### 2 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This memo summarizes the estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWC s ) of flupyradifurone ( PC Code 122304

, 2(5H

- (furanone), 4

- {{(6

- chloro

- 3

- pyridinyl)methyl](2,2

- difluoroethyl)amino]

- , also known as BYI 02960 ) and residues of concern in surface wat er and in ground water in support of the proposed Section 3 new chemical registration of flupyradifurone

as an insecticide on a varie ty of agricultural crops and crop groups

. Residues of concern

include:

• difluoroacetic acid (DFA),

• BYI 02960

- succinamide (M48),

• BYI 02960

- azabicyclosuccinamide (M47), and

• Unextracted residues.

EDWC s were calculated for total toxic residues consisting of 1) parent plus M47 plus M48 plus unextracted residues (referred to as “ TTR

- UN ” )

, and 2) parent plus M47 plus M48 (referred to

as “ TTR ” ) . EDWCs were also calculated for DFA alone. The structures of M47 and M48 are

similar to that of the parent

, and may po ssess a similar mode of action. The structure of DFA is very different from that of the parent , and its mode of action and observed toxicity patterns are
also different.

The EDWCs for both surface water and groundwater recommended for use in HED’s human health dietary risk assessment are summarized in Table 1 and 2

. T he national all

- agriculture

P ercen t Cropped Area (PCA) adjustment factor of 0 .91 was assumed for surface water

, as f lupyradifurone has proposed uses on a variety of agricultural crops. I f these EDWC s result in

risk concern s, they can be refined 1



### . The main uncertainty in the EDWC s is that a maximum annual application rate was not provided on the label for any use pattern

. Use rates were provided on a seasonal basis. Some proposed uses could entail multiple seasons per year. If

two and three seasons per year are assumed, EDWC s co uld be two to three fold higher than

those estimated based upon one season per year . Some crops are expected to have up to three

seasons per year in some areas ( USEPA, 2009b )

.

Table 1

. Tier I EDWCs for residues of flupyradifurone plus M47 plus M48 plus unextracted residues

. 1

Source of Drinking Water (Model) TTR

- UN concentration in drinking water ( μg/L)

Acute Annual Average or Post Breakthrough Average

Surface Water (Modified Tier 1 Rice Model) 112 112

Surface water (PRZM/EXAM S ) 46.1 ( 1 season) 47.7 (2 seasons) 52.5 (3 seasons) 13.9 ( 1 season) 20.1 (2 seasons) 22.3 (3 seasons)

Groundwater (PRZM

- GW) 117 (1 season) 23.8 (2 seasons) 352 (3 seasons) 102 (1 season) 208 (2 seasons) 307 (3 seasons)
* All values reflect residues of flupyradifurone plus M47 plus M48 plus unextracted residues.

1 Refinements can be made to get lower EDWC s Tier II modeling could be conducted to determine EDWC in groundwater.

1 Tier II modeling could be conducted to determine EDWC in groundwater

.

### 3 Table 2

. Tier I EDWCs for residues of Difluoroacetic acid (DFA)

. 1

Source of Drinking Water (Model) DFA concentration in drinking water ( μg/L)

Acute Annual Average or Post Breakthrough Average Surface Water (Modified Tier 1 Rice Model) 43 43

Surface water (PRZM/ EXAMS ) 7.35 ( 1 season)

8.18 (2 seasons)

9.71 (3 seasons) 4.34 ( 1 season)

5.12 (2 seasons)

7.74 (3 seasons)

Groundwater (PRZM

- GW) 51.7 (1 season)

105 (2 seasons)

152 (3 seasons) 36.0 (1 season)

76.2 (2 seasons)

114 (3 seasons)

1 Refinements can be made to get lower EDWC s

. Tier II modeling could be conducted to determine EDWC in groundwater

.



### 2 CHEMICAL CLASS AND M ODE OF ACTION

Flupyradifurone belongs to the butenolide chemical class of insecticides; the compound is taken up by plants and systemically distributed. The insecticidal activity of flupyradifurone is similar to the neonicotinoids, pr esumably due to its agonist activity in nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, making it a member of the Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC) Group 4 insecticide

class ( IRAC, 2012 )

.

3 PROPOSED USE S

The registrant (Bayer CropScience) is seeking registration of several use s (described in Table 3 )

of flupyradifurone on two labels:

• SivantoTM 200 SL (Sivanto) for use as a foliar and soil drench application to various agricultural crops, and

• BYI 02960 480 FS (BYI 02960), a systemic seed treatment insecticide for use on soybean

s eeds. Both are liquid formulations. Sivanto may be applied to agricultural crops before bloom, during bloom, or following bloom up to the stated pre

- harvest interval (PHI). Sivanto may be applied via ground, airblast, aerial, or chemigation equipment. BYI 02960 may be applied to soybean seeds via commercial seed treatment application only.

Most uses have the same proposed maximum single and seasonal application rates of 0.18 lbs active ingredient per acre (lbs a.i./A) and 0.37 lbs a.i./A per season , respectively. A few crops (fruiting vegetables, cucurbit vegetables, citrus fruit, small fruit and vine climbing group) have

both proposed maximum single and seasonal application rate s of 0.37 lbs a.i./A. The number of proposed seasonal or annual applications is not specified for any use, and retreatment intervals range from “not specified” to 10 days. The labels do include a maximum seasonal application

rate and thus the maximum number of applications per season may be estimated by dividing the maximum seasonal application rate by the maximum single application rate.

### 4 Table 3

. Proposed Uses of Flupyradifurone

Use Site Single App.

Rate
in lbs. a.i. /A (kg a.i. /ha) # of
App Seasonal
App. Rate
lbs. a.i. /A (kg

a.i. /ha) MRI (days) PHI (days) Geographic

Restrictions Comments

Crop Group 15:

Cereal Grains (except Rice) 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 7 7 forage and

sweet corn -- foliar 21 dried grain

--

Cotton 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 10 14

-- foliar

Nongrass Animal

Feeds (Forage, Fodder, Straw, Hay) 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 10 7 forage, silage, hay or seed of

alfalfa -- foliar

14 all others

--

Peanut 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 10 7

-- foliar

Root Vegetables (except Sugarbeet) 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 10 7

-- foliar

Tuberous and

Corm Vegetables 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 7 7 West of MS

river

Leafy Vegetables (except Brassica ) 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 7 1

-- foliar

Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 7 1

-- foliar

### 5 Use Site Single App.

Rate
in lbs. a.i. /A (kg a.i. /ha) # of
App Seasonal
App. Rate
lbs. a.i. /A (kg

a.i. /ha) MRI (days) PHI (days) Geographic

Restrictions Comments

Legume Vegetables (Succulent or Dried) 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 10 7 forage, leaves, vines, pods, cutting for hay or

seed -- foliar

21 dry soybean

seed -- foliar

Fruiting Vegetables 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 7 1 West of MS

river foliar

0.27

– 0.37 (0.31

– 0.41) NS 0.365 (0.409) NS 45

-- soil, chemigation to root zone, injection below seed line, potting hole drench at transplanting,

post

- transplant drench following setting and covering

Cucurbit Vegetables 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 7 1 West of MS

river foliar

0.27

– 0.37 (0.31

– 0.41) NS 0.365 (0.409) 7 21

-- soil, chemigation to root zone, injection below seed line, potting hole drench at transplanting,

post

- transplant drench following setting and covering

Hop 0.09

– 0.14 (0.10

- 0.15) NS 0.14 (0.15) NS 21

-- Foliar

Citrus Fruit 0.27

– 0.37 (0.31

– 0.41) NS 0.365 (0.409) 10 30

-- Soil, chemigation into root zone through low pressure drip, trickle, micro

- sprinkler; basal

drench in sufficient water to move into root zone

0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 10 1

-- foliar

Pome Fruit 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 10 14

-- Foliar, combine with horticultural oil for early season applications targeting San Jose scale and Pear psylla

Bushberry 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 7 3

-- foliar

Low Growing Berry (including 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 10 0

-- foliar

### 6 Use Site Single App.

Rate
in lbs. a.i. /A (kg a.i. /ha) # of
App Seasonal
App. Rate
lbs. a.i. /A (kg

a.i. /ha) MRI (days) PHI (days) Geographic

Restrictions Comments

Cranberry)

Small Fruit Vine Climbing (except Fuzzy Kiwifruit) 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS

0.365 (0.409) 10 0

-- foliar

0.27

– 0.37 (0.31

– 0.41) NS NS 30

-- soil, chemigation into root

- zone through low pressure drip, trickle, micro

- sprinkler or equivalent equipment; basal drench in sufficient

water to move into root zone.

Tree Nut 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 14 7

-- foliar

Prickly Pear/Cactus

pear 0.09

- 0.18 (0.10

- 0.20) NS 0.365 (0.409) 14 7

-- foliar, ground only

Soybean Seeds 0.037 (0.41) NA 0.365 NA NS

-- Maximum single application rate calculated from

label restriction of 0.068 mg a.i./seed and an assumption of 250,000 seeds planted per acre which may occur in North Dakota ( USEPA, 2011 )

. App=application; MRI=minimum retreatment interval; PHI=preharvest interval; NA=not applicable; NS=not specified; a.i. =active ingredient; A=acre *Applications limitations were on a single and seasonal application basis. It is possible that the chemical could be applied over multiple seasons to one field.

### 7 4 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE A ND TRANSPORT

Table 4 summarizes the identity information and physical

- chemical properties of flupyradifurone. While flupyradifurone reportedly does not dissociate at environmentally relevant pH, water solubility does decrease from 3200 mg/L at pH 4 and 7 to 3000 mg/L at pH 9. Based on its vapor pressure, water solubility, log octanol

- water partition coefficient (K OW 

### ), and

solid

- water distribution coefficients (K d 

### ), flupyradifurone is classified as non

- volatile fr om water, moist soils, and dry surfaces (OPPTS Guideline 835.6100 classification system). Based on flupyradifurone’s log K OW 

### value of 0.08, and log octanol

- air partition coefficient (K OA 

### ) values of 11, it is not likely to bioconcentrate in terrestrial org anisms. 2 

### This is supported by the predicted

short half

- life in the vapor phase (estimated atmospheric half

- life of 0.4 days, Table 5 ). Compounds with a log K OW 

### of three and above are generally considered to have the potential to bioconcentrate in aquatic organisms. Because flupyradifurone’s log K OW 

### is 0.08, it is not expected to significantly bioconcentrate in aquatic organisms.

Table 4 . Summary of physical

- chemical properties of flupyradifurone 1

Parameter Value and Units Source and/or Comment

PC Code 122304

-- CAS Number 951659

- 40

- 8

-- SMILES Code C1=CC(=NC=C1CN(CC(F)F)C2=CC(OC2)=O)Cl

--

Chemical Name Flupyradifurone

--

Empirical Formula C 12 H 11 ClF 2 N 2 O 2 --

Molecular Weight 288.68 g/mole

--

UV/Visible Absorption λ
max (nm): 213 and 259 nm MRID 48843628

Water Solubility at

20 o C (mg/L) pH Solubility

MRID 48843644 4 3200

7 3200

9 3000

Vapor Pressure o C Vapor Pressure

MRID 48843650. Non

- volatile under

field conditions Pascal Torr

20 9.1×10 - 7 6.8×10 - 9

25 1.7×10 - 6 1.3×10 - 8

Henry’s Law constant

at 20 o C 8.1×10 - 13 atm

- m 3 /mol (pH 4 and 7) Estimated from vapor pressure

and water solubility at 20 o C.

Log Dissociation Constant (pK
a ) No dissociation between pH 1

- 12 MRID 48843634. Not expected to

ionize in natural waters

2 A recent scientific advisory panel (SAP) reported, “Gobas et al. ( 2003 ) concluded that chemicals with a log K OA > 5 can biomagnify in terrestrial food chains if log K OW >2 and the rate of chemical transformation is low. However, further proof is neede d before accepting these limits without reservations” ( USEPA, 2009c ) . This was also supported by Armitage and Gobas’s work completed in 2007 ( Armitage and Gobas, 2007 )

.

### 8 Parameter Value and Units Source and/or Comment

Octanol

- water partition coefficient (K
ow ) at 25 o C 1.2 (log K OW =0.08) pH 4, 7, and 9 MRID 48843639. Not likely to

bioconcentrate.

Air

- water partition coefficient (K AW ) 3.3×10 - 11 (log K AW =

- 11) Estimated from vapor pressure and water solubility at 20 o C and pH 7.

Nonvolatile from water.

Octanol

- air partition coefficient (K OA ) 3.6×10 10 (log K OA = 11) Estimated from K AW and K OW .

Solubility in organic

solvents Methanol >250 g/L

n

- Heptane 0.0005 g/L

Toluene 3.7 g/L

Dichloromethane >250 g/L

Acetone >250 g/L Ethylacetate >250 g/L Dimethyl sulfoxide >250 g/L

1 All estimated values were estimated according to “ Guidance for Reporting on the Environmental Fate and Transport of the Stressors of Concern in Problem Formulations for Registration Review, Registration Review Risk Assessments, Listed Species Litigation Assessments, New Chemic al Risk Assessments, and Other Relevant Risk

Assessments ” ( USEPA, 2010a )

.



