### 1 

# Table of Contents

1. Executive summary ................................................................................................................. 2 2. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3 3. Use Characterization ............................................................................................................... 4 4. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments ....................................................................... 8

a. Ecological Risk Assessment ................................................................................................... 8 b. Drinking Water Exposure Assessments ............................................................................. 10

c. Clean Water Act Programs ................................................................................................ 10 5. Environmental Fate and Transport........................................................................................ 11 6. Receptors............................................................................................................................... 25

a. Ec ological Incidents ........................................................................................................... 33 7. Analysis Plan ........................................................................................................................ 34

a. S tressors of Concern .......................................................................................................... 34 b. Measures of Exposure ........................................................................................................ 35

c. Measures of Effect ............................................................................................................. 36 8. Endangered Species Assessments ...................................................................................... 36 9. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program ........................................................................... 36 10. Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps ........................................................................ 37 11. References .......................................................................................................................... 54 Appe ndix A ............................................................................................................................... 56

### 2



# 1. Executive summary

The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) has completed the preliminary problem formulation for the ecological risk, environmental fate, endangered species, and drinking water

a ssessments to be conducted as part of the registration review of three Triclopyr herbicidal active ingredients. The problem formulation describes the methods and data EF ED plans to use during the c ompletion of drinking water and ecological risk assessments in support of registration review and provides an overview of the environmental fate, ecological effects, and potential risks

a ssociated with the use of 3 Triclopyr actives: Triclopyr Acid, Triclopyr Triethylamine salt (T EA), and Triclopyr butoxyethyl ester (BEE), as well as uncertainties unique to the risk

a ssessment of these herbicides. This document also identifies additional studies that would be beneficial to the conduct of an ecological risk assessment. Major findings include the following

e nvironmental fate and ecological effects data gaps:

Fate Data Needs (see details in Table 18)

835.2240 Aqueous photolysis using triclopyr acid and xenon arc lamp 835.4100 Aerobic soil metabolism using triclopyr TEA and BEE 835.4200 Anaerobic soil metabolism using triclopyr acid, TEA, and BEE 835.4300 Aerobic aquatic metabolism using triclopyr BEE and degradate TCP 835.4400 Anaerobic aquatic metabolism using triclopyr BEE 85 0.1730 Fish BCF using triclopyr BEE Note : since triclopyr is less persistent than other pyridine herbicides (such as picloram, clopyralid, etc.), the compost dissipation study required by other pyridine herbicides is not required for triclopyr. If needed, triclopyr PRA will bridge data from the compost studies for other pyridine herbicides.

Ecological Effects Data Needs (see details in Table 19)

850.2100 Avian oral toxicity –Passerine with Triclopyr Acid 850.1300 Freshwater Invertebrate Lifecycle study with Triclopyr BEE 850.1350 Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate Lifecycle with Triclopyr BEE Special Study Acute oral toxicity to adult honey bees with Triclopyr Acid (OECD 213) Special Study Acute oral toxicity to larval honey bees with Triclopyr Acid (OECD 237) Special Study Chronic oral toxicity to larval honey bees with Triclopyr Acid S pecial Study Chronic oral toxicity to adult honey bees with Triclopyr Acid

Uncertainties Associated with the Current Data Gaps

Due to the lack of chronic lifecycle testing data with freshwater and estuarine/marine aquatic invertebrates, there is uncertainty regarding the risk for these organisms when exposed indirectly or directly to Triclopyr BEE products via spray drift. In addition, there has only been a single
spe cies, the Mallard duck, tested for avian oral toxicity with Triclopyr acid., which is both an

a ctive ingredient and a major degradation end product of the TEA and BEE active ingredients. C urrently recommended acute oral toxicity data in 40 CFR Part 158 include a passerine species of bird due to their potentially greater exposure (on a per body weight basis) and sensitivity to

### 3

pesticides. Triclopyr is a systemic herbicide with potential to be transported to bee hives in pollen from treated plants. Therefore, there is uncertainty regarding potential effects to developing larvae from feeding on residues in the pollen and nectar from treated crops. In

a ddition, Triclopyr may be available to adult honeybees in pollen and nectar for extended periods of time but data are lacking on effects to adult bees from acute and chronic oral exposure. For

c hronic oral toxicity testing with honey bee larvae, the OECD has a draft guideline for a chronic larval toxicity study that may be utilized. It may be possible to conduct the chronic (repeat-dose) stud y in such a way as to derive both an LD 50 

### (acute endpoint of interest) and a NOAEC (chronic endpoint of interest) from a single study. If the chronic larval toxicity study is conducted in such

a way that it derives both an LD 50 

### and NOAEC, then a separate acute larval toxicity study is not needed. All of these honey bee toxicity studies are needed in order to evaluate potential risks to bees, per the Agency’s recent guidance for assessing pesticide risks to bees. 1 

### Then need for any higher tier studies with bees ( e.g., Tier 2 semi-field or Tier 3 field studies) will be determined after review of these Tier 1 studies.



# 2. Introduction

Triclopyr acid (and its salts and esters) are systemic herbicides within the Pyridine carboxylic

a cid chemical family. They are used on limited numbers of crops including rice, on range and pasture land, forests, rights of way and on commercial turf such as golf courses. In addition, many multi active products containing Triclopyr active ingredients are used on home lawns. Tr iclopyr products control a number of woody plant and weed species. Triclopyr acid has fewer registered products than Triclopyr triethylamine salt (TEA) or Triclopyr butoxyethyl ester (B EE). Triclopyr TEA rapidly dissociates in water to the triclopyr acid/anion and a potential degradate (triethanolamine). Triclopyr BEE hydrolyzes in the environment to the triclopyr acid/anion and a potential degradate (butoxyethanol). Since none of the fate studies had moni tored the triethanolamine and the butoxyethanol parts, their fate remains unknown. Both triethanolamine and butoxyethanol are rapidly dissipated by microbial degradation. Triclopyr actives breakdown to 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP) and other degradation products.

As described in Section 5, the major stressors of ecological concern are triclopyr TEA and tric lopyr BEE, and their degradates (triclopyr acid which is also an active ingredient), TCP, and 3,5,6 -Trichloro-2-methoxypyridine (TMP).

Tr iclopyr acid penetrates exposed foliage and is also readily absorbed from soils through plantroots. Triclopyr is believed to acidify the cell wall by stimulating the activity of a membranebound ATPase proton pump. In low concentrations, triclopyr and other synthetic auxin type he rbicides cause uncontrolled cell division and growth resulting in vascular tissue destruction. In

c ontrast, with higher concentrations, they may inhibit cell division and growth (HRAC MOA Classification for Synthetic Auxins - wssa.net/wp

- c ontent/uploads/Herbicide MOA Classification )



### . Also, auxin type herbicides may cause chlorosis (yellowing of leaves due to lack of chlorophyll), and curling or bending of leaves (known as epinasty).

1 http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/efed/policy_guidance/team_authors/terrestrial_biology_tech_team/Guidance AssessingPesticideRisk2Bees.pdf

### 4

Triclopyr TEA was first registered in 1979 as an herbicide on non-crop areas and in forestry use for the control of broadleaf weeds and woody plants. Triclopyr BEE was subsequently registered in 1980 for

use on the same sites. Both formulations were registered for use on turf sites in 1984. In 1985, triclopyr BEE was registered for use on rangeland and permanent grass pastures. Most

recen tly (1995), triclopyr TEA was registered for use on rice to control broadleaf weed species.



# 3. Use Characterization

Use Sites

Registered site uses for Triclopyr products include domestic and commercial turf, Christmas tree plantations, numerous aquatic areas for aquatic weed control (canals, ponds, irrigation ditches, marshes, wetlands, reservoirs, bayous, lake shore, rivers), rangelands, pastures, industrial and agricultural structures and surrounding areas, fencerows, public park, wildlife refuge and forest lands, ornamental trees, flowering plants and shrubs, rights of way (rail, utility and road), airports, athletic fields, military installations, campgrounds and cabins, driveways, fallow land, livestock drinking water, and land enrolled in the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP).

Agricultural crops mentioned on current product labels include rice, alfalfa, almonds, brazil nut, butternut, cashews, filberts, hickory nut, macadamia nut, walnuts, hazelnut, cole crops, field corn, sweet corn, popcorn, flax, hickory nut, lentils, mint, oats, onions, potatoes, rapeseed, sorghum, soybean, sugar beets, sunflower, wheat (forage), blackberries, wild grapes, citrus trees (stump injection), apple trees (bark injection), ornamental trees, and vegetable crops (soil
tre atment).

Nonagricultural tree control uses include ash, birch, black walnut, douglas fir, elm, English walnut, gray birch, orchards as stump injection, sugar maple, sweetgum, white birch, white oak, white pine, spruce, red pine, mesquite, aspen, birch, dogwood, hackberry, locust, sassafras, red maple, red, white and post oak.

More detailed usage tables for each active (Acid, TEA, and BEE) are attached as addendums to this assessment and are obtained from current Agency use site summaries (Office of Pesticide Program Information Network OPPIN). In addition, the Biological Economic Analysis Division (BEAD) prepared a detailed chemical Profile for triclopyr products on March 13, 2014, which is available in the docket. This profile includes a historical look at usage trends on a variety of use sites.

Application Methods

Methods of application include aerial (fixed wing, rotary and low volume), tree trunk or stump injection, bark treatment, foliar spray, soil injection, and ground application as a granular (TEA).

### 5

Current Product Registrations

The current product list for Triclopyr acid is composed of 8 products. Six of these are technical and 2 are products containing from 0.76% to 29.4 % triclopyr acid.

Triclopyr TEA has 88 active products listed with three pending. Twenty-seven of these products contain Triclopyr TEA only. Sixty-two products are mixtures with other herbicides such as MCPA, Dicamba, 2,4-D (salts and esters), Clopyralid, Trifluralin, Benfluralin, Quinclorac, Picloram, Penoxsulam, Propanil, Glyphosate, and Fluroxypyr. A number of them have less Triclopyr TEA than the other components. The maximum percent of Triclopyr TEA active appears to be 44.4 % for these products.

Triclopyr BEE has 49 active registered products listed with 3 pending. Eight of these are
tec hnical products. Twenty-two products contain Triclopyr BEE only at percentages ranging from 13.6 to 83.9 %. Twenty-two of the products are multi-active mixtures with other herbicides including 2,4-D BEE and 2-EHE, Fluroxypyr 1-MHE, Clopyralid, Sulfentrazone, Dicamba, Penoxulam, and Fenoxyprop p-ethyl. Maximum percent of triclopyr BEE active is 61.6 % with one exception, Garlon XRT with 83.9 % Triclopyr BEE.

Formulation types include soluble concentrates, emulsifiable concentrates, liquids-pressurized, granules, wettable powders and pellets. A more detailed table of active products for these three actives is included as an addendum to this document.

Potential Acreage based on Current Crops and Usage Estimates

Based on USDA 2011 pesticide usage estimates for Triclopyr products a very small percentage was used on crops with the exception of rice (5-10% of usage). The major uses would appear to be for pasture and hay with minor use in orchards or vineyards. Use has declined from 1,800,000 lbs in 2000 to about 800,000 lbs in 2011. New pesticide usage estimates are expected when the 2012 Census estimates are published. BEAD estimates from 1998 to 2012 that an average of 1.3 million pounds of acid equivalent (not products) were applied to about 2.75 mi llion acres annually if based on average percent crop treated.

Based on Agency maximum percent crop use estimates for the crops using USDA 2007 Agr icultural Census estimates for crop acreages and using maximum percent crop treated estimates, the annual number of acres could potentially exceed 11,000,000 acres on a nationwide ba sis. Major Land Use (MLU) estimates were pasture, grassland, and rangeland. These uses do not account for aquatic weed control uses, domestic and commercial turf uses, forestry uses, or right of way uses which could add significantly to total potential acreage for Triclopyr use.

### 6

Table 1. Screening Level Estimates of Agricultural Uses 3 

### of Triclopyr Case (116001, 116002, 16004) (Reporting Timeframe: 2004-2011) BEAD report date April 19, 2014. Percent Crop Treated Acreage Range Crop Lbs. A.I 2



### . Average Maximum USDA total (x percent crop 1 

### )
1 Alfalfa (for hay) <500 <1 <2.5 20,244,497(5,061,124)
2 Apples <500 <1 <2.5 398,770 (9969)
3 Corn <500 <1 <2.5 86,248,542 (2,156,213)
4 Fallow (idle cropland) 5,000 <1 <2.5 2,964,000 ( 74, 000)
5 Hazelnuts (Filberts) <500 <1 <2.5 34,465 (861)
6 Oranges 10,000 <2.5 5 785,856 (39,292)
7 Pasture , Range, Grassland 1,000,000 <2.5 <2.5 614,000,000 (1,535,000)
8 Pecans 6,000 <1 <2.5 581,809 (14,545)
9 Rice (2012

- 2013 data) 90,000 15 25 2,699,000 (674,750)
10 Wheat (2013

- 2014 data) 2,000 <1 <2.5 56,160,000 ((1,404,000)

1 BEAD Maximum percent crop used as acreage multiplication factor for potential acreage

2 All numbers rounded.

3 Does not include non-agricultural uses such as commercial turf, rights of way, aquatic uses etc

<500 Less than 500 pounds of active ingredient

< 2.5 Less than 2.5 percent of crop treated
<1 Less than 1 percent of crop treated



### No acreage estimates for non-food uses of Triclopyr products such as golf courses, commercial buildings, greenhouses and nurseries, residential uses on lawns, ornamental trees and shrubs, right of ways, ditches, forests, public parks and aquatic water bodies such as canals, ponds, lakes (including reservoirs), rivers, or wetlands have been compiled at this time. These types of estimates are quite difficult to conduct. However, it is assumed that this acreage could potentially be substantial. In attempting to determine modeling procedures for golf courses, the Agency consulted the Golf 20/20 Industry Report for 2002. There were about 15,827 golf

c ourses in the United States as of March 2003. 

### Golf course characteristics information provided by the Golf Course Superintendents Association of America indicates that an 18-hole golf facilit y averages about 150-200 acres of total land, including water bodies, hard structures, and out- of

play areas. A typical urban golf course is only 110-120 acres, and courses in resort areas may be 170 -190 acres (G. Lyman, GCSAA; personal communication 11/19/04). Generally, pesticides are not applied to entire golf courses, but rather to some holes and some parts of the course ( e.g. , tees, greens, and/or fairways). Based on a median estimate of 150 acres/course multiplied by 15,827 total courses and reduced to 50% as potential turf area coverage the total potential acreage would be over 1,000,000 acres nationwide.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) pesticide use map shows regional scale patterns in use intensity within the United States. The USGS pesticide maps are based on State level estimates of pesticide use rates for individual crops, which have been compiled by the National Center for F ood and Agricultural Policy (NCFAP) for 1995-1998, and on recent Census of Agriculture for county crop acreage crop.

### 7

USGS Caution regarding maps: The pesticide use maps available from this site show regional-scale patterns of use intensity within the United States and are not intended for making local-scale estimates of pesticide use, such as for individual counties. The maps are based on state-level estimates of pesticide use rates for individual crops, which have been compiled by the National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy (NCFAP) and on the recent Census of Agriculture county crop acreage. Key limitations include: (1) state use-coefficients represent an average for the entire state and consequently do not reflect the local variability of pesticide management practices found within many states and counties, and (2) the county-level acreage are based on the Census of Agriculture and may not represent all crop acreage due to Census non-disclosure rules. Please refer to Method for Estimating Pesticide Use for a detailed discussion of how the pesticide use data were developed.



### Based on label rates examined during the 2009 Endangered Species Assessment California Redlegge d Frog 2



### , maximum single application rates may range from 0.5 to 20 lbs ai/Acre in noncrop areas. This large range of rates is also applied from 1 to up to 17 times per year with 21 day intervals between applications. Use on Rice is much more restricted with an application rate of 0.38 lbs ai/acre and a maximum of 2 applications per year. Direct application to water bodies is dependent on the size of the treated area, but limited to a maximum concentration of 2.5 PPM.

2 http://www.epa.gov/espp/litstatus/effects/redleg-frog/#triclopyr

### 8

EFED will use application scenarios that result in maximum exposure scenarios for a given use for the risk assessment. Any absence of information on the labels that specifies the maximum single application rate, the application interval, the annual maximum rate allowed (lbs ai/year), or application method may result in conservative assumptions.

Based on label rates examined during the 2009 Endangered Species Assessment 3 

### , maximum single application rates may range from 0.5 to 20 lbs ai/Acre in non-crop areas. This large range of rates is also applied from 1 to up to 17 times per year with 21 day intervals between applications. Use on rice is much more restricted with an application rate of 0.38 lbs ai/acre and

a maximum of 2 applications per year. Direct application to water bodies is dependent on the size of the treated area, but limited to a maximum concentration of 2.5 ppm.

EFED will use application scenarios that result in maximum exposure scenarios for a given use for the risk assessment. Any absence of information on the labels that specifies the maximum single application rate, the application interval, the annual maximum rate allowed (lbs ai/year), or application method may result in conservative assumptions. Given the relatively high

a pplication rates and frequencies of some uses ( e.g., non-crop areas), additional information to clarify or refine labeled uses would be particularly useful for the forthcoming ecological risk
assessment.


# 4. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments

a. Ecological Risk Assessment

The Agency has conducted multiple ecological risk assessments on Triclopyr actives that serve as a basis for this scoping document, including the Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) in 1998 and Label revision assessments for TEA (Garlon 3A) aquatic weed control in 2001. Due to the rapid dissociation of Triclopyr TEA to Triclopyr Acid within minutes of entering water, the exposure of aquatic life from Triclopyr TEA applications was presumed to essentially involve the acid form and it’s degradates. Triclopyr BEE is chronically toxic to fish at low levels (affecting growth at 48 ug ai/L and reproductive success at 0.99 ug ai/L (MRID 43230201)). The refore, the potential for short-term exposure to the BEE form and subsequent chronic effects was not discounted in these assessments. The primary risk issues that have been identified for birds a nd mammals relate to its use on turf at relatively high rates. Risk quotients for aquatic plants a lso exceeded concern levels for this taxonomic group as well. Areas of concern outlined in these assessments are briefly summarized below.

3 http://www.epa.gov/espp/litstatus/effects/redleg-frog/#triclopyr

### 9

Table 2. Summary of Acute /Chronic Risk Concerns Identified for Triclopyr Acid in Previous A ssessments (N.D. = not determined)

Birds Mammals Terr.

Plants Terr.

Inverts Fish BCF Aqua

. Inverts Aqua

.

Plants Groundwater

Contamination Persistence Degradates of Concern Yes 1 Yes N.D. N.D. No Unknown No N.D. Groundwater advisory moderate TCP

1 Acute and chronic risks were only predicted for use rates over 8.0 lbs ai/acre.



### Table 3. Summary of Acute/Chronic Risk Concerns Identified for Triclopyr TEA in Previous Assessments

Birds Mammals Terr.

Plants Terr.

Inverts Fish BCF Aqua

. Inverts Aqua

.

Plants Groundwater

Contamination Persistence Degradates of Concern Yes 1 Yes 2 Yes 3 N.D. No Unknown No Yes 3 Groundwater advisory moderate TCP

1 Acute concerns for birds feeding on turf (short grass) at 12 lb acid equivalent/acre (lbs ae/A). Endangered species concerns exceeded at 3.1 lb ae/A on short grass. Restricted use at 8 lbs ae/Acre on grasses, small insects and broadleaf plants. Chronic risk concerns were exceeded for all use rates on grasses, small insects and broadleaf plants and for fruits, pods, seeds and large insects at over 6 lbs ae/acre.

2 chronic risk concerns for small mammals were exceeded for all use rates greater than 1.5 lbs ae/A (short-grass

, insects).

3 Acute risks were predicted for all use rates terrestrial/semi aquatic plants and certain aquatic uses (drainage systems) and pasture uses for aquatic plants. Endangered species concern levels were exceeded for birds, mammals, aquatic plants and terrestrial plants.



### Table 4. Summary of Acute/Chronic Risk Concerns Identified for Triclopyr BEE in Previous Assessments

Birds Mammals Terr.

Plants Terr.

Inverts Fish BCF Aqua

. Inverts Aqua

.

Plants Groundwater

Contamination Persistence Degradates of Concern Yes 1 Yes 2 Yes 3 N.D. Yes 4 Unknown Yes 5 Yes 3 Groundwater advisory moderate TCP

1 Acute avian risk were only predicted for forest and aquatic use at over 8.0 lbs acid equivalent/acre on short grasses(non-listed) and/or short and long grasses, broadleaf plants and small insects for listed birds. Chronic avian risks were predicted for uses over 1.0 lb ai /A

. 2 chronic risk concerns were exceeded for all use rates greater than 6.0 lbs ae/A (3.1 lb ae/A for endangered mammals) on short grass and insects.

3 Acute risks were predicted for all use rates for terrestrial/semi aquatic plants (from runoff or spray drift) and certain direct application uses (drainage systems and pasture/forest uses) for aquatic plants.

4 Fish acute concerns exceeded for certain pasture, rangeland, and non-ag right of way uses or use around structures or fencerows (rates > 8 lb ai/A). Direct applications to water (forest, drainage systems, or streams and rivers for aquatic weed control) exceeded at all rates for these uses.

5 Invertebrate acute concern levels exceeded for direct applications to water (forest, drainage systems, or streams and rivers for aquatic weed control) exceeded at nearly all rates for these uses.



### Triclopyr actives were also more recently evaluated for potential effects to the California Red Legged Frog (CRLF) in 2009. This assessment addressed a much smaller area deemed to be biologically relevant to this particular listed species. The species is endemic to California and Baja California (Mexico) and inhabits both coastal and interior mountain ranges. A total of 243
stre ams or drainages are believed to be currently occupied by the species, with the greatest numbers in Monterey, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara counties (U.S. FWS 1996) in California. The following conclusions were made in regard to this species. The Agency made a

### 10

May Affect, and Likely to Adversely Affect determination for the CRLF based on the direct and indirect effects to the aquatic and terrestrial-phase CRLF from the use of triclopyr . Additionally, the Agency determined that there is the potential for modification of CRLF designated critical habitat from the use of triclopyr. Alteration of plant communities within the potentially exposed critical habitats was considered a major source of impact as well as indirect effects due to reduction of prey species. Direct exposure to developing larvae and adults from forest use, aquatic vegetation control use, and sod or turf farm use were predicted to present potential direct acute and chronic effect concerns for this amphibian.

In May 2004 the Agency completed an Effects Determination for 3 threatened or endangered Pacific anadromous salmon and steelhead trout based on triclopyr BEE uses in California forestry applications. That Effects Determination concluded that triclopyr BEE would have no effect on 1 Evolutionary Significant Units 

### ESU and was Not Likely to Adversely Affect the other 2 ESUs from registered uses on Forestry in California. In December 2004 the Agency completed

an Effects Determination fo r 26 Evolutionary 

### Significant Units(ESUs) of threatened and endangered Pacific anadromous salmon and steelhead based on all registered uses of triclopyr BEE in the Pacific Northwest and California, consistent with a court order in WTC v. EPA (Case No. 1:04- Cv -00126 -Ckk, 2004). The results of that endangered species risk assessment showed that the use of triclopyr BEE may affect and was likely to adversely affect 16 ESUs and may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect, 10 ESUs 

### of Pacific salmon and steelhead when used according to l abeled application directions. A full copy of the most recent biological Opinion for Pacific salmonids can be accessed at www.epa.gov/oppfead1biop.pdf

.



## b. Drinking Water Exposure Assessments

A drinking water exposure assessment on the use of triclopyr TEA in wetlands and the terrestrial uses was completed in 2002. EFED used the FIRST model to predict pesticide concentrations from wetlands and terrestrial applications and E DW C s were modeled using a scenario of a treated wetland adjacent to a drinking water reservoir. For wetland use, the peak drinking water concentration of triclopyr acid is 64 ppb. The resulting chronic concentration (annual average in I ndex Reservoir) is 50 ppb. The peak drinking water concentration of TCP is 11 ppb. The resulting chronic concentration (annual average in Index Reservoir) is 8.3 ppb. For terrestrial

use , the peak (acute) and chronic drinking water concentrations for triclopyr acid are estimated to be 507 ppb and 88 ppb, respectively. The peak drinking water concentration of TCP is 105 ppb. The resulting chronic concentration of TCP is 32 ppb.

No drinking water exposure assessment was conducted as part of the RED for triclopyr (acid, TEA, and BEE) (USEPA 1998).



## c. Clean Water Act Programs

Triclopyr acid, Triclopyr TEA, Triclopyr BEE, and the TCP degradate have not been identified as a cause of impairment for any water bodies listed as impaired under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. No Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) criteria have been developed for

### 11

Triclopyr actives. Aquatic benchmarks have been established for all 3 Triclopyr actives and the TCP degradate and are available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/ecorisk_ders/aquatic_life_benchmark.htm

. Any data submitted or otherwise located as part of the registration review process may be used to update aquatic life benchmarks if applicable.



# 5. Environmental Fate and Transport

Triclopyr acid has a low vapor pressure (1.3x10 -6 

### mm Hg) and is highly soluble (water solubility of 440 mg/L). Triclopyr TEA is a non-volatile, very soluble salt (vapor pressure < 1 x 10 -8 

### torr; solubility 41.2 wt%). Triclopyr BEE is non-volatile (vapor Pressure 3.6 x 10 -6 

### mm Hg) and shows relatively low solubility (7.4 ppm). Triclopyr acid is a weak acid which will dissociate completely to the triclopyr anion at pHs > 5 (dissociation constant pKa 3). Therefore, triclopyr anion will be the dominant moiety present in the environment when products containing either triclopyr acid or triclopyr TEA are used. However, triclopyr BEE is anticipated to persist longer in the environment than triclopyr TEA. Due to its high log Kow and low water solubility, Triclopyr BEE is expected to bioaccumulate in fish. Table 5 lists the basic physical and chemical properties of triclopyr acid, TEA and BEE.

