute inputs is allowed

via the RDF.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 61 of 95 Table A4.5. Refined Acute Livestock Maximum Reasonably Balanced Diets (MRBD) for Iprodione 1

% Diet Dietary Contributions (ppm)

Feedstuff

2 Type Tolerance

(ppm) Anticipated

Residue

(ppm) % Dry

Matter Beef Dairy Poultry Swine Beef Dairy Poultry Swine

Untreated 2 R

- - 15 4 5

- - - - - -

Carrot culls 3 CC 5.0 1.66 12

- 10

- - - 1.38

- -

Potato culls 3 CC 0.5 20 30

- - - 0.75

- - -

Rice Grain CC 10 1.96 88 20 20 20 35 0.44 0.44 0.39 0.69

Rice Bran CC 30 4.19 90 15 15 10 10 0.70 0.70 0.42 0.42

Untreated 3 CC

- - 15

- 45 40

- - - -

Canola Meal PC 1 88 5 10 15 15 0.06 0.11 0.15 0.15

Peanut Meal PC 0.5 85

- - 10

- - - 0.05

-

Totals 100 100 100 100 1.95 2.63 1.01 1.26

1 All data are based on Table 1 Feedstuffs (June 2008). Residue levels for beef and dairy are corrected for moisture content and a re determined

by formula: Dietary Contribution = Tolerance x (% in diet/%DM). Residue levels for poultry and swine are considered “as

- is” and are

determined by formula: Dietary Contribution = Tolerance x % in diet. If an AR has been developed, those values are used in the calculation in

place of the tolerance level.

2 Untreated: Can include any untreated feedstuff that is added to complete the proposed diet to 100%.

3 Calculations assume that there is no use on cowpeas and a label restriction preventing feeding treated peanut hay. Almond hu lls can be fed to

dairy cattle; however, they are not included here for dairy cattle sin ce only one “alternate feedstuff” is to be included in the animal’s diet and

inclusion of carrot culls, another “alternate feedstuff” gives a higher dietary burden for dairy cattle. Likewise, potato cu lls can be fed to dairy

cattle, however, they are not included in the dairy cattle diet since only one “alternate feedstuff” is to be included in the animal’s diet and carrot

culls provide a higher dietary burden for dairy cattle; they are however included in the beef cattle diet, since no other “al ternate fe edstuff” is

included in the beef cattle diet.

Table A4.6. Refined Chronic Livestock Maximum Reasonably Balanced Diets (MRBD) for Iprodione 1

% Diet Dietary Contributions (ppm)

Feedstuff

2 Type Tolerance

(ppm) Anticipate

d Residue

(ppm) Avg

%

CT 2 % Dry

Matter Beef Dairy Poultry Swine Beef Dairy Poultry Swine

Untreated 2 R

- - - - 15 4 5

- - - - - -

Carrot culls 3 CC 5.0 1.66 30 12

- 10

- - - 0.415

- -

Potato culls 3 CC 0.5 2.5 20 30

- - - 0.019

- - -

Rice Grain CC 10 1.96 1 88 20 20 20 35 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.007

Rice Bran CC 30 4.19 1 90 15 15 10 10 0.007 0.007 0.004 0.004

Untreated 3 CC

- - - - 15

- 45 40

- - - -

Canola Meal PC 1 87 88 5 10 15 15 0.049 0.099 0.130 0.130

Peanut Meal PC 0.5 100 85

- - 10

- - - 0.050

-

Totals 100 100 100 100 0.079 0.5 25 0.188 0.141

1 All data are based on Table 1 Feedstuffs (June 2008). Residue levels for beef and dairy are corrected for moisture content a nd are determined

by formula: Dietary Contribution = Tolerance x (% in diet/%DM) x % CT . Residue levels for poultry and swine are considered “as

- is” and are

determined by formula: Dietary Contribution = Tolerance x % in diet x % CT

. If an AR has been developed, those values are used in the

calculation in place of the tolerance level.

2 Reported average perecent crop treated of the feedstuff (BEAD Memo, A. Grube, 6/1/11).

2 Untreated: Can include any untreated feedstuff that is added to complete the proposed diet to 100%.

3 Calculations assume that there is no use on cowpeas and a labe l restriction preventing feeding treated peanut hay. Almond hulls can be fed to

dairy cattle; however, they are not included here for dairy cattle since only one “alternate feedstuff ” is to be included in the animal’s diet and

inclusion of carro t culls, a nother “alternate feedstuff ” gives a higher dietary burden for dairy cattle. Likewise, potato culls can be fed to dairy

cattle, however, they are not included in the dairy cattle diet since only one “alternate feedstuff” is to be included in the animal’s diet and carrot

culls provide a higher dietary burden for dairy cattle; they are however included in the beef cattle diet, since no other “al ternate feedstuff” is

included in the beef cattle diet.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 62 of 95 Determination of Livestock Acute and Chronic ARs

Ruminan ts

The feeding level closest to the MRBDs calculated above is the 5 ppm dose level. However, residues in

all matrices were below the limit of quantitation at that feeding level; therefore tissue to dose ratios from

that level cannot be calculated. Conseq uently, the anticipated residues are derived using a regression

developed using the data from the dose levels where there were quantifiable residues. For each matrices,

the linearity of the regression is assessed based on R 2 

### values and the curve with the most data points and

an acceptable linearity is used to derive the anticipated residue for that matrix.

Milk (Dairy Cattle MRBD Used)

R 2 

### = 0.833

Y = 0.0021x

If x = 2.63 ; then y = 0.0055 ppm

If x = 0.525; then y = 0.0011 ppm

R 2 

### = 0.9228

Y = 0.0041x

If x = 2.63; then y = 0.0108 ppm

If x = 0.525; then y = 0.0022 ppm

R 2 

### = 1

Y = 0.0066x

If x = 2.63; then y = 0.0174 ppm

If x = 0.525 ; then y = 0.0035 ppm

Since there is not good linearity

with the data (see R 2 

### values); the y = 0.0021x

R2 = 0.833

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45

0 50 100 150 200 250 

## Iprodione Milk Residue Regression

0, 15, 50 and 200 ppm Feeding Levels

0 0.099 0.196 y = 0.0041x

R2 = 0.9228

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 R e s i d u e ( p p m )

Feeding Level (ppm) 

## Iprodione Milk Residue Regression

0, 15 and 50 ppm Feeding Levels

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 63 of 95 most conservative approach was taken, and the anticipated residue was estimated from a regression using

only the first feeding level that resulted in quantifiable residues.

The milk acute AR is 0.0174 ppm (note the RDF w ill also include the highest %CT of all the feedstuffs

included in the dietary burden).

The milk chronic AR is 0.0035 ppm

– it has been adjusted for % CT; no further adjustment will be

included in the dietary assessment.

Milk, All; (Milk AR from Feedi ng Study and Canola Maximum % Imported for Acute)

Acute AR

– RDF #50

Max %CT = 93%

Calculated AR = 0.0174 ppm

Total samples assumed to be 100

# Treated samples = 93

Total zeros = 7 Chronic AR

0.0035 ppm (see calculations above)

Muscle (Beef Cattle MRBD Used)

R 2 

### = 0.8437

y = 0.0007x

If x = 1.95; then y = 0.0014 ppm

If x = 0.079; then y = 0.00006 ppm

R 2 

### = 1

y = 0.0014x

If x = 1.95; then y = 0.0027 ppm

If x = 0.079; then y = 0.0001 ppm

Since there is not good linearity with the data (see R 2 

### values); the most conservative approach was taken,

and the anticipated residue was estimated from a regression using only the first feeding level that resulted

in quantifiable residues.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 64 of 95 The m uscle acute AR is 0.0 027 ppm (no te the RDF will also include the highest %CT of all the

feedstuffs included in the dietary burden).

The muscle chronic AR is 0.00 01 ppm

– it has been adjusted for % CT; no further adjustment will be

included in the dietary assessment.

The chronic AR fo r dried meat is 0.0002 ppm as it incorporates the DEEM default processing factor of

1.92x.