### 4.1 Transformation Rates in Laboratory Studies

Table 5 summarizes abiotic and biotic transformation data. Study results indicate that flupyradifurone is persistent to very persistent 3 

### in soil, sediment and water. Measured aerobic

soil DT 50 

### s of 38 to 401 days are uncertain because of high amounts of unextracted residues which may or may not constitute residues of concern. Half

- lives calculated assuming that the unextracted residues do constitute residues of concern range from 79 to 799 days and are approximately double those for parent alone . Flupyradifurone is stable to hydrolysis at pH 4, 7,
and 9 , though it does degrade via aqueous photolysis, with a DT 50 

### of 2.5 days. Under aerobic aquatic conditions

, DT 50 

### values ranged from 237 to 365 days for parent alone, and from 676 to 893 days for parent plus unextracted residues. 4 

### Estimated DT 50 

### values for soil photolysis (1 soil), anaerobic soil metabolism (4 soils), and anaerobic aquatic metabolism (2 sediments) w ere all very high ( i.e ., >391 days) or not quantifiable ( i.e., stable), indicating that these degradation pathways contribute little to the dissipation of flupyradifurone.

3 According to the Toxic Release Inventory Classification System, c hemicals with half

- lives greater than 60

- days are classified as persistent and chemicals with half

- lives greater than 180 days are classified as very persistent ( USEPA,

2012a )

. 4 Unextracted residues in aerobic aquatic metabolism studies were greater than 10% applied radioactivity and it is uncertain whether the extraction procedures were sufficiently exhaustive.

### 9 Table 5 . Abiotic and Biotic Transformation Kinetics of Flupyradifurone , Flupyradifurone plus M48 plus M47, and Flupyradifurone plus Unextracted Residues.Study System Details (Kinetic Equation) Kinetic Equation

Fitted 1 Value 1 Representative
Half

- life to

Derive Model Input (days) 2 Reference Or (MRID), Study Classification

And Comments DT 50 (days) DT 90 (days)Hydrolysis(50oC) pH 4

No significant degradation Stable MRID 48843667, Fully Reliable pH 7

pH 9AtmosphericDegradation
Hydroxyl Radical ( SFO) 0.4 NA Not applicable Estimated using EPIWEB v.4.1 for 12

- hour day, 1.5x10 6 OH

- molecules/cm 3

. Flupyradifurone is not expected to undergo

long range transport in the vapor phase. 2Aqueous Photolysis(25oC) pH 7
Sterile

40 o N sunlight (SFO , SFO** ) 2.5
13.0** 8.2
43.2** 2.5
13.0** MRID 48843669, Fully reliable. Corrected for

40 o N latitude. Furanone ring labeled.

pH 8
Natural water

40 o N sunlight ( SFO , SFO** ) 2.5
9.6** 8.4
31.9** 2.5
9.3** MRID 48843670, Fully reliable. Corrected for

40 o N latitude. Furanone ring labeled.SoilPhotolysis CA loam pH 6.5, 20 o C (SFO) 449 1495 Not applicable MRID 48843672, Fully reliable. Soil photolysis is of minor importance for the degradation of

BYI 02960 under outdoor conditions and a major phototransformation product is not expected.Aerobic Soil Metabolism(20oC) German AX pH 6.8, 1.2% OC (DFOP, DFOP*) 62.9
169* 468
767* 178
258*

Results are shown for combined study results

for the German and U.S. soils. The furanone label soils had a higher percentage of

unextracted residues than t he other labels. The differences suggest that at least some of

the unextracted residues are a degradate. German HF pH 7.0, 1.8%OC

(IORE, IORE*) 37.5
78.8* 260
1292* 78.4
389*

German HN pH 5.9, 2.3%OC (DFOP, DFOP*) 112
303* 562
1100* 194
343*

German DD pH 7.7, 4.6%OC

(IORE, IORE*) 45.4
96.7* 249
1510* 75
455*

NE silt loam pH 6.7, 2.3%OC

( DFOP , SFO*) 215
355* 743
1179* 227
355*

CA sandy loam pH 7.4, 0.57%OC

(IORE, IORE*) 56.6
173* 378
3139* 114
945*

Argissolo pH 6.0, %OC 2.8

(SFO, SFO*) 202
296* 671
982* 202
296*

### 10Study System Details (Kinetic Equation) Kinetic Equation

Fitted 1 Value 1 Representative
Half

- life to

Derive Model Input (days) 2 Reference Or (MRID), Study Classification

And Comments DT 50 (days) DT 90 (days)

Latossolo pH 5.2, %OC 1.8

(DFOP, SFO*) 134
291* 364
966* 97.9
291*

Neossolo pH 4.9, %OC 0.21

(DFOP, SFO*) 170
221* 1293
734* 484
221*

Gleissolo pH 4.1, %OC 7.8

(SFO, SFO*) 401
799* 1331
2655* 401
799*AnaerobicSoil Metabolism(20oC) German HF soil pH 6.4, %OC 2.7

(SFO, SFO*) 632
3793* 2098
12601* 632
3793* MRID 48843686. Reliable with restrictions. Dissolve oxygen concentrations were near 1

mg/L at some time points. Unextracted

residues exceeded 10%AR but we re relatively constant post flood.

Sanger, CA pH 7.2, %OC 0.45 (SFO) 392 1303 392 MRID 48843687. Reliable with restrictions. Oxygen concentrations were near 1 mg/L at some time points after flooding but redox conditions were appropriate days 30

- 121

post flood. Unextracted residues were greater than 10%AR but were relatively

constant during the anaerobic phase.

NE soil pH 6.7, %OC 1.9 Essentially stable over 30 days MRID 48843688. Reliable with restrictions. Study terminated 60 days after flooding. No loss over 30 days of appropriate redox

conditions.Aerobic Aquatic (20oC) German pond HW pH 7.4, 3.59 %OC

20 o C (IORE, SFO*) 237
893* 1818
2965* 547
893* MRID 48843690 and 48843692. Reliable with restrictions due to presence of unextracted residues at greater than 10% applied radioactivity. Results are shown for combined study results. German gravel pit (AW) pH 7.0, 1.20 %OC

20 o C (IORE, SFO*) 365
676* 5793
2247* 1740
676*Anaerobic Aquatic(24oC) KS pond Water: pH 8.3,

7.8% OC

(SFO) 1999
Stable* 6640
Stable* 1999
Stable* MRID 48843689. Reliable with restrictions. Up to 12%AR present as unextracted residues

in NC system and it is uncertainty whether the extraction procedure was sufficiently

exhaustive. NC pond
Water: pH 7.4,

11.9%OC (SFO , SFO* ) 416
2470* 1381
8204* 416
2470*

### 11 OC=organic carbon; DT X =time for concentration/mass to decline by X percentage; SFO=single first order;

DFOP=double first order in parallel; IORE=indeterminate order (IORE); SFO DT 50 =single first order half

- life; T IORE =the

half

- life of a SFO model that passes through a hypothetical DT 90 of the IORE fit; DFOP slow DT 50 =slow rate half

- life of the DFOP fit, NA=not available , AR= applied radioactivity

* Value calculated for parent and unextracted residues which may or may not be parent. These values are relevant in understanding the uncertainty in data due to unextracted residues. ** Value calculated for parent plus M47 plus M48.

1 DT 50 and DT 90 values were calculated using nonlinear regression and SFO, DFOP, or IORE equations. The equations can be found in the document, Standard Operating Procedure for Using the NAFTA Guidance t o Calculate Representative Half

- life Values and Characterizing Pesticide Degradation ( USEPA, 2012c )

. 2 The value used to estimate a model input value is the calculated SFO DT 50 , T IORE , or the DFOP slow DT 50 from the DFOP equation. The model chosen is consistent with that recommended using the, Guidance for Evaluating and Calculating Degradation Kinetics in Environmental Media ( NAFTA, 2012 ) . The same kinetic equation used to determine the representative model i nput value was used to describe the DT 50 and DT 90 results based on standard kinetic equations.



### Four degradates were present in one or more fate studies at greater than 10% of applied radioactivity (AR) :

• 6

- chloronicotinic acid (6CNA),

• difluoroacetic acid (DFA),

• BYI 02960

- succinamide (M48), and

• BYI 02960

- azabicyclosuccinamide (M47).

Table 6 summarizes available degradation studies for 6CNA and DFA; 6CNA is degraded rapidly in three aerobic soil systems (DT 50 

### ranged from 3 to 7 days). The degradate DFA was persistent to very persistent in two aerobic aquatic systems (DT 50 

### ranged from 121 to 951 days).

Table 6 . Biotic degradation kinetics for 6CNA and DFA

Study System Details (Kinetic Equation) DT 50 (days) Reference Or (MRID), Study Classification

Aerobic Soil

Metabolism

– 6CNA UK sandy loam, 20 o C pH 6.7, 3.1%OC (IORE) 3.5

MRID 44651882. Reliable with

restrictions. UK clay, 20 o C pH 7.8, 3.8%OC (IORE) 2.7

UK loam, 20 o C pH 7.2, 2.9%OC (IORE) 6.5

Aerobic Aquatic
Metabolism

- DFA German pond HW, 20 o C pH 7.4, 3.59 %OC (SFO, SFO*) 121
226* MRID 48843691. Reliable with

restrictions. German gravel pit (AW), 20 o C pH 7.0, 1.20 %OC (SFO) 951

OC=organic carbon; DT 50 =time for concentration/mass to decline by 50% ; SFO=single first order; DFOP=double first order in parallel; IORE=indeterminate order (IORE)

* Value calculated for parent and unextracted residues which may or may not be parent. These values are relevant in understanding the uncertainty in data due to unextracted residues.

1 DT 50 values were calculated using nonlinear regression and SFO, DFOP, or IORE equations. The equations can be found in the document, Standard Operating Procedure for Using the NAFTA Guidance to Calculate Representative Half

- life Values and Characterizing Pest icide Degradation ( USEPA, 2012c )

.

### 12 4.2 Sorption and Mobility

Study results indicate that soil sorption of flupyradifurone is influenced by percent organic

carbon ( Table 7 )

. Based on organic

- carbon water normalized soil

- water distribution coefficients ( K oc 

### ) ranging from 80 to 283 L/kg

- organic carbon (measured in 10 soils)

, flupyradifurone is classified as mobile to moderately mobile ( FAO, 2000 ) (MRID 48843662, 48843663, 48843 664).

The degradate, 6CNA

, is mobile to moderately mobile, with K oc 

### values ranging from 17.2 to 134 L/kg in five soils and one sediment ( FAO, 2000 ) (MRID 44651884). DFA is highly mobile, with K oc 

### values ranging from 1.55 to 8.75 L/kg in five soils ( FAO, 2000 ) (MRID 48843665). Both 6CNA and DFA have the potential to leach to groundwater. Sorption data are not available for M47

and M48.

Table 7

. Summary of Submitted Sorption Studies for Flupyradifurone and its Degradate s 2

- chloronicotinic acid (6CNA), and difluoroacetic acid (DFA)

Soil texture

Source %

OC soil
pH Regressed

K d (L/kg

- soil) K OC (L/kg

- OC) K F (mg/L)(mg/kg) - 1/n 1/n K FOC (mg/L) (mg/kg) -
1/n

Parent, 20 o C, MRID 48843662, Fully Reliable Sandy loam AX, Germany 2.1 6.2 2.193 104.4 2.077 0.8445 98.9

Loam HF, Germany 2.4 6.6 2.353 98.05 2.213 0.8682 92.2

Loam HN, Germany 2.2 5.3 2.506 113.9 2.354 0.8643 107.0

Loam DD, Germany 5.1 7.2 4.118 80.74 3.822 0.8648 74.9

Parent, 20 o C, MRID 48843663, Fully Reliable Sandy loam

California 0.7 6.8 0.627 89.5 0.597 0.9021 85.2

Silt loam,

Nebraska 1.9 6.5 2.824 148.6 2.512 0.8505 132.2

Parent, 20 o C, MRID 48843664, Fully Reliable Clay, Argissolo,

Brazil 2.8 5.66 7.104 254 6.7 0.8153 241

Clay,Latossolo,

Brazil 1.7 4.59 1.462 86 1.5 0.9263 86

Loamy sand, Neossolo, Brazil 0.5 4.93 0.563 113 0.6 0.9246 115

Silty clay loam, Gleissolo, Brazil 7.8 3.51 22.07 283 21.1 0.8317 270

2

- chloronicotinic acid, MRID 44651884 , Fully Reliable Loamy sand 1

NC 0.25 4.4 0.335 134 0.377 0.803 151

Loamy sand 2

NC 1.5 6.2 0.863 57.6 0.818 1.11 54.5

Silt loam

MS 0.44 6.6 0.244 55.4 0.274 0.808 62.3

### 13 Soil texture

Source %

OC soil
pH Regressed

K d (L/kg

- soil) K OC (L/kg

- OC) K F (mg/L)(mg/kg) - 1/n 1/n K FOC (mg/L) (mg/kg) -
1/n

Clay

MS 0.82 7.5 0.205 17.2 0.21 0.96 17.6

Clay loam

CA 1.2 8.3 0.168 20.5 0.191 0.794 23.3

Sandy loam

sediment

NC 2.5 5.6 1.64 65.7 1.8 0.762 72.1

DFA, MRID 48843665, Fully Reliable

Silt loam HF Germany 2.4 6.5 0.210 8.75 0.229 0.910 9.53

Loam HN Germany 2.9 5.8 0.211 7.27 0.230 0.816 7.94

Clay loam DD Germany 4.5 7.4 0.361 8.03 0.372 0.964 8.26

Sandy loam

CA 0.5 6.0 0.030 6.05 0.034 0.703 6.83

Silty clay loam

NE 1.7 6.5 0.026 1.55 0.025 0.719 1.46

NR=not reported



### 4.3 Field Dissipation

Several terrestrial field dissipation studies have been completed for flupyradifurone ( Table 8 ). Studies were all completed on bare ground sites in the U.S. (California, Florida, and Idaho), Canada (Ontario, Prince Edward Island, and Saskatchewan) and Europe (Germany, Italy, United Kingdom, and Spain). The application rate at each North American si te was a single application

of 0.6 k g a.i./ha. This is higher than the highest proposed single application rate of 0.41 kg a.i./ha in the US . For each of the European sites, the application rate was 250 g a.i./ha. The study completed for the European si tes did not have an independent laboratory validation (ILV)

and consequently the levels detected and study conclusions are not considered fully reliable

. However, available information suggests that other than this

, the analytical chemistry method

was acc eptable.