T able 5. Physical and Chemical Properties of Triclopyr (Acid, TEA, and BEE). Properties Triclopyr Acid Triclopyr TEA Triclopyr BEE Water Solubility (25 o C) 1 440 ppm 41.2 wt% 7.4 ppm

Vapor Pressure (25 o C) 1 1.3x10

- 6 torr <1.0x10

- 8 torr 3.6x10

- 6 torr Henry’s Law
constant 1 9.7x10

- 7 atm m 3 mol

- 1 1.2x 10

- 14 atm m 3 mol

- 1 2.5 x 10

- 7 atm m 3 mol

- 1

L og Kow

- 0.45 2 0.09 3 4.01 2 pKa 2 3.0 Dissociate s in one minute 4 - -

1. EPA. 2009. Risks of Triclopyr Use to Federally Threatened California Red-legged Frog. http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/endanger/litstatus/effects/redleg-frog/triclopyr/analysis.pdf 2. USDA. 1996. Selected Commercial Formulations of Triclopyr – Garlon 3A and Garlon 4 Risk Assessment. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). USDA. http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/hfqlg/publications/herbicide_info/1996b_triclopyr.pdf 3. California Department of Pesticide Regulation. 1997. Environmental Fate of Triclopyr. http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/pubs/fatememo/triclopyr.pdf 

### 4. Product chemistry (MRID 43011401). Dissociation of Triclopyr Triethylamine Salt. Dow Chemical U.S.A.


### Triclopyr Acid

Based on laboratory studies, triclopyr acid is stable to hydrolysis (MRID 41879601) and

a naerobic aquatic metabolism (MRID 151967), and it degrades slowly under aerobic aquatic

c onditions (half-life 142 days; MRID 40479101). Triclopyr acid is a weak acid which will diss ociate completely to the triclopyr anion at pHs > 5 (dissociation constant pKa 3). Therefore, the tr iclopyr anion will be the predominant moiety present in the environment. The very low

### 12

K OW 

### for triclopyr acid indicates that it will not be bioaccumulated in fish tissue. Based on the preliminary review of a fish bioaccumulation study (MRID 44015101), this is confirmed

e xperimentally. It appears that aqueous photolysis is a predominant degradation mechanism in aquatic media. Photodegradation of triclopyr acid was less than 1 day in sterile solutions (either

e xposed to mercury lamp or natural sunlight) and approximately 1 day in natural water (exposed
to natur al sunlight) (MRID 41732201). The major photodegradation products observed were 5-

c hloro-3,6-dihydroxy-2 -pyridinoloxyacetic acid in sterile solutions and oxamic acid in sterile natural river water and buffer solutions.

I n soil, the predominant degradation mechanism for triclopyr acid is biotic metabolism. Triclopyr acid degraded in aerobic soil with half-lives of 8 to 18 days to intermediate degradates 3,5,6 -trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP) and 3,5,6-trichloro-2-methoxypyridine (TMP); the ultimate d egradate is carbon dioxide (MRID 40346304). TCP was also observed as a minor degradate in the a erobic aquatic metabolism study (MRID 40479101). Based on adsorption/desorption studi es, triclopyr acid and its major degradate TCP, both chemicals are expected to be very mobi le in soils. Freundlich K ads 

### for triclopyr were 0.165-0.975 mL/g (Koc = 53– 134; MRID 40749801 ). Koc for TCP is 149 (MRID 42493901).

Triclopyr TEA

Triclopyr TEA is a salt which is expected to dissociate rapidly in water to the triclopyr acid/anion. In measurements of conductance of a solution of triclopyr TEA in water as a function of time, triclopyr TEA was found to be dissolved and dissociated completely to the acid within one minute (MRID 43011401). Although the triethylamine portion of the triclopyr mol ecule was not monitored, it is reasonable to believe the other hydrolytic product (triethylamine) is formed at the same time. As indicated previously, triclopyr acid is expected to dissociate completely at environmentally relevant pH values and exist as the triclopyr anion.

The primary degradation pathway for triclopyr TEA is dissociation to triclopyr acid and presumably to triethylamine, because the latter degradate was not monitored in all available fate studies. Triethylamine is then degraded by aerobic microbial processes to CO 2 

### (soil half-life 5.6

– 13.7 days) (MRID 43837501). It is stable in aquatic conditions in the first 14-18 days and then
proc eeds to rapid degradation (half-life 9.3 days in the system; MRID 43837503). Triethylamine is s table to degradation under anaerobic aquatic conditions (half-life > 2 years) (MRID 43837502). Because of the rapid microbial degradation under aerobic conditions, it is not expected that volatilization, photodegradation, or bioaccumulation in fish will contribute sig nificantly to the dissipation of triethylamine (Kow = 0.09). Triclopyr TEA degraded with half-live of 2.2-7.6 days in the water at two study sites in AR and LA and half-lives of 2.9-7.6 days in the soil in rice field dissipation studies (MRID 43955901). TCP was detected up to 36 weeks after treatment in vegetated soil; it represented a considerable amount (0.131 ppm) at 63 weeks (last test interval) in bare soil.

Triclopyr BEE

Triclopyr BEE will persist to varying degrees in the environment depending on environmental conditions and type of study, with persistence in laboratory studies being shorter than that

### 13

observed in field studies. In the laboratory, the primary degradation pathway for triclopyr BEE is hydrolysis to triclopyr acid, with hydrolysis occurring more rapidly at higher pHs. Triclopyr BEE hydrolyzed quickly to triclopyr acid in non-sterile natural waters (pH 6.7; half-life of 0.5 da ys; MRID 134174), but somewhat slower at pH 7 in sterile pure water (half-life of 9 days; MR ID 134174). It appears that hydrolysis occurr ed more rapidly at higher pH valu es (half-life of 84.0, 9.0 and 0.3 days at pH 5, 7, and 9, respectively) in sterile pure water. Supplemental information indicates that triclopyr BEE degrades to triclopyr acid with a half-life of about three hours w hen applied to silty clay loam, silt loam, and sandy loam soils.

I n the field dissipation studies using triclopyr BEE, triclopyr BEE dissipated much faster in NC than in CA (with half-lives of 1.1 days and 39 days, respectively ; MRID 43033401, 42730601 ). The variation in half lives could be related to the difference in soil pH (NC site has a soil pH of 6.3 whe reas CA site has a pH of 4.7-5.7). In these studies, concentrations of triclopyr acid, TCP,

a nd TMP were not found in soil depths below 15 cm (MRID 42730601) or below 30 cm (MRID 43033401). In the forestry studies, the dissipation half-lives of triclopyr BEE were 15 days on foliage, 24 days in pond sediment, 96 days in soil, and 5 days in pond water (MRID 43011601). TCP was generally limited to the upper 30 cm of the soil, with sporadic detections in deeper soil depths. These observations appear to indicate that TCP is very persistent and mobile in the field and that triclopyr BEE may persist under some environmental conditions.

Tr iclopyr acid, triclopyr BEE and triclopyr TEA may produce TCP which is relatively mobile

a nd persistent and has the potential to reach groundwater. Triclopyr and TCP do not adsorb to soil and sediment particles, and may be transported in surface waters; information from two field dissipation studies (MRID 43955901) conducted on rice fields indicate that following application of triclopyr TEA , TCP can persist in flood waters. Below is a schematic showing the pathways for triclopyr acid, TEA
, and BEE, and their degradates in hydrolysis, soil and aquatic
meta bolism.

S ince the butoxyethanol part of triclopyr BEE in all fate studies was not monitored, the formation and decline of 2-butoxyethanol in the environment remains unknown. According to the fate studies of 2,4-D ester salt, 2-butoxyethanol (the test substance) degrades rapidly by microbial processes (aerobic soil and aerobic/anaerobic aquatic systems) to 2-butoxyacetic acid (half-lives of 0.9–1.4 h ours in soil; half-life of 0.6-3.4 days in a sediment/water mixture) (MRIDs 43799101, 43799103, a nd 43799106). The degradate (2-butoxyacetic acid) is more persistent under anaerobic aquatic conditions than aerobic aquatic conditions (half-lives of 73.3 and 1.4 da ys, respectively) (MRIDs 43799103 and 43799106). It is not expected that volatilization will contribute significantly to the dissipation of 2-butoxyethanol. Because of the rapid microbial degradation, it is not expected that photodegradation or bioaccumulation in fish will contribute significantly to the dissipation of butoxyethanol.

Stressors of Concern

For the purposes of the forthcoming preliminary risk assessment in registration review, the following stressors were evaluated as possible ecological stressors of concern: triclopyr TEA

a nd triclopyr BEE, and their degradates (triclopyr acid which it is also an active ingredient, TCP, TMP, 5-chloro-3,6-dihydroxy-2-pyridinyloxyacetic acid, oxamic acid, and (5/6)-chloro-3-

### 14

hydroxy-s-pyridinone. Triclopyr acid, TCP, and TMP were detected in various laboratory fate studies as well as in the field dissipation studies. Although TMP is a minor degradate, it was include d in the field dissipation studies because it is a residue of potential concern. The other three degradates (5-chloro-3,6-dihydroxy-2 -pyridinyloxyacetic acid, oxamic acid, and (5/6)- chloro-3-hydroxy-s-pyridinone) were detected only in the aqueous photolysis studies and their

c oncentrations increased with time during the duration of the studies. Based on the low toxicity

e stimated from ECOSAR, these three degradates (5 -chloro-3,6-dihydroxy-2 -pyridinyloxyacetic acid, oxamic acid, and (5/6)-chloro-3-hydroxy-s-pyridinone) will not be included in the for thcoming environmental fate and ecological risk assessment. . It should be noted that since the tr iethylamine portion of triclopyr TEA and the butoxyethanol portion of triclopyr BEE were
not m onitored in all fate studies, the fate of these two portions in triclopyr TEA and BEE remains unknown. Based on the chemical structures, triethylamine and butoxyethanol could be the potential degradates from triclopyr TEA and BEE, respectively. ECOSAR suggests that triethylamine and butoxyethanol have low toxicity, and are not included as stressors of concern at this time. However, additional assessment of triethylamine and butoxyethanol will be
pe rformed when those studies recommended for submission based on this Problem Formulation become available. Therefore, stressors of concern currently include Triclopyr Acid, TEA, BEE, TCP and TMP. The decision to include TCP and TMP were based on recent ECOSAR proje ctions of toxicity for degradates as well as data submitted to the Agency for Triclopyr acid, BEE, and the TCP degradate. The overall degradation pathway for the three active ingredients is provided in Figure 1 and a summary of environmental fate studies is provided in Table 6.

### 15

Figure 1. Degradation pathways fo r Triclopyr (Acid, TEA, and BEE)

### 16

Table 6. Summary of the fate studies for Triclorpyr (acid, TEA, and BEE)

OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID and Test Substance ) Study Results and Acceptability

835.2120 Hydrolysis 4 1879601(acid)

134174 (BEE) Stable at pHs 5, 7, 9 ( Acceptable )

Degrades to acid (t1/2 = 84 .0 , 9 .0 and 0.3 days in sterile pH 5, 7 and 9 solutions; t1/2 = 0.5 days in

non

- sterile natural water ) (Acceptable)

835.2240 Aqueous photolysis 41732201 (acid)

43007601 (BEE) Degrades rapidly (t1/2=0.4 days) (Supplemental)

T1/2 = 6.6 days (Acceptable)

835.2410 Soil photolysis 41323501 (acid)

4 4329901(acid) (Unacceptable)

T1/2=40 days (Acceptable)

835.4100 Aerobic soil

metabolism 40346304 (acid)

43837501 (degradate triethylamine

- HCl from TEA)

47293801 (BEE) T1/2 = 8 and 18 days in two soils ( Acceptable )

T1/2= 5.6 and 13.7 days in two soils (Acceptable)

Preliminary review suggested that BEE degradates rapidly to acid (t1/2= 0.3 and 0.7 days in two soils). Acid increased continuously to 83% at end of 9

- day study (In review).

835.4200 Anaerobic soil

metabolism --- ---

835.4300 Aerobic aquatic

metabolism 40479101 (acid)

43837503 ( d egradate triethylamine

- HCl from TEA) T1/2 = 142 days ( Acceptable )

T1/2= 9.3 days (Acceptable)

835.4400 Anaerobic aquatic

metabolism 43837502 (degradate

triethylamine

- HCl from TEA)

151967 (BEE) T1/2 = 2 years ( Acceptable )

Degrades rapidly to acid in two pH 5.7 and pH 6.3 soils (t1/2 < 1 day). Acid degrades slowly (t1/2 = 1,300 days). Soils were amended with ground alfalfa (Acceptable)

835.1230 835.1240 Adsorption/

desorption 4 0749801(acid)

42493901 (TCP) Koc 53

- 134 in 4 soils ( Acceptable )

Koc 149 in 4 soils (Acceptable) Leaching

--- --- 835.1410 Volatility

- laboratory

--- ---

### 17

OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID and Test Substance ) Study Results and Acceptability

835. 8100 Volatility Field

--- --

835.6100 Terrestrial field

dissipation 43033401 (BEE)

42730601 (BEE) 44030601(acid/TCP/TMP storage stability data) T1/2 = 1.1 days (Acceptable)

T1/2 = 39 days (Acceptable)

835.6200 A quatic Field

Dissipation 43955901(TEA)

44198101 (TMP storage data)

41714304 (TEA) 41714305 (TEA) 44456102 (TEA) 44456103 (TEA) 44456104 (TEA) 4403 9301 ( sto rage stability data) T1/2s are 2.2 and 7.6 days 2 in rice water phase at two sites; 2.9 and 7.6 days in rice soil phase at two sites (Acceptable)

Supplemental Supplemental Supplemental Supplemental Supplemental Acceptable

835.6300 Forest Field

Dissipation 43011601 (BEE)

44039301 (storage stability data) Acceptable

850.6100 Analytical method in

water and sediment (ECM/ILV) 44456105

44456106 44456109 44456110 44456111 In review In review In review In review In review

850.1730 Fish BCF 44015101 (acid; bluegill)

41714307 (TEA; crayfish) Preliminary review indicates BCF of triclopyr acid in whole fish is 0.2 whereas BCF of total residues in whole fish is 0.8 (In review)

BCF 0.5

- 1.1 in whole fish (Unacceptable)

### 18

a. Transformation Products

The major organic degradates of triclopyr acid, TEA and BEE in submitted environmental fate studies were triclopyr acid, 3,5,6-Trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP), 3,5,6-Trichloro-2

- methoxypyridine (TMP), 5-chloro-3,6-dihydroxy-2 -pyridinyloxyacetic acid, oxamic acid, and (5/6)-chloro-3-hydroxy-s-pyridinone. In the field dissipation studies for triclopyr TEA and BEE, three degradates (acid, TCP and TMP) were monitored. Since the fate of the triethylamine part of the triclopyr TEA molecule and the butoxyethanol of the triclopyr BEE molecule was not moni tored in all fate studies, the formation of triethylamine and 2-butoxyethanol could not be confirmed; however, it is expected to occur (see details in Table 7 below).

### 19

Table 7. Fate Properties of Triclopyr (Acid), Triclopyr TEA, and Triclopyr BEE and their Environmental Degradates



### Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Guideline Number Ref.

(MRID) Maximum %AR

(day) Final %AR

(study length)
PARENT Triclopyr (Triclopyr acid) IUPAC: 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridyloxyacetic acid

CAS: 2

- [(3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridinyl)oxy]acetic acid CAS No.: 55335

- 06

- 3 Formula: C 7 H 4 Cl 3 NO 3 MW: 256.5 g/mol SMILES: OC(=O)COc1nc(Cl)c(Cl)cc1Cl

Triclopyr TEA IUPAC: 2

- [(3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridyl)oxy]acetic

acid;triethylammonium CAS: Triclopyr Triethylamine salt CAS No.: 57213

- 69

- 1 Formula: C 13 H 20 Cl 3 N 2 O 3 MW: 358.6 g/mol SMILES: 

### [ H][N+](CC)(CC)CC.c1c(c(nc(c1Cl)Cl)OCC(=O)O)Cl

### 20 Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Guideline Number Ref.

(MRID) Maximum %AR

(day) Final %AR

(study length) Triclopyr BEE, (Triclopyr 2

- butoxyethyl ester, Triclopyr butoxyethyl ester] IUPAC: 2

- Butoxyethyl 3,5,6

- trichloro

- 2

-

pyridyloxyacetate. 2

- Butoxyethyl [(3,5,6

- trichloropyridin

- 2

- yl)oxy]acetate CAS: 2

- Butoxyethyl [(3,5,6

- trichloro

- 2

- pyridinyl)oxy]acetate. Acet ic acid, [(3,5,6

- trichloro

- 2

- pyridinyl)oxy)

- , 2

- butoxyethyl ester CAS No.: 64700

- 56

- 7 Formula: C 13 H 16 Cl 3 NO 4 MW: 356.6 g/mol SMILES: CCCCOCCOC(=O)COc1nc(Cl)c(Cl)cc1Cl
TRANSFORMATION PRODUCTS Triclopyr (Triclopyr acid) IUPAC: 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridyloxyacetic acid

CAS: 2

- [(3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridinyl)oxy]acetic acid CAS No.: 55335

- 06

- 3 Formula: C 7 H 4 Cl 3 NO 3 MW: 256.5 g/mol See above 835.2120 134174 BEE degrades to triclopyr acid (54.4% at Days 10 at pH 7) -

### 21 Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Guideline Number Ref.

(MRID) Maximum %AR

(day) Final %AR

(study length)

SMILES: OC(=O)COc1nc(Cl)c(Cl)cc1Cl 835.4400 151967 BEE rapidly degrades to triclopyr acid (100% at Day 1) 75% at the end of study (365 days)

835.6100 43955901 TEA dissipated in rice field with half

- life of 12 days in soil and 8 days in flood water. Highest

conc. (0.3 ppb) in water was at Days 29).

835.6200 44456104 TEA dissipated in a pond with half

- life of 6 days in water and 4.4 days in sediment. The highest conc. of triclopyr acid in water was 2.4 ppm at Day 0).

TCP IUPAC: 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol

CAS: 3,5,6

- Trichloropyridinol CAS No.: 6515

- 38

- 4 Formula: C 5 H 2 Cl 3 NO MW: 198.4 g/mol SMILES: Oc1nc(Cl)c(Cl)cc1Cl 835.2410 44329901 5.1% (Days 19) under natural sunlight in CA 4.6% (Days 31) under natural sunlight in CA

835.4100 40346304 11% in silt loam (Days 28) 26% in silty clay loam (Days 14)
835.4300 40479101 4% (Days 30)

- 835.4400 0015167 26% (Days 365)

-

835.6100 42730601 BEE dissipated in the field with half

- life of two weeks. TCP was detected only in 0

- 6” soil.

835.6100 43033401 BEE dissipated in the field with half

- life of 1.1

### 22 Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Guideline Number Ref.

(MRID) Maximum %AR

(day) Final %AR

(study length) days. TCP was detected only in 0

- 12” soil.

835.6100 43955901 TEA dissipated in rice field with half

- life of 12 days in soil and 8 days in flood water. Highest

conc. (0.003 ppb) in water was at Days 29.

835.6200 44456104 TEA dissipated in a pond with half

- life of 6 days in water and 4 days in sediment. Highest conc. (5.5 ppb) in water was at Day 0).

850.1710 44015101 Preliminary review indicates that triclopyr acid (which is the test substance) accounted for 24.2% and TCP accounted for 23.6% of residues in the Days 7 whole fish extracts. TMP IUPAC: 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- methoxypyridine

CAS: Pyridine, 2,3,5

- trichloro

- 6

- methoxy

- pyridine Formula: C 6 H 4 Cl 3 NO MW: 212 g/mol SMILES: COc1c(cc(c(n1)Cl)Cl)Cl 835.4100 40346304 8% in silty loam (Days 56) 5% in silty clay loam (Days 28) -

835.6100 42730601 BEE dissipated in the field with half

- life of two weeks. TMP was detected only in 0

- 6” soil.

### 23 Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Guideline Number Ref.

(MRID) Maximum %AR

(day) Final %AR

(study length)

835.6100 43033401 BEE dissipated in the field with half

- life of 1.1 days. TMP was detected only in 0

- 12” soil.

835.6100 43955901 TEA dissipated in rice field with half

- life of 12 days in soil and 8 days in flood water. Highest conc. (0.0004 ppb) in water was at Days 29.

835.6200 44456104 TEA dissipated in a pond with half

- life of 6 days in water and 4 days in sediment. Highest conc. (2.2 ppb) in water was at Day 1).

850.1710 44015101 Preliminary review indicates that TMP accounted for 0.4% of residues in the whole fish extracts. 5

- Chloro

- 3,6

- dihydroxy

- 2

- pyridinyloxyacetic acid IUPAC: 2

- [(5

- chloro

- 3,6

- dihydroxy

- 2

-

pyridyl)oxy]acetic acid Formula: C 7 H 6 ClNO 5 MW: 219.57 g/mol SMILES: c1c(c(nc(c1Cl)O)OCC(=O)O)O 835.2240 41732201 Continuously increased to 38% at the end of 12

- hour study in sterile pH 7 water (mercury l amp)

Continuously increased to 48% at the end of 13

- hour study in sterile pH 7 water (natural sunlight) -

### 24 Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Guideline Number Ref.

(MRID) Maximum %AR

(day) Final %AR

(study length)
Oxamic acid IUPAC: 2

- Amino

- 2

- oxoacetic acid

CAS No.: 471

- 47

- 6 Formula: C 2 H 3 NO 3 MW: 89.05 g/mol SMILES: O=C(O)C(=O)N 835.2240 41732201 Continuously increased to 12% at the end of 24

- hour study in sterile river water (mercury l amp)

Continuously increased to 16% at the end of 56

- hour study in sterile river water (natural sunlight) -

(5/6)

- Chloro

- 3

- hydroxy

- s

pyridinone IUPAC: 5,6

- Dichloro

- 3

- hydroxy

- 3H

- pyridin

- 2

- one

Formula: C 5 H 3 Cl 2 NO 2 MW: 179.98 g/mol SMILES: C1=C(C(=NC(=O)C1O)Cl)Cl 835.2240 43007601 Continuously increased to 17% at the end of 30

- day study in sterile pH 5 solution (natural sunlight) -

Triethylamine IUPAC: N,N

- Diethylethanamine

CAS No: 121

- 44

- 8 Formula : C6H15N MW : 101.2 g/mol SMILES: N(CC)(CC)CC A potential degradate from TEA. However, none of the fate studies monitored the formation and decline of the triethylamine portion in triclopyr TEA. Note: Triethylamine is a federal hazardous air pollutant (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/188polls.html).

IUPAC: Triethylammonium Formula: C6H16N MW: 102.1 g/mol SMILES: CC[NH+](CC)CC

2

- Butoxyethanol IUPAC: 2

- Butoxyethanol

Formula: C6H14O2 MW: 118.2 g/mol SMILES: O(CCCC)CCO A potential degradate from BEE. However, none of the fate studies monitored the formation and decline of the butoxyethyl portion in triclopyr BEE.

### 25



# 6. Receptors

The following summaries are based on the studies submitted by the registrants and reviewed by the Agency over a period of 35 years in support of Triclopyr actives. A complete table of all submitted aquatic and terrestrial organism toxicity data is included in T ables 17 and 18

.

A. Toxicity Summary for Aquatic Organisms :

Triclopyr Acid

Triclopyr acid was classified as practically non-toxic to fish and freshwater crustacean on an acute ba sis ( Table 8 ). A single study for the acid with freshwater algae, Sel enastrum capricornutum, 

### produced a 50% growth reduction effect at 32.5 mg a. i./L (ppm) for the technical a.i. No

e stuarine organism or chronic toxicity data for the acid has been submitted to the Agency.

Triclopyr TEA

Triclopyr TEA was classified as practically non -toxic to freshwater and marine fish and crustacea on an acute basis (Table 9)

. Chronic effects to freshwater fish and invertebrate were observed at concentrations greater than 100 ppm. Triclopyr TEA is slightly toxic to the marine mollusc (eastern oyster). The most sensitive algal species, Anabaena flos-aquae
, showed a 50% growth reduction at 5.9 ppm. The vascular aquatic plant, L emna gibba
, was less sensitive with and EC 50 

### of 19.5 ppm.

T riclopyr BEE

Unlike triclopyr acid and the TEA salt, triclopyr BEE was classified as highly toxic to freshwater fish a nd invertebrates and the marine mollusc (LC 50 

### /EC 50 

### levels from 0.35 to 0.45 ppm ; Table 10 ). The butoxyethyl ester was classified as moderately toxic to the estuarine shrimp. Generally, the a cute toxicity of triclopyr BEE to aquatic animals is two orders of magnitude greater than that observed for triclopyr acid or triclopyr TEA. Freshwater algal growth was 50% reduced at 0.1 ppm and vascular aquatic plant growth was 50% reduced at 0.88 ppm. Chronic effects to the freshwater fish were observed at 0.048 ppm. Chronic aquatic invertebrate data for the BEE have not been submitted to the Agency at this time.

T CP

The TCP degradate was tested and observed to be more toxic than the acid or TEA, but less toxic than triclopyr BEE ( Table 11 ). Test results showed slight toxicity to freshwater and marine fish and crustacea. It was observed to be moderately toxic to the marine mollusc (eastern oyster). Fifty percent reductions in growth were seen at 2.0 ppm for the freshwater algae, Anabae na flosaquae, a nd 8.2 ppm for the freshwater vascular plant, Lemna gibba

.

### 26

For reference 45% TEA products contain 32.3% acid equivalent and 44% products contain 31.8% acid equivalent. Common Triclopyr BEE products such as Garlon 4 at 61.6 % butoxyethyl ester contain 44.3% as acid equivalent. Technical Triclopyr BEE at 98% contains 70.4% acid equivalent. All results in following tables are expressed as active ingredient. Since the TEA disassoc iates rapidly to the Acid, the most sensitive toxicity value for either TEA or the Acid will be used in the forthcoming aquatic ecological risk assessment triclopyr TEA and the Acid. . For

a quatic risk assessment of Triclopyr BEE (which is mostly expected via spray drift), the toxicity

va lues shown for triclopyr BEE in Table 11 will be used. These toxicity values will be suppl emented with the receipt of any additional data requested of the registrant.

