### Page 2 of 43 

###  Terrestrial field dissipa tion studies (835.6100): No acceptable studies have been submitted. The TFD is a keystone study that allows for direct comparison of the conceptual model of pesticide behavior deri ved from laboratory data with real world applications in the field. Without these data, EFED has no way to confirm that the predicted behavior will happen.

 Environmental Chemistry Methods for Soil (OCSPP G uideline 850.6100) for parent and major degradates. No acceptable studies have been submitted

 Environmental Chemistry Methods for Water (OCSPP Guideline 850.6100) for parent and major degradates to support the aquatic field dissipation study. No acceptable studies have been submitted

The following ecological eff ect data gaps exist for dimethomorph:

 

### Rainbow Trout Early-Life Stage T oxicity Study (OCSPP Guideline 850.1400): Dimethomorph has outdoor uses that may result in exposure to fish. Significant reductions in the post-hatch weight and hatchling success of freshwater (MRID 44418104) and estuarine/marine fish (MRID 48326906), respectively, were observed at all test levels as low as 34 and 63 μg a.i./L, respectively, that a No Effect concentration (NOAEC) could not be produced to assess the risk to fish on a chroni c basis. A NOAEC of 25 μg a.i./L at the level of the modeled 60-day EEC from the FL cabba ge scenario (D316329) w ould result in a LOC exceedance. An ELS study with freshwater fish, specifically the rainbow trout, is requested to be repeated with lower concentrations to produce an NOAEC. Currently, an acute to chronic ratio (ACR) for estuarine/marine fish from the freshwater data is not appropriate because the acceptable acute and chronic studie s used different freshwater species that prevented the calculations. Instead of asking for another ELS study using estuarine/marine fish with lower doses to produce an NOAEC to a ssess chronic risk to estuary fish, EFED is only asking that the rainbow tr out ELS study be repeated with lower doses to produce an NOAEC in order to calculate an ACR using fr eshwater data on the same species (e.g., rainbow trout) to estimate the NOAEC for estu arine/marine fish. Without a repeated ELS study with the rainbow trout, chronic risk to both freshwater and estuarine/marine fish will be presumed.

 

### Avian Acute Oral with a Passerine Species (OCSPP Guideline 850.2100): Acceptable acute avian acute oral toxicity data were not submitted for a passerine species exposed to dimethomorph, which is now required under the 40 CFR Part 158 data requirements. However, in the most recent risk assessment th at stated while the ‘RQ <0.15’ of a 20 gram bird that eat short grass exceeds the Agency’s acute listed species LOC of 0.1, this ‘RQ’ is expected to be lower than the LOC because none of the other RQs exceeded the LOC and a non-definitive endpoint ( i.e., LD50 value >2,000 mg/kg-bw) based on the bobwhite quail was used to calculate that ‘RQ’ which result ed in exceeding the LOC where no mortality or other signs of toxicity were observed at the highest leve l tested. Though the available bobwhite quail study indicates dimethomorph has lo w toxicity to upland game bird species, it is uncertain whether passerines may be more or less sensitive to this chemical as a result of their higher metabolic rate and differing metabol ic pathways. Given the predicted ‘RQ’ of <0.15 that exceeded the LOC for sm all-sized birds, EFED cannot preclude the potential risk to passerines which are small-sized birds. An avian oral toxicity study is needed for a

### Page 3 of 43 

### passerine species. A passerine study protocol must be submitted for review by the Agency prior to initia tion of the study.

### Page 4 of 43 

# Problem Formulation for the Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk, Endangered Species, and Drinking

Water Assessments in Support of the Registration Review of Dimethomorph

acryloyl]morpholine; 4-[3-(4-Chlorophe nyl)-3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-1-oxo-2- propenyl]morpholine CAS Registry Number: 110488-70-5 PC Code: 268800

P

repared by: 

### Stephen Carey, Biologist Ibrahim Abdel-Saheb, Ph.D., Environmental Scientist U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs Environmental Fate and Effects Division Environmental Risk Branch VI 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Mail Code 7507P Washington, DC 20460 R eviewed by: 