Dissipation half

- lives for the whole soil profile ranged from 8 to 310 days. Time to 90% loss (DT90) values ranged from 205 to greater than 1000 days. At all sites most residues were observed in the top 15 cm; however, flupyradifurone was obser ved up to a depth of 40 cm.

Field sites vari ed in percent organic carbon (range from 0.8 to 4.4%OM), soil properties, and pH (range from 5.5 to 8.2). Carryover of residues at the end of the sampling period ranged from 8

to 59% AR , indicating that a porti on of applied flupyradifurone does have the potential to build

up in soil with subsequent applications from year to year. Two of the major degradates observed in laboratory studies, 6CNA and DFA, were also observed in the field studies. M47

and M48 were not looked for in the field dissipation studies.

### 14 Table 8 . Summary of Terrestrial Field Dissipation Study Results For FlupyradifuroneMRID(Year) Study Site, Crop Application Rate

Formulation % Carry
over of

residues

(Days) DT 50 (days) DT 90 (days) Average Max Conc in Soil (μg/kg

- soil) Max Depth detected (cm) Comments

Parent DFA 6CNA48843693(2012) Tulare Co. California, USA (bareground)

Flowable pH 8.2, 0.9 %OM 28 (272) 55.9 + 767 + 200.6

30 12.4
60* 5.6

15

Reliable with

restrictions. No cropped plots.48843694(2012) Jefferson Co. Florida, USA (bareground)

Flowable pH 6.5, 0.8%OM 19 (275) 9.62 + 577 + 304.5

15 8.2

15 5.2

1548843695(2012) Blaine Co. Idaho,

USA (bareground)

Flowable pH 8.0, 1.4%OM 30 (280) 45.6 + 566 + 416.5

30 5.0
106* 10.8

1548843696(2012) Ontario

CANADA (bareground)

Flowable pH 7.0, 4.4%OM 25 (337) 99.6 + 751 + 275.2

30 10.9
30* 3.8

15

Prince

- Edward

Island

CANADA (bareground)

Flowable pH NA, 3.6%OM 33 (345) 87.8 + 897 + 220.2

30 8.0
30* 4.8

15

Saskatchewan

CANADA (bareground)

Flowable pH 7.6, 2.5%OM 59 (337) 304 # >1000 # 238.5

30 4.7

15 2.1

1548843697 (2011) Monheim, Germany (bareground)

Flowable pH 6.3, 1.2%OM 27 (354) 38.4 + 743 + 236.6

30 11.2

30 NA Reliable with restrictions. Missing

ILV but available information suggests

methods were acceptable. No cropped plots. Application rate (250 g a.i./ha) much lower

than maximum proposed rate. Great Chishill, United Kingdom (bareground)

Flowable pH 5.8, 2.2%OC 45 (394) 310 + > 1000 + 235.9

30 7.2

20 NA

Burscheid, Germany (bareground)

Flowable pH 6.3, 0.9%OC 22 (357) 42.0 + 476 + 244.9

30 10.1

30 NA

### 15MRID(Year) Study Site, Crop Application Rate % Carry
over of

residues

(Days) DT 50 (days) DT 90 (days) Average Max Conc in Soil (μg/kg

- soil) Max Depth detected (cm) Comments

Albaro, Italy (bareground)

Flowable pH 7.4, 1.3%OC 8 (360) 8.3 + 278 + 267.5

30 8.7

30 NA

Vilobi d’Onyar, Spain (bareground)

Flowable pH 5.9, 0.7%OC 9 (357) 27.7 # 205 # 239.6

40 6.1

20 NA

Hanscheider Hof, Germany (bareground)

Flowable pH 5.5, 1.5%OC 19 (357) 40.8 # 477 # 252.9

20 13.5

30 NA

NA=not analyzed, ILV=independent laboratory validation, OC=organic carbon, OM=organic matter ;
Conc=concentration *Detected below the LOQ at the depth. + The DFOP equation was used to calculate d issip ation kinetics. # The IORE equation was used to calculate d issip ation kinetics.



### A study was also conducted examining dissipation of flupyradifurone in water and sediment in four outdoor microcosms spiked at two different concentrations (10 and 100 μg/L). Dissipation

half

- lives are summarized in Table 9

. 

### DT 50 

### values in the water and whole sediment ranged from 64 to 109 days and DT90 values ranged from 212 to 363 days . Concentrations of transformation products were not followed in the study.

Table 9 . Summary of DT 50 and DT 90 of flupyradifurone in outdoor microcosm studies (MRID 48843673)

Nominal Test

Concentration (μg/L) Water Phase Whole System

DT 50 (days) DT 90 (days) DT 50 (days) DT 90 (days)

10 63.9 212 74.0 246

100 95.0 316 109 363



### 5 POSSIBLE TRANSFORMAT ION PRODUCTS OF TOXICOLOGICAL AND EXPOSURE CONCERN

The following four transformation products were measured in environmental fate studies at 10% or greater of applied radioactivity:

• 6

- chloronicotinic acid (6CNA);

• difluoroacetic acid (DFA);

• BYI 02960

- succinamide (M48) ; and,

• BYI 02960

- azabicyclosuccinamide (M47).

The following three transformation products were also measured in environmental fate studies, at less than 10% of applied radioactivity:

### 16 • BYI 02960

- deschlorohydroxysuccinamide (DCHS);

• BYI 02960

- des

- difluoroethyl (M19); and,

• BYI 02960

- chloro (M01).

IUPAC names, molecular weights, formula’s, and SMILES codes are available for these compounds in the document titled, Data on Flupyradifurone and Its Environmental Transformation Products in Supp ort of the ROCKs ( USEPA, 2013, D415161 )

.

Figure 1 shows potential degradation pathways of flupyradifurone based on chemical structures and observed transformation products in various studies.

Figure 1 . Potential Degradation Pathway of Flupyradifurone

Bolded values were present at greater than 10% of applied radioactivity and the asterisk indicates the compound was observed in a field study. Abbreviations are defined in text above figure.



### Table 10 shows the maximum percent applied radioactivity for each identified transformation product and corresponding study type. The transformation products DFA and 6CNA were observed in aerobic environments, especially soils, while M48 and M47 were present in

a queous photolysis studies. All other transformation products were present at less than 10% applied radioactivity . There is some uncertainty as to whether additional major transformation

### 17 products w ould have be en identi fied had the unextracted residues been characterized (which is why the unextracted residues have been included in the modeling runs labeled TTR

- UN) . Many
of the maximum amount of AR associated with a degradate were observed at the final sampling interval. The transformation products loo ked for in field studies were DFA and 6CNA and they

were observed at less than 15 μg/L

.

Table 10 . Summary of maximum amount of transformation products observed in fate studies

Compound Maximum % of Applied Radioactivity Associate d with Degradate (Time of Peak) Amount Detected at Final Sampling Interval in Corresponding StudyHydrolysisSoilPhotolysisAerobic SoilAnaerobicSoilAqueousPhotolysisAerobicAquaticAnaerobicAquaticObserved inFieldDissipation

DFA NA NA 35 (48d) 24 (117d) 27 (37d) 27 (153d) NA NA NA Yes

6CNA NA NA 22 (64d) 6.2 (120d) 15 (14d) 13 (121d) NA NA NA Yes

M48 (succinamide) NA NA NA NA 39 (35hr) a NA NA NA

M4 7 ( azabicyclosucci namide) NA NA NA NA 15 (28hr) a NA NA

NA

BYI 02960

- des

difluoroethyl NA NA 0.5 (59d) ND (120d) NA NA NA NA NA

BYI 02960

- chloro NA NA 1.8 (120d) a 2.8 (59d) 2.4 (121d) NA NA NA NA

DCHS NA NA NA NA 2.8 (35hr) a NA NA NA

Unextracted

Residues NA 1.1(4d) 0.7 (8d) 34 (120d) a 31 (120d) 30 (123d) NA 27 (120d) a 12 (102d) a NA

CO 2 NA 2.3(8d) 59 (120d) a 27 ND 9 (119d) a 0.1(102d) a NA

NA=not analyzed; ND=not detected

a Peak at final sampling interval in some studies.

b In some aerobic soil metabolism studies

, significant mineralization occurred while in others minimal mineralization occurred (max CO 2 in one soil was 4% of AR ).



### 6 RESIDUES OF CONCERN

The Residues of Concern Knowledgebase Subcommittee (ROCKS) reported that the residue s of

concern for flupyradifurone in drinking water are flupyradifurone, DFA, M4 7 , and M4 8 ( USEPA,
2013, D413192 )

. While all of these residues are considered residues of concern

, t he way these residues are handled in the risk assessment was determined based on the expected toxicity
pattern and data available for estimating exposure. The aqueous photolysis degradates M4 7
and M4 8 , are only expected to influe n ce the surface water Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWC s ) as the aqueous photolysis data are not used in groundwater modeling

, and th e se degradates were only observed in the aqueous photolysis study. There were

unextracted residues quantified in the soil and aquatic metabolism studies at levels high

### 18 enough to influence EDWC s , when the unextracted residues were considered in calculating modeling inputs

. The chemical composition of the unextracted residues i s unknown ( e.g ., they could be parent or one of the other identified residues of concern or a residue that is not of

concern ). Therefore, to be protective, EDWC s were calc ulated assuming that the unextracted

residues are residue s of concern. A total toxic residue (TTR) approach was used to calculate

EDWC s for residues of flupyradifurone, M4 7 , M4 8 , and unextracted residues. In this approach, in the laboratory fate studies, the amount of radioactivity associated with flupyradifurone, M47, M48, and unextracted residues was summ ed , and degradation kinetics were calculated for the combined residues. The degradation kinetic results calculated in this way are used in modeling to estimate EDWC s for total residues. Th e same approach was also employ ed excluding the unextracted residues, in order to bracket the uncertainty caused by the presence of high amounts of unextracted residues in fate studies . EDWC s for DFA were calculated separately because DFA has a different mode of action and substantially different structure then flupyradifurone, M47, and M48.

7 MODELING APPROACH AN D INPUT PARAMETERS

EDWC s were calculated for the following residues of concern :

• total r esidues of parent plus M47 plus M48 plus unextracted residues (TTR

- UN)

,

• total residues of parent plus M47 plus M48 (TTR)

, and

• residues of DFA.

The EDWC s for residues of DFA were determined in part by estimating an “ application rate ” for DFA by multiplying the application rate for the parent by the ratio of the molecular weight of DFA divided by the molecular weight of parent. This is a conservative methodology of estimating possible DFA residues in drinking water because not all of the parent is expected to degrade to DFA . This estimate can be refined if needed by considering the amount of DFA

formed in fate studies

.

7.1 Models

7.1.1 SCI

- GROW (Groundwater)

Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI

- GROW v2.3, Jul. 29, 2003) is a regress ion model used as a screening tool to estimate pesticide concentrations found in groundwater used as drinking water. The SCI

- GROW model and user’s manual may also be downloaded from the

EPA Water Models web

- page ( http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/#scigrow ).

7.1.2 PRZM

- GW (Groundwater )

Tier 1 groundwater EDWCs for flupyradifurone were derived with PRZM

- GW (Pesticide Root Zone Model for Groundwater, version 1.0, August 31, 2012 ), using the GW

- GUI (Graphical User Interface, version 1.0, August 31, 2012 ) ( Baris et al. , 2013 )

. PRZM

- GW is a one

- dimensional leaching model used to estimate potential concentrations of pesticides in groundwater. The

### 19 model accounts for pesticide fate in the crop root zone by simulating transport and degradation occurring through out the soil profile after a pesticide is applied to an agricultural field. PRZM

GW permits the simulation of multiple years of pesticide application (up to 100 years) on a single site. Six standard scenarios, each representing a different region known to be vulnerable to groundwater contamination, are currently available for use with PRZM

- GW for risk

assessme nt purposes. In the PRZM

- GW simulations for this assessment

, all of these standard

scenarios were used. PRZM

- GW output s represent pesticide concentrations in a vulnerable groundwater supply located directly beneath a n agricultural field. Percent Cropped Area adjustment factors (PCAs) are not applied to the results of groundwater modeling , such as

those generated by either the SCI

- GROW or PRZM

- GW models.

7.1.3 PRZM/EXAM S (Surface Water , Non

- Cranberry Uses )

Estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) in surface water were generated using EFED’s Tier II aquatic models: PRZM (Pesticide Root Zone Model; version. 3.12.3, June 2006) ( Carsel et al. , 1997 ) and EXAMS (EXposure Analysis Modeling System; Version. 2.98.04.06, April 2005) ( Burns, 2000 )

. Calculations were carried out with the linkage program shell

– PE version 5.0 (November 2006)

– which implements the standard cr op scenarios developed by EFED ( USEPA, 2006 )

.