Table 8. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for Triclopyr Acid Taxonomic Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value

In PPM (mg ai/L) Toxicity

Classification Source

Freshwater fish 1 Acute Rainbow Trout

, Oncorhynchus mykiss LC 50 = 117 PPM

Technical Practically

non

- toxic 00049637

acceptable

Chronic Rainbow Trout or

Fathead minnow

, Pimephales promelas No Data

Freshwater invertebrates Acute Water Flea

, Daphnia magna EC 50 = 132.9 PPM w

technical Practically

non

- toxic 40346504

acceptable

Chronic Water Flea

,

Daphnia magna No data

Estuarine/ marine fish Acute /Chronic No Data

Estuarine/marine mollusc Acute No Data

Estuarine/marine
crustacean Acute /Chronic No Data

Aquatic plants and algae Vascular Duckweed

, Lemna gibba No data

Non

- vascular Freshwater algae,

Selenastrum capricornutum EC 50 = 32.5 PPM

NOEC = 7.0 PPM with technical 41736303 Supplemental

1 Freshwater fish may be surrogates for aquatic-phase amphibians.



### Table 9. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for Triclopyr TEA Taxonomic Group Study

Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value in PPM (mg ai/L) Acute Toxicity Classificatio

n Source

Freshwater fish 1 Acute Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss LC 50 = 240 PPM with

47.8 % ai Practically

non

- toxic 00062622

acceptable

Chronic Fathead minnow,

Pimephales promelas 28 D Early Life Stage

LOAEC= 162 PPM NOAEC= 104 PPM 00151958 acceptable

### 27

Taxonomic Group Study

Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value in PPM (mg ai/L) Acute Toxicity Classificatio

n Source

Estuarine/marine fish Acute Inland silverside, Menidia beryllina LC 50 = 130 PPM with

44.7% ai Practically

non

- toxic 41633703

acceptable

Freshwater invertebrate Acute Water Flea

, Daphnia magna EC 50 = 775 PPM with

64.7% ai Practically

non

- toxic 00151956

acceptable

Chronic Water Flea

,

Daphnia magna LOAEC= 149 PPM

NOAEC= 80.7 PPM with 44.9% ai 00151959 acceptable

Estuarine/ marine mollusc Acute Eastern Oyster ( Crassostrea virginica ) Larvae EC 50 =55.7

PPM Spat EC 50 =58 PPM with 43.8% ai Slightly toxic 40346606 acceptable

Estuarine/ marine crustacean Acute Grass shrimp

, Palaemonetes pugio LC 50 = 327 PPM with

46% ai Practically

non

- toxic 42646102

acceptable

Chronic No chronic data for estuarine crustacea

Aquatic plants and algae Non

vascular Bluegreen algae

,

Anabaena flos

- aquae EC 50 = 5.9 PPM

NOAEC = 2.0 PPM with 45% ai 41633706 acceptable

V ascular Duckweed, Lemna

gibba EC 50 = 19.5 PPM with

45% ai 41633709 sup plemental

1 Freshwater fish may be surrogates for aquatic-phase amphibians.

2 Toxicity endpoints presented, i.e.
, NOAEC or EC 50 , are the only ones available from the study.



### Table 10. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for Triclopyr BEE Taxonomic Group Study

Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value In PPM (mg ai/L) Acute Toxicity Classificatio

n Source

Freshwater fish 1 Acute Bluegill sunfish

, Lepomis macrochirus LC 50 = 0.36 PPM

with technical Highly toxic 42917901 acceptable

Chronic Rainbow trout

Oncorhynchus mykiss Early Life Stage

LOAEC = 0.048 PPM NOAEC = 0.026 PPM 43230201 acceptable

Estuarine/marine fish Acute Inland silverside

, Menidia beryllina LC 50 = 0.45 PPM

with technical Highly toxic 42053901 acceptable

Freshwater invertebrates Acute Water Flea

, Daphnia magna EC 50 = 1.7 PPM with

technical Moderately toxic 00151963

supplemental

Acute Water Flea

,

Daphnia magna EC 50 = 0.35 PPM

with 62.4% ai Highly toxic 43442603 acceptable

Chronic Water Flea

,

Daphnia magna No chronic data

### 28

Taxonomic Group Study

Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value In PPM (mg ai/L) Acute Toxicity Classificatio

n Source

Estuarine/marine mollusc Acute Eastern Oyster Crassostrea virginica EC 50 = 0.46 PPM

NOAEC < 0.30 PPM with technical Highly toxic 41971602 acceptable

Estuarine/marine
crustacean Acute Grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio LC50 = 2.48 PPM with

technical Moderately toxic 41971601

acceptable

Chronic No chronic data

Aquatic plants and algae Non

vascular Freshwater diatom,

Navicula pelliculosa 24 hr EC 50 = 0.10 PPM

NOAEC = 0.002 PPM with technical 42721102 supplemental

V ascular Duckweed, Lemna

gibba EC 50 = 0.88 PPM

NOAEC < 0.16 PPM with technical 42719101 acceptable

1 Freshwater fish may be surrogates for aquatic-phase amphibians.



### Table. 11 Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for TCP Degradate Taxonomic Group Study

Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value In PPM (mg ai/L) of TCP Metabolite Acute Toxicity Classification Source

Freshwater fish 1 Acute Bluegill sunfish , Lepomis macrochirus LC 50 = 12.5 PPM Slightly toxic 41829003 acceptable

Chronic Early Life Stage Rainbow trout

Oncorhynchus mykiss Submitted d ata was found

to be invalid 44997301 invalid 46033201 supplement

Estuarine/marine fish Acute Atlantic silverside

, Menidia menidia LC 50 = 58.4 PPM Slightly toxic 42245901 acceptable

Freshwater invertebrates Acute Water Flea Daphnia magna EC 50 = 10.4 PPM Slightly toxic 41829005 acceptable

Chronic Water Flea

Daphnia magna In review

- study lab

conclusions: LOAEC = 0.13 PPM NOAEC= 0.058 PPM 45861301

Estuarine/ marine mollusc Acute Eastern Oyster Crassostrea virginica EC 50 = 9.3 PPM Moderately toxic 42245903

acceptable

Estuarine/ marine crustacean Acute Grass shrimp

, Palaemonetes pugio LC 50 = 83.0 PPM Slightly toxic 42245902 acceptable

Chronic No data

Aquatic plants and algae Non

vascular Bluegreen algae,

Anabaena flos

aquae EC 50 = 2.0 PPM

NOAEC = 0.353 PPM 45312003 acceptable

V ascular Duckweed, Lemna

gibba EC 50 = 8.2 PPM

NOAEC= 1.02 PPM 45312002 acceptable

### 29 1 Freshwater fish may be surrogates for aquatic-phase amphibians.



### B. Toxicity Summary for Terrestrial Organisms

T riclopyr Acid

Triclopyr acid was classified as slightly toxic to birds on an acute oral basis with an observed oral LD 50 

### of 1698 mg ai/kg and slightly toxic on a dietary basis with an observed dietary LC 50 

### of 2934
ppm ( Table 12 ). Chronic effects (eggshell thickness) for the acid were noted at 200 ppm for the bobwhite qua il. Mammalian studies indicate that Triclopyr is practically non-toxic to the laboratory rat with and LD50 of 630 to 729 mg ai/Kg bodyweight. A two generation rat study with Triclopyr demonstrated an LEL of 250 mg ai/kg bodyweight/day with effects to litter size, bodyweight and reduced survival in F1 and F2 litters. The honeybee was not acutely sensitive with a contact LD50 of over 100 ug ai/bee.

T riclopyr TEA

Triclopyr TEA was classified as practically non-toxic to birds with an oral LD 50 

### of ov er 3000 ppm and a dietary LC 50 

### of 11,000 ppm ( T able 1 3 ). No avian reproduction studies were submitted for the TEA salt. The TEA salt was also not tested for the honeybee. Small mammal testing with the labor atory rat showed the TEA salt to be nearly non-toxic on an acute oral basis with and LD50 of 1847 mg ai/Kg of bodyweight. Terrestrial plant testing with the TEA 46 % technical showed 25% effects to vegetative vigor at application rates as low as 0.0076 lbs ai/A (sunflower) to > 0.33 lbs ai/A for less sensitive species such as corn. Early testing with the Garlon 3A formulation produced 50% adverse effect to sensitive plants at 0.029 lb ai /A (tomato and grape) to 0.691 lb ai/A for less sensitive species (peanut).

Triclopyr BEE

Triclopyr BEE was classified as slightly toxic to birds on an acute oral basis with and LD 50 

### of 735 mg ai/kg for the Bobwhite quail ( T able 14 ). On an acute dietary basis, triclopyr BEE was classified as practically non-toxic to birds, with an LC 50 

### of over 5401 ppm for the Mallard duck. Both studies were conducted using the technical grade of triclopyr BEE. No chronic avian studies have been submitted for the ester. Triclopyr BEE was found to be nearly non-toxic to thelaboratory rat with an LD50 of 803 mg ai/Kg of bodyweight. Triclopyr BEE was practically nontox ic to the honeybee with a contact LD 50 

### > 100 ug ai/bee for the technical grade. As might be expected, triclopyr BEE as the 62% ai Garlon 4 formulation displays effects to growth of juvenile terrestrial plants at very low rates of application ranging from 0.0089 for sunflower to 0.802 lbs ai/A for wheat. .

TCP

The TCP degradate data was based on studies conducted for support of triclopyr as well as chlorpyrifos. The TCP degradate was classified as practically non-toxic to birds on an acute oral and dietary basis with oral acute toxicity > 2000 mg ai/kg for Bobwhite quail and a dietary
tox icity LC 50 

### of > 5 620 ppm for Mallard duck ( Table 15 ). Tests conducted with the laboratory

### 30

rat show low toxicity with an acute oral LD50 of 870 mg ai/Kg Bodyweight. TCP was slightly

more toxic to the laboratory mouse with and LD50 of 380 mg ai/Kg of BW for male mice. No

a cute honeybee or terrestrial plant toxicity data has been received for TCP.
For terrestrial risk assessment, the most sensitive of the toxicity values for Triclopyr Acid, TEA, or BEE will be used, as shown in Table 12-1 4

.

Table 12. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for Triclopyr Acid Taxonomic Group Study

Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value (all units in terms of measured active ingredient) Acute

Toxicity Classification Source

Birds 1 Acute Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos LD 50 = 1698 mg ai/ k g of

bodyw eigh t Slightly toxic 40346401 acceptable

Sub

- acute dietary Bobwhite quail

,

Colinus virginianus LC 50 = 2934 mg ai/Kg

of diet Slightly toxic 40346403 acceptable

Chronic Mallard duck, Anas

platyrhynchos LOAEL= 200 mg ai/Kg

of diet NOAEL= 100 mg ai/Kg of diet 00031250 acceptable

Mammals Acute Oral Laboratory rat

, Rattus norvegicus LD 50 = 630 mg/ k g /BW

(females) Category III 00031940

Acute Inhalation Laboratory rat No data

Chronic Laboratory rat

Rattus norvegicus 2 gen reproductive

LOAEL =250 mg/ k g/day NOAEL= 25 mg/ k g/day Decreased litter size, body wt, and litter survival 43545701

Insects Acute

contact Honey bee

Apis mellifera LD 50 > 100 ug ai/bee Practically

non

- toxic 40356602

acceptable

Terrestrial plants Seedling

Emergence

or Vegetative Vigor Dicot No data

Monocot No data

1 Birds represent surrogates for terrestrial-phase amphibians and reptiles.



### Table 13. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for Triclopyr TEA 1 Taxonomic Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value

(a ll units in terms of measured active ingredient ) Acute

Toxicity Classification Source

Birds 1 Acute Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos LD 50 = 3176 mg ai/ k g Practically

non

- toxic 40346501

acceptable

### 31

Taxonomic Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value

(a ll units in terms of measured active ingredient ) Acute

Toxicity Classification Source

Sub

- acute dietary Bobwhite quail

, Colinus virginianus LC 50 = 11,622 ppm

diet (estimated) Practically

non

- toxic 4034650 3

acceptable

Chronic Bobwhite quail

, Colinus virginianus No Data

Mammals Acute Oral Laboratory rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) LD 50 = 1847 mg/ k g

(males and females) Category III 41443301

Insects Acute contact Honey bee

, Apis mellifera No data

- see acid

Terrestrial plants Seedling Emergence

With 46.5% Triclopyr TEA (33.3% AE equivalent) Dicot

– Sunflower, Helianthus annuus EC 25 > 1.0 lb ai/A

NOAEL = 1.0 lb ai/A 43129801 acceptable

Monocot

– Corn, Zea mays EC 25 > 0.333 lb ai/A

NOAEL < 0.333 lb ai/A 43129801 acceptable

Terrestrial plants Vegetative Vigor

With 46.5% Triclopyr TEA (33.3% AE equivalent) Dicot

– Sunflower, Helianthus annuus EC 25 = 0.0076 lb ai/A

NOAEL = 0.0041 lb ai/A 43129801 acceptable

Monocot

– Corn, Zea mays EC 25 = 0.176 lb ai/A

NOAEL = 0.111 lb ai/A 43129801 acceptable

1 TEA Molar equivalent = 1.40 for acid equivalent conversions



### Table 14. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for Triclopyr BEE Taxonomic Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value (a ll units in terms of measured active ingredient ) Acute

Toxicity Classificatio

n Source

Birds Acute Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus 21 day LD 50 = 735

mg/kg Slightly toxic 41902002 acceptable

Sub

- acute dietary Mallard duck, Anas

platyrhynchos LC 50 > 5401 ppm diet Practically

non

- toxic 41905501

acceptable

Chronic No data for any species submitted

### 32

Taxonomic Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value (a ll units in terms of measured active ingredient ) Acute

Toxicity Classificatio

n Source

Mammals Acute Oral Laboratory rat

, Rattus norvegicus LD 50 =803 mg/ k g

(males and females) Category III 40557004

Chronic Laboratory rat,

Rattus norvegicus 90 day LOAEL=28 mg/Kg/day NOAEL = 7 mg./Kg/day

Insects Acute contact Honey bee ( Apis mellifera L. ) LD 50 > 100 ug ai/bee Practically

non

- toxic 41219109

acceptable

Terrestrial plants Seedling

Emergence with Garlon 4 Dicot

– Alfalfa,

Medicago sativa EC 25 = 0.062 lbs ai/A

NOAEL = N.D. 43650001 acceptable

Monocot

– Onion, Allium cepa EC 25 = 0.0732 lb ai/A

NOAEL =0.003 lb ai/A 43650001 acceptable

Terrestrial plants Vegetative

Vigor with Garlon 4 Dicot

- Sunflower,

Helianthus annuus EC 25 = 0.0089 lb ai/A

NOAEL =0.004 lb ai/A 43650001 acceptable

Monocot EC 25 = 0.0089 lb ai/A

NOAEL < 0.089 lb ai/A 43650001 acceptable

1 Triclopyr BEE has a molar ratio of 1.39 to Triclopyr Acid which can be used to convert to Acid equivalents



### Table 15. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for TCP Degradate Taxonomic Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value (a ll units in terms of measured active ingredient ) Acute

Toxicity Classification Source

Birds Acute Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus 14 day LD 50 >2000

mg ai /kg bodywt Practically

non

- toxic 41829001

acceptable

Sub

- acute dietary Mallard duck, Anas

P latyrhynchos LC 50 > 5620 mg ai/Kg

diet Practically

non

- toxic 41829002

acceptable

Chronic No data

Mammals Acute Oral Laboratory rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) LD 50 = 794 mg/ k g

(males) Category III 00064938

Mammals Acute Oral Laboratory mouse LD 50 = 380 mg/ k g (males) Category II 00043243

Insects Acute contact Honey bee Apis mellifera L ) No data

Terrestrial plants Seedling

Emergence and Dicot No data

### 33

Taxonomic Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value (a ll units in terms of measured active ingredient ) Acute

Toxicity Classification Source

Vegetative Vigor Monocot

– No data



## a. Ecological Incidents

The Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS) is an OPP database that houses ecological incidents that have been reported to the Agency. When available, EIIS includes date and location of a n incident, type and magnitude of effects observed in various species, use(s) of pesticides known or suspected of contributing to the incident, and results of any chemical residue analysis o r other analyses conducted during incident investigation. EIIS incidents are categorized according to the certainty that the incident resulted from pesticide exposure. The Avian Monitoring System (AIMS) is a database administered by the American Bird Conservancy that contains publicly

a vailable data on reported avian incidents involving pesticides. Many of the incidents listed in thi s database are also in the EIIS.

EFEDs Incident Database had numerous incidents in which Triclopyr acid, TEA, or BEE products were applied and implicated in adverse effects. Over 100 incidents involving Triclopyr products have been recorded in the EIIS system. Most involved damage to non-target terrestrial and aquatic plants and one involved a fish kill near a rice field. Thirty four incidents with TEA produ ct applications were recorded in EIIS by the Agency. Many dealt with plant damage in conjunction with lawn care products and residential uses while 9 involved uses on rice. Nine incidents were recorded for Triclopyr BEE and all involved non-target plant damage. There were no incidents with terrestrial wildlife reported. All of these incidents will be further analyzed during the Registration Review process.

Exposure Pathways of Concern

Triclopyr products may be applied as a foliar spray by aerial or ground application equipment. For this reason both spray drift and runoff/erosion may be considered primary routes of exposure. Tr iclopyr products are systemic herbicides and therefore residues are expected to collect in plant ti ssues in leaf, root and stem areas of target plants and non-target plants exposed to drift. Degradation to the Triclopyr Acid form or the more persistent TCP degradate in or on plants, soils or water receiving runoff or drift can be expected within days. Degradation to the TCP de gradate in water is rapid. TCP is a persistent degradate.

Ma jor pathways for exposure to non-target organisms are summarized below:

Terrestrial Organisms

- Direct exposure to residues during application either dermally or via inhalation

- Exposure to applied residues on foliar surfaces from dermal contact

- Systemic adsorption by plants of residues through roots or foliar surfaces

### 34

- Dietary exposure through feeding on vegetation or insects that have been exposed during application either directly or via off target spray drift. - Ingestion of residues through drinking water sources such as puddles, irrigation ditches, canals, contaminated irrigation water or dew within or adjacent to the application site.

Aquatic or Semi Aquatic Organisms

- Exposure via water which has received direct application (aquatic vegetation control) or from spray drift for other uses

- Dermal exposure from spray drift in littoral areas (semi aquatic plants, amphibians and semi aquatic insects, and reptiles) near application sites

- Exposure to residues resulting from runoff originating on treated areas. Degradates, such as TCP, may be the more prevalent constituents of this runoff.

- Dietary ingestion of aquatic or semi aquatic plant tissues that have systemically adsorbed Triclopyr or TCP residues

- Because this chemical is applied directly to water (TEA) or to bogs, marshes, etc (BEE and TEA), d rinking water and dermal exposure are likely exposure pathways.

Triclopyr acid, Triclopyr TEA and Triclopyr BEE are considered non-volatile (see page 11, Table 5 ). The STIR (Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk) model has predicted that inhalation is an unlikely path for ground application at very high rates on turf. As triclopyr products may be applied aerially it would seem likely that exposed organisms could inhale aerial droplets directly. The SIP (Screening Imbibition Program) model has predicted drinking water may be a relevant exposure pathway for the Acid (major degradate of the TEA and BEE products).

SIP and STIR are described in detail at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/terrestrial/index.htm

.



# 7. Analysis Plan

a. Stressors of Concern

i. Ecological Risk Assessment

For the purposes of the forthcoming preliminary ecological risk assessment in registration review, the potential stressors of ecological concern are triclopyr TEA and triclopyr BEE, and their degradates (triclopyr acid which it is also an active ingredient, TCP, TMP, 5-chloro-3,6- dih ydroxy-2-pyridinyloxyacetic acid, oxamic acid, and (5/6)-chloro-3-hydroxy-sp yridinone). Triclopyr acid, TCP, and TMP were detected in various laboratory fate studies as well as in the field dissipation studies. Although TMP is a minor degradate, it was detected in

man y field dissipation studies. The other three degradates (5-chloro-3,6-dihydroxy-2-
p yridinyloxyacetic acid, oxamic acid, and (5/6)-chloro-3-hydroxy-s-pyridinone) were detected in the a queous photolysis studies and their concentrations increased with time during the duration of the studies.

### 35

Based on ECOSAR toxicity predictions the TMP degradate (3,5,6 -Trichloro-2 -methoxypyridine ) 

### and the potential degradate, Triethylamine, are predicted to display toxicity to aquatic organisms. The photolytic degradates (5-chloro-3,6-dihydroxy-2-pyridinyloxyacetic acid, oxamic acid and (5/6) -chloro-3-hydroxy-s-pyridinone)), and the potential degradates (Triethylammonium and butoxyethanol) are predicted to display low toxicity to aquatic organisms. A comparison tab le of ECOSAR predicted aquatic toxicity is included in the Appendix B.

Therefore, the stressors of concern for terrestrial and aquatic organisms are Triclopyr acid, Triclopyr TEA, Triclopyr BEE, TCP and TMP. Submitted ecological studies indicate that Triclopyr BEE is substantially more toxic to aquatic organisms than the salt, amine, and acid forms. Consequently, Triclopyr BEE will be considered separately for aquatic organisms, as has been indicated for 2,4-D, a herbicide with similar acid, amine, and ester forms. 4 

### For terrestrial scenarios, the most sensitive endpoint, regardless of the triclopyr form (ester, salt, acid) will be used in the risk assessment.

ii. Drinking Water

When EFED receives the fate studies for triclopyr acid, TEA, and BEE as requested in this PF, a ROCKS meeting and an updated drinking water assessment may be needed as part of the Registration Review process. If a new drinking water assessment is needed, EFED will includethe recently revised percentage crop area (PCA) factors as well as the newly-developed PRZMGW and SWCC model s to determine EDWCs in groundwater and surface water.



## b. Measures of Exposure

Estimates of Triclopyr residue levels on terrestrial surfaces will be produced through use of TREX modeling and actual foliar surface dissipation data for the Acid and the TEA, and independently the BEE if available.

Estimates of surface and groundwater monitoring exposure levels will be modeled using the latest SWCC modeling for scenarios determined to be of the highest concern. PFAM modeling will be uti lized for Rice uses. Groundwater exposure potential will be modeled using the latest version of the PR ZM-GW models. Monitoring programs will also be consulted for data regarding TCP or TMP detections in surface or groundwater.

EFED will use standard available models to evaluate potential exposures to aquatic and terrestrial organisms as described at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/models_db.htm

. In addition, EFAST and any additional available exposure models may be used to assess use in drains, drain lines, irrigation supply systems, waste water systems, sewage systems, sewer lines, and storm sewers. E-FAST is described in detail at http://www.epa.gov/oppt/exposure/pubs/efast.htm

.

i. Available Monitoring Data

4 http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA- HQ -OPP- 2012

- 0330 -0025

### 36

The Agency is aware of monitoring conducted by federal and state agencies and this source of

e xposure data will be considered in the assessment to the extent that data on Triclopyr and TCP are available. The California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) has been collecting surf ace water data on triclopyr for many years. Samples were taken in six California counties from March 1993 to March 2006. Out of 583 samples, 102 samples contained triclopyr. Other

ne w sources of federal or state monitoring data will be researched during the registration review
process.



## c. Measures of Effect

Toxicity data presented in Section 3 of this problem formulation will be used to calculate risk quoti ents. Any additional information submitted by the registrant or found in the open literature prior to conduct of the risk assessment will also be considered. The open literature studies are identifie d using EPA’s ECOTOXicology database (ECOTOX) (USEPA, 2007 c ), which employs a literature search engine for locating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife. The evaluation of both sources of data can also provide insight into the direct and indirect effects of pesticides on biotic communities from loss of species that are sensitive to the chemicals and from changes in structure and functional characteristics of the affected communities. Fo r the purposes of deriving risk estimates, the most sensitive endpoint among the stressors of concern will be used. For aquatic animals, this will generally be triclopyr BEE.



## 8. Endangered Species Assessments

Consistent with the Agency’s responsibility under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Agency will evaluate risks to federally listed threatened and/or endangered (listed) species from all registered uses of triclopyr Acid, Triclopyr TEA salt and Triclopyr BEE acid during registration review. The process for evaluating potential risks to listed species is further described
at http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/endanger/litstatus/riskasses.htm

. and also in the appendices of this document.



## 9. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

Triclopyr actives are not among the group of 58 pesticide active ingredients on the initial list to be

sc reened under the EDSP. Under FFDCA sec. 408(p) the Agency must screen all pesticide chemicals. Accordingly, EPA anticipates issuing future EDSP test orders/data call-ins for all
pe sticide active ingredients. Additional details are provided in the appendices of this document.

F or further information on the status of the EDSP, the policies and procedures, the list of 67 chemicals (actives and inerts), the test guidelines and the Tier 1 screening battery, please visit our

we bsite: http://www.epa.gov/endo/

.

### 37



## 10. Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps

a. Environmental Fate

Table 16 identifies environmental fate studies that offer data for each guideline requirement, as well as study classifications and whether or not further data are needed to support the risk assessment. Since the triethylamine part of triclopyr TEA in all available fate studies was not moni tored, the potential formation and decline of triethylamine is unknown. Although 2- butox yethanol could be a potential degradate, none of the fate studies had monitored the fate of the butoxyethyl part of triclopyr BEE. Therefore, the Agency recommends the registrant also investi gates the fate of the triethylamine part in TEA and the butoxyethyl part in BEE in the fate studies required in Table 16

. For example, the registrant should use triethylamine labeled TEA and butoxyethyl labeled BEE in two anaerobic soils.

Table 1 6 . S ubmitted Environmental Fate Data for Triclopyr (acid, TEA, and BEE)

OCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID and Test Substance ) Study Results and

Acceptability Are Data

Needed to Conduct Risk Assessment Type of Data Required and

Test Substance

835.2120 Hydrolysis 4 1879601(acid)

134174 (BEE) Stable at pHs 5, 7, 9

(Acceptable)

Degrades to acid (t1/2 = 84, 9 and 0.3 days in sterile pH 5, 7 and 9 solutions; t1/2 = 0.5 days in non

sterile natural water) (Acceptable) No N/A

835.2240 Aqueous

photolysis 41732201 (acid)

43007601 (BEE) Degradates rapidly

(t1/2=0.4 days) (Supplemental)

T1/2 = 6.6 days (Acceptable) Yes Mercury light was used in 41732201. A new study using triclopyr acid and xenon arc light is needed.

835.2410 Soil photolysis 41323501 (acid)

4 4329901(acid) (Unacceptable)

T1/2=40 days (Acceptable) No N/A

### 38

Table 1 6 . S ubmitted Environmental Fate Data for Triclopyr (acid, TEA, and BEE)

OCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID and Test Substance ) Study Results and

Acceptability Are Data

Needed to Conduct Risk Assessment Type of Data Required and

Test Substance

835.4100 Aerobic soil

metabolism 40346304 (acid)

43837501 (degradate triethylamine

- HCl from TEA)

47293801 (BEE) T1/2 = 8 and 18 days

in two soils (Acceptable)

T1/2= 5.6 and 13.7 days in two soils (Acceptable)

Preliminary review suggested that BEE degradates rapidly to acid (t1/2= 0.3 and 0.7 days in two soils). Acid increased continuously to 83% at end of 9

- day study (In review). Yes A new study using triethylamine labeled TEA and two soils is needed.

A new study using butoxyethyl labeled BEE and two soils is needed.

835.4200 Anaerobic soil

metabolism No data No data Yes New studies using triclopyr acid
, TEA , and BEE in two soils are needed (see labeling requirements in the aerobic soil metabolism section above for TEA and BEE )

835.4300 Aerobic aquatic

metabolism 40479101 (acid)

43837503 (degradate triethylamine

- HCl from TEA) T1/2 = 142 days

(Acceptable)

T1/2= 9.3 days (Acceptable) Yes A new study using butoxyethyl labeled BEE and two water sediment systems is needed.

A study using TCP as the test substance that was required in the RED is needed.

835.4400 Anaerobic

aquatic metabolism 43837502

(degradate triethylamine

- HCl from TEA)

151967 (BEE) T1/2 = 2 years

(Acceptable)

Degrades rapidly to acid in two pH 5.7 and pH 6.3 soils (t1/2< 1 day). Acid degrades slowly (t1/2 = 1,300 days). Soils were amended with ground alfalfa. ( Supplemental ) Yes A new study using butoxyethyl la beled BEE in one neutral or alkaline water/sediment system is needed. Note

– adding ground alfalfa to the test system is not recommended.