Beef, meat; Beef, meat

- baby food; goat, meat; horse, meat; pork, meat; pork, meat

- baby food;

sheep, meat (Muscle AR from Feeding Study and Canola Maximum % Imported for Acute)

Acute AR

– RDF #43

Max %CT = 93%

Calculated AR = 0.0027 ppm

Total samples assumed to be 100

# Treated samples = 93

Total zeros = 7 Chronic AR

0.0001 ppm (see calculations above)

Beef, meat, dried (Muscle AR from Feeding Study and Canola Maximum % Imported for Acute)

Acute AR

– RDF #43

Max %CT = 93%

Calculated AR = 0.0027 ppm

Total samples assumed to be 100

# Treated samples = 93

Total zeros = 7

Include 1.92 as Factor #1 in RDF Chronic AR

0.0001 ppm x 1.92 = 0.0002 ppm

Kidney (Beef Cattle MRBD Used)

R 2 

### = 0.9982

y = 0.0144x

If x = 1.95; then y = 0.0281 ppm

If x = 0.079; then y = 0.0011 ppm

Since there is good linearity with the data (see R 2 

### value); the anticipated residue is taken from a linear

regression which includes all dose levels and is forced through zero.

The kidney acute AR is 0. 0281 ppm (note the RDF will also include the highest %CT of all the

feedstuffs included in the dietary b urden).

The kidney chronic AR is 0.00 11 ppm

– it has been adjusted for % CT; no further adjustment will be

included in the dietary assessment.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 65 of 95 Beef, meat byproducts; Beef, meat byproducts

- baby food; Beef, kidney; Goat, meat byproducts;

Goat, kidney; Pork, meat byproducts; Pork, meat byproducts

- baby food; Pork, skin; Pork, kidney;

Sheep, meat byproducts; Sheep, kidney (Kidney AR from Feeding Study and Canola Maximum %

Imported)

Acute AR

– RDF #44

Max %CT = 93%

Calculated AR = 0.0281 ppm

Total samples assumed to be 100

# Treated samples = 93

Total zeros = 7 Chronic AR

0.0011 ppm (see calculations above)

Fat (Beef Cattle MRBD Used)

R 2 

### = 0.956

y = 0.0027x

If x = 1.95; then y = 0.0053 ppm

If x = 0.079; then y = 0.0002 ppm

Since there is acceptable linearity with

the data (see R 2 

### value); the anticipated residue is taken from a linear regression which includes all dose

levels and is forced through zero.

The fat acute AR is 0. 0053 ppm (note the RDF will also include the highest %CT of al l the feedstuffs

included in the dietary burden).

The fat chronic AR is 0.0002 ppm

– it has been adjusted for % CT; no further adjustment will be

included in the dietary assessment.

Beef, fat; Beef, fat

- baby food; Goat, fat; Pork, fat; Pork, fat

- baby food; Sheep, fat; Sheep, fat

- baby

food; (Fat AR from Feeding Study and Canola Maximum % Imported)

Acute AR

– RDF #45

Max %CT = 93%

Calculated AR = 0.0053 ppm

Total samples assumed to be 100

# Treated samples = 93

Total zeros = 7 Chronic AR

0.0002 ppm (see calculations above)

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 66 of 95 Liver (Beef Cattle MRBD Used)

R 2 

### = 0.9881

y = 0.0099x

If x = 1.95; then y = 0.0193 ppm

If x = 0.079; then y = 0.0008 ppm

Since there is good linearity with the

data (see R 2 

### value); the anticipated residue is taken from a linear regression which includes all dose levels

and is forced through zero.

The liver acute AR is 0.0 193 ppm (note the RDF will also include the highest %CT of all the feedstuffs

included in the dietary bu rden).

The liver chronic AR is 0.0008 ppm

– it has been adjusted for % CT; no further adjustment will be

included in the dietary assessment.

Beef, liver; Beef, liver

- baby food; Goat, liver; Pork, liver; Sheep, liver (Liver AR from Feeding

Study and Ca nola Maximum % Imported)

Acute AR

– RDF #46

Max %CT = 93%

Calculated AR = 0.0193 ppm

Total samples assumed to be 100

# Treated samples = 93

Total zeros = 7 Chronic AR

0.0008 ppm (see calculations above)

Poultry

The MRBD is below the lowest level in the feeding study. Since there are quantifiable residues in all

tissues at the lowest dosing level (10 ppm), anticipated residues are calculated by multiplying the MRBD

by the tissue to feed ratio.

Table X. Acute and Chronic Poultry Anticipated Residues

Matrix Acute AR 1 Chronic AR 1

MRBD

(ppm) Tissue

to feed

ratio

from 2 AR

(ppm) MRBD

(ppm) Tissue

to feed

ratio 2 AR

(ppm)

Eggs

1.01 0.055 0.0556

0.188 0.055 0.0103

Liver 0.365 0.3686 0.365 0.0686

Muscle 0.030 0.0303 0.030 0.0056

Skin/Fat 0.073 0.0737 0.073 0.0137

1 % CT of the most highly treated feedstuff will be incorporated into the acute assessment in the RDF. The % CT has been inclu ded in the

chronic AR and no further refinement is appropriate.

2 From the 10 ppm laying hen feeding study dose level.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 67 of 95 Poultry Meat

Chicken, meat; Chicken, meat

- baby food; Poultry, other, meat; Turkey, meat; Turkey, meat

- baby

food (Muscle AR from Feeding Study and 100% CT from Peanut Meal)

Acute AR

– RDF #47

Max %CT = 100%

Calculated AR = 0.030 ppm Chronic AR

0.0056 ppm (see calculations above)

Poultry liver, meat byproducts, fat and skin

In the original study, residues in fat and skin were not analyzed separately. No new feeding study data

are required for iprodione. However, since skin and fat were not analyzed separately, the anticipated

residue will come from the poultry commodity (excluding muscle) with the highest residue, which is the

liver AR.

Chicken, liver; Chicken, meat byproducts; Chicken, meat byproducts

- baby food; Chicken, fat;

C hicken, skin; Poultry, other, liver; Turkey, liver; Turkey, liver

- baby food (Liver AR from Feeding

Study and 100% CT from Peanut Meal)

Acute AR

– RDF #48

Max %CT = 100%

Calculated AR = 0.365 ppm Chronic AR

0.0686 ppm (see calculations above)

Eggs, All (Egg AR from Feeding Study and 100 %CT from Peanut Meal)

Acute AR

– RDF #49

Max %CT = 100%

Calculated AR = 0.0556 ppm Chronic AR

0.0103 ppm 

### (see calculations above)

Swine

A swine feeding study has not submitted and is not required for iprodione. Anticipated residues

developed for ruminants will be used for swine.

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 68 of 95 Attachment 5. RDFs

Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

Apricot, Fresh, peach fresh PDP data 2006, 2007, 2008, 75% CT

TOTALZ=315

LODRES=0.0076

TOTALLOD=532

Almond PDP Data 2007, 2008, 55%CT

TOTALZ=246 Apricot, canned, peach canned PDP data 2004,

75%CT Balsam Pear, Cucumber

FT Data, 100% CT Bell Pepper 42% CT

FT Data

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 69 of 95 Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

LODRES=0.0051

TOTALLOD=297

0.0373

0.0133

0.0185

0.0148 TOTALZ=186

LODRES=0.0173

TOTALLOD=557 TOTALZ=0

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=4

0.045

0.05

0.135

0.065

0.06 TOTALZ=11

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=2

0.135

0.175

0.095

0.173

0.21

0.375

Blueberry, fresh Blueberry PDP Data 2007, 2008,

15% CT

TOTALZ=1167

LODRES=0.0053

TOTALLOD=0 Cherry, fresh PDP data 2007, 20%CT

TOTALZ=335

LODRES=0.0044

TOTALLOD=67

1.2240 0.0184

0.6630 0.0064

0.6732

0.6426

0.0734

0.2346

0.4794

0.3162

0.2244

0.5610

0.0073

0.1734

0.2448

0.1938

0.0194 Cucumber, 20% CT FT

Data

TOTALZ=36

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=4

0.045

0.05

0.135

0.065

0.06

Cantaloupe and Honeydew Melon 30% CT, Melon

FT Data

TOTALZ=26

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=11 Broccoli, fresh, 2.5% CT, PDP 2006, 2007,

2008

TotalZ=1423

LODRES=0.007

TotalLOD=36 Caneberries, Blackberry

FT Data, 20% CT

TOTALZ=16

TOTALNZ=4

15.91 11.39

6.11 22.81 Casaba 100% CT, Melon

FT Data

TOTALZ=0

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=11

Chayote Fruit, 100% CT Squash FT Data

TOTALZ=0

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=7 Grape Juice 2008 PDP Data 5% CT