PRZM simulates pesticide fate and transport as a result of leaching, direct spray drift, runoff and erosion from an agricultural field, and EXAMS estimates resulting concentrations of pesticides in a n adjacent surface water body over a 30

- year period. The combined model s are expected to provide high

- end estimates of pesticide concentrations that might be found in

vulnerable aquatic environments following pesticide application. The loc ation of the field is specific to the crop being simulated using site

- specific information on the soils, weather, cropping, and management factors associated with the scenario. The crop/location scenario is intended to represent a high

- end exposure site o n which the crop is normally grown. Based on

historical rainfall data , the receiving water body receives multiple runoff (and possibly spray drift) event loading s over the course of the simulated time span . Weather and agricultural practices are simulate d for 30 year period s (1961 through 1990) so that the 1

- in

- 10

- year exceedance probability concentration at the site can be estimated. Additional information on

PRZM and EXAMS can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/ . For drinking water exposure assessments, the Index Reservoir (IR) receiving water body is used in lieu of the standard pond. The IR is used in a manner similar to that in which the standard pond is used in ecological exposure assessments, except that the IR is simulated as a flow

- through

system, with a scenario

- specific steady flow rate based upon the daily

- mean runoff over the

duration of a simulation (a function of local weather conditions ) . The IR is approximately 82

- m wide and 640

- m long, with an area of 5.3 h ectare ( USEPA, 1998 , 2010b ) . The area of the entire

watershed draining to the IR is 172.8 ha. Guidance for using the IR is located at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index_reservoir_dwa.html

.

### 20 7.1.4 Cranberry Modeling for Surface Water

To determine EDWCs for cranberry use, EFED used the EFED Tier 1 Rice M odel (v1.0, May 8, 2007). The Tier 1 Rice Model is used to estimate aquatic exposures for direct application to

water

. The Tier 1 Rice Model estimates one concentration that represents both acute and chronic exposure s . The Tier 1 Rice model estimates co ncentrations in a water body holding a 10 cm water depth. When a pesticide is applied to the water, the model employs the assumption that the pesticide instantaneously partitions between water and sediment

, as determined by the chemical’s sorption coeffic ient, according to:



# ( )

d b sed sed w ai

w 

## K d d m C ρ θ 3 2

0 

## 10 ' 10

− 

## + + =

and, if appropriate:

OC d 

## K K 01

. 0 =

where,

C w0 

### = initial water concentration [μg/L]

m ai 

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

K d 

### = water

- sediment partitioning coefficient [L/kg]

K OC 

### = organic carbon partitioning coefficient [L/kg]

d
w 

### = water column depth = 0.10 m

d sed 

### = sediment depth = 0.01 m
θ sed 

### = porosity of sediment = 0.509

ρ b 

### = bulk density of sediment = 1300 kg/m 3



### This simplifies to:

And, if appropriate:

K d 

### = 0.01K oc



### Where:

C w 

### =water concentration in μ g/L

m ai 

### ’=mass applied per unit area in kg/ha

K d 

### =soil

- water distribution coefficient (L/kg

- soil)

K oc 

### =organic

- carbon normalized soil

- water distribution coefficient (L/kg

- oc)

### 21 This model was used for this assessment with a modification to the depth of the water body

, to
reflect concentrations in the water of a cranberry bog rather than that of a rice paddy ( Cape Cod Cranberry Growers Association, 2001 ) . Sp ecifically, in the first equation above, the value of

d
w 

### (water column depth) was changed to 0.305 m (1 foot), from the usual 0.10 m depth that is assumed for rice paddies. This modification has been used in a previous assessment, to estimate aquatic expo sure concentrations for the chemical fenpyroximate ( USEPA, 2012,

D391431 , 2012, D405064 )

.

7.1.5 Percent Cropped Area Adjustment Factor

Percent Cropped Areas (PCA) that account for the maximu m area within a watershed that may be planted with a modeled crop are applied to concentrations predicted by FIRST or PRZM and

EXAMs according to Guidance on Development and Use of Percent Cropped Area Adjustment Factors in Drinking Water Exposure Assessme nts ( USEPA, 2012b )

. Flupyradifurone has proposed uses on a variety of agricultural crops. Therefore, the EDWC s from PRZM/EXAM S

were multiplied by the natio nal default PCA of 0.91 representing all

- agriculture

.

7.2 Input Parameters

S ummar ies of the model input parameter values used in SCI

- GROW

, PRZM

- GW , PRZM/EXAM S

, and the Tier I Rice Model are presented in Table 12

, 1 3

, 14, and 1 5 , respectively . Input parameters were selected in accordance with EFED’s “Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling t he Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides ,” Version 2.1 ( USEPA, 2009a )

and “G uidance for Selecting Input Parameters for Modeling Pesticide Concentrations in Groundwater Using the Pesticide Root Zone Model ,” Version 1 ( USEPA and Canada, 2013 )

.

Sorption Coefficients

TTR

- UN : Coefficients of variation s (CV) were lower for organic carbon normalized solid

- water
distribution coefficients (K OC 

### ; CV= 53 %) as compared to solid

- water distribution coefficients (K d 

### ;
CV= 140 %). Therefore, the mean K OC 

### ( 137 L/kg

- OC 

### ) was used to estimate flupyradifurone

concentrations with PRZM

- GW and PRZM/EXAM S

, an d the median K OC 

### ( 109 L/kg ) was used to estimated groundwater concentration s with SCI

- GROW

.

DFA: Coefficients of variations (CV) were lower for organic carbon normalized solid

- water distribution coefficients (K OC 

### ; CV=45%) as compared to solid

- water distribution coefficients (K d 

### ; CV=84%). Therefore, the mean K OC 

### (6.3 L/kg

- OC 

### ) was used to estimate flupyradifurone

concentrations with PRZM

- GW and PRZM/EXAMS, and the median K OC 

### (7.3 L/kg ) was used to estimated groundwater concentrations with SCI

- GROW.

Aerobic Soil Metabolism

TTR: The aerobic soil metabolism input value used in PRZM

- GW and PRZM/EXAM S was calculated as the 90 percent upper confidence limit on the mean of ten representative half

- life

### 22 values

. The aerobic soil metabolism input value used in SCI

- GROW was the median of the same representative half

- life value s

. Consistent with the input parameter guidance, the representative half

- li ves for PRZM

- GW were adjusted to a temperature of 25 o 

### C ( USEPA and Health Canada, 2012 )

. Temperature adjustments were not completed for ot her models.

DFA: Aerobic soil metabolism studies where DFA was the starting material were not available.

D FA was observed in three aerobic soil metabolism studies where the ethyl group was radiolabeled (MRID 48843679). A regression was completed using t he results from sampling points where the maximum amount of DFA was observed

, and subsequent data points

. R esult s from the three studies were used to estimate the 90 th 

### percentile upper confidence limit on the

mean half

- life . These calculated values for DFA are presumed to be conservative and may underestimate decay because DFA may have been forming at the same time as it was declining. Consistent with the input parameter guidance, the representative half

- lives for PRZM

- GW were adjusted to a temperat ure of 25 o 

### C ( USEPA and Health Canada, 2012 )

. Temperature adjustments were not employ ed for the aerobic soil inputs to other models.

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism

TTR: The aerobic aquatic metabolism input value used in PRZM

- GW and PRZM/EXAMS was calculated as the 90 percent upper confidence limit on the mean of two representative half

- life

values

. Half

- life values were adjusted from 20 o 

### C to 25 o 

### C according to input parameter guidance.

DFA: The aerobic aquatic metabolism input value used in PRZM

- GW and PRZM/EXAMS was calculated as the 90 percent upper confidence limit on the mean of two representative half

- life

values. Half

- life values were adjusted from 20 o 

### C to 25 o 

### C according to Guidance fo r Making Temperature Adjustments to Metabolism Inputs to EXAMs and PE5 ( USEPA, 2 010c )

.

Scenarios and Application Dates Chosen for PRZM/EXAM S modeling

Scenarios are used to specify soil, climatic, and agronomic inputs in PRZM, and are intended to result in high

- end water concentrations associated with a particular crop and pesticide within a geographic region. Each PRZM scenario is specific to a locatio n. Soil and agronomic data specific to the location are built into the scenario, and a specific climatic weather station providing 30 years of daily weather values is associated with the location. Table 11 identifies

the use sites associated with each PRZM scenario. For foliar and soil applications to agricultural crops, the date of application was chosen as the day when the crop was present on the field and during a period of generally high rainfall as it is expected that flupyradifurone may be used when the crop is on the field and dur ing periods of high rainfall. Crop

- specific management practices were used for modeling, including maximum application rates, maximum numbers of applications per year, minimum re

- application intervals, and the first application date for each

crop. For th e seed treatment use, the application date was chosen as two weeks before crop

emergence.

### 23 Table 11

. Use site group, associated crops, and PRZM scenarios used to calculate EDWC for the use site group

Use Site Crops Associated with Use Site Scenarios

Crop Group 15:

Cereal Grains (except Rice) Barley; buckwheat; corn; millet, pearl; millet, proso; oats; popcorn; rye; sorghum (milo); teosinte; triticale; wheat IAcornSTD

ILcornSTD KSsorghumSTD

MNCornSTD

MScornSTD

NCcornESTD
NDwheatSTD

OHcornSTD
ORwheatOP

PAcornSTD

INcornSTD

MNcornSTD

NEcornSTD

Cotton Cotton CAcottonWirrigSTD

MScottonSTD

NCcottonSTD

TXcottonOP

Nongrass Animal

Feeds (Forage, Fodder, Straw, Hay) Alfalfa; bean, velvet; clover (Trifolium , Melilotus ); kudzu; lespedeza; lupin; sainfoin; trefoil; vetch; vetch, crown; vetch,

milk CArangelandhayRLF_V2

NCalfalfaOP

PAalfalfaOP

TXalfalfaOP

ILalfalfaNMC

Peanut peanut NCpeanutSTD

Root Vegetables (except Sugarbeet) Arracacha; arrowroot; artichoke, Chinese; artichoke, Jerusalem; beet, garden; beet, sugar; burdock, edible; canna, edible; carrot; cassava, bitter and sweet; celeriac; chayote (root); chervil, turnip

- rooted; chicory; chufa; dasheen (taro); ginger; ginseng;

horseradish; leren; parsley, turnip

- rooted; parsnip; potato;

ra dish; radish, oriental; rutabaga; salsify; salsify, black; salsify, Spanish; skirret; sweet potato; tanier; turmeric; turnip; yam bean; yam, true. FlcarrotSTD FLpotatoNMC IdpotatowirrigSTD

MEpotatoSTD MIasparagusSTDv2 MNsugarbeetSTD

Ormint CAgarlicRLFV3

NC SweetPotatoSTD CARowCropRLF_V2.txt

Tuberous and Corm Vegetables Arracacha; arrowroot; artichoke, Chinese; artichoke, Jerusalem; canna, edible; cassava, bitter and sweet; chayote (root); chufa;

dasheen (taro); ginger; leren; potato; sweet potato; tanier; turmeric; yam bean; yam, true CAPotatoRLF IDNpotato_WirrigSTD MEpotatoSTD FLpotatoNMC NCsweetpotatoSTD CAgarlicRLFV3

Leafy Vegetables (except Brassica ) Amaranth (Chinese spinach); arugula (roquette); cardoon; celery; celery, Chinese; celtuce; chervil; chr ysanthemum, edible

leaved; chrysanthemum, garland; corn salad; cress, garden; cress, upland; dandelion; dock (sorrel); endive (escarole); fennel, Florence; lettuce, head and leaf; orach; parsley; purslane, garden; purslane, winter; radicchio (red chicory); rhubarb; spinach; spinach, New Zealand; spinach, vine; Swiss chard CAColeCropRLF

FLcucumberSTD

CAlettuceSTD FLcabbageSTD

Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables Broccoli; broccoli, Chinese (gai lon); broccoli raab (rapini); Brussels sprouts; cabbage;Chinese (bok choy); cabbage, Chinese (napa); cabbage, Chinese mustard(gai choy); cauliflower; cavalo broccolo; collards; kale; kohlrabi; mizuna; mustard greens; CAColeCropRLF

FLcucumberSTD

FLtomatoSTD
CAlettuceSTD

### 24 Use Site Crops Associated with Use Site Scenarios

mustar d spinach; rape greens FLcabbageSTD

Legume Vegetables (Succulent or Dried) Bean ( Lupinus ) (includes grain lupin, sweet lupin, white lupin,

and white sweet lupin); bean (Phaseolus ) (includes field bean, kidney bean, lima bean, navy bean, pinto bean, runner bean,

snap bean, tepary bean, wax bean); bean ( Vign a ) (includes adzuki bean, asparagus bean, blackeyed pea, catjang, Chinese longbean, cowpea, crowder pea, moth bean, mung bean, rice

bean, southern pea, urd bean, yardlong bean); broad bean (fava); chickpea (garbanzo); guar; jackbean; lablab bean; lentil;

pea (Pisum ) (includes dwarf pea, edible

- podded pea, English pea, field pea, garden pea, green pea, snowpea, sugar snap pea);

pigeon pea; soybean; soybea n (immature seed); sword bean MIbeansSTD

ORsnbeansSTD CARowCropRLF_V2

Fruiting Vegetables (except cucurbits) Eggplant; groundcherry ( Physalis spp); pepino; pepper (includes bell pepper, chili pepper, cooking pepper, pimento, sweet pepper); tomatillo; tomato CatomatowirrigSTD FLtomatoSTD_V2

PAtomatoSTD FLpeppersSTD

Cucurbit Vegetables Chayote (fruit); Chinese waxgourd (Chinese preserving melon); citron melon; cucumber; gherkin; gourd, edible (includes hyotan, cucuzza, hechima, Chinese okra); Momordica spp (includes balsam apple, balsam pear, bittermelon, Chinese cucumber); muskmelon (includes cantaloupe); pumpkin; squash, summer; squash, winter (includes butternut squash, calabaza, hubbard squash, acorn squash, spaghetti squash); watermelon CAMelonsRLF