### 39

Table 1 6 . S ubmitted Environmental Fate Data for Triclopyr (acid, TEA, and BEE)

OCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID and Test Substance ) Study Results and

Acceptability Are Data

Needed to Conduct Risk Assessment Type of Data Required and

Test Substance

835.1230 835.1240 Adsorption/

desorption 4 0749801(acid)

42493901 (TCP) Koc 53

- 134 in 4 soils

( Acceptable )

Koc 149 in 4 soils (Acceptable) No N/A

Leaching

--- --- No N/A

835.1410 Volatility

laboratory --- --- No N/A

835.8100 Volatility Field

--- --- No N/A

835.6100 Terrestrial field

dissipation 43033401 (BEE)

42730601 (BEE) 44030601(acid/ TCP/TMP storage stability data) T1/2 = 1.1 days

(Acceptable)

T1/2 = 39 days (Acceptable) No N/A

835.6200 Aquatic Field

Dissipation 43955901(TEA)

44198101 (TMP storage stability data)

41714304 (TEA) 41714305 (TEA) 44456102 (TEA) 44456103 (TEA) 44456104 (TEA)

44039301(storage stability data) T1/ 2 are 2.2 and 7.6

days 2 in rice water phase at two sites; 2.9 and 7.6 in rice soil phase at two sites (Acceptable)

T1/2 in water are 0.5

- 7.9 days ( Supplemental ) T1/2 in sediment are 4.4

- 6.7days ( Supplemental )

Stable ( Acceptable ) No N/A

835.6300 Forest Field

Dissipation 43011601 (BEE)

44039301 (storage stability data) Stable ( Acceptable ) No N/A

### 40

Table 1 6 . S ubmitted Environmental Fate Data for Triclopyr (acid, TEA, and BEE)

OCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID and Test Substance ) Study Results and

Acceptability Are Data

Needed to Conduct Risk Assessment Type of Data Required and

Test Substance

850.6100 Analytical

method in
water , soil, and sediment (ECM/ILV) 44456105

44456106 44456109 44456110 44456111 In review

In review In review In review In review No N/A

850.1730 Fish BCF 44015101 (acid; bluegill)

41714307 (TEA; crayfish) Preliminary review

indicates BCF of triclopyr in whole fish is 0.2 whereas BCF of total residues in whole fish is 0.8. (In review)

BCF 0.5

- 1.1 in whole fish (Unacceptable) Yes The TEA fish study is waived due to low K ow
A fish study using butoxyethyl labeled BEE is needed due to its high Kow (Log Kow=4) and low water solubility (7.4 ppm at 25 o C)

N/A Compost

Dissipation No data N/A No Since triclopyr is less persistent than other pyridine herbicides (such as picloram, clopyralid, etc.), the compost dissipation study is not required. If needed, triclopyr PRA will bridge data from the compost studies required for other pyridine herbicide s.

### 41

Ecological Effects

Table 17 and 18 identify ecological effects studies by MRID that offer data for each guideline requirement, as well as study classifications and whether or not further data are needed in order to support a particular guideline for risk assessment. Although the ecotoxicity database is not complete for each of the active ingredients (Triclopyr acid, TEA, BEE), EFED will bridge toxicity data across the three active ingredients where applicable. In some cases, conservative assumptions (using the most toxic active ingredient) will be used. This will reduced the need for extensive ecotoxicity testing on each of the active ingredients. Rationale for the additional data requested is presented below the tables.

For the major degradate TCP, acute toxicity data are available for birds, laboratory mammals, freshwater fish, freshwater invertebrates and aquatic plants. This data is sufficient for the registration review risk assessment for triclopyr active ingredient s.

For reference 45% TEA products contain 32.3% acid equivalent and 44% products contain 31.8% acid equivalent. Common Triclopyr BEE products such as Garlon 4 at 61.6 % butoxyethyl ester contain 44.3% as acid equivalent.

Table 17. Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for triclopyr Acid, TEA salt, BEE, and TCP

OSCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classification and Results Data Needed

to Conduct Assessment? Type of

Data required
850.1010 Acute FW

Invertebrate 40346504

Water flea

, Daphnia magna 99.5%

Technical acid Acceptable

EC 50 = 132.9 PPM 1 No N.A.

00151959 Water flea

, Daphnia
magna 44.9 % TEA Acceptable EC 50 =1496
ppm No N.A.

00159956 Water flea

, Daphnia magna 64.7 % TEA Acceptable EC 50 = 775 PPM No N.A.

00151963 Water flea

, Daphnia magna 96.4 %

Technical BEE Supplemental

EC 50 = 1.7 PPM No N.A.

00151965 Water flea

, Daphnia magna 96.4 %

Technical BEE Acceptable

EC50=12 PPM No N.A.

43442603 Water flea

, Daphnia magna 62.3%

Garlon 4 TEP Acceptable

EC 50 = 0.35 PPM No N.A.

41205408 Water flea

, Daphnia magna TCP

Degradate Report ES

83L 1978 No N.A.

41829005 Water flea

, Daphnia magna 99.9 % TCP

Degradate Acceptable

EC 50 = 10.4 PPM No N.A.

### 42

OSCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classification and Results Data Needed

to Conduct Assessment? Type of

Data required
850.1025 Acute

estuarine mollusc 42646101

Oyster spat, Crassostrea virginica 46% TEA Acceptable Formulated EC50=58 PPM No N.A.

00062623 40346606 Oyster spat, Crassostrea virginica 43.8 % TEA Acceptable Larvae EC 50 = 55.7 PPM Spat EC 50 =58 PPM No N.A.

41971602 Oyster spat, Crassostrea virginica 96.1 % BEE

technical Acceptable

EC 50 = 0.46 PPM No N.A.

41969903 Oyster spat, Crassostrea virginica 62.9 %

Garlon 4 Acceptable

EC50 =0.32 PPM No N.A.

42245903 Oyster spat, Crassostrea virginica 99.9% TCP

Degradate Acceptable

EC 50 = 9.3 PPM No N.A.

850.1035 Acute

E stuarine /Marine Crustacea 00062623

40346406 Pink shrimp, Penaeus duorarum 43.8 % TEA Supplemental LC50 = 895 PPM No N.A.

00062623 40346406 Fiddler crab, Uca pugilator 43.8 % TEA Supplemental EC50 > 1000 PPM No N.A.

42646102 Grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio 46 % TEA Acceptable LC 50 = 327 PPM No N.A.

41971601 Grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio 96.1 % BEE

technical Acceptable

LC50 = 2.48 PPM No N.A.

41969902 Grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio 62.4 %

Garlon 4 Acceptable

LC50 = 1.7 PPM No N.A.

42245902 Grass shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio 99.9% TCP

Degradate Acceptable

EC 50 = 83 PPM No N.A.

### 43

OSCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classification and Results Data Needed

to Conduct Assessment? Type of

Data required

850.1075 Freshwater

Fish Acute 00049637

Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss and Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus Technical

acid Acceptable

LC50 = 148 PPM

– Bluegill And 117 PPM for Rainbow
trout No N.A.

40098001 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss and Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 43.5 % acid

formulation Supplemental

LC50 > 100 PPM both species No N.A.

00151956 Fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss and Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 64.7 % TEA Supplemental LC50s = 891 PPM Bluegill, 947 PPM Fathead minnow, and 552 PPM Rainbow
trout No N.A.

00151958 Fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas 44.9 % TEA Supplemental LC50 = 279 PPM No N.A.

00062622 Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 47.8 % TEA Acceptable LC 50 = 240 PPM No N.A.

00151963 Fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas BEE

technical Supplemental

LC 50 = 2.4 PPM No N.A.

00151965 Fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas BEE

Technical Supplemental

LC 50 = 2.31 PPM No N.A.

41736304 Coho salmon (fry and fingerling), Oncorhynchus kisutch 99 % BEE

technical Supplemental

data Not conducted to guideline standards No N.A.

### 44

OSCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classification and Results Data Needed

to Conduct Assessment? Type of

Data required

41971603 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss 62.9 %

Garlon 4 Supplemental

LC 50 < 2.7 PPM No N.A.

41971604 Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 62.9 %

Garlon 4 Supplemental

LC 50 = 1.3 PPM No N.A.

42884501 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss 97 % BEE

technical Acceptable

LC 50 =0.65 PPM No N.A.

42917901 Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 97 % BEE

technical Acceptable

LC 50 = 0.36 PPM No N.A.

43442601 Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 62 % Garlon

4 Acceptable

LC 50 = 0.44 PPM No N.A.

43442602 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss 62 % Garlon

4 Acceptable

LC 50 = 0.98 PPM No N.A.

ACC 229783 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss and Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 42 % TEA

and BEE formulation Acceptable

LC 50 = 1.46 PPM for Bluegill and 1.29 PPM for Rainbow
trout No N.A.

41205402 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss and Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus TCP

Degradate Supplemental

information No N.A.

41829003 Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus 99.9 % TCP

Degradate Acceptable

LC 50 = 12.5 PPM No N.A.

41829004 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss 99.9 % TCP

Degradate Acceptable

LC 50 = 12.6 PPM No N.A.

### 45

OSCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classification and Results Data Needed

to Conduct Assessment? Type of

Data required

44585404 Pacific salmon

several species Garlon 3A,

Garlon 4, BEE, TCP and TMP Degradates Open lit

supplemental data No N.A.

00028766 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss , Bluegill sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus and Goldfish, Carassius

auratus TCP

degradate Not useable

incomplete No N.A.

850.1075 Estuarine/

Marine Fish Acute 41633703

Inland silverside, Menidia beryllina 44.7 % TEA Acceptable LC 50 = 130 PPM No N.A.

41969901 Inland silverside, Menidia beryllina 62.9 %

Garlon 4 Acceptable

LC 50 = 0.45 PPM No N.A.

42053901 Inland silverside, Menidia beryllina 96.1% BEE

technical Acceptable

LC 50 = 0.76 PPM No N.A.

42245901 Atlantic silverside, Menidia menidia 99.9 % TCP

Degradate Acceptable

LC 50 = 58.4 PPM No N.A.

850.1400 Fish Early

Life Stage 00151958

Fathead minnow, Pimephales promelas 44.9 % TEA Acceptable LOAEC= 162 PPM NOAEC= 104 PPM No N.A.

43230201 Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss 97% BEE

Technical Acceptable

LOAEC = 0.048 PPM NOAEC = 0.026 PPM No N.A.

44997301 and 46033201 amended Rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss 99.7% TCP

Degradate Unacceptable Yes further data needed with TCP degradate

### 46

OSCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classification and Results Data Needed

to Conduct Assessment? Type of

Data required

850.1300 Freshwater

Aquatic Invertebrate Chronic 00151959

Waterflea, Daphnia
magna 44.9 % TEA Acceptable LOAEC= 149 PPM NOAEC= 80.7 PPM No N.A.

45861301 Waterflea, Daphnia
magna TCP

Degradate In review Yes*

Waterflea, Daphnia
magna Triclopyr

BEE No data Yes Data needed with Triclopyr BEE technical

850.1350 Estuarine/

Marine Invertebrate Lifecycle Toxicity No data BEE technical No data Yes Data needed with Mysid and Triclopyr BEE technical

850.4400 Aquatic

Plant Vascular 41633709

Duckweed, Lemna gibba 45 % TEA Supplemental EC 50 = 19.5 PPM No N.A.

41736302 Duckweed, Lemna gibba 45 % TEA

Garlon 3 Acceptable

EC 50 = 24.4 PPM No N.A.

42719101 Duckweed, Lemna gibba 97 % BEE

technical Acceptable

EC 50 = 0.88 PPM No N.A.

43230310 Duckweed, Lemna gibba Access BEE

9%/ Picloram IOE 4.7% mix Acceptable

EC 50 = 99.8 PPM No Considered a Picloram product

45312002 Duckweed, Lemna gibba 99.7 % TCP

Degradate Acceptable E

C 50 = 8.2 PPM No

850.5 400 Aquatic

Plant Non

Vascular 41736303

Green algae

, Selenastrum capricornutum 98.8%

Technical acid Supplemental

EC 50 = 32.5 PPM NOEC = 7.0 PPM No N.A.

41633705 Green algae

, Selenastrum capricornutum 45 % TEA Acceptable EC 50 = 39.1 PPM No N.A.

41633704 Green algae

, Selenastrum capricornutum 61.3 % BEE

Garlon 4 Acceptable

EC 50 = 5.6 PPM No N.A.

### 47

OSCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classification and Results Data Needed

to Conduct Assessment? Type of

Data required

42645901 Green algae

, Selenastrum capricornutum Access

=Triclopyr BEE 9%/ Picloram IOE 4.7% mix Supplemental

EC 50 = 4.86 PPM No Considered a Picloram product

45312001 Green algae

, Selenastrum capricornutum 99% TCP

Degradate Acceptable

EC 50 = 2. 9 PPM No

45312003 Bluegreen algae

, Anabaena flos

aquae 99% TCP

degradate Acceptable

EC 50 = 2.0 PPM No

42721101 Bluegreen algae

, Anabaena flos

aquae 97%

Technical BEE Supplemental

EC 50 = 1.97 PPM No N.A.

41633706 Bluegreen algae

, Anabaena flos

aquae 45 %TEA Acceptable EC 50 = 5.9 PPM No N.A.

43230307 Bluegreen algae

, Anabaena flos

aquae Access =

BEE 9% Picloram IOE 4.7% Not

Acceptable No Considered a Picloram product

41633708 Freshwater diatom

, Navicula pelliculosa 45 % TEA Acceptable EC 50 = 15.3 PPM No N.A.

42721102 Freshwater diatom

, Navicula pelliculosa 97%

Technical BEE Supplemental

24 hr EC 50 = 0.10 PPM No N.A.

43230301 Freshwater diatom

, Navicula pelliculosa Access

=Triclopyr BEE 9%/Picloram IOE 4.7% Not

Acceptable No Considered a Picloram product

41633707 Marine diatom

, Skeletonema

costatum 45 % TEA Supplemental EC 50 = 14.9 PPM No N.A.

42721103 Marine diatom

, Skeletonema

costatum 97%

Technical BEE Supplemental

EC 50 = 1.17 PPM No N.A.

### 48

OSCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classification and Results Data Needed

to Conduct Assessment? Type of

Data required

43230304 Marine diatom

, Skeletonema

costatum Access

=Triclopyr BEE 9%/ Picloram IOE 4.7% mix Not

acceptable No Considered a Picloram product

1 

### PPM = mg ai/L * considered a data gap pending review of the submitted study.

Table 18. Submitted Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data for Triclopyr Acid, TEA, BEE and TCP

OSCPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classifications and results Further

Data Needed? Type of Data

Required

850.2100 Avian Oral

Acute 40346401 Mallard

duck, Anas platyrhynchos Technical

acid Acceptable

LD 50 =1698 Mg ai/Kg bw No N.A.

00134178 Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos 64.7 TEA Supplemental LD 50 =3175 Mg ai/Kg bw No N.A.

40346501 Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos 64.7 TEA Acceptable LD 50 =3176 Mg ai/Kg bw No N.A.

41902002 Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus 96.1 %

BEE technical Acceptable

LD 50 =735 No N.A.

4190200 3 Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus 62.9 %

Garlon 4 Acceptable

LD 50 =849.2 No N.A.

41829001 Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus TCP

Degradate Acceptable

LD 50 > 2000 mg ai/Kg No N.A.

00028759 Domestic chicken TCP

Degradate Supplemental

LD 50 > 1000 Mg si/Kg No N.A.

Passerine Species Triclopyr

Acid No Data Yes An acute, oral toxicity study with a passerine species is requested with Triclopyr Acid 850.2300 Avian Acute

Dietary 00031249 Mallard

duck, Anas platyrhynchos 99 %

Technical acid Acceptable

LC 50 >5620 PPM No N.A.

40346403 Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus Technical

acid Acceptable

LC 50 = 2934 PPM No N.A.

### 49

OSCPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classifications and results Further

Data Needed? Type of Data

Required

00049638 Coturnix quail, Coturnix coturnix TEA

technical Supplemental

LC 50 = 3272 PPM No N.A.

40346502 Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos 64.7 % TEA Acceptable LC 50 > 10
, 000 PPM No N.A.

40346503 Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus 64.7 %

TEA Acceptable

LC 50 >10,000 PPM No N.A.

00134179 Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos 93 % BEE

technical Acceptable

LC 50 >10,000 PPM No N.A.

00134180 Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus 93 % BEE

technical Acceptable

LC 50= 9026 PPM No N.A.

4190550 1 Bobwhite quail

, Colinus virginianus 96.1%

BEE technical Acceptable

LC 50 = 5401 PPM No N.A.

4190550 2 Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos 96.1 %

BEE technical Acceptable

LC 50 >5401 PPM No N.A.

41829002 Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos TCP

degradate Supplemental

LC 50 > 5620 PPM No N.A.

850.2300 Avian

Reproduc

tio n 0003125 0 Mallard

duck, Anas platyrhynchos 99%

Technical acid Acceptable

LOAEL=200 PPM No N.A.

0003125 1 Bobwhite quail, Colinus virginianus 99%

Technical acid Supplemental

LOAEL>500 PPM No N.A.

850.3020 Honeybee

Acute 40356602 Honeybee,

Apis mellifera 99.2%

Technical acid Acceptable

>100 ug ai/bee No N.A.

41219109 Honeybee, Apis mellifera 97.7%

Technical BEE Acceptable

> 100 ug ai/bee No N.A.

42625901 Honeybee, Apis mellifera Access =

BEE 9% Picloram EHE 4.7% Acceptable

>25 ug form./bee No Considered a Picloram product

850.3030 Honeybee

Residues on Foliage N.A. N.A. No data No N.A.

Non

Guideline Honeybee

Oral Acute N.A. N.A. No data Yes 48 hour honeybee oral

### 50

OSCPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classifications and results Further

Data Needed? Type of Data

Required

Non

Guideline Honeybee

Chronic Oral Toxicity Test N.A. N.A. No data Yes 10 day oral honeybee
exposure

Non

Guideline Honeybee

Larvae Chronic Toxicity N.A. N.A. No data Yes 21 day chronic exposure test

850.3040, OECD 75 Higher Tier

Bee Studies * N.A. N.A. No data, Condition

ally Required residue and/or

colony

- level effects studies

850.4400 Terrestrial

Plants Tier I Seedling Emergence 41734301 Ten

Species Tier I Seedling Emergence 63.7 %

BEE Acceptable

EC25 < 9.0 lb ai/A all species No N.A.

41734301 Ten Species Tier I Seedling Emergence 45.2 %

TEA Acceptable

EC25 < 8.0 lb ai/A all species No N.A.

41296501 Species Tier I Seedling Emergence Access 9%

Triclopyr BEE with 4.7% Picloram Supplemental

Drybean EC25 = 0.000004 lb ai/A No Considered a Picloram product

850.4450 Terrestrial

Plants Tier I Vegetative Vigor 41784401 Ten

Species Tier I Vegetative Vigor 45.2 %

TEA Acceptable

EC25<9.0 lb ai/A all species No N.A.

417 343 01 Ten Species Tier I Vegetative Vigor 63.7 %

BEE Acceptable

EC25<8.0 lb ai/A all species No N.A.

41296501 Species Tier I Vegetative Vigor Access 9%

Triclopyr BEE with 4.7% Picloram Supplemental

Soybean EC25 = 0.0002 lb ai/A No Considered a Picloram product

850.4400 Terrestrial

Plants Tier II Seedling Emergence 43129801 Ten

Species Tier II Seedling Emergence 46.5 %

TEA salt Acceptable

Corn EC25>0.333 lb ai/A No N.A.

43276601 Tier II Seedling Emergence Access 9%

Triclopyr BEE with 4.7% Picloram Acceptable

Lima bean EC25 0.00042 lb ai/A No Considered a Picloram product

### 51

OSCPP Guideline Data

Requirement Submitted Studies

(MRID) Test

Material Study

Classifications and results Further

Data Needed? Type of Data

Required

43650001 Ten Species Tier II Seedling Emergence 62.2%

Garlon 4 Triclopyr BEE Acceptable

Alfalfa EC25=0.062 lb ai/A No N.A.

850.4150 Terrestrial

Plants Tier II Vegetative Vigor 43129801 Ten

Species Tier II Vegetative Vigor 46.5 %

TEA salt Acceptable

Sunflower EC25 = 0.0076 lb ai/A No N.A.

43650001 Ten Species Tier II Vegetative Vigor 62.2%

Garlon 4 Triclopyr BEE Acceptable

Sunflower EC25 =0.0089 lb ai/A No N.A.

Non

Guideline ACC 235248 Tier III Veg vigor

- foliar application

- in field Garlon 3A Acceptable No Field Study

useable information * Pending the results of laboratory studies on individual bees (Tier 1), additional data may be requested to address exposure and effects at the colony level, per USEPA’s bee risk assessment guidance (USEPA 2014).

### 52

Data Needed for Complete Assessment of Triclopyr Actives and Uses

Guideline Number: 

### 850. 1300 Study Title: Chronic Toxicity to Freshwater Invertebrate using Triclopyr BEE technical Rationale for Requiring the Data 

### Based on acute toxicity values to aquatic invertebrates, T riclopyr BEE is by far the most toxic form of the triclopyr active ingredients. Although BEE is expected to hydrolyze to triclopyr acid in pH 7 water (t1/2 = 9 days), this time is considered sufficient to elicit chronic effects on aquatic invertebrates. A lso, multiple applications are permitted on current labels. Therefore, since BEE is highly toxic to the w ater flea, Daphnia magna

, and is expected to be transported directly to water via spray drift, a study is required to determine the chronic toxicity o f BEE to freshwater aquatic invertebrates.

. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? The data will be used to characterize the potential chronic risk for t riclopyr BEE products

. How could the data change the Agency’s decision or impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? 

### The data could be used in quantitative risk assessment and thus may change the conclusions of that assessment. I t could change the general conclusions of the qualitative characterization of risks to freshwater invertebrate s, including endangered species

.

Guideline Number: 850.1300 Study Title: Chronic Toxicity to Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate using Triclopyr BEE technical Rationale for Requiring the Data 

### Based on acute toxicity values to aquatic invertebrates, Triclopyr BEE is by far the most toxic form of the triclopyr active ingredients. Although BEE is expected to degrade to triclopyr acid relatively rapidly (t1/2 < 9 days at pH 7), this time is considered sufficient to elicit chronic effects on aquatic invertebrates. Also, multiple applications are permitted on current labels. B ased on acute toxicity values which classify the Butoxyethyl ester as highly toxic to the Grass shrimp, Pal aemonetes pugio , uncertainties exist re gar ding the potential environmental exposure time for this active in higher pH marine water , and the use as a direct application near potentially sensi tive estuarine aquatic habitats

. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? The data will be used to characterize the potential chronic risk for Triclopyr BEE products How could the data change the Agency’s decision or impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? 

### The data could be used in quantitative risk assessment and thus may change the conclusions of that assessment. It could change the general conclusions of the qualitative characterization of risks to estuarine marine invertebrate crustacea.

### 53

Guideline Number Honeybee Larval Chronic Toxicity Testing with Triclopyr Acid technical 

### Rationale for Requiring the Data 

### The USEPA has recently developed guidance for assessing pesticide risks to bees ( 5 

### ). B ased on the systemic mode of action of triclopyr products, potential to accumulate in pollen, exte nsive outdoor end uses use patterns

, and expectation that the TEA and BEE products will eventually degrade to the Acid this study is requested. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? 

### This data will be used to further characterize the risk to developing honeybees from the acid as an active and also as a major degradate when used in terrestrial environments such as forest lands, pastures, rights of way and commercial turf

. How could the data change the Agency’s decision or impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? 

### The data could be used in quantitative risk assessment and thus may change the conclusions of that assessment. It could change the general conclusions of the qualitative characterization of acute risks to honeybee larvae from transport of triclopyr residues to the hive when used as currently labeled for vegetation control.

Guideline Number Honeybee Acute Oral Toxicity Testing with Triclopyr Acid technical 

### Rationale for Requiring the Data 

### Based on the systemic mode of action of triclopyr products, potential to accumulate in pollen, extensive outdoor end uses use patterns, and expectation that the TEA and BEE products will degrade to the Acid this study is requested with the technical acid.

. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? 

### This data will be used to further characterize the risk to honeybees from oral ingestion of the acid as an active and also as a major degradate when used in terrestrial environments such as forest lands, pastures, rights of way and commercial turf. How c ould the data change the Agency’s decision or impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? 

### The data could be used in quantitative risk assessment and thus may change the conclusions of that assessment. It could change the general conclusions of the quali tative characterization of acute risks to honeybee from oral ingestion of residues in pollen.

5 http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/science/efed/policy_guidance/team_authors/terrestrial_biology_tech_team/GuidanceA ssessingPesticideRisk2Bees.pdf

### 54

Guideline Number Honeybee 10 Day Chronic Adult Oral Toxicity Testing with Triclopyr Acid technical 

### Rationale for Requiring the Data 

### The USEPA has recently developed guidance for assessing pesticide risks to bees. Based on the systemic mode of action of triclopyr products, potential to accumulate in pollen, extensive outdoor end uses use patterns, and expectation that the TEA and BEE pr oducts will degrade to the Acid this study is requested with the technical acid

. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? 

### This data will be used to further characterize the potential chronic risk to adult honeybees from the acid as an a ctive and also as a major degradate when used in terrestrial environments such as forest lands, pastures, rights of way and commercial turf. How could the data change the Agency’s decision or impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? 

### The data could be used in quantitative risk assessment and thus may change the conclusions of that assessment. It could change the general conclusions of the qualitative characterization of chronic risks to honeybee adults from long term exposure to resid ues when used as currently labeled for vegetation control.

Guideline Number 850.2100 Avian Oral Toxicity test with passerine species using BEE technical 

### Rationale for Requiring the Data 

### A second species test for the Triclopyr BEE technical is requested based on outdoor end uses use patterns and expectation that acute exposure to BEE may occur and the somewhat greater acute toxicity of BEE vs. Triclopyr acid/TEA to birds. For outdoor uses FIFRA recommends that two species be te sted. Therefore, an acute, oral study with a passerine species is requested. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? 

### This data will be used to further characterize the risk of the BEE as an active and also the Acid as a major degradate result ing from uses in terrestrial environments such as forest lands, pastures, rights of way and commercial turf. How could the data change the Agency’s decision or impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? 

### The data could be used in quantitative ris k assessment and thus may change the conclusions of that assessment. It could change the general conclusions of the qualitative characterization of acute risks to birds from ingestion of triclopyr when used at high rates currently permitted for turf uses.



# 11. References

Below are some common references....

Jones, R.D. et al., 2000. Guidance for use of the Index Reservoir and Percent Crop Area Factor in Drinking Water Assessments (March 21, 2000). Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Arlington, VA.

### 55

USEPA. 1999. Guidance for Use of the Index Reservoir in Drinking Water Exposure Assessments. Arlington, VA.

USEPA. 2000. Drinking Water Screening Level Assessment. Part A: Applying a Percent Crop Area Adjustment to Tier II Surface Water Model Estimates for Pesticide Drinking Water Exposure Assessments. FQPA Science Policy Document .Public Comment Draft September 1, 2000. Federal Register: October 11, 2000 (volume 65, number 197). Electronic copy available at http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/trac/science/ .

USEPA. 2009. Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Tr ansport of Pesticides, Version 2.1. Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Arlington, VA.

U.S. EPA. 2012. Guidance for Residues of Concern in Ecological Risk Assessment. Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, U.S. Environmental Protection A gency. Arlington, VA.