TOTALZ=708

LODRES=0.0113

TOTALLOD =37 Eggs AR from dietary

burden and FS, 100% CT

TOTALZ=0

0.0556 Garlic, fresh 25%CT

Tolerance

TOTALFREQ=1

TOTALZ=15

5,0.1

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 70 of 95 Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

Carrot, fresh 45% CT, PDPD Data 2006, 2007

TOTALZ=818

LODRES=0.0222

TOTALLOD=459 Kiwi fruit Field Trial Data

100% CT

TOTALZ=0

TOTALNZ=30

0.4

0.46

0.5

0.59

0.61

0.76

1.98

2.09

2.14

2.36

2.44

2.57

2.75

2.76

2.77

2.8

2.84

2.92

3

3.12

3.37

3.57

3.62

3.78

3.8

4.04

4.14

4.23

4.45

4.51 Lettuce, fresh 35%CT

PDP 2004, 2005

TOTALZ=966

LODRES=0.0109

TOTALLOD=501

1.7400

0.6670

0.4060

0.1276

0.1131

0.0624

0.0537

0.0508

0.0421

0.0203

0.0203

0.0203

0.0203

0.0203

0.0203

0.0203

0.0203

0.0203

0.0203

Egg Plant 48% CT Bell Pepper FT Data

TOTALZ=9

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=2

0.135

0.175

0.095

0.173

0.21

0.375 Green Bean, fresh 15% CT PDP Data 2004,

2005, 2007, 2008

TOTALZ=982

LODRES=0.0117

TOTALLOD=141 Green Bean, frozen 15%

CT PDP Data 2005

TOTALZ=472

LODRES=0.0113

TOTALLOD=73

0.3190

0.3045

0.2465

0.2030

0.1885

0.1247

0.1015

0.0363

0.0363

0.0363 Okra 100% CT Bell

Pepper FT Data

TOTALZ=0

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=2

0.135

0.175

0.095

0.173

0.21

0.375

Green Beans, Canned 15% CT, PDP 2004

TotalZ=157

LODRES=0.0122

TotalLOD=28 Meat AR from dietary burden and FS, 93%

CT

TOTALZ=7

93, 0.0027 Milk AR from dietary

burden and FS, 93% CT

TOTALZ=7

93, 0.0174 Mustard Green 2.5%CT

Tolerance

TOTALFREQ=1

TOTALZ=195

5,15

Non

- Bell Pepper 42% CT FT Data

TOTALZ=6

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=1

0.175

0.18

1.18 Poultry Meat AR from dietary burden and FS,

100% CT

TOTALZ=0

0.030 Prune, dried plum PDP

data 2005, 2006 25%CT

TOTALZ=283

LODRES=0.0199

TOTALLOD=0

0.3672 Pumpkin, 4% CT

Squash FT Data

TOTALZ=168

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=7

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 71 of 95 Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

Onion, dry bulb 30%CT Tolerance

TOTALFREQ=1

TOTALZ=70

30,0.5 Peach, canned PDP data 2004, 25%CT

TOTALZ=557

LODRES=0.0173

TOTALLOD=186 Potato, fresh, 5% CT, PDP

2008, 2009

TotalZ=1414

LODRES=0.0117

TotalLOD=74 Poultry liver AR from

dietary burden and FS,

100% CT

TOTALZ=0

0.365

Raspberry, Raspberry FT Data, 20% CT

TOTALZ=36

TOTALNZ=9

7.63

1.28

4.40

4.56

11.80

13.85

4.2

2.9

5.5 Stawberry, fresh PDP data 2004, 2005, 2009,

20% CT

TOTALZ=2362

LODRES=0.0112

TOTALLOD=571

1.2240

0.1122

0.6120

0.3060

0.7038

1.5300

0.1836

0.3468

1.2240

0.0490

0.2958

0.1938

0.7242

0.2652

0.3366

0.9078

0.9282

0.5508

0.1020

0.2652 Tomatillo 100% CT

tomato FT Data

TOTALZ=0

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=4

0.135

0.045

0.05

0.035

0.46

0.39

0.325

0.835

0.81

0.695

1.34

0.605 Tomato, fresh, baby food

12% CT FT Data

TOTALZ=117

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=4

0.135

0.045

0.05

0.035

0.46

0.39

0.325

0.835

0.81

0.695

1.34

0.605

Ruminant fat AR from dietary burden and FS, 93%

CT

TOTALZ=7

93, 0.0053 Kidney AR from dietary burden and FS, 93%

CT

TOTALZ=7

93, 0.0281 Ruminant liver AR from

dietary burden and FS,

93% CT

TOTALZ=7

93, 0.0193 Squash, 20% CT FT

Data

TOTALZ=28

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=7

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 72 of 95 Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

Nectarine, fresh PDP data 2007, 2008 35%CT

TOTALZ=803

LODRES=0.0199

TOTALLOD=7

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 73 of 95 Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

Grape PDP data 2004, 2005, 2009, 2010 5%CT

TOTALZ=2538

LODRES=0.0111

Peach, fresh PDP data 2006, 2007, 2008, 25% CT

TOTALZ=847

LODRES=0.0076

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 74 of 95 Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

TOTALLOD=0

Plum, fresh PDP data 2005, 2006 25%CT

TOTALZ=674

LODRES=0.0199

TOTALLOD=0

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 75 of 95 Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 76 of 95 Table A 5. Iprodione Residue Distribution Files

Tomato 48% CT tomato FT Data

TOTALZ=17

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=4

0.135

0.045

0.05

0.035

0.46

0.39

0.325

0.835

0.81

0.695

1.34

0.605 Tomato Juice 12% CT tomato HAFT values corrected for 1.27x empirical

processing factor for paste

TOTALZ=117

LODRES=0.0191

TOTALLOD=4

0.1715

0.0572

0.0635

0.0445

0.5842

0.4953

0.4128

1.0605

1.0287

0.8827

1.7018

0.7684 Watermelon, 9% CT

Melon FT Data

TOTALZ=111

LODRES=0.015

TOTALLOD=11

Acute Surface Water Distribution (Partial File

– Highest Values Shown)

Turf EDWC 1962

- 1991



## ...

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 77 of 95 Attachment 6. Iprodione Acute Dietary Input File

Filename: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ ipro acute all f_w.R98

Chemical: Iprodione

RfD( Chronic): .05 mg/kg bw/day NOEL(Chronic): 5 mg/kg bw/day

RfD(Acute): .05 mg/kg bw/day NOEL(Acute): 5 mg/kg bw/day Q*= .0439

Date created/last modified: 03

- 15

- 2012/13:45:41/8 Program ver. 2.03

---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- RDL indices and parameters for Monte Carlo Analysis:

Index Dist Parameter #1 Param #2 Param #3 Comment

# Code

----- ---- ------------ -------- -------- ------- 1 6 carrot_fresh.rdf

2 6 potat o_fresh.rdf

3 6 garlic_tol.rdf

4 6 onion bulb_tol.rdf

5 6 lettuce_fresh.rdf

6 6 broccoli_fresh.rdf

7 6 mustard green_tol.rdf

8 6 green beans_fresh.rdf

9 6 green beans_canned.rdf

10 6 green beans_frozen.rdf

11 6 eggplant_fresh_ft.rdf

12 6 okra_fresh_ft.rdf

13 6 bell pepper_fresh_ft.rdf

14 6 nonbell pepper_fresh_ft.rdf

15 6 tomatillo_fresh_ft.rdf

16 6 tomato_fresh_baby_ft.rdf

17 6 toma to_juice_ft.rdf

18 6 balsam pear_ft.rdf

19 6 cucumber_ft.rdf

20 6 Cantaloupe honeydew_ft.rdf

21 6 casaba_ft.rdf

22 6 watermelon_ft.rdf

23 6 chayote fruit_ft.rdf

24 6 pumpkin_ft.rdf

25 6 squash_ft.rdf

26 6 apricot_fresh.rdf

27 6 peach_fresh.rdf

28 6 apricot_canned.rdf

29 6 peach_canned.rdf

30 6 cherry_fresh.rdf

31 6 nectarine_fresh.rdf

32 6 plum_fresh.rdf

33 6 prune_dried plum.rdf

34 6 caneberry_ft.rdf

35 6 raspberry_ft.rdf

36 6 blueberry_fresh.rdf

38 6 almond_PDP.rdf

39 6 grape_pdp.rdf

40 6 grape_juice_pdp.rdf

41 6 kiwi_ft.rdf

42 6 strawberry_fresh.rdf

43 6 meat.rdf

44 6 ruminant kidney.rdf

45 6 ruminant fat.rdf

46 6 ruminant liver.rdf

47 6 poultry meat.rdf

48 6 poultry liver.rdf

49 6 eggs.rdf

50 6 milk.rdf

51 6 water.rdf

EPA Crop Commodity Name Def Res Adj.Factors RDL Comment

Code Grp (ppm) #1 #2 Pntr

-------- ---- ------------------------------- ---------- ------ ------ --- -------