FLcucumberSTD

NJmelonSTD

MImelonSTD

MOmelonSTD

Hop Hop ORhopsSTD

Citrus Fruit Calamondin; citrus citron; citrus hybrids (includes chironja, tangelo, tangor); grapefruit; kumquat; lemon; lime; mandarin (tangerine); orange, sour; orange, sweet; pummelo; Satsuma
mandarin Cacitrus_WirrigSTD

FLcitrusSTD

Pome Fruit Apple; azarole; crabapple; loquat; mayhaw; medlar; pear; pear, Asian; quince; quince, Chinese; quince, Japanese; tejocote; cultivars, varieties, and/or hybrids of these NCappleSTD ORappleSTD
PAapp leSTD CAfruit_WirrigSTD

Bushberry Blueberry, highbush and lowbush; currant; elderberry; gooseberry; huckleberry ORberriesOP

Low Growing Berry (including Cranberry) Bearberry; bilberry; blueberry, lowbush; cloudberry; cranberry; lingonberry; muntries; partridgeberry; strawberry; cultivars, varieties, and/or hybrids of these Flstrawberry_WirrigSTD

OrberriesSTD CAStrawberry

noplasticRLF FLstrawberry_WirrigSTD

ORberriesOP

Small Fruit Vine Climbing (except Fuzzy Kiwifruit) Amur river grape; gooseberry; grape; kiwifruit, fuzzy; kiwifruit, hardy; maypop; schisandra berry; cultivars, varieties, and/or hybrids of these ORberriesOP NYGrapesSTD CAWineGrapesRLF OrberriesSTD (07

- 04) CAfruit_WirrigSTD.txt

Tree Nut African nut

- tree; almond; beechnut; Brazil nut; Brazilian pine; CAalmond_WirrigSTD

### 25 Use Site Crops Associated with Use Site Scenarios
bunya; bur oak; butternut; Cajou nut; candlenut; cashew; chestnut; chinquapin; coconut; coquito nut; dika nut; ginkgo;

Guiana chestnut; hazelnut (filbert); heartnut; hickory nut; Japanese hors e

- chestnut; macadamia nut; mongongo nut; monkey

- pot; monkey puzzle nut; Okari nut; Pachira nut; peach palm nut; pecan; pequi; Pili nut; pine nut; pistachio; Sapucaia nut; tropical almond; walnut, black; walnut, English; yellowhorn; cultivars, varieties, an d/or hybrids of these ORfilbertSTD GApecanSTD

Prickly Pear/Cactus

pear CAcitrusSTD

Soybean Seeds MSsoybeanSTD



### Currently approved standard PRZM crop scenarios were used in modeling when available. The

low

- growing berry subgroup includes cranberry, bearberry, bilberry, cloudberry, muntries, partridgeberry, and strawberry . Low growing berries include both berries grown on the ground (strawberries) and berries grown on shrubs. The ORberriesOP and the Flstrawberry_WirrigSTD

scenari os were used for the low growing berry subgroup. Additionally , a modified version of

the Tier I Rice model was used to calculate an EDWC for the use on cranberries. The ORberriesOP scenario (this scenario was developed for the organophosphate cumulative assessment) was prepared for use on blackberries and is representative for berries grown on

shrubs. Flupyradifurone is not an organophosphate class chemical; however, the organophosphate berry scenario is the only scenario available for this type of crop. The Root Vegetables Crop Group includes the following: garden beet, burdock, carrot, celeriac, turnip

root chervil, chicory, ginseng, horseradish, turnip rooted parsley, parsnip, radish, Oriental radish, rutabega, salsify, black salsify, Spanish salsify, skirret, and turnip. The following scenarios were chosen for this crop group: FlcarrotSTD, IDpotatowirrigSTD, MEpotatoSTD, MIasparagusSTDv2, and ORmint. The asparagus and sugarbeet scenarios were chosen to be representative of use on ginseng. OrmintST D was chosen to be representative of use on parsley. To represent use on turnip greens, the FlcarrotSTD scenario and the MEpotatoSTD

were chosen.

Unlike our standard crop scenarios, the organophosphate (OP)

- cumulative scenarios were not developed speci fically to target a high

- end exposure site for the particular crop. Instead, these scenarios were developed by first identifying areas of high combined use of the entire OP class of chemicals that coincided with drinking water intakes that draw from surfa ce water sources. Within these high OP

- use areas, major crop uses were identified and scenarios were developed to represent high runoff

- prone soils known to support the crops in these areas. In some instances, these scenarios may represent the major growi ng area for a particular crop. In other instances, the major crop area may be elsewhere, and the scenario in the high OP

- use area may represent a "fringe" area of the crop in question. It has not been determined how the vulnerability of a crop scenario developed for the OP cumulative assessment compares to a standard scenario developed for the same crop. The OP scenarios may represent either greater or lesser vulnerability than standard scenarios. Because the OP scenarios focused on areas that

coincide d with drinking water intakes, their suitability as high

- end vulnerable scenarios for

### 26 ecological exposure assessments is less certain. The California red legged frog ( Rana draytonii ) scenarios were developed in support of risk assessments conducted to eva luate potential risks to this listed species in California. These scenarios have similar issues as the scenarios developed for the OP assessments, except that they were not chosen based on proximity to drinking water intakes, but rather to evaluate specif ic uses of pesticides in California. They may not be representative of vulnerable areas across the United States.

Table 12

. SCI

- GROW (v2.3) Input Parameter Values for Total Residues of Flupyradifurone plus M47 plus M48 (abbreviated as “ TTR ” ) plus unextracted residues ( abbreviated as “ TTR

- UN ” ) and for difluoroacetic acid alone (DFA) 1

Parameter Residues Value Source Comments

Application Rate (lbs residue/acre) TTR

TTR

- UN See
Table

16 to

18 Proposed label Maximum application rate for active ingredient

DFA Maximum application rate for parent × MW of DFA (96.03 g/mole) / MW of parent (288.68 g/mole)

# of A pplications All

--

K oc (mL/g) TTR

TTR

- UN 109 MRIDs
48843662, 48843663, and

48843664 Median of 10 K OC values. There is not a three

fold difference in observed values.

DFA 7.3 MRID

48843665 Median of five K OC values. There is not a three

fold difference in observed values.

Aerobic S oil

M etabolism Half

- life (days) TTR

- UN 349 MRIDs
48843674,
48843676, 48843677,
48843679,
48843681,

48843683 Median of 10 values. There is a five

- fold difference between the lowest (75 days) and highest representative half

- lives ( 484 days) for

TTR. There is not a 5

- fold difference for TTR

- UN.

No temperature conversion was completed. TTR 186

DFA 134 MRID

48843679 DFA degradation kinetics calculated using the maximum amount observed in the study and

subsequent samplin g points for DFA. The

calculation methodology does not account for

the fact t hat DFA was forming and degrad ing at
the same time.

TTR

- UN: Value for total residues of flupyradifurone, M47, M48, and unextracted residues. TTR: Value for total residues of flupyradifurone, M47, and M48. DFA: Value for modeling difluoroacetic acid

.

Table 13

. Tier I PRZM

- GW Input Parameters

Parameter (units) Residues Input Value Data Source Comments

Application Rate (kg residue/ha) TTR

- UN

TTR See Table 1 7 and 18

Proposed

label Maximum application rate for flupyradifurone.

DFA Maximum application rate for parent × MW of DFA (96.03 g/mole) / MW of parent (288.68 g/mole)

Number of Applications All

--

### 27 Application Date(s) All See Table 17 and 18

--
Applications O ccur
E very All 1/year and from year 1 to the last

year --

Application

Method All Above canopy (2) Soil (1) seed

treatment --

Date of F irst Application All residues 10 days after crop emergence for

foliar

14 days before crop emergence for seed

treatment -- Assumed

Hydrolysis H alf

- life ( days) All Stable (0) MRID

48843667 --

Soil Metabolism

H alf

- life at 25 o C (days) TTR

- UN 371 MRIDs 48843674,
48843676,
48843677,
48843679, 48843681,

48843683 The 90 percent upper confidence

bound on the mean of ten half

- life

values. Half

- life values adjusted from

2 0 o C to 25 o C according to input parameter guidance. TTR 124

DFA 110 MRID

48843679 The 90 percent upper confidence

bound on the mean of three half

- life

values. Half

- life values adjusted from

20 o C to 25 o C according to input parameter guidance.

K oc (L/kg

- OC) TTR

- UN

TTR 137 MRIDs 48843662,
48843663,

48843664 Mean of ten K OC values for flupyradifurone.

DFA 6.33 MRID

48843665 Mean of five K OC values for DFA.

Table 14 . Input Values Used for Tier II Surface Water Modeling with PRZM/EXAM S

Parameter (units) Residue Value (s) Source Comments

PRZM Scenario All See Table 16

and 1 8 -- Screening scenario that is expected to result in a high end EDWC.

EXAMS environment All ir298.exv

-- Index Reservoir

Field Size All Index

Reservoir -- --

Molecular W eight (g/mol) TTR

- UN

TTR 288.68

-- --

DFA 96.03

-- --

Henry’s Law Constant (atm

- m 3 /mol) TTR

- UN

TTR 8.1×10 - 13

-- Estimated from vapor pressure at

25 o C and water solubility at 20 o C. DFA 8.8 ×10 - 14

--

### 28 Parameter (units) Residue Value (s) Source Comments

Vapor Pressure (Torr) at

25 o C TTR

- UN

TTR 1.3×10 - 8 MRID

48843650 --

DFA 3.5×10 - 7 MRID

48843652 4. 7 ×10 - 5 Pascal at 25 o C

Solubility in Water @ 20

O C, pH not reported (mg/L) TTR

- UN

TTR 3200 MRID

48843644 20 o C and pH 7

DFA 500000 MRID

48843648 The water solubility of DFA at 20 o C
was above 500 g/L in a pH range of

1.6 to 13.0

Organic

- carbon

Normalized Soil

- water
Distribution Coefficient (K OC (L/kg

- OC )) TTR

- UN

TTR 137 MRIDs 48843662,
48843663,

48843664 Mean of ten K OC values for flupyradifurone.

DFA 6.33 MRID

48843665 Mean of five K OC values for DFA.

Chemical Application

Method (CAM) All 2 (foliar) 1 (seed

treatment and soil) Proposed

Label --

Depth of Incorporation All 0

-- Not specified on the label.

Application Rate (kg/ha) TTR

- UN

TTR See Table 16

and 1 8 Proposed

label Maximum application rate for active ingredient

DFA Maximum application rate for parent × MW of DFA (96.03 g/mole) × MW of parent (288.68 g/mole)
Application E fficiency (decimal) All 0.99 (ground) 0.95 (aerial ) -- –

Spray D rift F raction (decimal) All 0. 135 (aerial)

0.06 6(ground) 0.0 (seed treatment) ( USEPA,

2013 ) Default spray drift assumptions

Application D ate (day/month) All See Table 16

and 18 -- Determined based on when crop

was on field and times when maximum precipitation occurred in that month for foliar applications.

Number of Applications

All See Table 16

and 18 Proposed

label --

Minimum R etreatment

I nterval -- --

IPSCND All Foliar: 3

Soil: 1 -- --

Hydrolysis Half

- life (days) TTR

- UN

TTR Stable (0) MRID:

46235726 --

DFA Stable (0) No data

--

### 29 Parameter (units) Residue Value (s) Source Comments

Aqueous Photolysis Half

life @ pH 7 (days) TTR

- UN

TTR 13.0 MRID

48843669 The aqueous photolysis half

- life input value was adjusted for

continuous illumination as well as

for latitude/season to reflect photolysis in summer sunlight at

40 o N latitude

DFA Stable (0) No data

--

Water Half

- life or Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half

life (days) TTR

- UN 791

MRID
48843690,

48843692 Represents the 90 percent upper

confidence bound on the mean (791 and 2107) of two representative half

- life values.

Half

- life values adjusted from 20 o C

to 25 o C according to input parameter guidance. TTR

2107

DFA

1282 MRID

48843691 Represents the 90 percent upper

confidence bound on the mean (809 and 555) of two representative half

- life values.

Half

- life values adjusted from 20 o C

to 25 o C according to input parameter guidance.

Benthic Half

- life or Anaerobic Aquatic

Metabolism Half

- life (days) TTR

- UN Stable (0)

MRID

48843689 One available value was stable.

The other value was 2470.

TTR 2576 Represents the 90 percent upper

confidence bound on the mean (854) of two representative half

- life

values. Half

- life values adjusted

from 20 o C to 25 o C according to

input parameter guidance.