U.S. EPA. 2003. Use of Regional Percent Crop Area Factors in Refined Drinking Water Assessments. US EPA Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED), Water Quality Technical Team (WQTT). Arlington, VA

USEPA. 2004. Overview of the Ecological Risk Assessment Process in the Office of Pesticide Programs . United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. Available at http://www.epa.gov/espp/consultation/ecorisk-overview.pdf

. U.S. EPA. 2012. Approval of PRZM-GW for Use in Drinking Water Exposure Assessments. Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Arlington, VA.

U.S. EPA. 2014. Implementation of the Surface Water Concentration Calculator for Use in EF ED. Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Arlington, VA.

### 56



## Appendix A

116001 (Triclopyr Acid) /116002 (Triclopyr TEA) /116004 (Triclopyr BEE) Fate-Chemistry Combined Bibliography

161-1 Hydrolysis

MRID Citation Reference

41879601 Cleveland, C.; Holbrook, D. (1991) A Hydrolysis Study of Triclopyr: Lab Project Number:

ENV91023. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco, North American Environ. Chem. Lab. 40 p.

134174 Bidlack, H. (1978) The Hydrolysis of Triclopyr EB Ester in Buffered Deionized Water

Natural Water and Selected Soils: GH

- C 1106. (Unpublished study received Nov 13, 1979 under 464

- 554; submit

- ted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, MI; CDL:241362

- A)



## 161-2 Photodegradation-water

MRID Citation Reference

41732201 Woodburn, K.; Batzer, F.; White, F.; et al. (1990) The Aqueous Photolysis of Triclopyr:

Lab Project Number: GH

- C 2434. Unpub

- lished study prepared by DowElanco. 133 p.

43007601 Havens, P.; Shepler, K. (1993) Photodegradation of (carbon 14)

- Tric lopyr Butoxyethyl

Ester in a Buffered Aqueous Solution at pH 5 by Natural Sunlight: Lab Project Number: 330W

- 1: 330W: ENV91090. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL West, Inc. and DowElanco, N. American Environmental Chem. Lab. 103 p.



## 161-3 Photodegradation-soil

MRID Citation Reference

41323501 Woodburn, K.; McGovern, P.; Shepler, K.; et al. (1989) Photodegra

- dation of Triclopyr

on Soil by Natural Sunlight: Project Number: GH/C/2250. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 85 p.

### 57

44329901 Concha, M.; Kennard, L. (1997) Photodegradation of (2,6

- (carbon 14))Triclopyr in/on

Soil by Natural Sunlight: (Final Report): Lab Project Number: 647W

- 1: 647W: ENV 97064. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL West, Inc. 110 p.



## 162-1 Aerobic soil metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

40346304 Acc 229781 Laskowski, D.; Comeaux, L.; Bidlack, H. (1977) Aerobic Soil Decomp osition of [carbon

14]

- Labeled 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- methopyridine: Laboratory ID: GHC

- 964. Unpublis hed study prepared by Dow Chem ical. 50 p.

43837501 Merritt, D. (1995) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of (carbon 14)

- Triethylamine: Lab Project

Number: ENV94074. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco's North American Environmental Chemistry Lab. 126 p.

47293801 Yoder, R. (2007) Degradation of Triclopyr BEE in Two US Soils under Aerobic Conditions.

Project Number: 060080. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Agrosciences LLC. 56 p.



## 162-2 Anaerobic soil metab.

MRID Citation Reference

151967 Laskowski, D.; Bidlack, H. (1984) Anaerobic Degradation of Triclo

- pyr Butoxyethyl Ester:

GH

- C 1697. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 40 P.



## 162-3 Anaerobic aquatic metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

43837502 Wolt, J. (1995) Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism of (carbon 14)

- Triethylamine: Lab Project

Number: ENV94086. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco's North American Environmental Chemistry Lab. 102 p.

151967 Laskowski, D.; Bidlack, H. (1984) Anaerobic Degradation of Triclo pyr Butoxyethyl Ester:

GH

- C 1697. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 40 P.



## 162-4 Aerobic aquatic metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

### 58

40479101 Cranor, W. and K.B. Woodburn (1987) Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism of ?Carbon 14|

-

Triclopyr: 35651. Unpublished study p repared by Analytical Bio

- Chem istry Laboratories, Inc. 48 p.

43837503 Merritt, D. (1995) Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism of (carbon 14)

- Triethylamine: Lab Project

Number: ENV94073. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco's North American Environmental Chemistry Lab. 100 p.



## 163-1 Leaching/adsorption/desorption

MRID Citation Reference

40749801 Woodburn, K.; Fontaine, D.; Richards, J. (1988) A Soil Adsorption/ Desorption Study of

Triclopyr: Project ID: GHC

- 2017. Unpublish

- ed study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 62 p.



## 164-1 Terrestrial field dissipation

MRID Citation Reference

42730601 Buttler, I.; Roberts, L.; Siders, L.; et al. (1993) Non

- Crop Right

- of

- Way Terrestrial Dissipation of Triclopyr in California: Lab Project Number: ENV91019. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco and A&L Great Lakes Labs. 228 p.

43033401 Petty, D.; Gardner, R. (1993) Right

- Of

- Way Terrestrial Dissipation of Triclopyr in North Carolina: Lab Project Number: ENV92049. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco Chemistry Lab. 125 p.

43955901 Poletika, N.; Phillips, A. (1996) Field Dissipation of Triclop yr in Southern U.S. Rice

Culture: Lab Project Number: ENV94015. Unpublished study prepared by A&L Great Lakes Laboratories, Inc.; North American Environmental Chemistry Laboratory, DowElanco; and Mid

- South Weed Scientists, Inc. 429 p.



## 164-2 Aquatic field dissipation

MRID Citation Reference

41714305 Woodburn, K. (1989) The Aquatic Dissipation of Triclopyr in Banks Lake, Washington:

Lab Project Number: GH

- C 2211: 1645

- 87

- 0070. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Ricerca, Inc. and A&L Great Lakes Laboratories. 163 p.

41714304 Woodburn, K. (1989) The Aquatic Dissipation of Triclopyr in Lake Seminole, Georgia: Lab

Project Number: GH

- C 2093. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 76 p. Actually TEA was applied, but degraded to acid.

44456102 Houtman, B.; Foster, D.; Getsinger, K . et al. (1997) Aquatic Dissipation of Triclopyr in

Lake Minnetonka, Minnesota: Lab Project Number: ENV94001: CMXX

- 94

- 0380: 13939. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco, Braun Intertec and The Dow Chemical Co. 527 p. {OPPTS 860.1400}

### 59

44456103 Foster, D .; Getsinger, K.; Petty, D. (1997) The Aquatic Dissipation of Triclopyr in a Whole

Pond Treatment: Lab Project Number: ENV95012. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco, ABC Labs. and A&L Great Lakes Lab. 306 p. {OPPTS 860.1400}

44456104 Houtman, B.; Foster, D.; Getsinger, K. et al. (1997) Triclopyr Dissipation and the Formation

and Decline of its TMP and TCP Metabolites in an Aquatic Environment: Lab Project Number: ENV96052: DE

- 05

- 96. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco, A&L Great La kes Labs., Inc. and Enviro

- Bio

- Tech, Ltd. 259 p. {OPPTS 860.1400}

44198101 Phillips, A.; Poletika, N.; Lindsay, D. (1996) Frozen Storage Stability of 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

-

Methoxypyridine in Soil Stored in Acetate Liners: Lab Project Number: ENV94015.01. Unp ublished study prepared by DowElanco. 44 p.



## 164-3 Forest field dissipation

MRID Citation Reference

44039301 Gardner, R. (1996) Response to EPA Review of Triclopyr Terrestrial and Forestry Field

Dissipation Studies: "Non

- Crop Right

- of

- way Terrestrial Dissipation of Triclopyr in California:" MRID 42730601: and "The Dissipation and Movement of Triclopyr in a Northern USA Forest System:" MRID 43011601: Lab Pr oject Number: GH

- C 4074: RES94045/RES94046/RES94154. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco's Global Environmental Chemistry Lab. 22 p.

43011601 Cryer, S.; Cooley, T.; Schuster, L. et al. (1993) The Dissipation and Movement of Triclopyr

in a Northern US A Forest Site Preparation Ecosystem: Lab Project Number: ENV91087: PM91

- 2502. Unpublished study prepared by Pan

- Agricultural Labs, Inc. 555 p.

92189037 Fontaine, D. (1990) Dow Chemical U S A Phase 3 Summary of MRID 41445001.

41445001 Fontaine, D. (1990 ) Dow Chemical U S A Dispersal and Degradation of Triclopyr within a

Canadian Boreal Forest Ecosystem following an Aerial Application of Garlon 4: Project ID. GH

- C2314. Prepared by DOW CHEMICAL U S A. 12 p.

92189038 Havens, P. (1990) Dow Chemical U S A Ph ase 3 Summary of MRID 41353201

.

Determination of Residues in a Forest Ecosystem Resulting from the Aerial Application of Garlon 4 Herbicide: Project ID: GH

- C2283. Prepared by DOWELANCO. 15 p.

44039301 Gardner, R. (1996) Response to EPA Review of Triclopyr Terrestrial and Forestry Field

Dissipation Studies: "Non

- Crop Right

- of

- way Terrestrial Dissipation of Triclopyr in California:" MRID 42730601: and "The Dissipation and Movement of Triclopyr in a Northern USA Forest System:" MRID 43011601: Lab Project Number: GH

- C 4074: RES94045/RES94046/RES94154. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco's Global Environmental Chemistry Lab. 22 p.

44039302 Havens, P. (1995) Response to EPA Review EFGWB#92

- 0111 : "Dispersal and Degradation

of Triclopyr within a C anadian Boreal Forest Ecosystem Following an Aerial Application of Garlon 4:" MRID 41445001: Lab Project Number: GH

- C 2314A. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco Environmental Fate Lab. 15 p.



## 165-4 Bioaccumulation in fish

MRID Citation Reference

### 60

44015101 Rick, D.; Kirk, H.; Fontaine, D.; et al. (1996) The Nature of Triclopyr Residues in the

Bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque: Lab Project Number: DECO

- ES

- 2761. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 64 p.

42090415 Woodburn, K. (1991) Response to Phase 3 Submission on Triethyl

- ammonium

Triclopyr...?Bioaccumulation in Fish|. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Environmental Tox & Chem Res. Lab. 11 p.



## Analytical Methods

44456105 Olberding, E. (1997) Va lidation Report for the Determination of Residues of Triclopyr,

3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol, and 2

- Methoxy

- 3,5,6

- trichloropyridine in Water by Capillary Gas Chromatography with Mass Selective Detection: Lab Project Number: RES94075: GRM 95.18. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 58 p.

44456106 Young, D.; Mihaliak, C. (1997) Validation Report for the Determination of Residues of

Triclopyr and Trichloropyridinol in Water by Immunoassay: Lab Project Number: RES94069: GRM 95. 11. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 50 p. {OPPTS 850.7100}

4445 6109 Harris, E. (1997) Independent Laboratory Validation of Method GRM 95.18

--

Determination of Residues of Triclopyr, 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol, and 2

- Methoxy

- 3,5,6

- trichloropyridine in Water by Capillary Gas Chromatography with Mass Selective Detection: Lab Project Number: QMAP97002: GRM 95.18. Unpublished study prepared by Quality Management and Analytical Services, Inc. and DowElanco. 93 p. {OPPTS 850.7100}

44456110 Emery, M. (1997) Independent Laboratory Validation of Method GRM 95.11

--

Determination of Residues of Triclopyr and Trichloropyridinol in Water Using Magnetic Particle

- Based Immunoassay Test Kits: Lab Project Number: 06

- 9708I: GRM 95. 11: RES94069. Unpublished study prepared by Minnesota Valley Testing Labs., Inc (MVTL) and DowElanco. 65 p. {OPPTS 850.7100}

44456111 Frederick, P. (1997) Independent Laboratory Validation of Method GRM 95.19

--

Determination of Residues of Triclopyr, 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol, and 2

- Methoxy

- 3,5,6

- trichloropyridine in Sediment and Soil by Capillary Gas Chroma tography with Mass Selective Detection: Lab Project Number: CSA05287: GRM 95.19. Unpublished study prepared by Central States Analytical and DowElanco. 117 p. {OPPTS 850.7100}

44456107 Olberding, E.; Foster, D.; McNett, D. (1997) Validation Report for th e Determination of

Residues of Triclopyr, 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol, and 2

- Methoxy

- 3,5,6

- trichloropyridine in Sediment and Soil by Capillary Gas Chromatography with Mass Selective Detection: Lab Project Number: RES94145: GRM 95.19. Unpublished study prep ared by DowElanco and The Dow Chemical Co. 68 p.

Other Studies The following fate studies (2

- butoxyethanol and TCP) are not listed in the

bibliography of Trichlopyr. They were submitted to other chemicals.

43799101 Batzer, F.R. 1995. Aerobic Soil metabolism of 14C

- 2

- Butoxyethanol. Laboratory Study

ID ENV94094. Unpu b lished study performed and submitted by DowElanco, Indianapolis, IN. (Submitted to 2,4

- D, butoxyethyl ester; PC Code 030052)

### 61

43799103 Batzer, F. (1995) Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism o f (Carbon 14)

- 2

- Butoxyethanol: Lab

Project Number: ENV94096. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco North American Environmental Chemistry Lab. 88 p. (Submitted to 2,4

- D, butoxyethyl ester; PC Code 030052)

43799106 Batzer, F. (1995) Aerobic Aquatic Meta bolism of (Carbon 14)

- 2

- Butoxyethanol: Lab

Project Number: ENV94096. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco North American Environmental Chemistry Lab. 88 p. (Submitted to 2,4

- D, butoxyethyl ester; PC Code 030052)

43509201 Shepler, K.; Racke, K.; Concha, M. (1994) Photodegradation of 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

-

Pyridinol on Soil by Natural Sunlight: Lab Project Numbers: 455W

- 1: 455W: ENV94027. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL West, Inc. 101 p. (Submitted to 

### PC Code 206900 (2(1H)

- pyr idinon, 3,5,6

- trichloro ))

42144912 Cranor, W. (1990) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of ?carbon 14| TCP: Lab Project Number:

36641. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Labs, Inc. 44 p. (Submitted to PC Code 059101 (chlorpyrifos))

42493901 Racke, K.; Lubinski, R. (1992) Sorption of 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- Pyridinol in Four Soils: Lab

Project Number: ENV91081. Unpublished study prepared by DowElnco. 44 p. (Submitted to PC Code 059101 (chlorpyrifos) and 

### PC Code 206900 (2(1H)

- pyridinon, 3,5,6

- trichlo ro ))

### 62



## Eco Effects Bibliographies PC Codes 116001, 116002, 116004, 2069000- Triclopyr Acid, TEA, BEE and TCP d egradate Combined 

## Ecoeffects

71 -1 850.2100 Avian Single Dose Oral Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference



### Triclopyr Acid studies

40346401 Wildlife International Ltd. (1976) Acute Oral LD50

-- Mallard Duck Triclopyr

Technical Final Repo rt: Project No. 103

- 156. Unpub lished study. 11 p.



### TEA Salt studies

134178 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.; Brown, R. (1978) Acute Oral LD50

-- Mallard Duck: Tri clopyr

ethylene Glycol Butyl Ether Ester: Project No. 103

- 175. Final rept. (Unpublished study received Nov 13, 1979 under 464

- 554; prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. and Washington College, submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, MI; CDL:241360

- B) PDF 2045559

40346501 Wildlife International Ltd. (1978) Acute Oral LD50

-- Mallard Duck Triclopyr

Triethylamine Salt: Final Report: Project No. 103

- 174. Unpublished study. 14 p. Triclopyr TEA salt= 116002 PDF 2045568
Triclopyr BEE Studies

41902001 Ormand, J.; Bell, C. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: Stability in Prepared Game Bird Starter

Ration: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 6. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co. 14 p. Stability in feed see 4192002

- 2003

41902002 Campbell,S.; Lynn,S. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: An Acute Oral Toxicity Study With the

Northern Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 9. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co. 25 p. 2022125

41902003 Campbell,S.; Lynn,S. (1991) Garlon 4 Herbicide: An Acute Oral Toxi city Study With

the Northern Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0224

- 6186

- 8. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife Interna t ional LTD. 22 p. Garlon 4 is Triclopyr BEE

. 2022102



## 71 -2 850.2200 Avian Dietary Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

Triclopyr Acid studies

31249 or 134177 Beavers, J.B.; Fink, R.; Brown, R.; et al. (1979) Final Report: Eight

- Day Dietary

LC50

-- Mallard Duck: Project No. 103

- 193. (Un

- published study received Apr 29, 1980 under 464

- 546; prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. in cooperation with Washington College, submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, Mich.; CDL: 242368

- B) 2035109

### 63

40346403 Wildlife International Ltd. (1976) Eight Day Dietary LC50

-- Bobwhite Quail

Triclopyr Technical Final Report: Project No. 103

- 155. Unpublished study. 11 p.



### Triclopyr TEA Salt Studies

40346502 Wildlife International Ltd. (1977) Eight

- day Dietary LC50

- Ma llard Duck, Triclopyr

Triethylamine Salt: Final Report: Project No. 103

- 171. Unpublished study. 13 p. 2045569

40346503 Wildlife International Ltd. (1977) Eight

- day Dietary LC50

- Bobwhite q uail Triclopyr

Triethylamine Salt: Final Report: Project No. 103

- 170 . Unpublished study. 14 p. 2045570

42090404 Mayes, M. (1991) Response to Phase 3 Submission on Triethylammonium

Triclopyr.... ?Acute Avian Dietary LC50 Test

-- Quail|: Lab Project Number: GHRC 130. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Tox & Chem Res. Lab. 4 p. Study response for project GHRC 130.
Triclopyr BEE Studies

41905501 Lynn, G.; Smith, G.; Grimes, J. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: A Dietary LC50 Study with the

Northern Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 10. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International LTD. 22 p. PDF 2022122

41905502 Lynn, S.; Smith, G.; Grimes, J. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: A Dietary LC50 Study With the

Mallard: Lab Project No: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 11. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International LTD. 21 p. PDF 2022122

134179 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.; Brown, R. (1977) Eight

- day Dietary LC50

-- Mallard Duck:

Triclopyr

- ethylene Gl ycol Butyl Ether Ester: Proj ect No. 103

- 173. Final rept. (Unpublished study received Nov 13, 1979 under 464

- 554; prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. and Washington College, submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Mid

- land, MI; CDL:241360

- C) PDF 2022124

134180 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.; Brown, R. (1978) Eight

- day Dietary LC50

-- Bobwhite Quail:

Triclopyr

- ethylene Glycol Butyl Ether Ester: Project No. 103

- 172. Final rept. (unpublished study received Nov 13, 1979 under 464

- 554; prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. and Washington College, submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, MI; CDL:241360

- D) PDF 2022123



## 71 -4 850.2300 Avian Reproduction

MRID Citation Reference



### Triclopyr Acid

31250 DOWCO 233 Beavers, J.B.; Fink, R.; Grimes, J.; et al. (1980) Final Report: One

- Generation Reproduction

Study

-- Mallard Duck: Project No. 103

- 192. (Unpublished study received Apr 29, 1980 under 464

- 546; prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd., submitted by Dow Chemic al U.S.A., Midland, Mich.; CDL:242368

- C) PDF 2035112

31251 DOWCO 233 Beavers, J.B.; Fink, R.; Grimes, J.; et al. (1979) Final Report: One

- Generation Reproduction

Study

-- Bobwhite Quail: Project No. 103

- 191. (Unpublished study received Apr 29, 1980

### 64 under 4 34

- 546; prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd., submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, Mich.; CDL:242368

- D ) PDFs 2035110 2035111

92189005 Mayes, M. (1990) Dow Chemical U S A Phase 3 Summary of MRID 00031251. One

generation Reproduction Study

- Bobwhite Quail: Dowco 233; Final Report: Project ID: 103

- 191. Prepared by Wildlife International Ltd.. 13 p.

92189006 Mayes, M. (1990) Dow Chemical U S A Phase 3 Summary of MRID 00031250. One

generation Reproduction Study

- Mallard Duck Dowco 233; Fina l Report: Project ID: 103

- 174. Prepared by Wildlife International Ltd.. 14 p.



### Triclopyr TEA Salt Studies

42090406 Mayes, M. (1991) Response to Phase 3 Submission on Triethylammonium Triclopyr....

?Avian Reproduction Test

-- Mallard|: Lab Project Number: GHRC 161. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Environmental Tox & Chem Res. Lab. 39 p. DOW Response



## 72 -1 850.1075 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Fish

MRID Citation Reference

Triclopyr Acid studies

62622 (found in 116002) Batchelder, T.L. (1973) Acute Fish Toxicity of Dowco 233 ... and Two Derivatives

.

(Unpublished study received Nov 4, 1975 under 464

- EX

- 46; submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, Mich.; CDL:233134

- G) PDF 2045567

44585404 Wan, M.; Moul, D.; Watts, R. (1987) Acute toxicity to juvenile pacific salmonids of

Garlon 3A , Garlon 4, tric lopyr , triclopyr ester, and their transformation products: 3,5,6

- trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol and 2

- methoxy

- 3,5,6

- trichloropyridine. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39:721

- 728. Open lit ECOTOX reference 12605


### Triclopyr TEA Salt Studies

151956 DOW Responses

42090407 42090408 McCarty, W.; Alexander, H. (1978) Toxicity of Triclopyr, Triethyl

- amine Salt to

Freshwater Organisms: ES

- 199. Unpublished study prepared by Environmental Research Lab., Dow Chemical U.S.A. 14 p. PDF 2045560 BG and RBT

151958 Mayes, M.; Dill, D.; Mandoza, C.; et al. (1983) The Acute and Chro nic Toxicity of

Triclopyr (...) Triethylamine Salt Solution to Fathead Minnows (...): ES

- 582. Unpublished study prepared by Environmental Sciences Research , Dow Chemical U.S.A. 18 p. PDF 2045561

151964 Batchelder, T. (1975) Environmental Analysis and Special Fish Toxi

- cities of Two

Triclopyr Formulations. Unpublished study pre

- pared by Dow Chemical Co. 20 p.

41714301 Barron, M.; Ball, T. (1989) Garlon 3 A Herbicide: Evaluation of the Toxicity to the

Channel Catfish (Ictalurus punctatus): Lab Pro

- ject Number: ES

- DR

- 0121

- 6064

- 8: ES

- 2097. Unpublished study pre

- pared by The Dow Chemical Co. 15 p. PDF 2045578

### 65

44585404 Wan, M.; Moul, D.; Watts, R. (1987) Acu te toxicity to juvenile pacific salmonids of

Garlon 3A , Garlon 4, triclopyr, triclopyr ester, and their transformation products: 3,5,6

- trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol and 2

- methoxy

- 3,5,6

- trichloropyridine. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39:72 1

- 728. OPEN LIT

92189007 Mayes, M. (1990) Dow Chemical U S A Phase 3 Summary of MRID 00151956.

Toxicity of Triclopyr, Triethylamine Salt to Freshwater Organisms: Project ID: ES

199. Prepared by DOW CHEMICAL U S A. 10 p. Registrant summary

92189008 Mayes, M. (1990) Dow Chemical U S A Phase 3 Summary of MRID 00151956.

Toxicity of Triclopyr, Triethylamine Salt to Freshwater Organisms: Project ID. ES

199. Prepared by DOW CHEMICAL U S A 10 p. Registrant summary

48939402 Wemhoner, U. (2006) GF

- 1883

- Ac ute Toxicity to Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus

mykiss) Under Flow

- Through Conditions. Project Number: 060394/OCR, 1072/010/108. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories (Europe). 55p. Triclopyr TEA + Aminopyralid TIPA salt

- 005209 In Review
Triclopyr BEE Studies

151962 ACC 259512 Ross, D.; Pell, I. (1981) The Acute Toxicity of Garlon 4E to Rain

- bow Trout (...):

Report No. DWC 336 (a)/81750. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre. 15 p.

151963 ACC 259512 Milazzo, D.; Batchelder, T. (1981) Evaluation of Garlon 4 Formu

- lation in the

Aquatic Environment: Report No. ES

- 426. Unpub

- lished study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 21 p. PDF 2022115

151965 Milazzo, D.; Batchelder, T. (1981) Environmental Screening of Chemicals: Garlon 4

Triclopyr EB Ester: Report No. ES

- 427. Un

- published study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 26 p. PDF 2022115

41714302 McCall, P. (1987) Simulation of the Aquatic Fate of Tri clopyr Buto xyethyl Ester and

Its Expected Impact on Aquatic Species: Lab Project Number: GH

- C 1916. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co. U.S.A. 30 p. PDF 2022099

41928901 Gorzinski, S.; Lehr, K.; Piasecki, D. et al (1991) Triclopyr Bee: Static Acute 96

- Hour

Toxicity to the Bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque: Lab Project Number: ES

DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 8. Unpubli shed study prepared by Dow Chemical Co. 35 p. PDF 2022106

41928902 Gorzinski, S.; Lehr, K.; Piasecki, D. et al. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: St atic Acute 96

- Hour

Toxicity to the Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 7. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co. 33
p. PDF 2022107

41971603 Gorzinski, S.; Lehr, K.; Piasecki, D.; et al. (1991) Garlon 4 Herbicide: Static Acute

96

- Hour Toxicity to the Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 022406168

- 4. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 33 p. PDF 2022114

41971604 Gorzinski, S.; Lehr, K.; Piasecki, D.; et al. (1991) Ga rlon 4 Herbicide: Static Acute

96

- Hour Toxicity to the Bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 022406186

- 3. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 33 p. PDF 2022113

42884501 Woodburn, K.; Rick, D.; Kirk, H. (1993) Triclopyr Bee: Acute 96

- Hour Flow

Through Toxicity to the Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum: Lab Project Number: DECO

- ES

- 2619. Unpublished study prepared by The Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry Research Lab., Dow Chemical Co. 31 p. PDF 2022126

### 66

42917901 Woodburn, K.; Hugo, J.; Kirk, H. (1993) Triclopyr BEE: Acute 96

- Hour Flow

Through Toxicity to the Bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque: Lab Project Number: DECO

- ES

- 2620. Unpublished study prepared by The Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry Research L ab. 31 p. PDF 2022127

43442601 Weinberg, J.; Hugo, J.; Miller, J. (1994) Evaluation of the Acute Toxicity of Garlon 4

Herbicide to the Bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque: Lab Project Number: DECO

- ES

- 2854. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chem ical Co. 25 p. PDF 2022131

43442602 Weinberg, J.; Hugo, J.; Miller, J. (1994) Evaluation of the Acute Toxicity of Garlon 4

Herbicide to the Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum: Lab Project Number: DECO

- ES

- 2853. Unpublished study prepared by The Do w Chemical Co. 25
p. PDF 2022130

134181 ACC 259511 McCarty, W.; Alexander, H. (1978) Toxicity of Triclopyr, Ethylene Glycol Butyl

Ether Ester to Freshwater Organisms. (Unpublished study received Nov 13, 1979 under 464

- 554; submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A ., Midland, MI; CDL:241360

- E)

41971603 Gorzinski, S.; Lehr, K.; Piasecki, D.; et al. (1991) Garlon 4 Herbicide: Static Acute

96

- Hour Toxicity to the Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 022406168

- 4. Unpublished study prep ared by DowElanco. 33 p. PDF 2022214

41971604 Gorzinski, S.; Lehr, K.; Piasecki, D.; et al. (1991) Garlo n 4 Herb icide: Static Acute

96

- Hour Toxicity to the Bluegill, Lepomis macrochirus Rafinesque: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 022406186

- 3. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 33 p. PDF 2022113

44585404 Wan, M.; Moul, D.; Watts, R. (1987) Acute toxicity to juvenil e pacific salmonids of

Garlon 3A, Garlon 4 , triclopyr, triclopyr ester, and their transformation products: 3,5,6

- trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol and 2

- methoxy

- 3,5,6

- trichloropyridine. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39:721

- 728. OPEN LIT

TC P Degradate Studies

44585404 Wan, M.; Moul, D.; Watts, R. (1987) Acute toxicity to juvenile pacific sal m onid of

Garlon 3A, Garlon 4, triclopyr, triclopyr ester, and their transformation products: 3,5,6

- trichloro

- 2

- pyridinol and 2

- methoxy

- 3,5,6

- trichloropy ridine . Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 39:721

- 728. Open Lit



## 72 -2 850.1010 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Invertebrates

MRID Citation Reference



### Triclopyr Acid studies

40346405 Batchelder, T.; McCarty, W. (1977) Static Acute Toxicity of Triclopyr to Daphnia

magna, Letter Report ES

- 37L , Enviromental (sic) Sciences Research. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co. 3 p. Letter re 403465804

40346504 (Found in 116002) McCarty, W.; Batchelder, T. (1977) Toxicity of Triclopyr to Daphnids.