01010780 1AB Carrot 1.000000 1.000 1.000 1

01010781 1AB C arrot

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 1

01010790 1AB Carrot, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 1

01011680 1AB Ginseng, dried 4.000000 1.000 1.000

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 78 of 95 01032960 1C Potato, chips 1.000000 1.000 1.000 2

01032970 1C Potato, dry (granules/ flakes) 0.011700 6.500 1.000

01032971 1C Potato, dry (granules/ flakes)

- b 0.011700 6.500 1.000

01032980 1C Potato, flour 0.01 1700 6.500 1.000

01032981 1C Potato, flour

- babyfood 0.011700 6.500 1.000

01032990 1C Potato, tuber, w/peel 1.000000 1.000 1.000 2

01032991 1C Potato, tuber, w/peel

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 2

01033000 1C Potato, tuber, w/o peel 1.000000 1.000 1.000 2

01033001 1C Potato, tuber, w/o peel

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 2

03001640 3 Garlic 1.000000 1.000 1.000 3

03001650 3 Garlic, dried 0.025000 1.000 1.000

03001651 3 Garlic, dried

- babyfood 0.025000 1.000 1.000

03002370 3 Onion, dry bulb 1.000000 1.000 1.000 4

03002371 3 Onion, dry bulb

- b abyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 4

03002380 3 Onion, dry bulb, dried 0.150000 1.000 1.000

03002381 3 Onion, dry bulb, dried

- babyfood 0.150000 1.000 1.000

04012040 4A Lettuce, head 1 .000000 1.000 1.000 5

04012050 4A Lettuce, leaf 1.000000 1.000 1.000 5

05010610 5A Broccoli 1.000000 1.000 1.000 6

05010611 5A Broccoli

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1. 000 6

05010620 5A Broccoli, Chinese 1.000000 1.000 1.000 6

05022290 5B Mustard greens 1.000000 1.000 1.000 7

06010430 6A Bean, snap, succulent

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Me th N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

213

- Cooked; Fres h or N/S; Fried

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

215

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled/baked

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 1.000000 1.000 1.000 10

222

- Cooked; Frozen; Boiled 1.000000 1.000 1.000 10

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

24 0

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 9

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 1.000000 1.000 1.000 9

06010431 6A Bean, snap, succulent

- babyfood

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 9

06020310 6B Bean, broad, succulent 1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

06020330 6B Bean, cowpea, succulent

212

- Cooked; F resh or N/S; Boiled

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

222

- Cooked; Frozen; Boiled 1.000000 1.000 1.000 10

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 1.000000 1.000 1.000 9

06020370 6B Bean, lima, succulent

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

1.000000 1.000 1.000 8

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 1.000000 1.000 1.000 10

222

- Cooked; Frozen; Boiled 1.000000 1.000 1.000 10

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 9

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 1.000000 1.000 1.000 9

06030300 6C Bean, black, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.011900 1.000 1.000

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 79 of 95 06030320 6C Bean, broad, seed

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

06030340 6C Bean, cowpea, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

06030350 6C Bean, great northern, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.011900 1.000 1.000

06030360 6C Bean, kidney, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.050000 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.011900 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.011900 1.000 1.000

06030380 6C Bea n, lima, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.05000 0 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

06030390 6C Bean, mung, seed

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.00 0 1.000

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.050000 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

2 33

- Cooked; Dried; Fried 0.050000 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.011900 1.000 1.000

06030400 6C Bean, navy, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cook ed; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.011900 1.000 1.000

06030410 6C Bean, pink, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

06030420 6C Bean, pinto, seed

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 80 of 95 210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.050000 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.050000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

06030980 6C Chic kpea, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.050000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.050000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.050000 1.000 1.000

234

- Cooked; Dried; Fried/baked 0.050000 1.000 1.000

06030981 6C Chickpea, seed

- babyfood

240

- Cooked; Canned; Coo k Meth N/S

0.014400 1.000 1.000

06030990 6C Chickpea, flour 0.050000 1.000 1.000

08001480 8 Eggplant 1.000000 1.000 1.000 11

08002340 8 Okra 1.000000 1.000 1.000 12

08002700 8 Pepper, bell 1.000000 1.000 1.000 13

08002701 8 Pepper, bell

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 13

08002710 8 Pepper, bell, dried 0.062800 1.000 1.000

08002711 8 Pepper, bell, dried

- babyfood 0.062800 1.000 1.000

08002720 8 Pepper, nonbell 1.000000 1.000 1.000 14

08002721 8 Pepper, nonbell

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 14

08002730 8 Pepper, nonbell, dried 0.155000 1.000 1.000

08003740 8 Tomatillo 1.000000 1.000 1.000 15

08003750 8 Tomat o 1.000000 1.000 1.000 16

08003751 8 Tomato

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 16

08003760 8 Tomato, paste 0.055200 1.000 1.000

08003761 8 Tomato, paste

- babyfood 0.055200 1.000 1.000

08003770 8 Tomato, puree 0.018300 1.000 1.000

08003771 8 Tomato, puree

- babyfood 0.018300 1.000 1.000

08003780 8 Tomato, dried 0.043500 1.000 1.000

08003781 8 Tomato, dried

- babyfood 0.043500 1.000 1.000

08003790 8 Tomato, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 17

09010750 9A Cantaloupe 1.000000 1.000 1.000 20

09010800 9A Casaba 1.000000 1.000 1.000 21

09011870 9A Honeydew melon 1.000000 1.000 1.000 20

09013990 9A Watermelon 1.000000 1.000 1.000 22

09014000 9A Wa termelon, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 22

09020210 9B Balsam pear 1.000000 1.000 1.000 18

09020880 9B Chayote, fruit 1.000000 1.000 1.000 23

09021020 9B Chinese waxgourd 1.000000 1.000 1.000 21

09021350 9B Cucumber 1.000000 1.000 1.000 19

09023080 9B Pumpkin 1.000000 1.000 1.000 24

09023090 9B Pumpkin, seed 0.000 600 1.000 1.000

09023560 9B Squash, summer 1.000000 1.000 1.000 25

09023561 9B Squash, summer

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 25

09023570 9B Squash, winter 1.000000 1.000 1.000 25

09023571 9B Squash, winter

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 25

12000120 12 Apricot

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 26

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

1.000000 1.000 1.000 26

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

1.000000 1.000 1.000 26

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 1.000000 1.000 1.000 26

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 1.000000 1.000 1.000 26

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 28

12000121 12 Apricot

- babyfood

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 28

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 81 of 95 12000130 12 Apricot, dried 0.543600 6.0 00 1.000

12000140 12 Apricot, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 28

12000141 12 Apricot, juice

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 28

12000900 12 Cherry 1.000000 1.000 1.000 30

120 00901 12 Cherry

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 30

12000910 12 Cherry, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 30

12000911 12 Cherry, juice

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 30

12002300 12 Nectarin e 1.000000 1.000 1.000 31

12002600 12 Peach

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 27

120

- Uncooked; Frozen; Co ok Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 27

130

- Uncooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 27

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 27

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

1.000000 1.000 1.00 0 27

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

1.000000 1.000 1.000 27

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 1.000000 1.000 1.000 27

223

- Cooked; Frozen; Frie d 1.000000 1.000 1.000 27

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 29

12002601 12 Peach

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 29

12002610 12 Peach, dried 0.543600 7.000 1.000

12002611 12 Peach, dried

- babyfood 0.543600 7.000 1.000

12002620 12 Peach, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 29

12002621 12 Peach, juice

- b abyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 29

12002850 12 Plum 1.000000 1.000 1.000 32

12002851 12 Plum

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 32

12002860 12 Plum, prune, fresh 1.000000 1.000 1.000 32

12002861 12 Plum, prune, fresh

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 32

12002870 12 Plum, prune, dried 1.000000 1.000 1.000 33

12002871 12 Plum, prune, dried

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 33

12002880 12 Plum, prune, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 33

12002881 12 Plum, prune, juice

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 33

13010550 13A Blackberry 1.000000 1.000 1.000 34

130105 60 13A Blackberry, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 34