DFA Stable (0) No data

--

Soil Half

- life or Aerobic Soil

Metabolism Half

- life (days) TTR

- UN 525 MRIDs
48843674, 48843676,
48843677,
48843679,
48843681,

48843683 The 90 percent upper confidence

bound on the mean of ten half

- life

values. No temperature conversion was performed. TTR 265

DFA 155 MRID

48843679 The 90 percent upper confidence

bound on the mean of three half

life values. Foliar Degradation Rate All 0 d

- 1 Default

-- Foliar Washoff Rate All 0.5 cm

- 1 Default

--

Table 15 . Modified Tier I Rice Model (for Estimating Exposure from Use on Cranberries) Input Parameters

Input Parameter Value Comments Source
Application R ate (lbs a.i./A) TTR

- UN: 0.37

DFA: 0.12 Maximum proposed annual application

rate Proposed label

### 30 Input Parameter Value Comments Source

Soil

- water D istribution

C oefficient (K d ) (L/kg) TTR

- UN: 4.58

DFA: 0.17 Represents the mean K d value (n= 10 for

paren t ; n=5 for DFA ). MRID 45405216
and 48843665



### 8 MODELING RESULTS

The uses on agricultural crops allow for ground, aerial, airblast, and seed treatment applications

of a flowable material. EDWC s were estimated for aerial, ground, and seed treatment applications. The number of seasons per year was not specified on the label and flupyradifurone could be used for multiple seasons per year on one site. Therefore, simulations were run assuming two and three seasons per year, for the simulations that resulted in the highest EDWC for a single season per year . For the multi se ason per year simulations, the crop in the scenario was only present for one season a year ; however, applications were assumed to occur over multiple seasons

. Standard simulations assume spray drift will occur, some

simulations were also run without spray drift, to be able to explore the possibility for mitigating

with vegetative spray drift buffers.

TTR

- UN and TTR

Estimated TTR

- UN and TTR concentrations in surface water and groundwater used for drinking

water are summarized i n Table 1 6 and 17 , respectively

. PRZM

- GW predicted the highest

EDWC s for the foliar application at a rate of 0.18 lbs a.i./A with two applications, and a 7

- day

retreatment interval. T he maximum single

- day concentration of TTR

- UN residues was 117 μg/L

, and the associated post

- breakthrough average concentration was 102 μg/L. The maximum single

- day TTR

- UN concentration in groundwater for other uses ranged from 30 to 1 09 μg/L.

P ost

- breakthrough average concentrations for these uses ranged from 17 to 9 6 μg/L. The average simulation breakthrough time for PRZM

- GW ranged from 1346 to 3217 days (3.6 to 8.8 years). These simulations indicate that it c ould take years following initiation of the use of flupyradifurone before the compound reach es groundwater (although preferential flow could substantially shorten such “breakthrough” times)

. Assuming two and three seasons per year

resulted in EDWC s that were approximately two to three times those estimated for one season

per year. Specifying the number of cr op seasons per year on the label would reduce uncertainty in the EDWC s

.

For surface water, the highest EDWC s were derived for the use on cranberries. A screening

model (the Tier 1 rice model) was employed

, which estimated a n EDWC of 112 μ g/L for the

pare nt chemical

. The value is calculated for residues of parent only

, because the model does not account for degradation. Th is value represents both the acute and the chronic EDWC.
Among uses other than cranberry

, the simulated foliar application to c ereal grains (0.18 lbs a.i./A, 2 applications, 7

- day retreatment interval) resulted in the highest daily EDWC for TTR

- UN

in surface water : 46.1 μg/L . The highest annual average TTR

- UN EDWC in surface water was

### 31 13.9 μg/L

, which resulted from a simulation of Crop Group 18 N ongrass A nimal F eeds 5



### . Acute

TTR

- UN EDWCs for other use scenarios ranged from 1.31 to 36.4 μg/L. Estimated annual

average EDWC s ranged from 0.70 to 10.8 μg/L. Eliminating spray drift from the scenarios that resulted in the highest EDWC (other than the use on cranberry) had little impact on the calculated EDWC. EDWC with and without spray drift were within 1 μ g/L of each other for PRZM/EXAMs runs for Crop Group 15 Cereal Grains and Crop Group 18 N ongrass A nimal F eeds

. This indicates t hat for these scenarios, the driver of the EDWCs was runoff. Assuming two and three seasons per year increased the EDWC s for surface water slightly compared with EDWCs

estimated assuming only one season per year. For example, maximum values with three

se asons per year for all crops excluding cranberries t he acute EDWC was 52.5 μ g/L and the annual average EDWC was 22.3 μ g/L. Cranberry uses are not expected to have multiple

seasons per year.

U nextracted residues were conservatively assumed to comprise residue s of concern in most of

the modeling

, though the extent to which unextracted residues are actually com po sed of

residues of concern is not known . T he scenarios that result ed in the highest EDWC s using half

lives based on inclusion of unextracted re sidues were therefore also modeled using half

- lives

calculated based on values that excluded the unextracted residues ( i.e ., TTR residues of flupyradifurone plus M47 plus M48), thus employing the less conservative assum ption that

none of the unextracted residues represent residues of concern

. The model inputs corresponding to both sets of assumptions ( i.e ., for parent only

, and for parent plus

unextracted residues ) are shown in T ables 1 2 to 1 5

. Not unexpectedly, t he inclusion of

u nextracted residues in degradation half

- life calculations did have an impact on EDWC s , especially for simulations with the PRZM

- GW model

, where in concentrations increased by approximately 64 to 66%.

Table 16 . Comparison of EDWC f or residues of TTR

- UN versus TTR

Model Acute EDWC Chronic EDWC

TTR

- UN TTR %
Difference TTR

- UN TTR % Difference

PRZM

- GW 117 71.5 64% 102 61.3 66%
PRZM/EXAMs * 46.1 28.3 63% 9.56 8.47 13%
PRZM/EXAMs ** 23.2 23.4

- 1% 13.9 14.5

- 4% % Difference = (TTR

- UN EDWC

- TTR EDWC)/TTR EDWC × 100

*TXcornOP (10

- 07) scenario ; see Table 17

** CArangelandhayRLF_V2 (01

- 01) scenario; see Table 17



### Difluoroacetic Acid

PRZM

- GW predicted the highest DFA EDWCs for the seed treatment use with an assumed application rate of 0.37 lbs a.i./A. For use as a seed treatment, the maximum single

- day

5 Crop Group 18 Nongrass Animal Feeds includes the following crops: Alfalfa; bean, velvet; clover ( Trifolium , Melilotus ); kudzu; lespedeza; lupin; sainfoin; trefoil; vetch; vetch, crown; vetch, milk (see http://ir4.rutgers.edu /other/CropGroup.htm).

### 32 concentration of DFA was 52 μg/L, and the associated post

- breakthrough average concentration was 36 μg/L. The acute DFA EDWCs in groundwater for other uses ranged from

42 to 46 μg/L. Post

- breakthrough average concentrations for these uses ranged from 31 to 36 μg/L. The average simulation breakthrough time for PRZM

- GW was 971 days (2.7 years) . These

simulations indica te that it c ould take relatively few years after use of flupyradifurone for DFA

to reach groundwater (although preferential flow could substantially shorten such “breakthrough” times)

. All six standard scenarios were run, and of these the Wisconsin Sand scenario resulted in the highest EDWC s . Increasing the number of seasons per year to three

increased the acute EDWC to 152 μ g/L

, and the post

- breakthrough average EDWC to 114 μ g/L. The use on cranberry resulted in the highest EDWC s (acute and chronic) fo r surface water

, at 43

μ g/L.

Table 17

. Estimated Concentrations of F lupyradifurone p lus M47 p lus M48 (TTR) and plus unextracted residues (TTR

- UN) in Surface Water Source Drinking Water.

Values with an aster isk were calculated for TTR . Values without an asterisk were calculated for TTR

- UN

. Purple

values were the highest across scenarios. Bold black values were the highest value for the use site.Use Site(ApplicationTiming for PRZM-GW)Single App. Ratelbs.a.i./Aa(kg a.i./ha)# of AppRet. Int.daysApp. Type6ScenarioApplication Date(DD-MM) EDWC for parent, M47, M48, and unextracted residues in μg/L EDWC for parent, M47, and M48 in μg/L*

Aerial Ground

Acute Annual
Average Acute Annual
Average

Crop Gro up 15:
Cereal Grains (except Rice) 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A

, G IAcornSTD (01

- 06) 8.56 3.46

-- -- ILcornSTD (01

- 0 6 ) 13.9 4.86

-- -- INcorn STD (01

- 06 9.65 3.35

-- -- KSSorghum STD (01

- 06) 15.8 5.54

-- -- MNcornSTD (01

- 07) 20.8 10.8

-- -- MScornSTD (10

- 04) 26.1 4.45

-- -- NCcornESTD (01

- 06) 16.7 5.31

-- -- NEcornSTD (01

- 05) 24.2 8.45

NDwheat STD (01

- 06) 14.7 8.94 13.0 7.88

OHcorn STD (01

- 05) 9.74 3.77

-- -- ORwheatOP (01

- 12) 13.1 6.48

-- -- PAcorn STD (01

- 07) 13.4 6.03

-- --

TXcornOP ( 10

- 07 ) 46.1

45.2 s
28.3 *

47.7 α 52.5β 9.56

9.03 s
8.47 *

12.8 α 15.3β -- --

TXsorghumOP (01

- 05) 25.6 7.60

-- -- TXwheatOP (01

- 05) 36.4 10. 4 35.8 10.1

Cotto n 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A

, G CAcotton_WirrigSTD (01

- 01) 11.7 5.61

-- -- MScottonSTD (10

- 05) 17.9 3.34

-- -- NCcottonSTD (01

- 06) 18.7 5.42

-- -- TX cotton OP (01

- 05) 19.9 6.38

-- --

Peanut 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A

, G NCpeanutSTD (01

- 06) 12.5 4.10 -- --

Root Veg. (except Sugarbeet)

and

Tuberous and 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A

, G FLcarrotSTD (01

- 09) 23.1 3.44

-- -- IDpotato_wirrigSTD (01

- 06) 4.17 2.56

-- -- MEpotatoSTD (01

- 06) 6.50 3.23

-- -- MIasparagusSTDv2 (01

- 09) 14.2 10.92

-- -- MNsurgarbeetSTD (01

- 06) 14.6 8.85

-- --

### 33Use Site(ApplicationTiming for PRZMGW)Single App. Ratelbs.a.i./Aa(kg a.i./ha)# of AppRet. Int.daysApp. Type6ScenarioApplication Date(DD-MM) EDWC for parent, M47, M48, and unextracted residues in μg/L EDWC for parent, M47, and M48 in μg/L*

Aerial Ground

Acute Annual Average Acute Annual Average
Corm Veg. OR mint STD (15

- 04) 3.11 1.67

-- -- CAgarlicRLFV3 (01

- 01) 8.92 5.94

-- -- CArowcropRLF_V2 (01

- 02) 9.07 5.42

-- -- NCsweetpotatoSTD (01

- 06) 15.0 4.77

-- -- Leafy Veg. (except

Brassica ) and Brassica (Cole) Leafy Veg. 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A

, G CAColeCropRLF (01

- 02) 19.0 9.19

-- -- FLcucumberSTD (01

- 09) 23.1 3.39

-- -- FLtomatoSTD_v2 (01

- 03) 18.5 2.94

-- -- CAlettuceSTD (16

- 02) 16.7 9.37

--- -- FLcabbageSTD (01

- 02) 13.7 3.58

-- -- Legume Veg. (Succulent or Dried) 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A

, G MIbeansSTD (01

- 09) 22.2 9.28

-- -- ORsnbeanssSTD (01

- 06) 7.70 2.67

-- -- CARowCropRLF_V2 (01

- 02) 9.07 5.42

-- --

Fruiting Vegetables 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A CAtomato_wirrigSTD (01

- 03) 7.14 4.73

-- -- FLtomatoSTD_v2 (01

- 03) 18.5 2.94

-- -- PAtomatoSTD (01

- 05) 7.56 3.19

-- -- FLpeppersSTD (01

- 09) 14.9 2.28

-- --

Cucurbit Vegetables 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A MOmelonSTD (10

- 04) 8.82 2.16

-- -- FLcucumberSTD (01

- 09) 23.1 3.39

-- -- NJmelonSTD (01

- 07) 12.4 5.01

-- -- MImelonSTD (01

- 07) 15.3 6.65

-- -- 0.37 (0.40) 1

-- S, G FLcucumberSTD (01

- 09) 23.9 3.72 MImelonSTD (01

- 07) 7.34 3.29

Hops 0.14 (0.15) 1 0.14 (0.15) F, A ORhopsSTD ( 01

- 04) 1.31 0.70 -- --

Citrus Fruit 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A CAcitrus_WirrigSTD (01

- 01) 8.39 6.75 3.63 s 2.75 s
FLcitrusSTD (01

- 10) 31.5 5.51

-- --

0.37 (0.40) 1

-- S, G CAcitrus_WirrigSTD (01

- 01) 4.34 3.43

FLcitrusSTD (01

- 10) 3 4

. 1

33.4 s 6.59

6.42 s

Pome Fruit 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A CAfruit_WirrigSTD (16

- 01) 8.60 6.96

-- -- NCapplesSTD (01

- 06) 8.90 3.39

-- -- ORappleSTD (01

- 10) 7.23 3.69

-- -- PAappleSTD _V2 (01

- 07) 11.1 5.92

-- --

Bushberry 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A NYgrapesSTD (01

- 09) 13.8 7.63

-- -- ORberriesSTD (07

- 04) 3.23 1.76

-- --
Low Growing Berry (excluding Cranberry) 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A Flstrawberry_WirrigSTD (01

- 02) 17.3 3.94 -- -- ORberriesSTD (07

- 04) 3.23 1.76

-- -- CA strawberry

- noplasticRLF (01

- 02) 19.5 8.24 -- --

Cranberry 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A Modified Tier I Rice Model 112 112

-- --

Small Fruit Vine Climbing (except Fuzzy Kiwifruit) 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A High from bushberry 13.8 7.63