Environmental Sciences Research,, DOW Chemical. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical. 8 p. ACC 234248 PDF 2035114


### Triclopyr TEA Salt Studies

### 67

151956 McCarty, W.; Alexander, H. ( 1978) Toxicity of Triclopyr, Triethyl

- amine Salt to

Freshwater Organisms: ES

- 199. Unpublished study prepared by Environmental Research Lab., Dow Chemical U.S.A. 14 p. PDF 2045560

151959 Gersich, F.; Mandoza, C.; Hopkins, D.; et al. (1982) The Acute and C hronic

Toxicity of Triclopyr (...) Triethylamine Salt Solution to Daphnia magna Straus: ES

- 583. Unpublished study prepared by Environmental Sciences Research, Dow Chemical U.S.A. 19 p. PDF 2045562

151960 Gersich, F.; Hopkins, D.; Milazzo, D. (1985) The De velopment of Flow

- through

Acute and Chronic Test Methods for Daphnia magna Straus: ES

- 756. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 20 p. Test Methods

41736301 Barron, M.; Mayes, M.; Ball, T. (1989) Garlon 3A Herbicide Evaluation of The

Toxicity to The Crayfish: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0121

- 6064

- 78. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 15 p. PDF 2045580

92189009 Mayes, M. (1990) Dow Chemical U S A Phase 3 Summary of MRID 00151956.

Toxicity of Triclopyr, Triethylamine Salt to Freshwater Organisms: Project ID: ES

199. Prepared by Dow Chemical Co.. 10 p.

42090409 Mayes, M. (1991) Response to Phase 3 Submission on Triethylammonium

Triclopyr... ?Acu te Toxicity Test for Freshwater Invertebrate|: Lab Project Number: ES

- 199. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Environmental Tox & Chem Res. Lab. 7 p.
Triclopyr BEE Studies

151963 Milazzo, D.; Batchelder, T. (1981) Evaluation of Garlon 4 Fo rmulation in the Aquatic

Environment: Report No. ES

- 426. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 21 p. PDF 2022116

151965 ACC 259512 Milazzo, D.; Batchelder, T. (1981) Environmental Screening of Chemicals: Garlon 4

Triclopyr EB Ester: Report No. ES

- 427. Un

- published study prepared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 26 p. PDF 2022115

43442603 Weinberg, J.; Hugo, J.; Massaro, L. et al. (1994) Evaluation of the Acute Toxicity of

Garlon 4 Herbicide to the Daphnid, Daphnia magna Straus: Lab Project Number: DECO

- ES

- 2855. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 25 p. PDF 2022129



## 72 -3 850.1025, 850.1035, or 850.1075

Acute Toxicity to Estuarine/Marine Organisms

MRID Citation Reference

Triclopyr Acid studies

No ne submitted


### Triclopyr TEA Salt Studies

62623 or 40346406 Heitmuller, T. (1975) Acute Toxicity of M

- 3724 to Larvae of the Eastern Oyster

( Crassos trea virginica), Pink Shrimp ( Penaeus duorarum), and Fiddler Crabs ( Uca pugilator). (Unpublished study received Nov 4, 1975 under 464

- EX

- 46; pre

- pared by

### 68 Bionomics, EG& G, Inc., submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, Mich.; CDL:233134

- H) PDF 2045563

40346406 Bionomics

-- EG& G, Inc. (1975) Acute Toxicity of M

- 3724 to Larvae of the Eastern

Oyster (Crassostrea virginica), Pink Shrimp (Penaeus duorarum), and Fiddler Crabs (UCA pugilator). Unpublished study. 11 p. PDFs 2045563, 2045564, 2045565, 2045566

41633703 Ward, T.; Boeri, R. (1989) Acute Flow

- through Toxicity of Triclopyr TEA Sala to the

Tidewater Silverside, Menidia beryllina: Lab Project Number: 8990/D. Unpublished study prepared by Resource Analysts, Inc. 26 p. PDF 2045571

42646101 Ward, T.; Kowalski, P.; Boeri, R. (19 93) Acute Flow

- Through Mollusc Shell

Deposition Test with Triclopyr TEA Salt: Lab Project Number: 51

- DO: ES

- 2498. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Labs., Inc. 24 p. PDF 2045584

42646102 Ward, T.; Kowalski, P.; Boeri, R. (1992) Acute Toxicity o f Triclopyr TEA Salt to the

Grass Shrimp, Palaemonetes pugio: Lab Project Number: 50

- DO: ES

- 2497. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Labs., Inc. 25 p. PDF 2045585
Triclopyr BEE Studies

41971601 Ward, T.; Boeri, R. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: Acute Fl ow

- Through Toxic

- ity to the

Grass Shrimp, palaemonetes pugio: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 12. Unpublished study prepared by Resource Ana

- lysts, Inc. 27 p. PDF 2022109

41971602 Ward, T.; Boeri, R. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: Acute Flow

- Through Shell D eposition Test

with the Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virginica: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 14. Unpublished study prep

- ared by Resource Analysts, Inc. 25 p. PDF 2022110

41969901 Ward, T.; Boeri, R. (1991) Garlon 4 Herbicide: Acute Flow

- through Toxicity to the

Tidewater Silverside, Menidia beryllina: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0224

- 6186

- 6. Unpublished study prepared by Resource Analysts, Inc. 26 p. PDF 2022105

41969902 Ward, T.; Boeri, R. (1991) Garlon 4 Herbicide: Acute Flow

- through Toxicity to Grass

Shrimp, pugio: Lab Project No: ES

- DR

- 0224

- 6186. Unpublished study prepared by Resource Analysts, Inc. 27 p. PDF 2022108

42948001 Alexander, H. (1993) Supplemental to MRID No. 4196 9902

-- Garlon 4 Herbicide:

Acute Flow

- through Toxicity to Grass Shrimp Palaemonetes pugio: Lab Project Number: MWM093093. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Environmental Tox. & Chem. Research Lab and DowElanco. 14 p. Supplement

41969903 Ward , T.; Boeri, R. (1991) Garlon 4 Herbicide: Acute Flow

- through Shell Deposition

Test with the Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virginica: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

0224

- 6186

- 7. Unpublished study prepared by Resource Analysts, Inc. 26 p. PDF 2022111

41971601 Wa rd, T.; Boeri, R. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: Acute Flow

- Through Toxic

- ity to the

Grass Shrimp, palaemonetes pugio: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 12. Unpublished study prepared by Resource Ana

- lysts, Inc. 27 p. PDF 2022109

41971602 Ward, T.; Boeri, R. (1991) Triclopyr Bee: Acute Flow

- Through Shell Deposition Test

with the Eastern Oyster, Crassostrea virginica: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 14. Unpublished study prep

- ared by Resource Analysts, Inc. 25 p. PDF 2022110

42053901 Ward, T.; Boeri, R. (1991) Triclopyr BEE: Acute Flow

- Through Toxic

- ity to the

Tidewater Silverside, Menidia beryllina: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 13.

### 69 Unpublished study prepared by EnviroSystems Division & Resource Analysts, Inc. 26 p. PDF 202212 1

TCP Degradate

42245901 Graves, W.; Smith, G. (1991) 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- Pyridinol: A 96

- Hour Flow

- through

Acute Toxicity Test with the Atlantic Silverside (Menidia menidia): Amended Report: Lab Project Number: 103A

- 101A: ES

- DR

- 0037

- 0423

- 9. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 48 p Amended report 2066446 in PC 059101



## 72 -4 850.1400 850.1300

Fish Early Life Stage/Aquatic Invertebrate Life Cycle Study

MRID Citation Reference

Triclopyr Acid

No Data


### Triclopyr TEA Salt Studies

46269 Swabey, Y.H.; Schenk, C.F. (1963) Report on Algicides and Aquatic Herbicides.

(Ontario, Water Resources Commission, Laboratory Division, Biology Branch, unpublished study; CDL:107773

- B)

49637 ACC 259511 and 259512 Batchelder, T.L. (19 73) Acute Fish Toxicity of Dowco 233 (3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

-

pyridyloxyacetic acid) and Two Deriv a tives ?sic|: Report WCL

-- 73014. (Unpublished study received Feb 26, 1974 under unknown admin. no.; submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A.; Midland, Mich.; CDL:222240

- E) PDF 2045521 pg 11

151958 Mayes, M.; Dill, D.; Mandoza, C.; et al. (1983) The Acute and Chronic Toxicity of

Triclopyr (...) Triethylamine Salt Solution to Fathead Minnows (...): ES

- 582. Unpublished study prepared by Environmental Sciences Research, Dow Chemical U.S.A. 18 p. ACC 259511 PDF 2045561

151959 Gersich, F.; Mandoza, C.; Hopkins, D.; et al. (1982) The Acute and Chronic Toxicity

of Triclopyr (...) Triethylamine Salt Solution to Daphnia magna Straus: ES

- 583. Unpublished study prepared by Environm ental Sciences Research, Dow Chemical U.S.A. 19 p. ACC 259511 PDF 2045562

151960 ACC 259511 Gersich, F.; Hopkins, D.; Milazzo, D. (1985) The Development of Flow

- through

Acute and Chronic Test Methods for Daphnia magna Straus: ES

- 756. Unpublished study pr epared by Dow Chemical U.S.A. 20 p. Methods development

42090410 Mayes, M. (1991) Response to Phase 3 Submssion on Triethylammonium

Triclopyr...?Fish Early Life

- Stage Test

-- Fathead Minnow|: Lab Project Number: ES

582. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Environmental Tox and Chem Res. Lab. 45 p.

42090411 Mayes, M. (1991) Response to Phase 3 Submission on Triethylammonium

Trichlopyr...?Invertebrate Life

- Cycle Test (Daphnia)|: Lab Project Number: ES

- 583.

### 70 Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Environmental Tox & Chem Research Lab. 18 p.

43230201 Weinberg, J.; Hugo, J.; Mar tin, M.; et al. (1994) Evaluation of the Toxicity of

Triclopyr Butoxyethyl Ester to the Early Life Stages of the Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum: Lab Project Number: DR/0133/7242: DECO/ES/2699. Unpublished study prepared by The Environmental Tox icology & Chemistry Research Lab. 47 p. PDF 2022128

41736304 Barron, M.; Mayes, M.; Murphy, P.; et al. (1989) Pharmacokinetics And Metabolism

of Triclopyr Butoxyethyl Ester In Coho Salmon: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242

- 5: ES

- 1082. Unpublished Stu dy prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 31 p.
TCP Degradate Studies

44997301 (found in 116002) Marino, T.; Gilles, M.; Rick, D. et al. (1999) Evaluation of the Toxicity of 3,5,6

-

Trichloro

- 2

- Pyridinol (TCP) to the Early Life Stages of the Rainbow Trout, On corhynchus mykiss Walbaum: Lab Project Number: 991173. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 56 p. PDF 2045587 invalidated

46033201 Marino, T.; McClymont, E.; Hales, C.; et. al. (2003) Revised Report for 3,5,6

-

Trichloro

- 2

- Pyridinol (TCP): Evaluation of the Toxicity to the Early Life Stages of the Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss Walbaum. Project Number: 011150, 011150R. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 69 p. See 44997301

45861301 Machado, M. (2003) Triclopyr Metabolite 3,5,6

- TCP

-- Full Life

- Cycle Toxicity Test

with Water Fleas, Daphnia magna, under Static

- Renewal Conditions: Lab Project Number: 12550.6286: 021300. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories. 66 p.



## 72 -7 Simulated or Actual Field Testing

MRID Citation Reference

Triclopyr BEE Study

151961 Washburn & Gillis Associates Ltd. (1983) Assessment of the Effects of the Herbicide

Garlon 4 on Aquatic Fauna [Including Methods for Analysis of Soils and Water]. Unpublished study. 88 p. ACC 259512



## 122-1 850.4400 and 850.4150

Seedling Emergence and Vegetative Vigor Tier 1

MRID Citation Reference



### Triclopyr Acid

– No data
Triclopyr TEA Salt Studies

41784401 Weseloh, J.; Stockdale, G. ( 1990 ) A Study to Determine the Effects of Triclopyr on

Vegetative Vigor: Lab Project Number: GH

- P 1474. Unpublished study prepared by

### 71 DowElanco/Midland Field Research Station. 47 p. TEA Salt at 9.0 Lbs ae per Acre PDF 2022103

42908301 Weseloh, J. (1993) Supp lemental Information for MRID 41734301 : A Study to

Determine the Effects of Triclopyr on Seed Germination and Seedling Emergence: Lab Project Number: MLJ083093. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 11 p.

41734301 Weseloh, J.; Stockdale, G. (1990) A S tudy to Determine the Effects of Triclopyr on Seed

Germination and Seedling Emergence: Lab Project Number: GH

- P 1475: 90032. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 55 p. TEA Salt at 9.0 Lbs ae per Acre PDF 2022101
Triclopyr BEE Studies

41734301 Weselo h, J.; Stockdale, G. (1990) A Study to Determine the Effects of Triclopyr on Seed

Germination and Seedling Emergence: Lab Project Number: GH

- P 1475: 90032. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 55 p. . Triclopyr BEE at 8.0 Lbs ae per Acre PDF 2022101

41784401 Weseloh, J.; Stockdale, G. (1990) A Study to Determine the Effects of Triclopyr on

Vegetative Vigor: Lab Project Number: GH

- P 1474. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco/Midland Field Research Station. 47 p. Applied Triclopyr BEE at 8.0 Lbs ae
p er Acre PDF 2022103



## 123-1 850.4400 and 850.4150

Seed germination/seedling emergence and vegetative vigor

MRID Citation Reference



### Triclopyr TEA Salt Studies

43129801 Schwab, D. (1993) Evaluating the Effects of Triclopyr TEA on the Germination,

Emergence, and Vegetative Vigor of Non

- Target Terrestrial Plants: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 40874. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Lab., Inc. 168 p. PDF 2045586

40346508 Smith, L.; Geronimo, J. (1977) Response of Seven Crops to Six Auxin

- like

Herbicides. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemi

- cal. 29 p. PDF 2045591
Triclopyr BEE Study

43650001 Schwab, D. (1995) Evaluating the Effects of Triclopyr BEE on the S eedling

Emergence and Vegetative Vigor of Non

- Target Terrestrial Plants: Lab Project Numbers: 41964: RES94090. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs., Inc. 152 p. PDF 2022132



## 123-2 850.4400 and 850.5400 Aquatic plant growth

MRID Citation Reference

Triclopyr Acid Study

### 72

41736303 Cowgill, U.; Milazzo, D. (1989) Triclopyr Acid: Evaluation of The Five Day Toxicity

to The Green Alga Selenastrum Capricornutum: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0040

- 8195

- 8: ES

- 2047. Unpublished Study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 15 p. PDF 2035116


### Triclopy r TEA Salt Studies

41633705 Dill, D.; Milazzo, D. (1987) Triclopyr Triethylamine Salt: Evalua

- tion of the

Toxicity to a Freshwater Green Alga, Selenastrum Ca

- pricornutum Printz: Lab Project Number: ES/DR/0287/8071/2. Un

- published study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 16 p. PDF 2045573

41633706 Hughes, J. (1987) Triclopyr Triethylamine Salt: the Toxicity to An

- abaena flos

aquae: Lab Project Number: 0460/02/1100/1. Unpub

- lished study prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 25 p. PDF 2045574

41633707 Cowg ill, U.; Milazzo, D. (1987) Triclopyr Triethylamine Salt: The Five Day Toxicity

of Skeletonema Costatum Grev. Cleve Bacillari

- ophyceae, Clone Skel, A Marine Diatom: Lab Project Number: ES/ dr/0287/8071/3. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Com pany. 18 p. PDF 2045575

41633708 Hughes, J. (1987) Triclopyr Triethylamine Salt: The Toxicity to Navicula pelliculosa:

Lab Project Number: 0460/02/1100/2. Un

- published study prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 24 p. PDF 2045576

41633709 Cowgill, U.; Milazzo, D. (1987) Triclopyr Triethylamine Salt: The Fourteen

- Day

Toxicity to Lemna Gibba L. G

- 3 Duckweed: Lab Pro

- ject Number: ES/DR/0287/8071/1. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Company. 19 p. PDF 2045577

41736302 Cowgill, U. ; Milazzo, D.; Landenberger, B. (1988) A Comparison of the Effect of

Triclopyr Triethylamine Salt (Garlon 3A) on Two Species of Duckweed Examined For Seven

- Day and Fourteen Day Period: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0003

- 7070

- 2. Unpublished study prepared by Do w Chemical Co. 49 p. PDF 2045581

42090413 Mayes, M. (1991 ) Response to Phase 3 Submission on Triethylammonium

Triclopyr...?Growth and Reproduction of Aquatic Plants Tier 2: Lemna gibba|: Lab Project Number: ES

- 970. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemic al Co., Environmental Tox & Chem Res. Lab. 21 p.

42090414 Mayes, M. (1991) Response t o Phase 3 Submission on Triethylammonium

Triclopyr...?Growth and Reproduction of Aquatic Plants Tier 2: Skeletonema costatum|: Lab Project Number: ES

- 971. Unpublished st udy prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Environmental Tox & Chem. Res. Lab. 11 p.

48939403 Wemhoner, U. (2006) GF

- 1883

- Growth Inhibition Test with Freshwater Diatom

(Navicula pelliculosa). Project Number: 060393/OCR, 1072/010/440. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories (Europe). 71p.
Triclopyr BEE Studies

41633704 Cowgill, U.; Milazzo, D. (1989) GARLON 4 Herbicide: Evaluation of the Five Day

Toxicity to the Green Alga Selenastrum Capricornu

- tum: Lab Project Number: ES/DR/0224/6186/ 1. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical company. 18 p. PDF 2022097 or 2045572

42090422 Mayes, M. (1991) Response to Phase 3 Submission on Butoxyethyl Tri

clopyr...?Growth and Reproduction of Aquatic Plants Tier 2: Selenaestrum capricornutum|. Unpublished study prepared by Dow Chemical Co., Environmental Tox & Chem Res. Lab. 16 p.

### 73

42719101 Milazzo, D.; Servinski, M.; Weinberg, J.; et al. (1993) Triclopyr Butoxyethyl Ester:

Toxicity to the Aquatic Plant, Duckweed, Lemna gibba L. G

- 3: Lab Project Number: ES

- 2592: DECO

- ES

- 2592. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 38 p. PDF 202212 0

42721101 Hughes, J.; Alexander, M. (1993) The Toxicity of Triclopyr Butoxyethyl Ester

(Triclopyr BEE) to Anabaena flos

- aquae: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242: ES

- 2529. Unpublished study prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 37 p. PDF 2022118

42721102 Hu ghes, J.; Alexander, M. (1993) The Toxicity of Triclopyr Butoxyethyl Ester

(Triclopyr BEE) to Navicula pelliculosa: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242: ES

- 2530. Unpublished study prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 37 p. PDF 2022118

42721103 Hughes, J.; Ale xander, M. (1993) The Toxicity of Triclopyr Butoxyethyl Ester

(Triclopyr BEE) to Skeletonema costatum: Lab Project Number: ES

- DR

- 0133

- 7242: ES

- 2531. Unpublished study prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 38 p. PDF 2022119

42645901 Hughes, J.; Williams, T. (19 93) The Toxicity of Access Herbicide Formulation to

Selenastrum capricornutum: Lab Project Number: ES

- 2587: B460

- 152

- 1. Unpublished study prepared by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc. 35 p. PDF 2039127

43230301 Ward, T.; Kowalski, P.; Boeri, R. (1994) Access Herbicide : Toxicity to the

Freshwater Diatom, Navicula pelliculosa: Lab Project Number: 430/DO: ES/2766. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 25 p. Triclopyr BEE/Picloram EHE PDF 2039127

43230304 Ward, T.; Kowalski, P.; Boeri, R. (1994 ) Access Herbicide: Toxicity to the Marine

Diatom, Skeletonema costatum: Lab Project Number: 431/DO: ES/2767. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 25 p. PDF 2001400

43230307 Boeri, R.; Kowalski, P.; Ward, T. (1994) Access Herbici de: Toxicity to the

Freshwater Blue

- Green Alga, Anabaena flos

- aquae: Lab Project Number: 432/DO: ES/2768. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 25 p. PDF 2039125

43230310 Milazzo, D.; Kirk, H.; Humbert, L.; et al. (1994) The Toxic ity of Access Herbicide

Formulation to the Aquatic Plant, Duckweed, Lemna gibba L.G

- 3: Lab Project Number: DECO/ES/2762. Unpublished study prepared by The Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry Research Lab. 33 p. PDF 2039124
TCP Degradate Studies

45312 001 Kirk, H.; Gilles, M.; Hugo, J. et al. (1999) Effect of 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- Pyridinol

(TCP) on the Growth of the Freshwater Green Alga, Selenastrum capricornutum, PRINTZ: Lab Project Number: 991194. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Company. 43 p. PDF 2082443

45312002 Kirk, H.; Gilles, M.; McClymont, E. et al. (2000) 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- Pyridinol (TCP):

Growth Inhibition Test with the Freshwater Aquatic Plant, Duckweed, Lemma gibba L. G

- 3: Lab Project Number: 001148. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Company. 39 p. PDF 208244

45312003 Kirk, H.; Gilles, M.; McClymont, E. et al. (2000) 3,5,6

- Trichloro

- 2

- Pyridinol (TCP):

Growth Inhibition Test with the Bluegreen Alga, Anabaena flos

- aquae: Lab Project Number: 001149. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Compamy. 38
p. PDF 2082445

### 74



## 141-1 850.3020 Honey bee acute contact

MRID Citation Reference

Triclopyr Acid Studies 40356602 Dingledine, J. (1985) Triclopyr Acid: An Acute Contact Toxicity Study with Honey Bees:

Final Report: Laboratory Project ID 103

- 239. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 14 p. PDF 2035115

Triclopyr TEA Salt No data

Triclopyr BEE Studies 41219109 Dingledine, J. (1985) Triclopyr BE Ester: An Acute Contact Toxicity Study with Honey

Bees: Final Report: Project Study ID: 103

- 240. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 15 p. PDF 2022104 42625901 Hoxter, K.; Bernard, W.; Smith, G. (1 992) Access Herbicide: An Acute Contact Toxicity

Study with the Honey Bee: Lab Project Number: ES

- 2602: 103

- 389. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 20 p. PDF 2039123



## NON Guideline Selections

MRID Citation Reference

151964 Batchelder, T. (1975) Environmental Analysis and Special Fish Toxi cities of Two Triclopyr

Formulations. Unpublished study pre

- pared by Dow Chemical Co. 20 p. ACC 259512

42305500 42305501 Texas Dept. of Agriculture (1992) Submission of a Report of the Inv estigation of a

Complaint of Adverse Effects of Garlon 3A and Rodeo on Horses and Property in Accordance with FIFRA 6(a)2 Requirements. Transmittal of 1 study. Incident Report

151957 Batchelder, T.; Milazzo, D. (1981) Evaluation of Garlon 3A Herbi

- cide in the Aquatic

Environment: ES

- 362. Unpublished study pre

- pared by Environmental Sciences Research Laboratory, Dow Chemi

- cal U.S.A. 46 p. General summary

42411805 Woodburn, K. (199 2) Fish Metabolism Study on Triclopyr Requested by EPA for Aquatic

Registration: Lab Project Number: KBW

- 792. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 5 p.

43474200 DowElanco (1994) Submission of DERBI Numbers for Adverse Effect Incidents in Support

of F IFRA 6(a)(2) for Chlorpyrifos and Other Chemicals. Transmittal of 1 Study.

44292003 Wolt, J.; Weglarz, T.; Wright, J.; et al. (1997) Triclopyr Non

- Target Plant Risk Assessment:

Lab Project Number: GH

- C 4357. Unpublished study prepared by DowElanco. 95 p.

44385901 Eisenbrandt, D.; Nolan, R.; McMaster, S. et al. (1997) Triclopyr: An Asses sment of

Common Mechanism of Toxicity: Lab Project Number: HET K

- 042085

- 097. Unpublished study prepared by The Dow Chemical Co. 15 p.

44015101 44456102 44456103 44456104 44456108 44456112 45170901 Triclopyr in Fish and Shellfish: Evaluation of

Residue Data and Analytical Methods.

HED Studies listed on FOIA website

### 75

47164601 Moore, D.; Breton, R.; Rodney, S.; et al. (2007) Generic Problem Formulation for

California Red

- Legged Frog. Project Number: 89320, 05232007. Unpublished study prepared by Cantox E nvironmental Inc. 87 p. Registrant assessment

47164602 Holmes, C.; Vamshi, R. (2007) Data and Methodology Used for Spatial Analysis of

California Red Legged Frog Observations and Proximate Land Cover Characteristics. Project Number: 3152007, WEI/252/03. Unpublished study prepared by Waterborne Environmental, Inc. (WEI). 19 p. ESA report from consulting firm

47164600 Croplife America (2007) Submission of Environmental Fate and Exposure and Risk Data in

Support of the Preservation of the California Red Le gged Frog. Transmittal of 2 Studies. Registrant assessment

48216801 Patterson, B. (2010) Co

- Occurrence of 2,4

- D and Triclopyr in Water Monitoring Samples

within Threatened and Endangered Salmonid: Evolutionarily Significant Units. Project Number: 102388/F . Unpublished study prepared by Stone Environmental, Inc. 70 p.

48216802 Patterson, B. (2010) Land Cover Characterization and Water Monitoring Data Summaries

for Triclopyr Butoxyethyl Ester Within Threatened or Endangered Salmonid Evolutionarily Significant Units. Project Number: 102388/G. Unpublished study prepared by Stone Environmental, Inc. 112 p.