### William P. Eckel, Senior Science Advisor Brian Kiernan, Biologist Mark Corbin, ERB6 Chief

Decemeber 6, 2012 

## Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention

### Page 5 of 43 

## Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. ........... 6 2. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments ....................................................................... 7 2.1. Ecological Risk Assessments .......................................................................................... 7 2.2. Drinking Water Exposure Assessments ........................................................................... 7 2.3. Clean Water Act Programs ............................................................................................... 7 3. Environmental Fate and Transport .......................................................................................... ... 8 3.1. Transformation Products ................................................................................................ 10 4. Receptors...................................................................................................................... ......... 10 4.1. Effects to Aquatic Organisms ........................................................................................ 10 4.2. Effects to Terrestrial Organisms .................................................................................... 11 4.3. Ecological Incidents ....................................................................................................... 12 5. Exposure Pathways of Concern ............................................................................................ 12 6. Analysis Plan ............................................................................................................. .............. 13 6.1. Stressors of Concern....................................................................................................... 13 6.2. Measures of Exposure ................................................................................................... 13 6.3. Measures of Effect ......................................................................................................... 13 6.4. Endangered Species Assessments .................................................................................. 14 6.5. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program ....................................................................... 14 7. Environmental Fate and Ec ological Effects Data ................................................................. 14 7.1. Environmental Fate ....................................................................................................... ..... 14 7.2. Effects .................................................................................................................. .............. 17 8. References ................................................................................................................ ................ 21

### Page 6 of 43 

# 1. Introduction

EFED evaluated the most recent ecological risk assessments fo r Dimethomorph in association with the updated toxicity, exposur e, and usage information to determine if sufficient data are available and if further updates are needed to support registration review. Recent risk assessments include a 2011 assessment for the use of dimethomorph on Grapes (D387380), and a 2011 assessment on brassica subgroup 5A, 5B, and green onions (D387477, 387476). Appendix A lists the most recent usage information on dimethomorph uses.

In addition, EFED considered th e latest EPA science policies a nd risk assessment methodologies. The structure of dimethomorph, as well as the ch emical names and other identifiers can be found in the chemical identity table attached to this document (Table 2).

Dimethomorph is a systemic fungicide used to control molds on plants. It is a cinnamic acid derivative and a member of the morpholine chemical family. Its mode of action is the inhibition of sterol (ergosterol) synthesis. It is a mixture of two isomer s (E and Z), but only the Z isomer has fungicidal activity.

Dimethomorph is currently registered for use on a variety of agricultural food and feed crops, including Brassica leafy vegetabl es, bulb vegetables, cucurbit ve getables, fruiting vegetables, ginseng, grapes, hops, lettuce, lima beans, potatoe s, taro, tobacco, fiel d-grown tomatoes, and turnip greens.

It is formulated in active end-use products as a water dispersible granule, and emulsifiable concentrate. Treatment equipment includes aircraft, ground equipment, high volume ground sprayer, ultra low volume ground sprayer, and low volume ground sprayer. The chemical profile produced by BEAD, located in the docket, lists the use patterns of maximum exposures for the current uses of Dimethomorph. EFED wi ll use application scenar ios that result in upper bound maximum exposure scenarios for a give n use for the risk assessment.

The major degradate of dimethomorph in submitted environmental fate studies was CO 2 

### (aerobic soil metabolism, and anaerobic aerobic aquatic metabolism), and an unidentified degradate recovered at up to 16% of the applied radioactiv ity (aerobic and anaerobic aquatic metabolism). These unidentified residues will be added to the total toxic residue (TTR) to characterize their impact. Absence of data on these degradates will be adding an uncertainty to the risk assessment. Additional data such as (e.g. chemical structur e, fate data) could re duce such uncertainty.

### Page 7 of 43 

# 2. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments

2.1. Ecological Risk Assessments

The Agency has conducted multiple ecological risk assessments on Dimethomorph that serve as a basis for this scoping document. These a ssessments are briefly summarized below.

The most recent risk assessments for Dimethomorph are for the use revision of Dimethomorph on grapes (DP Barcode 387380) and the IR-4 Secti on 3 registration for use on Brassica head and stem subgroup 5A (DP Barcode 316329). The majo r ecological conclusions presented in these risk assessments were as follows:

Table 1. Summary of Risk Concerns Identified for Dimethomorph in Previous Assessments

Bird

s Mammal

s Terr. Plant

s Terr. Invert

s Fish BC F Aquati

c Inverts Aquati

c Plants Ground water Contami

nation Persiste

nce Degradates of Concern

√ a √ b

-- c -- c √ d

-- e

-- c

-- c No Yes Uncertain f

a Chronic LOC exceeded for bi rds; no acute exceedances.
b Chronic LOC exceeded for mammals based on do se-based effects; no acute exceedances.

c No LOC exceedances
d Chronic risk presumed for freshwater and estuarine/marine fish and aquatic-phase amphibians based on lack of data due to significant eff ects observed in all levels; no acute exceedances.

e BCF data waived because 

### K ow 

### is <1000.
f An unidentified degradate was recovered at 16% of radioactivity; however, was never assessed whether it is a degradate of concern or not.