-- -- CA winegrapesRLF _V2 (01

- 03) 4.95 3.47

-- --

0.37 (0.40) 1

-- S, G CA winegrapesRLF (01

- 03) 3.36 2.06 NYgrapesSTD (01

- 09) 12.3 5.7 ORberriesSTD (07

- 04) 2.43 1.22 CAgrapes_WirrigSTD (01

- 02) 4.30 3.19

Tree Nut 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A GApecansSTD (01

- 06) 15.7 3.12

-- -- Caalmond_WirrigSTD (16

- 01) 9.83 5.01

-- --

### 34Use Site(ApplicationTiming for PRZMGW)Single App. Ratelbs.a.i./Aa(kg a.i./ha)# of AppRet. Int.daysApp. Type6ScenarioApplication Date(DD-MM) EDWC for parent, M47, M48, and unextracted residues in μg/L EDWC for parent, M47, and M48 in μg/L*

Aerial Ground

Acute Annual Average Acute Annual Average

ORfilbertSTD (09

- 11) 11.6 5.94

-- --
Prickly Pear 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, G CAcitrus_WirrigSTD (01

- 01) 8.39 6.75 -- --

Nongrass
Animal Feeds (Forage, Fodder, Straw, Hay) 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A ILalfalfaNMC (01

- 07) 14.0 5.50

-- -- MN alfalfaOP (01

- 06) 12.9 9.03

-- -- NC alfalfaOP (01

- 06) 12.9 4.08

-- -- PA alfalfa OP (01

- 07) 11.6 4.80

-- -- TX alfalfaOP (01

- 05) 30.0 9.37

-- --

CArangelandhayRLF_V2 (01

- 01) 23. 2

20.7 s
23. 4 *

32.2 α 32.1β 13. 9

12.2 s
14.5 *

20.4 α 22.3β -- --

Soybean See d

Treatment 0.37 (0.40) 1

-- G MSsoybeanSTD (15

- 04)

-- -- 13.5s 2.93s Abbreviations: App=Application; A=aerial application; AB=airblast application ; NJ/DE=Delmarva Sweet Corn; NC=NC cotton; WI=Wisconsin Corn; GA=Georgia Peanuts ; Ave=average ; Veg.=vegetables
* Results are for residues of flupyradifurone plus M47 plus M48 . All other values reflect residues of flupyradifurone plus M47 plus M48 plus unextracted residues. All results for surface water include , except the cranberry estimate, the correction of the model output with a 0.91 PCA value for total agriculture (USEPA, 2012b)

. α Simu lation for two seasons per year for residues of TTR

- UN

. s Simulation without spray drift of TTR

- UN

. β Simulation with three seasons a year of TTR

- UN

.

Table 18

. Estimated Concentrations of Flupyradifurone Plus M47 Plus M48 (TTR) plus unextracted residues (TTR

UN) in Groundwater Source Drinking Water Bold values were the highest value for the use site.

Use Site ( Timing of App) Single
App. Rate
lbs. a.i. /A a (kg a.i./ha) # of App Ret.

Int.

D ays App. Type 6 EDWC in μg/L

SCI

- GROW PRZM

- GW

Peak Scenario Daily

Peak Post Breakthrough

Average Ave Breakthrough

Time (Days)

Foliar Application (10 days post emergence) 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A 2.10
1.09* NJ/DE 67.4 53.9 1346

FL Citrus 68.5 54.2 1357

FL Potato 18.5 17.0 3137

NC 69.6 56.3 2166

WI 117
71.5*

238α 352β 102
61.3*

208α 307β 3053

GA 29.9 26.7 3217

Soil Application (10 days post

emergence) 0.18 (0.20) 2 7 F, A 2.10
1.09* WI 117 102 3053

0.37 (0.40) 1

-- G 2.16 WI 109 94.8 3053

Seed Treatment 0.37 1

-- G 2.16 WI 109 95.7 3053

### 35 Use Site ( Timing of App) Single
App. Rate
lbs. a.i. /A a (kg a.i./ha) # of App Ret.

Int.

D ays App. Type 6 EDWC in μg/L

SCI

- GROW PRZM

- GW

Peak Scenario Daily

Peak Post Breakthrough

Average Ave Breakthrough

Time (Days) (14 days pre

emergence) (0.40) 1.01*

4.31α 72.9 *

172α 63.0 *

150α Abbreviations: App=Application; A=aerial application; AB=airblast applicat ion; NJ/DE=Delmarva Sweet Corn; NC=NC cotton; WI=Wisconsin Corn; GA=Georgia Peanuts ; Ave.=average * Results are for residues of flupyradifurone plus M47 plus M48. All other values reflect residues of flupyradifuro ne plus M47 plus M48 plus unextracted residues. α Simulation for two seasons per year. β Simulation with three seasons a year of TTR

- UN

### 36 Table 19

. Estimated Concentrations of Difluoroacetic Acid (DFA) in Surface Water and Groundwater Source Drinking Water Purple values were the highest across scenarios. Bold values were the highest value for across use sites for different exposure durations.

Use Site Single
App. Rate
lbs. a.i. /A a (kg a.i./ha) # of
App Ret.

Int. days App. Type 6 EDWC for DFA in μg/L

Surface Water 1 Ground w ater

SCI

- GROW PRZM

- GW

Acute Annual Average Peak Scenario Highest Daily Peak Post Breakthrough

Average Average Simulation Breakthrough Time for

PRZM

- GW (Days)

Foliar Application (10 days post emergence) 0.06 (0.07) 2 7 A 11.9 TX

6.53 CA

7.18α 8.51β 2.75 TX

4.34 CA

5.12α 7.74β 3.84 WI 41.5 30.7 971

0.12 (0.13) 1

-- A 10.2 TX 2. 49 TX 3.84 WI 46.0 33.6 971

Soil Application (10 days post

emergence) 0.06 (0.07) 2 7 G 4.83 CA

7.35 TX

8.18α 9.71β 3.16 CA

1.82 TX

2.43α 3.36β 3.84 WI 48.3

105α 152β 35.6

76.2α 114β 971

0.12 (0.13) 1

-- G 6.60 TX 1.66 TX 3.84 WI 46.0 33.6 971

Seed Treatment (14 days pre

emergence) 0.12 (0.13) 1

-- G 3.59 0.769 3.84 WI 51.7

91.5α 36.0

71.3α 971

Cranberry 0.06 (0.07) 2 7 A 43 43 3.84 WI 41.5 30.7 971

Abbreviations: App=Application; A=aerial application; AB=airblast application; NJ/DE=Delmarva Sweet Corn; NC=NC cotton; WI=Wi sconsin Corn; GA=Georgia Peanuts
α Simulation for two seasons per year. β Simulation for three seasons per year.

1 The TXcornOP scenario with a July 10 th application date and the CArangelandhayRLF_V2 with a January 1 st application date were used in the surface water simulations. A n April

15 th application dat e and the MSsoybeanSTD scenario were used for the seed treatment simulation

. All results for surface water include, except the cranberry estimate, the correction with a 0.91 PCA value for total agriculture (USEPA, 2012b).

### 37 9 MONITORING DATA

Flupyradifurone is a proposed new chemical. There are no monitoring data currently available for flupyradifurone.

10 DRINKING WATER TREAT MENT

There is no information available about the effects of drinking water treatment on flupyradifurone . The EDWCs in this assessment are representative of concentrations in drinking water source water (pre

- treatment). For surface water, the conceptual model assumes that a pesticide reaches water via spray drift and/ or surface runoff

, and is instantaneously mixed through out the receiving water body. Fate data show that flupyradifurone is sta ble to hydrolysis. Therefore, flupyradifurone will not degrade by hydrolysis during the time that elapses between intake of raw water and distribution of treated water to a consumer’s tap. Flupyradifurone does degrade via aqueous photolysis ; t herefore if ultraviolet light were used as a means of disinfection, degradation of flupyradifurone may occur; however , some of the degradates for this route of degradation have be en ide ntified as residues of co ncern

. Additionally, the amount of UV radiation used is likely not sufficient to have a significant impact on degradation. Flupyradifurone degrade s only slowly via aerobic aquatic metabolism;

therefore aerobic metabolism is not expected to be a significant loss mechanism for the compound during water treatment either . The most successful treatment process for removal of pesticides from drinking water is generally thought to be treatment with granular ac tivated carbon (GAC)

, which because it is expensive may only be used in relatively large drinking water

treatment facilities. The ability of GAC to remove organic compounds such as pesticides var ies
with the properties of the chemical , the properties of the GAC, and the degree of saturation of GAC sorption sites ( Badriyha et al. , 2003 ; Zhao et al. , 1999 ) . Data on the sorption of flupyradifurone to GAC are not available ; however, some loss of flupyradifurone due to sorption would be expected where GAC is used in drink i ng water treatment.

11 UNCERTAINTIES

There are a number of uncertainties associated with this drinking water exposure assessment.

These uncertainties include lack of a maximum annual application rate, presence of unextracted residues, and use of screening

- level models and /or scenarios to calculate EDWC s

.

Maximum application rates for flupyradifurone were provided on a seasonal basis. For most modeling, a single season was assumed per year. However, for many crops more than one

season per year may occur. For example, there are commonly multiple seasons

, or crops rotated with other crops in a single year

, where leafy and fruiting vegetables are grown . In order to account for this uncertainty, EDWC s were also estimated assuming two and three seasons a year for the scenario re sulting in the highest EDWC for surface water and groundwater. EDWC s estimated assuming two and three seasons per year were up to two to

three times the EDWC s for one season per year. Specify ing a maximum application rate on an

annual basis for flupyradifurone on product labels would reduce this uncertainty in the EDWC s

.

### 38 Table 20 . Comparison of EDWC with 1 to 3 seasons per year

Peak or

Chronic TTR

- UN EDWC μ g/L TTR

- UN 3 season/ 1

season DFA EDWC μ g / L DFA 3 season/

1 season 1 season 2 season 3 season 1 season 2 season 3 season

Surface Water

peak 46.1 47.7 52.5 1.14 7.35 8.18 9.71 1.32

Chronic 13.9 20.1 22.3 1.60 4.34 5.12 7.74 1.78

G roundwater

peak 117 238 352 3.01 51.7 105 152 2.94

Chronic 102 208 307 3.01 36 76.2 114 3.17



### One source of uncertainty in the assessment is the inclusion of unidentified, unextracted

residues in the calculation of aerobic soil and aerobic aquatic metabolism half

- lives. EDWC s for

residues of TTR alone were 60 to 104% of EDWC for TTR with unextracted residues. The presence of unextracted residues contributes to uncertainty in EDWC s

.

There is also uncertainty associated with the use of screening

- level models

. The EDWC s in this document are high

- end and conservative estimates of exposure for vulnerable areas. These

EDWC s would only occur in vulnerable areas

, and are not expected to occur nationally across

the United States. If dietary risks require refinement, higher

- tiered models and modeling

scenario s can be utilized upon request.

12 LITERATURE CITED

Armitage, J. M., & Gobas, F. A. P. C. 2007. A terrestrial food

- chain bioaccumulation model for

POPs. Environmental Science and Technology, 41 , 4019

- 4025. Badriyha, B. N., Ravindran, V., Den, W., & Pirbazari, M. 2003. Bioadsorber efficiency, design, and performance forecasting for alachlor removal. Water Research, 37

. Baris, R., Barrett, M., Bohaty, R. F. H., Echeverria, M., Villaneuva, P., Wolf, J., et a l. 2013. Guidance for Using PRZM

- GW in Drinking Water Exposure Assessments . December 11, 2012. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/przm_gw/wqtt_przm_gw_guidance.htm (Accessed January 22, 2013).
Burns, L. A. 2000. Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS): User Manual and System

Docum entation. Revision G . EPA/600/R

- 00/81

- 023. September 2000. Ecosystems Research Division. National Exposure Research Laboratory. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Cape Cod Cranberry Growers Association. 2001. Conservation District Grant Pr ogram of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Environmental Affairs. Cranberry Water Use. An Information Fact Sheet . June 2001. Available at http://www.cranberries.org/pdf/waterus e.pdf (Accessed October 25, 2012).

### 39 Carsel, R. F., Imhoff, J. C., Hummel, P. R., Cheplick, J. M., & Donigian Jr., J. S. 1997. PRZM

- 3, A Model for Predicting Pesticide and Nitrogen Fate in Crop Root and Unsaturated Soil Zones: Users Manual for Release 3.0 . M emorandum From to Environmental Research Laboratory. Office of Research and Development. United States Environmental Protection Agency. FAO. 2000. Appendix 2. Parameters of pesticides that influence processes in the soil. In FAO

Information Division Editorial Group (Ed.), Pesticide Disposal Series 8. Assessing Soil Contamination. A Reference Manual . Rome: Food & Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Available at http:// www.fao.org/DOCREP/003/X2570E/X2570E06.htm (Accessed July 10, 2009). Gobas, F. A. P. C., Kelly, B. C., & Arnot, J. A. 2003. Quantitative structure activity relationships for predicting the bioaccumulation of POPs in terrestrial food

- webs. QSAR Comb. Sci , 22

, 329

- 336.

IRAC. 2012. IRAC MoA Classification Scheme . Version 7.2. April 2012. Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC). IRAC International Mode of Action Working Group. Available

at http://www.irac

- online.org/content/uploads/MoA

- classification.pdf (Accessed January 10, 2012).

NAFTA. 2012. Guidance for Evaluating and Calculating Degradation Kinetics in Environmental

Media . December 2012. NAFTA Technical Working G roup on Pesticides. Available at http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/international/naftatwg/guidance/degradation

- kin.pdf (Accessed December 16, 2013).

USEPA. 1998. An Ind ex Reservoir for Use in Assessing Drinking Water Exposure. Proposed Methods for Basin

- scale Estimation of Pesticide Concentrations in Flowing Water and Reservoirs for Tolerance Reassessment. J.

- . Presentation to FIFRA Science Advisory Panel, 1998., .