48304701 Gelis, C. (2008) (Green S): Measurement of Ground Contamination Underneath Brushwood

Canopies: Final Report. Project Number: DOW/GRE/07001 . Unpublished study prepared by ADME Bioanalyses. 170 p.

### 76



## Appendix B

Comparison Table Eco effect data to ECOSAR predicted endpoints A cute Toxicity Actual in bold (when available) and ECOSAR Predicted in parenthesis 

### Test Material FW Fish 96 Hr Daphnid 48 hr Aquatic Algae 96 hr Triclopyr Acid 117 ppm ( 18.34 ppm) 132.9 ppm (13.0 ppm) 32.5 ppm ( 38.4 ppm) 

### Triclopyr BEE 0.36 ppm (3.18 ppm) 0.35 ppm (5.33 ppm) 24 hr= 0.1 ppm (1.65 ppm ) 

### TCP D egradate 12.5 ppm (5.9 ppm) 10.4 ppm (2.7 ppm) 2.0 ppm (11.6 ppm) 

### ECOSAR Predictions

- No actual data available TMP Degradate 1.02 ppm 0.81 ppm 9.7 ppm Photo Degradate 5,6

- Dichloro

- 3

- hydroxy

- 3H

pyridin

- 2

- one 1634 ppm 1164 ppm 1002 ppm

Photo Degradate (5/6)

- Chloro

- 3

- hydroxy

- s

pyridinone 1634 ppm 1164 ppm 1002 ppm

Oxamic acid 6.53x10 5 

### ppm 2.47 x 10 5 

### ppm 34313 ppm Triethylamine 40.6 ppm 4.58 ppm 4.23 ppm Triethylammonium 70483 ppm 29630 ppm 6368 ppm Butoxyethanol 1889 ppm 935 ppm 403 ppm

Chronic Toxicity Actual (when available) and ECOSAR Predicted in parenthesis Test Material Fish Chronic Daphnia Chronic Triclopyr Acid No data (3.335 ppm) No data (0.408 ppm) Triclopyr BEE 0.026 ppm (0.157 pm) No data (2.0 ppm) TCP D egradate Invalid (0.69 ppm) 2.7 ppm (0.53 ppm) TMP Degradate No data (0.098 ppm) No data (0.018 ppm) Photo Degradate 5,6

- Dichloro

- 3

- hydroxy

- 3H

pyridin

- 2

- one No data (2457 ppm) No data (0.69 ppm)

Photo Degradate (5/6)

- Chloro

- 3

- hydroxy

- s

pyridinone No data (2427 ppm) No data (0.69 ppm)

Oxamic acid No data ( 39529 ppm) No data (7778 ppm) Triethylamine No data (2.8 ppm) No data (0.36 ppm) Triethylammonium No data (4832 ppm) No data (1251 ppm) Butoxyethanol No data (157.3 ppm) No data (63 ppm)

Chemical : ECOSAR Class Selected for Each Test Material Triclopyr Acid: Halopyridines – acid Triclopyr BEE: Esters TCP degradate: Phenols TMP degradate: Halopyridines

### 77

Photo-d eg r adates 1 and 2 : 5,6 -Dichloro-3-hydroxy-3H-pyridin-2-one 

### and (5/6)-Chloro-3- h ydroxy-s-pyridinone : 

### Vinyl/Allyl Halides Oxamic acid ,Triethylammonium and Butoxyethanol degradates : Neutral Organics Triethylamine: Aliphatic amines

### 78



## Appendix C

Pending and Active Registrations For 116001 / 55335-06

-3 / Triclopyr Acid

Registratio n # Registration Name Compa ny # Company Name Current Status % of Active Ingredient



### Products containing Triclopyr Acid Only

1812

- ULG STRADA

HERBICIDE 1812 GRIFFIN L.L.C. Pending 44.4% Triclopyr acid

5905

- 580 TRYCERA 5905 HELENA CHEMICAL CO Active 29.4% Triclopyr acid

35935

- 55 NUFARM

TRICLOPYR ACID TECHNICAL 35935 NUFARM LIMITED Active 98% Triclopyr acid

42750

- 123 TRICLOPYR TGAI 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 98% Triclopyr acid

42750

- 191 TRICLOPYR TGAI II 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 98% Triclopyr acid

42750

- 197 TRICLOPYR TGAI

III 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 98% Triclopyr acid

62719

- 533 TRICLOPYR ACID

TECHNICAL 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES Active 98.8% Triclopyr acid

83558

- 29 TRICLOPYR

TECHNICAL (ACID) 83558 CELSIU S PROPERTY B.V., AMSTERDAM NL Active 98% Triclopyr acid

62719

- EUP

8 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES Active 44.4% Triclopyr acid



### Products with Mixtures of 2 or More Active Ingredients

None Located

Total = 8 Products * Does not include Special State Registrations

### 79 Pending and Active Registrations For 116002 / 57213-69-1 / Triclopyr, triethylamine salt

Registration # Registration Name Com
pany # Company

Name Status % of Active Ingredient



### Products containing Triclopyr Triethylamine salt only

228

- 520 TRICLOPYR 3

HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

228

- 597 NUP

- 07333

HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 14 % Triclopyr TEA

239

- 2491 ORTHO BRUSH

- B

GON BRUSH KILLER 239 THE SCOTTS COMPANY Active 8 % Triclopyr TEA

239

- 2587 BRUSH

- B

- GON

POISON IVY & POISON OAK KILLER 239 THE SCOTTS COMPANY Active 0 .7 % Triclopyr TEA

802

- 594 LILLY MILLER

BLACKBERRY & BRUSH KILLER 802 LILLY MILLER BRANDS Active 8 % Triclopyr TEA

802

- 596 LILLY/MILLER

READY

- TO

- USE BLACKBERRY & BRUSH KILLER 802 LILLY MILLER BRANDS Active 0 .75 % Triclopyr TEA

8959

- 56 NAVITROL

LANDSCAPE 8959 APPLIED BIOCHEMISTS Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

42750

- 127 TRICLOPYR 44%

TEA IVM 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

42750

- 128 TRICLOPYR 44%

TEA RICE 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

42750

- 200 TRICLOPYR 44%

TEA MUP HERBICIDE 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

42750

- 243 TRICLOPYR 8.8% 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 8.8 % Triclopyr TEA

53883

- 216 TRICLOPYR 8.8%

HERBICIDE 53883 CONTROL SOLUTIONS, INC. Active 8.8 % Triclopyr TEA

62719

- 37 GARLON 3A 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCE S LLC Active, 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

### 8 0

62719

- 53 TRICLOPYR,

TRIETHYLAMINE SALT SOLUTION 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCE S LLC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

62719

- 187 RENOVATE

HERBICIDE 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCE S LLC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

62719

- 215 GRANDSTAND R 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCE S LLC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

62719

- 226 DOWELANCO

BRUSH AND WEED 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCE S LLC Active 8.8 % Triclopyr TEA

62719

- 257 TURFLON AMINE 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCE S LLC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

62719

- 338 CROSSBOW SF 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCE S LLC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

66222

- 152 TRICLOPYR 3 SL 66222 MAKHTESHI M AGAN OF N

. AMERICA, INC. Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

67690

- 42 RENOVATE

GRANULAR 67690 SEPRO CORPORATION Active 14 % Triclopyr TEA

70506

- 228 TRIKE 70506 UNITED PHOSPHORUS, INC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

70506

- 265 KRAKEN 70506 UNITED PHOSPHORUS, INC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

72155

- 19 TRICLOPYR 8.8%

CONCENTRATE HERBICIDE 72155 BAYER ADVANCED Active 8.8 % Triclopyr TEA

72155

- 22 TRICLOPYR 0.8%

RTU 72155 BAYER ADVANCED Active 0 .8 % Triclopyr TEA

81927

- 13 ALLIGARE

TRICLOPYR 3 81927 ALLIGARE, LLC Active 44.4 % Triclopyr TEA

83558

- 28 TRICLOPYR TEA

MC 83558 CELSIUS PROPERTY B.V., AMSTERDAM (NL) Active

44.4 % Triclopyr TEA



### Multi Active Formulated Products with Triclopyr TEA

228

- 313 HORSEPOWER

SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 49% MCPA DMA 5.59 % Triclopyr TEA 4.8 % Dicamba TEA

### 81

228

- 316 TURFLON II

AMINE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 34.2 % 2,4

- D 15.2 % Triclopyr TEA

228

- 324 RIVERDALE

SWEET SIXTEEN XL WEED AND FEED WITH HORSEPOWER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 1.6 % MCPA DMA salt 0.184 % Triclopyr TEA 0.16 % Dicamba DMA salt

228

- 325 RIVERDALE

SWEET SIXTEEN WEED AND FEED WITH HORSEPOWER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 1.1 % MCPA 0.12 % Triclopyr TEA 0.11 % Dicamba

228

- 326 HORSEPOWER

WEED AND FEED 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 0.093 % Triclopyr TEA 0.8 % MCPA 0.08 % Dicamba

228

- 327 RIVERDALE

HORSEPOWER L.A. WEED AND FE ED 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 0.08 % Triclopyr TEA 0.7 % MCPA 0.07 % Dicamba

228

- 328 HORSEPOWER

GRANULAR WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 1.1 % MCPA DMA 0.12 % Triclopyr TEA 0.11 Dicamba DMA

228

- 334 RIVERDALE

HORSEPOWER LAWN WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 13.7 % MCPA DMA 1.56 % Triclopyr TEA 1.3 % Dicamba DMA

228

- 335 RIVERDALE

HORSEPOWER 8000 LAWN WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 10.97 % MCPA DMA 1.25 % Triclopyr TEA 1.08 % Dicamba DMA

228

- 336 HORSEPOWER

SPOT WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 0.74 % MCPA DMA 0.084 % Triclopyr TEA 0.07 % Dicamba DMA

228

- 355 RIVERDALE

ENTERPRISE SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 56.9 % 2,4

- D T I PA 5.37 % Triclopyr TEA 3.8 % Dicamba TEA

228

- 356 DTDA/DMA

- TEA

DMA SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 37.3 % 2,4

- D T I PA 5.42 % Triclopyr TEA 4.7 % Dicamba

228

- GAG RIVERDALE TSC

PREMIUMLAWN WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Pending 11.36 % 2,4

- D TIPA 0.84 % Triclopyr TEA 0.3 % Clopyralid

### 82

228

- 371 RIVERDALE MTCA

PREMIUM SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 37.9 % MCPA DMA 3.8 % Triclopyr TEA 1.3 % Clopyralid

228

- GOE RIVERDALE

TURFLON II IVM AMINE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Pending 34.2 % 2,4

- D DMA 15.2 % Triclopyr TEA

228

- 402 RIVERDALE

SWEET SIXTEEN WEED AND FEED WITH DTDA 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 2.0% 2,4

- D TIPA salt 0.251 % Triclopyr TEA 0.09 % Dicamba

228

- 403 RIVERDALE DTDA

GRANULAR WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 2.0% 2,4

- D TIPA salt 0.251 % Triclopyr TEA 0.09 % Dicamba

228

- 404 RIVERDATE DTDA

12800 LAWN WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 20.16% 2,4

- D TIPA salt 1.93 % Triclopyr TEA 1.38 % Dicamba

228

- 405 DTDA 10000 LAWN

WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 16.2 % 2,4

- D T I PA salt 1.51 % Triclopyr TEA 1.08 % Dicamba

228

- 406 RIVERDALE DTDA

8000 LAWN WEED KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 12.9% 2,4

- D T I PA salt 1.2 % Triclopyr TEA 0.09 % Dicamba

228

- 407 DTDA SPOT WEED

KILLER 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 1.23% 2,4

- D T I PA salt 0 .11 % Triclopyr TEA 0.08% Dicamba

228

- 411 RIVERDALE WIL

POWER SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 46.9% MCPA DMA 10.68 % Triclopyr TEA 9.12 % 2,4

- DP

- p DMA

228

- 418 RIVERDALE

MOMENTUM FX 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 44.2% 2,4

- D TIPA salt 3.31 % Triclopyr TEA 8.52 % Fluroxypyr 1 methyl heptyl ester

228

- 422 RIVERDALE

BATTLESHIP 2 SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 37.48 % MCPA DMA 3.45 % Triclopyr TEA 8.9 % Fluroxypyr 1 methyl heptyl ester

228

- 424 HORSEPOWER

CONCENTRATE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 13.7 % MCPA DMA 1.56 % Triclopyr TEA 1.35 % Dicamba DMA

### 83

228

- 447 MOMENTUM FX2

HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 44.2 % 2,4 D TIPA 3.86 % Triclopyr TEA 4.2 % Fluroxypyr 1

- methylheptyl ester

228

- 453 BATTLESHIP 3

SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 37.8 % MCPA DMA 4.07 % Triclopyr TEA 4.45 % Fluroxypyr 1

- methylheptyl ester

228

- 564 BRAZEN

HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 33 % Triclopyr TEA 12.1 % Clopyralid MEA salt

228

- 568 BRAZEN SF

HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 33 % Triclopyr TEA 12.1 % Clopyralid

228

- 590 4

- SPEED XT

SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 41.2% 2,4

- D EHE 4.81 % Triclopyr TEA 3.46% Dicamba 0.067 % Pyaflufen ethyl

352

- ITU DUPONT INVORA

HERBICIDE 352 E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY (S300/419) Pending 20.4 % Triclopyr TEA 10.8 % Aminocyclopyr TEA

961

- 390 LEBANON LAWN

FERTILIZER CONTAINS CONFRONT AND TEAM 961 LEBANON SEABOARD CORPORATIO N Active 0.5% Triclopyr TEA 0.43 % Trifluralin/ 0.82 % Benfluralin/ 0.18 % Clopyralid TEA

961

- 391 LEBANON TURF

FERTILIZER WITH CONFRONT AND TEAM 961 LEBANON SEABOARD CORPORATIO N Active 0.5 % Triclopyr TEA 0.43 % Trifluralin/ 0.82 % Benfluralin/ 0.18 % Clopyralid TEA

961

- 395 CONFRONT III +

FERTILIZER 961 LEBANON SEABOARD CORPORATIO N Active 1.0 % 2,4

- D DMA 0.303 % Triclopyr TEA 0.20 % Fluoroxypyr MHE/

961

- 406 CONFRONT* IV +

FERTILIZER 961 LEBANON SEABOARD CORPORATIO N Active 0.303 % Triclopyr TEA 0.17 % Fluoroxypyr MHE/ 0.82 % 2,4

- D DMA 0.14 % Dithiopyr

2217

- 921 EH

- 1467

HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 30.8 % 2,4

- D DEA 7.28 % Triclopyr TEA 2.48 % Dicamba DMA

### 84 0.6 % Sulfentrazone

2217

- 949 EH

- 1491

HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 30.8 % 2,4

- D DEA 7.28 % Triclopyr TEA 2.48 % Dicamba DMA

2217

- 950 EH

- 1492

HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 16.5 % 2,4

- DP DEA salt 7.81 % Triclopyr TEA 1.4 % Dicamba DMA

34704

- 930 CHASER 2 AMINE 34704 LOVELAND PRODUCTS, INC. Active 34.2 % 2,4

- D DMA salt 15.2 % Triclopyr TEA

34704

- 958 TAILSPIN 34704 LOVELAND PRODUCTS, INC. Active 16.1 % Triclopyr TEA 5.6 % Fluroxypyr 1

- MHE

42750

- 125 TRICLOPYR TEA +

CLOPYRALID TEA R&P 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 33 % Triclopyr TEA 12.1 % Clopyralid Triethanolamine

53883

- 332 QUALI

- PRO 2TQ 53883 CONTROL SOLUTIONS, INC. Active 38 % 2,4

- D DMA 10.7% Triclopyr TEA 3.3 % Quinclorac

58501

- 2 WEEDEX

DANDELION STICK 58501 TERAGRO INC. Active 4.5 % 2,4

- D DMA 2% Triclopyr TEA

62719

- 92 CONFRONT 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 33 % Triclopyr TEA 12 .1% Clopyralid triethanolamine

62719

- 217 XRM

- 5202 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 50.7 % 2,4

- D TIPA 3.8 % Triclopyr TEA 1.3 % Clopyralid

62719

- 232 CONFRONT* F 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 33 % Triclopyr TEA 12.1 % Clopyralid

62719

- 262 TURF FERTILIZER

CONTAINS CONFRONT 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 0.5 % Triclopyr TEA 0.18 % Clopyralid

62719

- 337 REDEEM R & P 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 33 % Triclopyr TEA 12.1 % Clopyralid

62719

- 511 GARLON EV 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 16.1 % Triclopyr TEA 5.6 % Fluroxypyr 1 methylheptyl ester

62719

- 528 GF

- 1249 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 22.2 % Triclopyr TEA 4.0% Picloram potassium

### 85

62719

- 572 MILESTONE VM

PLUS 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 16.2% Triclopyr TEA 2.22 % Aminopyralid TIPA

62719

- 599 GF

- 2121 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 44.2 % 2,4

- D TIPA 3.86 % Triclopyr TEA 4.2 % Fluroxypyr 1

m ethylheptyl ester

62719

- 610 Grasp Xtra 62719 DOW AGROSCIENC ES LLC Active 23.0% Triclopyr TEA 2.77 % Penoxsulam

67690

- 50 SP1037 67690 SEPRO CORPORATIO N Active 14 % 2,4

- D DMA 4.0 % Triclopyr TEA

71085

- 29 RICEPYR 71085 RICECO LLC Active 36.5 % Propanil 3.8 % Triclopyr TEA

71995

- 36 MON 78783

HERBICIDE 71995 MONSANTO COMPANY Active 1.0 % Glyphosate IPA 0.1 % Triclopyr TEA

71995

- 37 MON 78736

HERBICIDE 71995 MONSANTO COMPANY Active 18 % Glyphosate IPA 2.0 % Triclopyr TEA

71995

- 41 RD 1645

HERBICIDE 71995 MONSANTO COMPANY Active 1.2 % 2,4

- D TIPA 0.112 % Triclopyr TEA 0.08 % Dicamba

71995

- 42 RD 1644

HERBICIDE 71995 MONSANTO COMPANY Active 16.19 % 2,4

- D TIPA 1.51 % Triclopyr TEA 1.08 % Dicamba

71995

- 48 RD 1662

HERBICIDE 71995 MONSANTO COMPANY Active 2.0 % Nonanoic acid/ 1.0 % Glyphosate Isopropylammonium 0.1 % Triclopyr TEA

71995

- 50 RD 1689

HERBICIDE 71995 MONSANTO COMPANY Active 18 % Glyphosate Isopropylammonium 2.0 % Triclopyr TEA 1.0% Diquat

81927

- 30 ALLIGARE

PRESCOTT HERBICIDE 81927 ALLIGARE, LLC Active 33 % Triclopyr TEA 12.1 % Clopyralid TEA

Total =92 Products * Does not include Special State Registrations

### 86 Pending and Active Product Registrations For 116004 / 64700-56-7 / Triclopyr, butoxyethyl ester

Registration # Registration Name Co mp any # Company Name Status % of Active Ingredient

Products Containing Only Triclopyr BEE

228

- 517 TAHOE 4E 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

228

- 521 RELEGATE

SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

228

- 552 RELEGATE RTU

HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 13.6% Triclopyr BEE

17545

- 8 TURFLON ESTER 17545 BRANDT CONSOLIDATED, INC. Active 60.45% Triclopyr BEE

35935

- 56 NURFARM

TRICLOPYR BEE TECHNICAL 35935 NUFARM LIMITED Active 98% Triclopyr BEE

42750

- 126 TRICLOPYR 4E 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

42750

- 129 TRICLOPYR 61% BEE

R&P 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

42750

- 173 TRICLOPYR 13.6% BEE 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 13.6% Triclopyr BEE

42750

- 174 TRICLOPYR BEE

TECHNICAL 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 98% Triclopyr BEE

42750

- 198 TRICLOPYR 61% BEE

TURF 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

51036

- GIU Triclopyr 96% Ester

Technical 51036 BASF SPARKS LLC Pending 96% Triclopyr BEE

51036

- UEG TRICLOPYR 98%

ESTER TECHNICAL 51036 BASF SPARKS LLC Pending 97.5% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 40 GARLON 4 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 70 REMEDY 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 87 TRICLOPYR

BUTOXYETHYL ESTER 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 96.3% Triclopyr BEE

### 87

62719

- 176 PATHFINDER II 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 13.6% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 251 TURFLON ESTER F 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 258 TURFLON ESTER 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 527 GF

- 1529 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 60.45% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 552 REMEDY ULTRA 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 60.45% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 553 GARLON XRT 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 83.9% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 566 TURFLON ESTER

ULTRA 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 60.45% Triclopyr BEE

66222

- 153 TRICLOPYR 4 66222 MAKHTESHIM AGAN OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

69361

- 35 TRICLO 4 SPECIALTY

HERBICIDE 69361 REPAR CORP Active 61.6 % Triclopyr BEE

69361

- 34 TRICLOPYR

BUTOXYETHYL ESTER TECHNICAL 69361 REPAR CORP Active 98% Triclopyr BEE

70506

- EL TRICLOPYR

BUTOXYETHYL ESTER TECHNICAL 70506 UNITED PHOSPHORUS, INC Pending 98.5% Triclopyr BEE

74779

- 8 RTSA IVM SPECIALTY

HERBICIDE 74779 RAINBOW TREECARE SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENTS Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

81927

- 11 ALLIGARE

TRICLOPYR 4 81927 ALLIGARE, LLC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

81927

- 33 ALLIGARE

TRICLOPYR RTU HERBICIDE 81927 ALLIGARE, LLC Active 13.6% Triclopyr BEE

81927

- 48 ALLIGARE

TRICLOPYR 4E 81927 ALLIGARE, LLC Active 61.6% Triclopyr BEE

83558

- 30 TRICLOPYR

TECHNICAL (BEE) 83558 CELSIUS PROPERTY B.V., AMSTERDAM (NL) Active 98% Triclopyr BEE

### 88 Multi Active Formulated Products with Triclopyr BEE

228

- 317 COOL POWER

SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 56% MCPA 2

- EHE 5% Triclopyr BEE 3.6 % Dicamba

228

- 395 PROGENY HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 56% MCPA 2

- EHE 5% Triclopyr BEE 3.6 % Dicamba

228

- 565 CANDOR HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 34.4 % 2,4

- D BEE 16.5 % Triclopyr BEE

228

- 716 NUP

- 11032 HERBICIDE 228 NUFARM AMERICAS, INC. Active 5 .0% Dicamba 0.76% Triclopyr BEE 0.55% Fenoxyprop p ethyl

961

- 394 LEBANON FERTILIZER

PLUS CONFRONT TR BRAND HERBICIDE 961 LEBANON SEABOARD CORPORATION Active 0.4 % Triclopyr BEE 0.829 % 2,4

- D BEE

2217

- 920 EH

- 1466 HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 31.8% 2,4

- D 2

- EHE 8.4 % Triclopyr BEE 0.73% Sulfentrazone 2.43% Dicamba

2217

- 951 EH

- 1493 HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 31.8% 2,4

- D, 2

- EHE 8.4 % Triclopyr BEE 2.43% Dicamba

2217

- 952 EH

- 1494 HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 16% 2,4

- D 2

- EHE 8.4 % Triclopyr BEE 1.2% Dicamba

2217

- 965 EH

- 1515 HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 55.5 % MCPA, 2

- EHE 4.95% Triclopyr BEE 3.64% Dicamba

2217

- 966 EH

- 1514 HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 54.7 % MCPA, 2

- EHE 9.3% Triclopyr BEE 3.6% Dicamba

2217

- 974 EH 1520 HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 30% 2,4

- D 2

- EHE 7.73% Triclopyr BEE 0.66% Sulfentrazone 2.8% Dicamba DMA 0.77% Penoxsulam

2217

- 975 EH 1528 HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 30% 2,4

- D 2

- EHE 3.89 Triclopyr BEE

### 89 0.67% Sulfentrazone 2.25% Dicamba

2217

- 976 EH 1527 HERBICIDE 2217 PBI/GORDON CORP Active 29.3 % 2,4

- D 2

- EHE 7.72% Triclopyr BEE 0.66 % Sulfentrazone 2.2 2 % Dicamba

34704

- 928 CHASER TURF

HERBICIDE 34704 LOVELAND PRODUCTS, INC

. Active 34.4 % 2,4

- D BEE 16.5% Triclopyr BEE

42750

- 124 TRICLOPYR BEE + 2,4

-

D BEE 42750 ALBAUGH INC Active 34.4 % 2,4

- D BEE 16.5% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 67 TURFLON D 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 34.4 % 2,4

- D BEE 16.5% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 260 CROSSBOW 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 34.4 % 2,4

- D BEE 16.5% Triclopyr BEE

62719

- 477 PASTUREGARD 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 25% Triclopyr BEE 8.6% Fluroxypyr 1

- MHE

62719

- 637 PASTUREGARD HL 62719 DOW AGROSCIENCES LLC Active 45.07% Triclopyr BEE 15.56% Fluroxypyr 1

- MHE

66222

- 222 QUALI

- PRO 2

- D

HERBICIDE Mixture 66222 MAKHTESHIM AGAN OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. Active 33% Triclopyr BEE 12 % Clopyralid TEA

81927

- 29 ALLIGARE EVERETT

HERBICIDE 81927 ALLIGARE, LLC Active 34.4 % 2,4

- D BEE 16.5% Triclopyr BEE

Total Products = 49 excluding Special State Exemption Registrations Three products are pending.