13010561 13A Blackberry, juice

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 34

13010580 13A Boysenberry 1.000000 1.000 1.000 34

13011420 13A Dewberry 1.000000 1.000 1.000 34

13012080 13A Loganberry 1.000000 1.000 1.000 34

13013200 13A Raspberry 1.000000 1.000 1.000 35

13013201 13A Raspberry

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 35

13013210 13A Raspberry, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 35

13013211 13A Raspberry, juice

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 35

13020570 13B Blueberry

1 10

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

120

- Uncooked; Frozen; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

130

- Uncooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

214

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried/baked

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

223

- Cooked; Frozen; Fried 1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

13020571 13B Blueberry

- babyfood

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 82 of 95 13021360 13B Currant 1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

13021370 13B Currant , dried 1.000000 1.000 1.000 36

14000030 14 Almond 1.000000 1.000 1.000 38

14000031 14 Almond

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 38

14000040 14 Almond, oil 0.005200 1.000 1.000

14000041 14 Almond, oil

- babyfood 0.005200 1.000 1.000

15003230 15 Rice, white 0.002600 1.000 1.000

15003231 15 Rice, white

- babyfood 0.002600 1.000 1.000

15003240 15 Rice, brown 0.002600 1.000 1.000

15003241 15 Rice, brown

- babyfood 0.002600 1.000 1.000

15003250 15 Rice, flour 0.007800 1.000 1.000

15003251 15 Rice, flour

- babyfood 0.007800 1.000 1.000

15003260 15 Rice, bran 0.007800 1.000 1.000

15003261 15 Rice, bran

- babyfood 0.007800 1.000 1.000

20003190 20 Rape seed, oil 0.007800 1.000 1.000

20003191 20 Rapeseed, oil

- babyfood 0.007800 1.000 1.000

21000440 M Beef, meat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 43

21000441 M Beef, meat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 43

21000450 M Beef, meat, dried 1.000000 1.920 1.000 43

21000460 M Beef, meat byproducts 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

21000461 M Beef, meat byproducts

- babyfood 1.00000 0 1.000 1.000 44

21000470 M Beef, fat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 45

21000471 M Beef,fat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 45

21000480 M Beef, kidney 1.000000 1.000 1.000 4 4

21000490 M Beef, liver 1.000000 1.000 1.000 46

21000491 M Beef, liver

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 46

23001690 M Goat, meat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 43

23001700 M G oat, meat byproducts 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

23001710 M Goat, fat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 45

23001720 M Goat, kidney 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

23001730 M Goat, liver 1.000000 1.000 1.000 46

24001890 M Horse, meat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 43

25002900 M Pork, meat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 43

25002901 M Pork, meat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 43

25002910 M Pork, skin 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

25002920 M Pork, meat byproducts 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

25002921 M Pork, meat byproducts

- ba byfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

25002930 M Pork, fat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 45

25002931 M Pork, fat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 45

25002940 M Pork, kidney 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

25002950 M Pork, liver 1.000000 1.000 1.000 46

26003390 M Sheep, meat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 43

26003391 M Sheep, meat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 43

26003400 M Sheep, meat byproducts 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

26003410 M Sheep, fat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 45

26003411 M Sheep, fat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 45

26003420 M Sh eep, kidney 1.000000 1.000 1.000 44

26003430 M Sheep, liver 1.000000 1.000 1.000 46

27002220 D Milk, fat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 50

27002221 D Milk, fat

- baby food /infant for 1.000000 1.000 1.000 50

27012230 D Milk, nonfat solids 1.000000 1.000 1.000 50

27012231 D Milk, nonfat solids

- baby food/in 1.000000 1.000 1.000 50

27022240 D Milk, water 1.000 000 1.000 1.000 50

27022241 D Milk, water

- babyfood/infant form 1.000000 1.000 1.000 50

27032251 D Milk, sugar (lactose)

- baby food/ 1.000000 1.000 1.000 50

40000930 P Chicken, meat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

40000931 P Chicken, meat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

40000940 P Chicken, liver 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

40000950 P Chicken, meat byproducts 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

40000951 P Chicken, meat byproducts

- babyfoo 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

40000960 P Chicken, fat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

40000961 P Chicken, fat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

40000970 P Chick en, skin 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

40000971 P Chicken, skin

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

50003820 P Turkey, meat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

50003821 P Turkey, meat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

50003830 P Turkey, liver 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

50003831 P Turkey, liver

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

50003840 P Turkey, meat byproducts 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

50003841 P Turkey, meat byproducts

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

50003850 P Turkey, fat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 83 of 95 50003851 P Turkey, fat

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

50003860 P Turkey, skin 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

50003861 P Turkey, skin

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 48

60003010 P Poultry, other, meat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

60003020 P Po ultry, other, liver 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

60003030 P Poultry, other, meat byproducts 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

60003040 P Poultry, other, fat 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

60003050 P Poultry, other, skin 1.000000 1.000 1.000 47

70001450 P Egg, whole 1.000000 1.000 1.000 49

70001451 P Egg, whole

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 49

70001460 P Egg, white 1.000 000 1.000 1.000 49

70001461 P Egg, white (solids)

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 49

70001470 P Egg, yolk 1.000000 1.000 1.000 49

70001471 P Egg, yolk

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 49

86010000 O Water, direct, all sources 1.000000 1.000 1.000 51

86020000 O Water, indirect, all sources 1.000000 1.000 1.000 51

95001750 O Grape 1.000000 1.000 1.000 39

95001760 O Grape, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 40

95001761 O Grape, juice

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 40

95001770 O Grape, leaves 1.000000 1.000 1.000 39

95001780 O Grape, raisin 1.000000 1.000 1.000 39

95001790 O Grape, wine and sherry 1.000000 1.000 1.000 40

95001950 O Kiwifruit 1.000000 1.000 1.000 41

95002630 O Peanut 0 .500000 1.000 1.000

95002640 O Peanut, butter 0.036200 1.000 1.000

95002650 O Peanut, oil 0.500000 1.000 1.000

95003590 O Strawberry 1.000000 1.000 1. 000 42

95003591 O Strawberry

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 42

95003600 O Strawberry, juice 1.000000 1.000 1.000 42

95003601 O Strawberry, juice

- babyfood 1.000000 1.000 1.000 42

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 84 of 95 Attac hment 7. Iprodione Acute Dietary Results File

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.02

DEEM

- FCID ACUTE Analysis for IPRODIONE (1994

- 98 data)

Residue file: ipro acute all f_w.R98 Adjustment factor #2 used.

Analysis Date: 03

- 15

- 2012/13:47:49 Residue file dated: 03

- 15

- 2012/13:45:41/8

NOEL (Acute) = 5.000000 mg/kg body

- wt/day

Daily totals for food and foodform consumption used.

MC iterations = 1000 MC list in residue file MC seed = 1960

Run Comment: ""

===============================================================================

Summary calculations (per capita):

95th Percentile 99th Percentile 99.9th Percentile

Exposure % aRfD MOE Exposure % aRfD MOE Exposure % aRfD MOE

---------- ------- -------- ---------- ------- -------- ---------- ------- --------

Females 13

- 49 yrs:

0.001742 3.48 2870 0.003926 7.85 1273 0.011997 23.99 416

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 85 of 95 Attachment 8. Iprodione Chronic Dietary Input File

Filename: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ ipro chronic all f_w.R98

Chemical: Iprodione

RfD(Chronic): .05 mg/kg bw/day NOEL(Chronic): 5 mg/kg bw/day

RfD(Acute): .05 mg/kg bw/day NOEL(Acute): 5 mg/kg b w/day Q*= .0439

Date created/last modified: 03

- 15

- 2012/14:06:38/8 Program ver. 2.03

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA Crop Def Res Adj.Factors Comment

Code Grp Commodity Name (ppm) #1 #2

-------- ---- ------------------------------- ---------- ------ ------ -------

01010780 1AB Carrot 0.013900 1.000 1.000

01010781 1AB Carrot

- babyfood 0.013900 1.000 1.000

01010790 1AB Carrot, juice 0.013900 1.000 1.000

01011680 1AB Ginseng, dried 4.000000 1.000 1.000

01032960 1C Potato, chips 0. 011700 1.000 1.000

01032970 1C Potato, dry (granules/ flakes) 0.011700 6.500 1.000

01032971 1C Potato, dry (granules/ flakes)