U SEPA. 2006. (P)RZM (E)XAMs Model Shell, Version 5.0 . November 15, 2006. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available a t http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/pe5_user_manual.htm (Accessed April 18, 2013).

USEPA. 2009a. Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate

an d Transport of Pesticides, Version 2.1 . Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/input_parameter_guidance.htm (Accessed November 12, 2010).

USEPA. 2009b. Report on the number of crop cycles per year for select crops in California

. Memorandum From M. A. Ruhmann to K. White. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency.

USEPA. 2009c. SAP Minutes No. 2009

- 01. A set of Scientific Issues Being Considered by the Environmental Protection Agency Regarding: Selected Issues Associated with the Risk Assessment Process for Pesticides with Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic

Characteristics. October 28

- 31, 2008. January 29, 2009. FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel

. Office of Science Coordination and Policy. Available at

### 40 http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/meetings/2008/102808_mtg.htm (Accessed July 9, 2009).

USEPA. 2010a. Guidance for Reporting o n the Environmental Fate and Transport of the Stressors of Concern in the Problem Formulation for Registration Review, Registration Review Risk Assessments, Listed Species Litigation Assessments, New Chemical Risk Assessments, and

Other Relevant Risk Asses sments . January 25, 2010. Environmental Fate and Effects Division, . Available at http://www.epa.gov/p esticides/science/efed/policy_guidance/team_authors/endanger ed_species_reregistration_workgroup/esa_reporting_fate.htm (Accessed July 5, 2012).

USEPA. 2010b. Guidance on Development and Use of the Index Reservoir in Drinking Water
Exposure Assessments . Se ptember 14, 2010. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available

at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed 1/models/water/index_reservoir_dwa.pdf (Accessed December 9, 2010).

USEPA. 2010c. WQTT Advisory Note Number 9: Temperature Adjustments for Aquatic Metabolism Inputs to EXAMS and PE5 . Memorandum From D. Young to W. Q. T. Team.

Environmental Fate and Effec ts Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available at http://w ww.epa.gov/pesticides/science/efed/policy_guidance/team_authors/water_qu ality_tech_team/wqtt_temp_adjust_exams_pe5.pdf (Accessed January 29, 2014).

USEPA. 2011. Acres Planted per Day and Seeding Rates of Crops Grown in the United States

. March 24, 2011. Me morandum From J. Becker & S. Ratnayake to P. Deschamp & D. Spatz. Biological and Economic Analysis Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. United States Environmental Protection
Agency.

USEPA. 2012a

. Criteria Used by the PBT Profiler . September 4, 2012. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available at http://www.pbtprofiler.net/criter ia.asp (Accessed September 7, 2012).

USEPA. 2012b. Development and Use of Percent Cropped Area and Percent Turf Area Adjustment Factors in Drinking Water Exposure Assessments: 2012 Update . March 16,

2012. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office o f Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/pca_adjustment_dwa.html (Accessed April 25, 2012).

US EPA. 2012.D391431. Fenpyroximate: Drinking Water Exposure Assessment for Proposed New Uses on Snap Beans and Tropical Fruits including Avocado and a Proposed Outdoor Use

on Cucumbers . D391431. Memorandum From G. Orrick to G. Kramer & S. Jackson.

Environm ental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency.

USEPA. 2012c. Standard Operating Procedure for Using the NAFTA Guidance to Calculate Representative Half

- life Values and Characterizing Pesticide Degradation . November 30, 2012. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available at

### 41 http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/ecorisk_ders/degradation_kinetics/NAFTA_Degradation _Kinetics.htm (Accessed December 16, 2013).

USEPA. 2012.D405064. Tier I Drinking Water Exposure Assessment for the Section 3 New Use of

Boscalid on V arious Agricultural Crops Including Cranberries . D405064. Memorandum From K. White to S. Funk, B. O'Keefe, A. Ertman & B. Madden. November 27, 2012. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Poll ution Prevention. United States Envrionmental Protection
Agency.

USEPA. 2013.D415161. Data on Flupyradifurone and Its Environmental Transformation Products in Support of the ROCKS . October 23, 2013. Memorandum From S. Glaberman & K. White to C. Olinge r & E. Scollon. October 23, 2013. Environmental Fate and Effect Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution

Prevention.

USEPA. 2013.D413192. Flupyradifurone. Report of the Residues of Concern Knowledgebase

Subcomm ittee D413192. Memorandum From I. Negron

- Encarnacion to Flupyradifurone Risk Assessment Team. December 19, 2013. Health Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. United States

Environmental Prote ction Agency.

USEPA. 2013. Guidance on Modeling Offsite Deposition of Pesticides Via Spray Drift for Ecological and Drinking Water Assessment . Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollut ion Prevention. United States Environmental Protection Agency. USEPA, & Canada, H. 2013. Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters for Modeling Pesticide Concentrations in Groundwater Using the Pesticide Root Zone Model . Version 1. October 15, 2012. Enviro nmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/ water/przm_gw/wqtt_przm_gw_input_guidanc

e.htm (Accessed February 28, 2013). USEPA, & Health Canada. 2012. Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters for Modeling Pesticide Concentrations in Groundwater Using the Pesticide Root Zone Model. Version 1.0

. Octobe r 15, 2012. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Assessment Directorate. Pesticide Management Regulatory Agency. Health Canada. Available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/przm_gw/wqtt_przm_gw_input_guidanc e.pdf (Accessed January 29, 2014). Zhao, X., Hickey, R. F., & Voice, T. C. 1999. Long

- term evaluatio n of adsorption capacity in a biological activated carbon fluidized bed reactor system. Water Research, 33 (13).

### 42 Appendix A

. Modeling Output

SCIGROW

VERSION 2.3

ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECTS DIVISION

OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

SCREENING MODEL
FOR AQUATIC PESTICIDE EXPOSURE

SciGrow version 2.3 chemical:flupyradifurone time is 12/31/2013 15:44:15

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate (lb/acre) applications (lb/acre/yr) (ml/g) metabolism (days)

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0.370 1.0 0.370 1.09E+02 349.0

---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- groundwater screening cond (ppb) = 2.16E+00

************************************************************************

SciGrow version 2.3 chemical:flupyradifurone time is 12/31/2013 15:53:14

--------------------- --------------------------------------------------- Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate (lb/acre) applications (lb/acre/yr) (ml/g) metabolism (days)

----------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 0.200 2.0 0.400 1.09E+02 349.0

------------------------------------------------------------------------ groundwater screening cond (ppb) = 2.33E+00

**************************************************** ********************

SciGrow version 2.3 chemical:flupyradifurone time is 12/31/2013 15:56: 4

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate (lb/a cre) applications (lb/acre/yr) (ml/g) metabolism (days)

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0.200 2.0 0.400 1.09E+02 186.0

---------------------------------------------------- -------------------- groundwater screening cond (ppb) = 1.09E+00

************************************************************************

SciGrow version 2.3 chemical:flupyradifurone time is 12/31/2013 15:56:25

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate (lb/acre) applications (lb/acre/yr) (ml/g) metabolism (days)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

### 43 0.370 1.0 0.370 1.09E+02 186.0

------------------------------------------------------------------------ groundwater screening cond (ppb) = 1.0 1E+00

************************************************************************

SCIGROW

VERSION 2.3

ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECTS DIVISION

OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS

U.S. ENVIRO NMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

SCREENING MODEL
FOR AQUATIC PESTICIDE EXPOSURE

SciGrow version 2.3
chemical:DFA time is 1/ 2/2014 14:16:55

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate (lb/acre) applications (lb/acre/yr) (ml/g) metabolism (days)

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0.060 2.0 0.120 7.30E+00 134.0

------------------------------------------------------------------------ groundwater screening cond (ppb) = 3.84E+00

****************************************************************** ******

SciGrow version 2.3
chemical:DFA time is 1/ 2/2014 14:17:17

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate (lb/acre) applications (lb/a cre/yr) (ml/g) metabolism (days)

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 0.120 1.0 0.120 7.30E+00 134.0

------------------------------------------------------------------------
grou ndwater screening cond (ppb) = 3.84E+00

************************************************************************

PRZM EXAMS Run resulting in highest EECs



### stored as flud.out
Chemical: Flupyradifurone

PRZM environment:

TXcornOP.txt modified Thuday, 14 June 2007 at 10:24:04

EXAMS environment:

ir298.exv modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 05:14:07

Metfile: w13958.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at

08:06:24 Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 22.42 21.95 20.08 16.76 15.3 5.52

### 44 1962 63.12 61.74 56.99 47.8 42.09 14.63

1963 19.1 18.79 17.56 15.15 13.62 7.555

1964 5.97 5.851 5.573 4.805 4.559 2.655

1965 16.36 16.05 14.81 12.43 10.98 4.419

1966 29.33 28.94 26.58 22.99 20.44 8.666

1967 13.21 12.94 12.67 11.12 9.911 5.63

1968 13.15 12.88 12.11 10.24 9.054 4.213

1969 29.71 29.17 27.63 24.1 21.36 8.278

1970 9.29 9.105 8.495 7.331 6.534 4.873

1971 17.63 17.35 15.98 13.35 11.77 4.985

1972 7.349 7.198 6.746 5.91 5.297 3.121

1973 53.08 51.96 48.39 40.71 35.9 10.19

1974 21.49 21.12 19.66 16.83 15.05 10.54

1975 9.601 9.409 8.665 7.679 7.641 4.552

1976 14.48 14.19 13.04 11.38 10.16 4.747

1977 18.06 17.68 16.21 14.07 12.59 5.351

1978 15.24 14.92 13.67 11.72 10.46 5.581

1979 55.31 54.14 51.97 43.96 38.71 14.45

1980 12.85 12.65 11.85 10.29 9.285 5.998

1981 16.78 16.43 15.15 13.62 12.32 4.869

1982 6.52 6.412 5.979 5.146 4.62 3.11

1983 9.569 9.369 8.778 7.773 7.475 3.355

1984 6.386 6.296 5.925 5.094 4.508 2.633

1985 8.973 8.791 8.372 7.916 7.195 3.202

1986 19.02 18.62 17.2 14.39 12.7 5.214

1987 12.92 12.66 11.6 10.28 9.908 5.451

1988 5.992 5.869 5.512 4.88 4.605 2.911

1989 11.73 11.48 10.51 8.862 7.979 3.256

1990 9.932 9.726 9.058 7.799 7.162 3.795

Sorted results

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

0.032258 63.12 61.74 56.99 47.8 42.09 14.63

0.064516 55.31 54.14 51.97 43.96 38.71 14.45

0.096774 53.08 51.96 48.39 40.71 35.9 10.54

0.129032 29.71 29.17 27.63 24.1 21.36 10.19

0.16129 29.33 28.94 26.58 22.99 20.44 8.666

0.193548 22.42 21.95 20.08 16.83 15.3 8.278

0.225806 21.49 21.12 19.66 16.76 15.05 7.555

0.258065 19.1 18.79 17.56 15.15 13.62 5.998

0.290323 19.02 18.62 17.2 14.39 12.7 5.63

0.322581 18.06 17.68 16.21 14.07 12.59 5.581

0.354839 17.63 17.35 15.98 13.62 12.32 5.52

### 45 0.387097 16.78 16.43 15.15 13.35 11.77 5.451

0.419355 16.36 16.05 14.81 12.43 10.98 5.351

0.451613 15.24 14.92 13.67 11.72 10.46 5.214

0.483871 14.48 14.19 13.04 11.38 10.16 4.985

0.516129 13.21 12.94 12.67 11.12 9.911 4.873

0.548387 13.15 12.88 12.11 10.29 9.908 4.869

0.580645 12.92 12.66 11.85 10.28 9.285 4.747

0.612903 12.85 12.65 11.6 10.24 9.054 4.552

0.645161 11.73 11.48 10.51 8.862 7.979 4.419

0.677419 9.932 9.726 9.058 7.916 7.641 4.213

0.709677 9.601 9.409 8.778 7.799 7.475 3.795

0.741935 9.569 9.369 8.665 7.773 7.195 3.355

0.774194 9.29 9.105 8.495 7.679 7.162 3.256

0.806452 8.973 8.791 8.372 7.331 6.534 3.202

0.83871 7.349 7.198 6.746 5.91 5.297 3.121

0.870968 6.52 6.412 5.979 5.146 4.62 3.11

0.903226 6.386 6.296 5.925 5.094 4.605 2.911

0.935484 5.992 5.869 5.573 4.88 4.559 2.655

0.967742 5.97 5.851 5.512 4.805 4.508 2.633

0.1 50.743 49.681 46.314 39.049 34.446 10.505 Average of yearly

averages: 5.791667

Inputs generated by pe5.pl

- Novemeber 2006

Data used for this run:
Output File: flud

Metfile: w13958.dvf

PRZM scenario: TXcornOP.txt

EXAMS environment
file: ir298.exv

Chemical Name: Flupyradifurone

Description Variable

Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 288.68 g/mol
Henry's Law Const. henry 8.10E

- 13 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 1.30E

- 08 torr Solubility sol 3200 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 137 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 13 days Half

life
Aerobic Aquatic kbacw 791 days Halfife

### 46 Metabolism
Anaerobic Aquatic

Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 525 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual
Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm Application Rate: TAPP 0.2 kg/ha
Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction
Spray Drift DRFT 0.135 fraction of application rate applied to pond
Application Date Date 7

- Oct dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm
Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app.
app. rate 1 apprate 0.2 kg/ha

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 3

UPTKF

Record 18: PLVKRT

PLDKRT

FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR Reservoir Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF total none, monthly or total(average of entire run)