### 90



## Appendix D

Approved Site/Pest Information For Triclopyr acid, Triclopyr triethylamine salt and Triclopyr Butoxyethyl ester S ite Information

Site Code Site Name Actives

660000101 AGRICULTURAL (NONCROP AREAS) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

660002503 AGRICULTURAL (NONCROP AREAS) (STUMP TREATMENT) BEE only

610005901 AGRICULTURAL BUILDINGS (OUTDOOR) TEA and BEE

670010102 AIRPORTS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA and BEE

670010204 AIRPORTS (SOIL TREATMENT) BEE only

350160106 ALDER (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

230010106 ALFALFA (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

030010206 ALMONDS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

330130106 ANNUAL BLUEGRASS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid , TEA

330130101 ANNUAL BLUEGRASS (ORNAMENTAL TURF) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

330140103 ANNUAL RYEGRASS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

630010024 APARTMENTS (INDOOR) BEE only

040012401 APPLES (BASAL BARK TREATMENT) BEE Only

650000001 AQUATIC AREAS Acid , TEA

650006201 AQUATIC AREAS (SHORELINES) (SURROUNDING VEGETATION) (FOLIAR

TREATMENT) Acid , TEA

650006201 AQUATIC AREAS (SHORELINES) (SURROUNDING VEGETATION) (FOLIAR

TREATMENT) Acid , TEA

650006104 AQUATIC AREAS (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

650002302 AQUATIC VEGETATION (INJECTION TREATMENT) TEA

350220106 ASH (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

350230107 ASPEN (BARK TREATMENT) BEE only

160020106 ASPARAGUS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

770000005 ATHLETIC FACILITIES TEA

670020107 ATHLETIC FIELDS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

330150

- BAHIAGRASS (athletic fields, cemete ries, dormant, golf courses, sod farms, rights of

way, lawns, ornamental turf, parks, soil treatment BEE and TEA

330150106 BAHIAGRASS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid , TEA

240010106 BARLEY (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

660020107 BARRIER STRIPS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

650316103 BAYOUS (SLOW FLOWING) (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

### 91 150010108 BEANS (DRY) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

030130201 BEECH NUT (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

330160000 series BENTGRASS , (soil, foliar, athletic fields, bowling greens, cemeteries, golf courses,

sod farms, lawns, ornamental turf, parks) BEE and TEA

330160106 BENTGRASS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

330170001 BERMUDAGRASS (soil, foliar, athletic fields, bowling greens, cemeteries, golf

courses, sod farms, lawns, ornamental turf, parks) TEA

330170106 BERMUDAGRASS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

350280106 BIRCH ( foliar(TEA) or bark treatment (BEE) ) BEE and TEA

010020111 BLACKBERRIES (Bark treatment) BEE ONLY

351500103 BLACKJACK OAK (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE only

030120201 BLACK WALNUT (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

330190001 series BLUEGRASS (soil, foliar, athletic fields, bowling greens, cemeteries, golf courses,

sod farms, lawns, ornamental turf, parks) BEE and TEA

650336111 BOG LAKES (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

030020201 BRAZIL NUT (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

330200106 BUFFALOGRASS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid, BEE and TEA

330200110 series BUFFALOGRASS (soil, foliar, athletic fields, bowling greens, cemeteries, golf

courses, sod farms, lawns, ornamental turf, parks) TEA

670030102 BUILDING FOUNDATIONS ( foliar treatment , soil treatment, non

- agricultural) ( TEA

030100201 BUTTERNUTS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

630010006 CABINS (OUTDOOR) TEA

670020105 CAMP AREAS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

670020205 CAMP AREAS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

670020005 CAMP SITES TEA

650136110 CANALS Acid and TEA

650136109 CANALS (slow flowing, standing) TEA

030030201 CASHEWS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

330230106 CENTIPEDEGRASS (soil, foliar, athletic fields, bowling greens, cemeteries, golf

courses, sod farms, lawns, ornamental turf, parks) Acid, BEE and TEA

030040201 CHESTNUTS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

300050

- series CHRISTMAS TREE PLANTINGS ( foliar treatment, soil treatment, stump

treatments) Acid and TEA

300050

- series CHRISTMAS TREE PLANTINGS ( foliar treatment, soil treatment, stump

treatments, frill treatment, injection) TEA

020002501 CITRUS TREES (STUMP TREATMENT) BEE only

130040106 COLE CROPS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

770005914 COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL/INDUSTRIAL AREAS (OUTDOOR) TEA

### 92 300040001 CONIFER RELEASE (foliar, frill, injection, soil treatment, stump treatment) TEA

300040106 CONIFER RELEASE ( foliar treatment only ) Acid, BEE and TEA

300020202 CONIFER PLANTINGS (SOIL TREATMENT) BEE and TEA

660020109 CONSERVATION RESERVE PROGRAM LAND ( soil and foliar treatment) Acid , TEA and BEE

280060106 CORN (FIELD) ( foliar, seed, soil treatment) TEA

150040106 CORN (POP) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

150050106 CORN (SWEET) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

65013 0001 DITCH BANKS (foliar treatment) Acid , TEA and BEE

650130102 DITCH BANKS ( foliar, frill, injection and stump trea tments ) TEA and BEE

650226201 DITCHES Acid , TEA, and BEE

350430107 DOGWOOD (BARK TREATMENT) BEE only

630030003 DOMESTIC DWELLINGS (OUTDOOR) TEA and BEE

350440106 DOUGLAS

- FIR (foliar, dormant, forest, soil treatment) TEA

650130101 DRAINAGE DITCH BANKS ( foliar, shoreline, slow

- flowing, water treatment) TEA

670110002 DRIVEWAYS (foliar and soil treatment) TEA

350490107 ELM ( bark treatment, cuttings, injection ) TEA

030090206 ENGLISH WALNUTS (soil treatment) TEA

660020105 FALLOW LAND (foliar and soil treatment) TEA

610005902 FARM BUILDINGS (OUTDOOR) Acid , TEA and BEE

660000105 FARM FUEL STORAGE AREAS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

660000102 FARM YARDS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid , TEA and BEE

660000202 FARM YARDS (S oil, stump, dormant, basal bark treatment ) BEE only

660010101 FENCE ROWS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

680090001 FENCEROWS (Foliar, Frill, nonagricultural, injection, soil treatment, stump

treatment) TEA

680090101 FENCEROWS ( foliar treatment only ) Acid , TEA and BEE

680090002 FENCES TEA

330310000 FESCUE (athletic fields, cemeteries, golf courses, sod farms, rights of way, lawns,

ornamental turf, parks, soil treatment) BEE and TEA

330310106 FESCUE ( foliar treatment, chewings) Acid and TEA

330450106 FESCUE (CREEPING RED) ( golf courses, sod farms, lawns, ornamental turf, parks,

soil treatment, foliar treatment) TEA

330451602 FESCUE (CREEPING RED) (foliar treatment) Acid and TEA

030050206 FILBERTS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

331130111 FINE FESCUE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid, BEE , TEA

350510106 FIR ( foliar or soil treatment in forest ) BEE and TEA (forest)

280090106 FLAX (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

### 93 650380101 FLOOD PLAIN (DRY) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA ad BEE

650386116 FLOOD PLAINS (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

300000106 FOREST LANDS ( foliar treatment ) Acid, BEE and TEA

300002401 FOREST LANDS ( BASAL BARK TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

300000103 FOREST LANDS (dormant, frill, injection, stump treatments) TEA

300040107 FOREST MANAGEMENT AREAS (foliar, frill, injection, stump treatments) Acid, BEE (Basal bark) and TEA

300000107 FOREST TREES ( frill, injection, stump treatments, hardwoods) BEE and TEA

220000107 GRASSES (FORAGE) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

220000106 GRASSES (HAY) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

220000108 GRASSES (SILAGE) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

352400101 GRAY BIRCH (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

670040109 GUARDRAILS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

350670105 HACKBERRY (BARK TREATMENT) BEE only

HARDWOODS (basal bark and stump treatment) BEE only

680090102 HEDGEROWS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

350690106 HICKORY (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

030060201 HICKORY NUTS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

630030030 HOMES (OUTDOOR) TEA

630030031 HOMES (YARDS) (OUTDOOR) TEA

650316101 IMPOUNDED WATER TEA

670090103 INDUSTRIAL AREAS (OUTDOOR) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

670090101 INDUSTRIAL SITES ( foliar (TEA and BEE) frill, stump, tree injection treatments) Acid , TEA and BEE

650216202 IRRIGATION DITCH BANKS TEA

650216101 IRRIGATION CANALS Acid and TEA

650216102 IRRIGATION DITCHES TEA

650216109 IRRIGATION SUPPLY SYSTEMS (WATER TREATMENT) Acid , TEA, and BEE

330340106 KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid, BEE , and TEA

KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS (sod farms) BEE

330340126 KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS FESCUE (athletic fields, cemeteries, golf courses, sod

farms, rights of way, lawns, ornamental turf, parks, soil, and seed treatment) TEA

330350201 KIKUYUGRASS (ORNAMENTAL TURF) (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

650316201 LAKES ( shoreline ) Acid and TEA

650316104 LAKES ( slow flowing, and standing as water treatment) ) TEA

150110106 LENTILS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

650146102 LIVESTOCK DRINKING WATER Acid and TEA

### 94 350770106 LOCUST (FOLIAR TREATMENT and Dormant ) BEE only

670090104 LUMBER YARDS ( foliar or soil treatment (BEE only)) TEA and BEE

030070206 MACADAMIA NUTS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

650330101 MARSH/SWAMP ( surrounding vegetation foliar treatment) Acid , TEA, and BEE

650336204 MARSHES ( surface, surrounding vegetation, water treatment) TEA

342520000 MESQUITE (bark treatment) BEE only

670000105 MILITARY INSTALLATIONS (OUTDOOR) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA and BEE

280120106 MINT (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

680050000 NON

- AGRICULTURAL AREAS (PUBLIC HEALTH) TEA

680050002 NONAGRICULTURAL AREAS (WILDLIFE REFUGE) TEA

670000004 NONCROP AREAS (dormant, foliar, injection stump treatments) Acid , BEE and TEA

670000101 NONCROP AREAS (F rill, soil, wild host plant treatments) TEA and BEE

670000102 NONGRAZING AREAS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

240030106 OATS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

140110107 ONIONS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

280362501 ORCHARDS (STUMP TREATMENT) TEA

350000000 ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES (ALL OR UNSPECIFIED) TEA

310030208 ORNAMENTAL FLOWERING PLANTS (BEDDING) (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

310000101 ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

330100107 ORNAMENTAL LAWNS ( foliar treatment ) Acid and TEA

330100207 ORNAMENTAL LAWNS ( soil and foliar treatment) TEA

320000208 ORNAMENTAL PLANTS ( soil treatment) BEE, TEA

350000107 ORNAMENTAL TREES ( soil, plant bed, stump, basal bark, and foliar treatment) TEA

350002502 ORNAMENTAL TREES ( stump, trunk and foliar treatment) Acid and TEA

330080207 ORNAMENTAL TURF FESCUE (athletic fields, cemeteries, golf courses, sod farms,

rights of way, lawns, ornamental turf, parks, industrial, recreation areas as soil and foliar treatment and also as a seed treatment) TEA

330080113 ORNAMENTAL TURF ( commercial and golf course as foliar treatment) Acid, BEE and TEA

330081601 ORNAMENTAL TURF ( sod farms ) Acid, BEE and TEA

320010105 ORNAMENTAL WOODY PLANTS ( bark, foliar, stump treatment ) Acid, BEE and TEA

320012302 ORNAMENTAL WOODY PLANTS ( injection treatment) TEA

340040108 ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS ( foliar and soil treatment and plant beds) TEA

670110106 PARKING AREAS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

670020012 PARKS (soil treatment) TEA

670020103 PARKS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE only

### 95 220250101 PASTURES ( bahiagrass, Bermuda grass, bluegrass, fescue, orchardgrass, ryegrass,

timothy, wheatgrass in pastures as foliar or frill treatment and as a stump or tree injection treatment) TEA, BEE

220130106 PASTURES ( grass as foliar treatment) Acid and TEA

670120002 PATHS (foliar and soil treatment) TEA

630030012 PATIOS (soil and foliar treatment) TEA

280160106 PEAS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

030088106 PECANS (SOIL FUMIGATION) TEA

331160102 PERENNIAL BLUEGRASS ( foliar treatment) Acid and TEA

220350101 PERENNIAL RYEGRASS ( for forage

- foliar treatment) TEA

670090118 PETROLEUM PUMPING STATION (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

670090117 PETROLEUM TANK FARM (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

301030102 PINE and RED PINE (FOREST) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE and TEA

030110201 PISTACHIO NUTS (SOIL TREATMENT) TEA

640020006 POLES/POSTS TEA

650316117 PONDS (SLOW FLOWING) (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

650316118 PONDS (STANDING) (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

650316209 PONDS (SURROUNDING VEGETATION) Acid and TEA

650316110 PONDS (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

352560103 POST OAK (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE only

140130106 POTATOES (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

140130406 POTATOES (SEED CROP FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

670050102 RAILROADS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA and BEE

280450106 RANGELAND (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

280452301 RANGELAND ( Frill, foliar, stump, tree injection, and soil treatments) TEA, BEE

270170101 RAPESEED (OIL CROP) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

670020101 RECREATIONAL AREAS outdoor ( foliar and soil treatment) TEA and BEE

650316128 RECREATIONAL WATERS (WATER TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

330450107 RED FESCUE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE and TEA

330451601 RED FESCUE (GROWN FOR SOD) BEE and TEA

352040102 RED MAPLE (FOLIAR (TEA) or BARK (BEE) TREATMENT) TEA and BEE

350910101 RED OAK (FOLIAR (TEA) or BARK (BEE) TREATMENT) TEA and BEE

351060107 RED PINE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE and TEA

301030102 RED PINE (FOREST) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE and TEA

650006103 RESERVOIR WATER (UNSPECIFIED AND BANKS ) Acid and TEA

680020103 RESIDENTIAL AREAS ( foliar and injection treatments) TEA

### 96 240040106 RICE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

240040206 RICE

- dry seeded, Ratoon , Beds, Water treatments ) TEA

240040108 RICE (WATER SEEDED) ( foliar treatment) Acid and TEA

240040202 RICE (WATER SEEDED) ( soil treatment ) TEA

670130301 RIGHT

- OF

- WAYS communication and highway, ( water, foliar, frill injection

treatments , stump injection (BEE) ) TEA and BEE

670060104 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY communication and highway, ( water, foliar, injection treatments ) Acid , TEA and BEE

670060006 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (PIPELINE) TEA

670060105 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (PIPELINE) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid , TEA and BEE

670062304 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (PIPELINE) (FRILL TREATMENT) TEA

670062504 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (PIPELINE) (STUMP TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

670062307 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (PIPELINE) (TREE INJECTION TREATMENT) TEA

670060103 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (POWER LINES) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

670062303 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (POWER LINES) ( Frill, Stump, Tree injection treatment ) TEA

670050101 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (RAILROAD) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid , BEE and TEA

670052301 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (RAILROAD) (FRILL TREATMENT) TEA

670052302 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (RAILROAD) (INJECTION TREATMENT) TEA

670052501 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (RAILROAD) (STUMP TREATMENT) TEA

670132501 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (STUMP TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

670060114 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (UTILITY) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid , TEA and BEE

670062301 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (UTILITY) (FRILL TREATMENT) TEA

670062501 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (UTILITY) (STUMP TREATMENT) TEA

670062306 RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY (UTILITY) (TREE INJECTION TREATMENT) TEA

650326109 RIVERS (SLOW FLOWING) (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

650326101 RIVERS (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

650136102 ROADSIDE DITCHES TEA

670040102 ROADSIDES (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid , TEA and BEE

670042302 ROADSIDES (F rill, Injection, soil, stump treatment ) TEA and BEE

240050106 RYE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

330490000 RYEGRASS (athletic fields, cemeteries, golf courses, sod farms, rights of way, lawns,

ornamental turf, parks, industrial, recreation areas as soil and foliar treatment and also as a seed treatment) BEE and TEA

330490108 RYEGRASS (ORNAMENTAL TURF) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

330430106 RYEGRASS (PERENNIAL) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

270080106 SAFFLOWER (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

351110106 SASSAFRAS (FOLIAR and Dormant TREATMENT) BEE only

330980102 SEASHORE PASPALUM (ORNAMENTAL TURF) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE and TEA

### 97 330310127 SHEEP FESCUE (athletic fields, cemeteries, golf courses, sod farms, rights of way,

lawns, ornamental turf, parks, industrial, recreation areas as soil and foliar treatment and also as a seed treatment) TEA

330310113 SHEEP FESCUE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid and TEA

670110009 SIDEWALKS TEA

670110104 SIDEWALKS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

240060107 SORGHUM (GRAIN) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

240060103 SORGHUM (MILO) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

280230106 SOYBEANS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

351160105 SPRUCE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE and TEA

300640101 SPRUCE (FOREST) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

300640201 SPRUCE (FOREST) (SOIL TREATMENT) BEE and TEA

330500108 ST. AUGUSTINEGRASS ( Foliar treatment on lawns and sod farms and foliar or soil

treatment on ornamental turf ) TEA

650336105 STANDING WATER TEA

650336106 STANDING WATER (MARGINS) TEA

770040003 STORAGE AREAS TEA

670090102 STORAGE YARDS ( foliar, frill, stump, and tree injection treatments) TEA

010160106 STRAWBERRIES (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

650326110 STREAMS (SLOW FLOWING) (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

650326104 STREAMS (WATER TREATMENT) TEA

300002501 STUMPS TEA

280200106 SUGAR BEETS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

351170106 SUGAR MAPLE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

342750101 SUMAC ( foliar and Dormant T reatment ) BEE only

270110102 SUNFLOWER (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

650336205 SWAMPS ( foliar and water treatment) TEA

650336206 SWAMPS/MARSHES/BOGS/STANDING WATER (VEGETATION) (FOLIAR

TREATMENT) TEA

351180106 SWEETGUM (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

330310116 TALL FESCUE (athletic fields, cemeteries, golf courses, sod farms, rights of way,

lawns, ornamental turf, parks, industrial, recreation areas as soil and foliar treatment and also as a seed treatment) Acid and TEA

330511601 TALL FESCUE (GROWN FOR SOD) BEE

330510103 TALL FESCUE (LAWNS) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE

330510102 TALL FESCUE (ORNAMENTAL TURF) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) Acid, BEE and TEA

670090107 TANK FARMS ( foliar trea t ment and soil treatment (BEE only) ) TEA and BEE

670120005 TRAILS TEA

### 98 670120105 TRAILS ( Foliar or Stump treatment) TEA

670060101 UTILITY (RIGHTS

- OF

- WAY) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

680020004 VACANT LOTS TEA

670000103 VACANT LOTS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

280240206 VEGETABLE CROPS (SOIL TREATMENT) BEE only

670120107 WALKS (BRICK) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

670120109 WALKS ( foliar or soil tr ea tment ) TEA

680000102 WASTELAND (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

650156104 WATER (POTABLE) TEA

650336202 WETLANDS Acid and TEA

650336202 WETLANDS (STUMP TREATMENT) Acid ONLY

650336202 WETLANDS (TREE INJECTION TREATMENT) Acid ONLY

220070106 WHEAT (FORAGE) (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

352480102 WHITE BIRCH (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

352300101 WHITE OAK (FOLIAR (TEA) or BARK (BEE) TREATMENT) TEA and BEE

351260106 WHITE PINE (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

301350101 WHITE PINE (FOREST) ( Foliar or Soil TREATMENT) TEA and BEE

010140103 WILD GRAPES (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE Only

640020025 WOOD FENCE POSTS TEA

010140103 WILD GRAPES (FOLIAR TREATMENT) BEE ONLY

680010102 WOODLAND AREAS (FOLIAR TREATMENT) TEA

343880104 YAUPON tree ( bark tr e a tment ) BEE only

341430000 YUCCA BEE only

330560000 ZOYSIAGRASS (soil and foliar treatments, athletic fields, cemeteries, golf courses,

sod farms, lawns, ornamental turf, parks) TEA and BEE

330560109 ZOYSIAGRASS ( foliar treatment lawns and ornamental lawns) Acid and TEA

### 99

Appendix D Endangered Species Based on this screening-level assessment, there are potential risks of direct effects to listed taxa from the use of Triclopyr TEA and Triclopyr BEE on some of their registered use sites. Listed species of these taxa may also be affected through indirect effects be cause of the potential direct effects on listed and non-listed species. Potential direct effects on listed species from the use of Triclopyr products may be associated with modi fication of primary constituent elements of designated critical habitats, where such designations have been made. However, at this current stage of the Registration Review process, it is premature to make effects determinations for listed species until further refinements are conducted. To make effects determinations for individual species, useful refinements may include analyses of 1) more detailed, species-specific ecological and biological data; 2) more detailed and accurate information on Triclopyr use patterns; and 3) sub -county level spatial proximity data for the co-occurrence of potential effects areas and listed species and any designated critical habitat. Examples of such refinements are described below.

EFED is currently developing tools that are expected to further refine the assessment and are designed to support effects determinations for individual federally listed species and their designated critical habitats (where applicable). Scientific information obtained from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and other reliable sources is being collated by EFED to address all currently listed species. The information will be stored in an Office of Pesticide Programs P esticide Registration Information SysteM (PRISM) knowledgebase. The listed species knowledgebase will consist of an information repository that houses biological and behavioral information relevant to individual species ( e.g. , habitat, diet, and life history, including specific temporal and spatial associations) and a document repository that contains supporting documents ( e.g ., USFWS recovery plans) and electronic information ( e.g ., GIS data files). For terrestrial taxa, the biological information relevant to risk quotient (RQ) calculations ( e.g ., diet and body weight) will be used to parameterize exposure estimates to derive species-specific RQs using a method consistent with currently used methods in the T-REX and T-HERPS models.

R efinements may also include more detailed analyses of the registered uses and their use patterns that result in LOC exceedances for federally listed species in the screening-level assessment. The analyses may include more information on where, when, and how Triclopyr is used on all use sites. Actual usage data (when available) and national landcover datasets that indicate potential use sites [ e.g ., national land cover dataset (NLCD), crop data layer (CDL)] may be used to support a more refined analysis of where triclopyr products are reasonably expected to be used. Similarly, refinements for the timing of applications and how triclopyr products are used may be based on the analysis of

a dditional usage data, beyond what were available at the time of the screening-level assessment, and a more in-depth exploration of agronomic practices.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, along with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Marine

### 100

Fisheries Service (NMFS), have announced the availability of a report developed by the National Academy of Sciences’ National Research Council outlining recommendations on specific scientific and technical issues related to the development of endangered and threatened species risk assessments for pesticides that are compliant with the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). The EPA, USDA, FWS and NMFS asked the NRC to consider a range of scientific and technical issues including:

• identifying best available scientific data and information;

• considering sub-lethal, indirect and cumulative effects;

• assessing the effects of chemical mixtures and inert ingredients;

• analyzing the effects of pesticide use through the use of models;

• incorporating uncertainties into the evaluations; and

• using geospatial information and datasets that can be employed by the agencies in the course of these assessments.

After reviewing the NRC’s recommendations on these scientific and technical issues, the EPA and its federal partners will determine how these recommendations can be implemented and incorporated into the scientific approaches for developing listed species risk assessments. It is anticipated that any draft guidance and/or science policies developed by EPA and its federal partners as a result of the NAS recommendations would be released for public comment prior to implementation.

The refinements based on individual species data; additional, detailed usage information, when available; and further recommendations from the NRC report are expected to help to more accurately identify potential areas of effect and to better inform effects and habitat determinations for listed species and any designated critical habitats. For example, if Triclopyr is used when a particular species of concern is not present ( e.g ., it is migratory) or is not co-located in space, then risk of potential direct effects to the species may often be precluded. If LOCs are still exceeded for monocots, mammals, freshwater inver tebrates, estuarine/marine invertebrates, and freshwater fish after conducting the

re fined analyses, further analyses of the potential spatial and temporal co-occurrence of listed species of concern (and any designated critical habitat) may be conducted. The extent of possible refinement in the analyses of spatial/temporal co-occurrence will largely depend on the scale and quality of the available sub-county level use site ( e.g ., N LCD, CDL) and species location data

.

APPENDIX E ENDOCRINE DISRUPTOR SCREENING PROGRAM: As required under FFDCA section 408(p), EPA has developed the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) to determine whether certain substances (including pesticide active and other ingredients) may have an effect in humans or wildlife similar to an effect produced by a “naturally occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as the Administrator may designate.” The EDSP employs a two-tiered approach to making the statutorily required determinations. Tier 1 consists of a battery of 11 screening assays to identify the potential of a chemical substance to interact with the estrogen, androgen, or thyroid (E, A, or T) hormonal systems. Chemicals that go through Tier 1 screening and

### 101

are found to have the potential to interact with E, A, or T hormonal systems will proceed to the next stage of the EDSP where EPA will determine which, if any, of the Tier 2 tests

a re necessary based on the available data. Tier 2 testing is designed to identify any adverse endocrine related effects caused by the substance, and establish a dose-response relationship between the dose and the E, A, or T effect.

B etween October 2009 and February 2010, EPA issued test orders/data call-ins for the fir st group of 67 chemicals, which contains 58 pesticide active ingredients and 9 inert ingredients. This list of chemicals was selected based on the potential for humanexposure through pathways such as food and water, residential activity, and certain postapplication agricultural scenarios. This list should not be construed as a list of known or likely endocrine disruptors.

Triclopyr is not on List 2. List 2 represents the next set of chemicals for which EPA intends to issue test orders/data call-ins in the near future. “ For further information on the status of the EDSP, the policies and procedures, the lists of chemicals, future lists, the test guidelines and the Tier 1 screening battery, please visit our website. 6

6 http://www.epa.gov/endo/

Welcome to the EFED Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk This tool is designed to provide the risk assessor with a rapid method for determining the potential significance of the inhalation exposure route to birds and mammals in a risk assessment. 

# Input Application and Chemical Information Enter Chemical Name Triclopyr Acid Enter Chemical Use Turf Is the Application a Spray? (enter y or n) y If Spray What Type (enter ground or air) ground Enter Chemical Molecular Weight (g/mole) 256.5 Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 1.30E

- 06 Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 12

Toxicity Properties Bird

### 102 Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 1698 Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15 Enter Tested Bird Weight (kg) 1.58 Mammal Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 630 Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC 50 (mg/L) 2.6 Duration of Rat Inhalation Study (hrs) 4 Enter Rat Weight (kg) 0.35 

# Output Results Avian (0.020 kg ) Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation mg/m 3 ) 1.79E

- 02 Maximum 1

- hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.26E

- 03 Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 2.82E+01 Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 8.01E

- 05 Exposure not Likely Significant Maximum Post

- treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.27E+00 Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 4.50E

- 02 Exposure not Likely Significant


### Results Mammalian (0.015 kg ) Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.79E

- 02 Maximum 1

- hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.84E

- 03 Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.55E+02 Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.83E

- 05 Exposure no t Likely Significant Maximum Post

- treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.59E+00 Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.03E

- 02 Exposure not Likely Significant

SIPS Model
Table 1. Inputs
Parameter Value
Chemical name Triclopyr Acid
Solubility (in water at 25 o C; mg/L) 440

Mammalian LD 50 (mg/kg

- bw) 630 Mammalian test species laboratory rat Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Mammalian NOAEL (mg/kg

- bw) 25
Mammalian test species laboratory rat Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Avian LD 50 (mg/kg

- bw) 1698 Avian test species mallard duck Body weight (g) of "other" avian species Mineau scaling factor 1.15

### 103

Mallard NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) 100 Bobwhite quail NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) 500 NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) for other bird species Body weight (g) of other avian species NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) for 2nd other bird species Body weight (g) of 2nd other avian species

Table 2. Mammalian Results
Parameter Acute Chronic Upper bound exposure (mg/kg

- bw) 75.6800 75.6800 Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg

- bw) 484.5712 19.2290 Ratio of exposure to toxicity 0.1562 3.9357

Conclusion* Exposure through drinking water alone is a potential concern for mammals Exposure through drinking water alone is a potential concern for mammals

Table 3. Avian Results
Parameter Acute Chronic Upper bound exposure (mg/kg

- bw) 356.4000 356.4000 Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg

- bw) 881.6447 4.9613 Ratio of exposure to acute toxicity 0.4042 71.8366

Conclusion* Exposure through drinking water alone is a potential concern for birds Exposure through drinking water alone is a potential concern for birds

*Conclusion is for drinking water exposure alone. This does not combine all routes of exposure. Therefore, when aggregated with other routes ( i.e ., diet, inhalation, dermal), pesticide exposure through drinking water may contribute to a total exposure that has potential for effects to non

- target animals.