- b 0.011700 6.500 1.000

01032980 1C Potato, flour 0.011700 6.500 1.000

0103298 1 1C Potato, flour

- babyfood 0.011700 6.500 1.000

01032990 1C Potato, tuber, w/peel 0.000300 1.000 1.000

01032991 1C Potato, tuber, w/peel

- babyfood 0.000300 1.000 1.000

01033000 1C Potato, tuber, w/o peel 0.000300 1.000 1.000

01033001 1C Potato, tuber, w/o peel

- babyfood 0.000300 1.000 1.000

03001640 3 Garlic 0.010000 1.000 1.000

03001650 3 Garlic, dried 0.010000 1.000 1. 000

03001651 3 Garlic, dried

- babyfood 0.010000 1.000 1.000

03002370 3 Onion, dry bulb 0.100000 1.000 1.000

03002371 3 Onion, dry bulb

- babyfood 0.100000 1.000 1.000

03002380 3 Onion, dry bulb, dried 0.100000 9.000 1.000

03002381 3 Onion, dry bulb, dried

- babyfood 0.100000 9.000 1.000

04012040 4A Lettuce, head 0.004400 1.000 1.000

04012050 4A Lettuce, leaf 0.00440 0 1.000 1.000

05010610 5A Broccoli 0.000100 1.000 1.000

05010611 5A Broccoli

- babyfood 0.000100 1.000 1.000

05010620 5A Broccoli, Chinese 0.000100 1.000 1.000

05022290 5B Mustard greens 0.150000 1.000 1.000

06010430 6A Bean, snap, succulent

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.004600 1.000 1.000

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.004600 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.004600 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.004600 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.004600 1.000 1.000

215

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled/baked

0.004600 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.003200 1.000 1.000

222

- Cooked; Frozen; Boiled 0.003200 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.004600 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.000600 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.000600 1.000 1.000

06010431 6A Bean, snap, succulent

- babyfood

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.000600 1.000 1.000

06020310 6B Bean, broad, succulent 0.004600 1.000 1.000

06020330 6B Bean, cowpea, succulent

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.004600 1.000 1.000

222

- Cooked; Frozen; Boiled 0.003200 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.000600 1.000 1.000

06020370 6B Bean, lima, succulent

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.004600 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.004600 1.000 1.000

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 86 of 95 213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.004600 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.003200 1.000 1.000

222

- Cooked; Frozen; Boiled 0.003200 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.000600 1. 000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.000600 1.000 1.000

06030300 6C Bean, black, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.011900 1.000 1.000

06030320 6C Bean, broad, seed

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

06030340 6C Bean, cowpea, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0 .020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

06030350 6C Bean, great northern, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Bo iled 0.011900 1.000 1.000

06030360 6C Bean, kidney, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.020000 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Me th N/S

0.011900 1.000 1.000

242

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.011900 1.000 1.000

06030380 6C Bean, lima, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

06030390 6C Bean, mung, seed

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.020000 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

233

- Cooked; Dried; Fried 0.020000 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.011900 1.000 1.0 00

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 87 of 95 06030400 6C Bean, navy, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

24 2

- Cooked; Canned; Boiled 0.011900 1.000 1.000

06030410 6C Bean, pink, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

06030420 6C Bean, pinto, seed

210

- Coo ked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Coo ked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.020000 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Fr ozen; Baked 0.020000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

06030980 6C Chickpea, seed 0.020000 1.000 1.000

06030981 6C Chickpea, seed

- babyfood 0.014400 1.000 1.000

06030990 6C Chickpea, flour 0.020000 1.000 1.000

06031820 6C Guar, seed

1 10

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

120

- Uncooked; Frozen; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

130

- Uncooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.020000 1.000 1.000

214

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried/baked

0.020000 1.000 1.000

215

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled/baked

0.020000 1.000 1.000

220

- Cooked; Frozen; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.020000 1.000 1.000

222

- Cooked; Frozen; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

223

- Cooked; Frozen; Fried 0.020000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Coo k Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

231

- Cooked; Dried; Baked 0.020000 1.000 1.000

233

- Cooked; Dried; Fried 0.020000 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.011900 1.000 1.000

250

- Cooked; Cured etc; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

06031821 6C Guar, s eed

- babyfood 0.020000 1.000 1.000

06032030 6C Lentil, seed

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

212

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Boiled

0.020000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.020000 1.000 1.000

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 88 of 95 232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.020000 1.000 1.000

08001480 8 Eggplant 0.049700 1.000 1.000

08002340 8 Okra 0.149100 1.000 1.000

08002700 8 Pepper, bell 0.036200 1.000 1.000

08002701 8 Pepper, bell

- babyfood 0.036200 1.000 1.000

08002710 8 Pepper, bell, dried 0.036200 1.000 1.000

08002711 8 Pepper, bell, dried

- babyfood 0.036200 1.000 1 .000

08002720 8 Pepper, nonbell 0.091200 1.000 1.000

08002721 8 Pepper, nonbell

- babyfood 0.091200 1.000 1.000

08002730 8 Pepper, nonbell, dried 0.091200 1.000 1.000

08003740 8 Tomatillo 0.361600 1.000 1.000

08003750 8 Tomato 0.123100 1.000 1.000

08003751 8 Tomato

- babyfood 0.028900 1.000 1.000

08003760 8 Tomato, paste 0.0367 00 1.000 1.000

08003761 8 Tomato, paste

- babyfood 0.036700 1.000 1.000

08003770 8 Tomato, puree 0.012100 1.000 1.000

08003771 8 Tomato, puree

- babyfood 0.012100 1.000 1.000

08003780 8 Tomato, dried 0.028900 14.300 1.000

08003781 8 Tomato, dried

- babyfood 0.028900 14.300 1.000

08003790 8 Tomato, juice 0.036700 1.000 1.000

09010750 9A Cantaloupe 0.002400 1.000 1.000

09010800 9A Casaba 0.015000 1.000 1.000

09011870 9A Honeydew melon 0.002400 1.000 1.000

09013990 9A Watermelon 0.001200 1.000 1.000

09014000 9A Watermelon, juice 0.001200 1.000 1.000

09020210 9B Balsam pear 0.046100 1.000 1.000

09020880 9B Chayote, fruit 0.015000 1.000 1.000

09021020 9B Chinese waxgou rd 0.046100 1.000 1.000

09021350 9B Cucumber 0.005100 1.000 1.000

09023080 9B Pumpkin 0.000300 1.000 1.000

09023090 9B Pumpkin, seed 0.000300 1.000 1.000

09023560 9B Squash, summer 0.001300 1.000 1.000

09023561 9B Squash, summer

- babyfood 0.001300 1.000 1.000

09023570 9B Squash, winter 0.001300 1.000 1.000

09023571 9B S quash, winter

- babyfood 0.001300 1.000 1.000

12000120 12 Apricot

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.539900 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/ S; Baked

0.539900 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.539900 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.539900 1.000 1.000

232

- Cooked; Dried; Boiled 0.539900 6.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.008700 1.000 1.000

12000121 12 Apricot

- babyfo od 0.008700 1.000 1.000

12000130 12 Apricot, dried 0.543600 6.000 1.000

12000140 12 Apricot, juice 0.008700 1.000 1.000

12000141 12 Apricot, juice

- babyfood 0.008700 1.000 1.000

12000900 12 Cherry 0.014200 1.000 1.000

12000901 12 Cherry

- babyfood 0.014200 1.000 1.000

12000910 12 Cherry, juice 0.014200 1.500 1.000

12000911 12 Cherry, juice

- babyfood 0.014200 1.500 1.000

12002300 12 Nectarine 0.719500 1.000 1.000

12002600 12 Peach

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.538500 1.000 1.000

120

- Uncooked; Frozen; Cook Meth N/S

0.538500 1.000 1.000

130

- Uncooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.538500 7.000 1.000

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.538500 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Baked

0.538500 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.538500 1.000 1.000

221

- Cooked; Frozen; Baked 0.538500 1.000 1.000

223

- Cooked; Frozen; Fried 0.538500 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 89 of 95

0.003500 1.000 1.000

12002601 12 Peach

- babyfood 0.003500 1.000 1.000

12002610 12 Peach, dried 0.543600 7.000 1.000

12002611 12 Peach, dried

- babyfood 0.543600 7.000 1.000

12002620 12 Peach, juice 0.003500 1.000 1.000

12002621 12 Peach, juice

- babyfood 0.003500 1.000 1.000

12002850 12 Plum 0.482700 1.000 1.000

12002851 12 Plum

- babyfood 0.482700 1.000 1.000

12002860 12 Plum, prune, fresh 0.482700 1.000 1.000

12002861 12 Plum, prune, fresh

- babyfood 0.482700 1.000 1.000

12002870 12 Plum, prune, dried 0.003000 1.000 1.000

12002871 12 Plum, prune, drie d

- babyfood 0.003000 1.000 1.000

12002880 12 Plum, prune, juice 0.003000 1.000 1.000

12002881 12 Plum, prune, juice

- babyfood 0.003000 1.000 1.000

13010550 13A Blackberry 0.702800 1. 000 1.000

13010560 13A Blackberry, juice 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13010561 13A Blackberry, juice

- babyfood 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13010580 13A Boysenberry 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13011420 13A Dewb erry 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13012080 13A Loganberry 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13013200 13A Raspberry 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13013201 13A Raspberry

- babyfood 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13013210 13A Raspberry, juice 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13013211 13A Raspberry, juice

- babyfood 0.702800 1.000 1.000

13020570 13B Blueberry

110

- Uncooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N /S

0.036000 1.000 1.000

120

- Uncooked; Frozen; Cook Meth N/S

0.036000 1.000 1.000

130

- Uncooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/ S

0.036000 1.000 1.000

210

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Cook Meth N/S

0.036000 1.000 1.000

211

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Bake d

0.036000 1.000 1.000

213

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried

0.036000 1.000 1.000

214

- Cooked; Fresh or N/S; Fried/baked

0.036000 1.000 1.000

223

- Cooked; Frozen; Fried 0.036000 1.000 1.000

230

- Cooked; Dried; Cook Meth N/S

0.03600 0 1.000 1.000

240

- Cooked; Canned; Cook Meth N/S

0.036000 1.000 1.000

13020571 13B Blueberry

- babyfood 0.036000 1.000 1.000

13021360 13B Currant 0.036000 1.000 1.000

13021370 13B Currant, dried 0.036000 1.000 1.000

14000030 14 Almond 0.002400 1.000 1.000

14000031 14 Almond

- babyfood 0.002400 1.000 1.000

14000040 14 Almond, oil 0.005200 1.000 1.000

14000041 14 Almond, oil

- babyfood 0.005200 1.000 1.000

15003230 15 Rice, white 0.002600 1.000 1.000

15003231 15 Rice, whi te

- babyfood 0.002600 1.000 1.000

15003240 15 Rice, brown 0.002600 1.000 1.000

15003241 15 Rice, brown

- babyfood 0.002600 1.000 1.000

15003250 15 Rice, flour 0.007 800 1.000 1.000

15003251 15 Rice, flour

- babyfood 0.007800 1.000 1.000

15003260 15 Rice, bran 0.007800 1.000 1.000

15003261 15 Rice, bran

- babyfood 0.007800 1.000 1.000

20003190 2 0 Rapeseed, oil 0.177200 1.000 1.000

20003191 20 Rapeseed, oil

- babyfood 0.177200 1.000 1.000

21000440 M Beef, meat 0.000100 1.000 1.000

21000441 M Beef, meat

- babyfood 0.000100 1.000 1.000

21000450 M Beef, meat, dried 0.000200 1.000 1.000

21000460 M Beef, meat byproducts 0.001100 1.000 1.000

21000461 M Beef, meat byproducts

- babyfood 0.001100 1.000 1.000

21000470 M Beef, fat 0.000200 1.000 1.000

21000471 M Beef,fat

- babyfood 0.000200 1.000 1.000

21000480 M Beef, kidney 0.001100 1.000 1.000

21000490 M Beef, liver 0.000800 1.000 1.000

21000491 M Beef, liver

- babyfood 0.000800 1.000 1.000

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 90 of 95 23001690 M Goat, meat 0.000100 1.000 1.000

23001700 M Goat, meat byproducts 0.001100 1.000 1.000

23001710 M Goat, fat 0.000200 1.000 1.000

23001720 M Goat, kidney 0.001100 1.000 1.000

23001730 M Goat, liver 0.000800 1.000 1.000

24001890 M H orse, meat 0.000100 1.000 1.000

25002900 M Pork, meat 0.000100 1.000 1.000

25002901 M Pork, meat

- babyfood 0.000100 1.000 1.000

25002910 M Pork, skin 0.001100 1.000 1.000

25002920 M Pork, meat byproducts 0.001100 1.000 1.000

25002921 M Pork, meat byproducts

- babyfood 0.001100 1.000 1.000

25002930 M Pork, fat 0.000200 1.000 1.000

25 002931 M Pork, fat

- babyfood 0.000200 1.000 1.000

25002940 M Pork, kidney 0.001100 1.000 1.000

25002950 M Pork, liver 0.000800 1.000 1.000

26003390 M Sheep, meat 0.000100 1.000 1.000

26003391 M Sheep, meat

- babyfood 0.000100 1.000 1.000

26003400 M Sheep, meat byproducts 0.001100 1.000 1.000

26003410 M Sheep, fat 0.000200 1.00 0 1.000

26003411 M Sheep, fat

- babyfood 0.000200 1.000 1.000

26003420 M Sheep, kidney 0.001100 1.000 1.000

26003430 M Sheep, liver 0.000800 1.000 1.000

27002220 D Milk, fat 0.003500 1.000 1.000

27002221 D Milk, fat

- baby food/infant for 0.003500 1.000 1.000

27012230 D Milk, nonfat solids 0.003500 1.000 1.000

27012231 D Milk, nonfat soli ds

- baby food/in 0.003500 1.000 1.000

27022240 D Milk, water 0.003500 1.000 1.000

27022241 D Milk, water

- babyfood/infant form 0.003500 1.000 1.000

27032251 D Milk, sugar (lactose)

- baby food/ 0.003500 1. 000 1.000

40000930 P Chicken, meat 0.005600 1.000 1.000

40000931 P Chicken, meat

- babyfood 0.005600 1.000 1.000

40000940 P Chicken, liver 0.068600 1.000 1.000

40000950 P Chic ken, meat byproducts 0.068600 1.000 1.000

40000951 P Chicken, meat byproducts

- babyfoo 0.068600 1.000 1.000

40000960 P Chicken, fat 0.068600 1.000 1.000

40000961 P Chicken, fat

- babyfood 0.068600 1.000 1.000

40000970 P Chicken, skin 0.068600 1.000 1.000

40000971 P Chicken, skin

- babyfood 0.068600 1.000 1.000

50003820 P Turkey, meat 0.005600 1.000 1.000

50003 821 P Turkey, meat

- babyfood 0.005600 1.000 1.000

50003830 P Turkey, liver 0.068600 1.000 1.000

50003831 P Turkey, liver

- babyfood 0.068600 1.000 1.000

50003840 P Turkey, meat byproduct s 0.068600 1.000 1.000

50003841 P Turkey, meat byproducts

- babyfood 0.068600 1.000 1.000

50003850 P Turkey, fat 0.068600 1.000 1.000

50003851 P Turkey, fat

- babyfood 0.068600 1.000 1.000

50003860 P Turkey, skin 0.068600 1.000 1.000

50003861 P Turkey, skin

- babyfood 0.068600 1.000 1.000

60003010 P Poultry, other, meat 0.005600 1.000 1.000

60003020 P Poultry, other, liver 0.068600 1.000 1.000

60003030 P Poultry, other, meat byproducts 0.068600 1.000 1.000

60003040 P Poultry, other, fat 0.068600 1.000 1.000

60003050 P Poultry, other, s kin 0.068600 1.000 1.000

70001450 P Egg, whole 0.010300 1.000 1.000

70001451 P Egg, whole

- babyfood 0.010300 1.000 1.000

70001460 P Egg, white 0.010300 1. 000 1.000

70001461 P Egg, white (solids)

- babyfood 0.010300 1.000 1.000

70001470 P Egg, yolk 0.010300 1.000 1.000

70001471 P Egg, yolk

- babyfood 0.010300 1.000 1.000

86010000 O Wate r, direct, all sources 0.031000 1.000 1.000

86020000 O Water, indirect, all sources 0.031000 1.000 1.000

95001750 O Grape 0.026300 1.000 1.000

95001760 O Grape, juice 0.000300 1.000 1.000

95001761 O Grape, juice

- babyfood 0.000300 1.000 1.000

95001770 O Grape, leaves 0.026300 1.000 1.000

95001780 O Grape, raisin 0.026300 4.300 1.000

95001 790 O Grape, wine and sherry 0.000300 1.000 1.000

95001950 O Kiwifruit 2.645600 1.000 1.000

95002630 O Peanut 0.500000 1.000 1.000

95002640 O Peanut, butter 0.036200 1.000 1.000

95002650 O Peanut, oil 0.500000 1.000 1.000

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 91 of 95 95003590 O Strawberry 0.004200 1.000 1.000

95003591 O Strawberry

- babyfood 0.004200 1.000 1.000

95003600 O Strawberry, juice 0.004200 1.000 1.000

95003601 O Strawberry, juice

- babyfood 0.004200 1.000 1.000

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 92 of 95 Attachment 9. Iprodione Chronic Dietary Results File

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00

DEEM

- FCID Chronic analysis for IPRODIONE (1994

- 98 data)

Residue file name: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ ipro chronic all f_w.R98

Adjust ment factor #2 used.

Analysis Date 03

- 15

- 2012/14:21:39 Residue file dated: 03

- 15

- 2012/14:20:33/8

Reference dose (RfD, Chronic) = .05 mg/kg bw/day

===============================================================================

Total exposure by population subgroup

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Exposure

----------------------------------- Population mg/kg Percent of

Subgroup body wt/day Rfd

-------------------------------------- ------------- --------------- U.S. Population (total) 0.000893 1.8%

U.S. Population (spring season) 0.000870 1.7%

U.S. Population (summer season) 0.001024 2.0%

U.S. Population (autumn season) 0.000842 1.7%

U.S. Population (winter season) 0.000834 1.7%

Northeast region 0.000826 1.7%

Midwest region 0.000900 1.8%

Southern region 0.000832 1.7%

Western region 0.001044 2.1%

Hispanics 0.001019 2.0%

Non

- hispanic whites 0.000 877 1.8%

Non

- hispanic blacks 0.000815 1.6%

Non

- hisp/non

- white/non

- black 0.001085 2.2%

All infants (< 1 year) 0.002414 4.8%

Nursing infants 0.000962 1.9%

Non

- nursing infants 0.002965 5.9%

Children 1

- 6 yrs 0.001416 2.8%

Children 7

- 12 yrs 0.000905 1.8%

Females 13

- 19 (not preg or nursing) 0.000648 1.3%

Females 20+ (not preg or nursing) 0.000855 1.7%

Females 13

- 50 yrs 0.000848 1.7%

F emales 13+ (preg/not nursing) 0.000887 1.8%

Females 13+ (nursing) 0.001221 2.4%

Males 13

- 19 yrs 0.000674 1.3%

Males 20+ yrs 0.000784 1.6%

Seniors 55+ 0.000852 1.7%

Children 1

- 2 yrs 0.001574 3.1%

Children 3

- 5 yrs 0.001387 2.8%

Children 6

- 12 yrs 0.000949 1.9%

Youth 13

- 19 yrs 0.000663 1.3%

Adults 20

- 49 yrs 0.000805 1.6%

Adults 50+ yrs 0.000856 1.7%

Females 13

- 49 yrs 0.000805 1.6%

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 93 of 95 Attachment 10

. Iprodione Cancer Dietary Results Fi le s

Water Only

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00

DEEM

- FCID Chronic analysis for IPRODIONE (1994

- 98 data)

Residue file name: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ Ipro cancer water only.R98

Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date 02

- 27

- 2012/12:09:02 Residue file dated: 02

- 13

- 2012/08:51:04/8

Q* = 0.0439

===============================================================================

Total exposure by population subgroup

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Exposure

-------------- --------------------- Population mg/kg Lifetime risk

Subgroup body wt/day (Q*= .0439)

-------------------------------------- ------------- ------------- U.S. Population (total) 0.000379 1.67E

- 05



### Existing Food Uses Only

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00

DEEM

- FCID Chronic analysis for IPRODIONE (1994

- 98 data)

Residue file name : C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ Ipro chronic cancer existing food only.R98

Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date 03

- 15

- 2012/14:33:37 Residue file dated: 03

- 12

- 2012/15:29:32/8

Q* = 0.0439

===== ==========================================================================

Total exposure by population subgroup

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Exposure

----------------------------------- Population mg/kg Lifetime risk

Subgroup body wt/day (Q*= .0439)

--------- ----------------------------- ------------- ------------- U.S. Population (total) 0.000179 7.85E

- 06



### Existing and New Uses and Water

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00

DEEM

- FCID Chronic analysis for IPRODIONE (1994

- 98 data)

Residue file name: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ Ipro cancer all f_w.R98

Adjustment factor #2 used.

Analysis Date 03

- 15

- 2 012/14:41:47 Residue file dated: 03

- 12

- 2012/15:32:43/8

Q* = 0.0439

===============================================================================

Total exposure by population subgroup

---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------

Total Exposure

----------------------------------- Population mg/kg Lifetime risk

Subgroup body wt/day (Q*= .0439)

-------------------------------------- ------------- ------------- U.S. Population (total) 0.000619 2.72E

- 05

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 94 of 95 Attachment 11 . 3,5

- DCA Dietary Input File

Filename: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ 35DCA cancer f_w.R98

Chemical: 3,5

- DCA

RfD(Chronic): 0 mg/kg bw/day NOEL(Chronic): 0 mg/kg bw/day

RfD(Acute): 0 mg/kg bw/day NOEL(Acute): 0 mg/kg bw/day Q*= .0683

Date created/last modified: 02

- 28

- 2012/10:23:45/8 Program ver. 2.03

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- EPA Crop Def Res Adj.Factors Comment

Code Grp Commodity Name (ppm) #1 #2

-------- ---- ------------------------------- ---------- ------ ------ -------

86010000 O Water, direct, all sources 0.027000 1.000 1.000

86020000 O Water, indirect, all sources 0.027000 1.000 1.0 00

95001790 O Grape, wine and sherry 0.064800 1.000 1.000

### Iprodione Dietary Risk Assessment for Cucurbits and Fruiting Vegetables

Page 95 of 95 Attachment 12 . 3,5

- DCA Cancer Dietary Assessment Results Files

Water Only

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00

DEEM

- FCID Chroni c analysis for 3,5

- DCA (1994

- 98 data)

Residue file name: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ 35DCA cancer water only.R98

Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date 02

- 28

- 2012/10:13:35 Residue file dated: 02

- 28

- 2012/10:12:56/8

Q* = 0.0683

===============================================================================

Total exposure by population subgroup

---------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------

Total Exposure

----------------------------------- Population mg/kg Lifetime risk

Subgroup body wt/day (Q*= .0683)

-------------------------------------- ------------- ------------- U.S. Population (total) 0.000569 3.89E

- 05



### Food Only

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00

DEEM

- FCID Chronic analysis for 3,5

- DCA (1994

- 98 data)

Residue file name: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ 35DCA cancer food only.R98

Adjustment factor #2 used.

Analysis Date 03

- 15

- 2012/14:50:33 Residue file dated: 03

- 15

- 2012/14:46:26/8

Q* = 0.0683

===============================================================================

Total exposure by pop ulation subgroup

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Exposure

-----------------------------------

Popu lation mg/kg Lifetime risk

Subgroup body wt/day (Q*= .0683)

-------------------------------------- ------------- ------------- U.S. Population (total) 0.000008 5.67E

- 07



### Food and Water

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ver. 2.00

DEEM

- FCID Chronic analysis for 3,5

- DCA (1994

- 98 data)

Residue file name: C: \ DDavis05 \ DEEM files \ Iprodione \ 35DCA cancer f_w.R98

Adjustment factor #2 NOT used.

Analysis Date 03

- 15

- 2012/14:49:05 Residue file dated: 03

- 15

- 2012/14:47:11/8

Q* = 0.0683

==================================================================== ===========

Total exposure by population subgroup

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Exposure

----------------------------------- Population mg/kg Lifetime risk

Subgroup body wt/day (Q*= .0683)

-------------------------------------- ------------- ------------- U.S. Population (total) 0.000577 3.94E

- 05