## 2.2. Drinking Water Exposure Assessments

The latest Tier I drinking wa ter exposure assessment for the proposed new use Brassica leafy, and bulb vegetables; and dimethomorph new use on leafy vegetables was conducted for Dimethomorph in 2011 (USEPA, 2011, D387377, D387371, D382099, D382109). That exposure assessment was conducted on the parent onl y since the degradates were deemed to not be of tox concern by HED. Tier I exposure estim ates of Dimethomorph from currently labeled uses that produce maximum exposure (use on broccoli) were 24.7 μg/L for surface water and 0.264 μg/L for ground water. 

## 2.3. Clean Water Act Programs

Dimethomorph is not identified as a cause of impair ment 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 Dimethomorph. Aqua tic benchmarks have been established for Dimethomorph and are available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/ecoris k_ders/aquatic_life_benchmark.htm . Any data submitted or

### Page 8 of 43 

### otherwise located as part of th e registration review process may be used to update aquatic life benchmarks if applicable. 

# 3. Environmental Fate and Transport

Although the fate database is incomplete, a pr eliminary environmental fate assessment can be made. From acceptable and supplemental laboratory studies with Dimethomorph, it appears that microbial metabolism is the pr imary route of dissipation with reported laboratory aerobic soil metabolic half-lives of 66-117 days. No aerobic soil metabolism degradates were identified other than small amounts of 14 

### CO 2


### . 

### As Dimethomorph degraded, most of the radioactivity was not extracted from the soil. While it is also clear that Dimethomorph will degrade in an aerobic soil and anaerobic aqua tic systems, the rates cannot be determined at this time since the subm itted studies had additional carbon sources which may have significantly accelerated the degr adation rates. A pairof isomers of monodesmethyl Dimethomorph were is olated and identified as pr imary intermed iates for the anaerobic studies.

Dimethomorph did not hydrolyze or photodegra de in the submitted studies. Dimethomorph was shown to be moderate ly mobile to slightly mobile in soil. Mobility in German soils ( K d 

### values were 2.09-1 1.67 ml/g and K oc 

### values were 290-566). M obility in the four selected USA soils has 

### K d 

### values range of 10.1-19.0 ml/g, and K oc 

### values range of 787-1588.

S election of environmental fate and transport properties of 

### Dimethomorph is summarized in Table 2

.
Table 2. Chemical Properties and Environmental Fate Parameters of 

### Dimethomorph

. Parameter Value Description Source Selected Physical/Chemical Parameters Molecular mass (molecular formula) 387.86 g/mole

Vapor pressure (20°C) E isomer 7.3 x 10 -9 

### mmHg Z isomer 7.5 x 10 -9 

### mmHg Non-volatile Tomlin (ed.)

Aqueous solubility (20  C) <50 mg/l at 20-23 deg C Low water solubility Tomlin (ed.)

Henry’s Law Constant 2.06-2.13 x 10 -10 

### atmm3/ Mole Non-volatile Estimated from vapor pressure and water solubility Log octanol-to-water partition coefficient (Log K O W 

### ) 2.68 Low hydrophobic Tomlin (ed.)

Persistence Hydrolysis half-life (25  C) @ pH 4, 7, and 9 stable Stable at all pHs for a period of 10 weeks. MRID 43917226

### Page 9 of 43 Parameter Value Description Source Aqueous photolysis half-life (pH 5, 25  C) T 1/2 

### = 50-56 days Value corresponds to 12 hour photo cycle in midsummer, uncorrected half-life with continuous irradiation was 25-28 days. MRID 43917227

Soil photolysis half-life (25  C) T 1/2 

### = 75 days Continuous irradiation (15 days) with a Xenon arc lamp. MRID 43917228

Aerobic soil metabolism half-life (20°C) T 1/2 

### = 66 days T 1/2 

### = 117 days MRID 43917229, MRID 43917230

Anaerobic aquatic metabolism half-life (20  C) 0.9, 1.3 (parent) days Supplemental study MRID 43917233

Aerobic aquatic metabolism halflife (20  C) 24.7-56.9 days Supplemental study MRID 43917233 48326905 Mobility Freundlich soil-water partition coefficients (K d 

### ); 4.47, 11.67, 2.09, 4.94, 8.51, 2.72, 3.03, 15.7, 10.1, 19.0, 11.9 mL/g Various foreign soils. The last four readings were performed with domestic soils. MRID: 46235734 43917235 44780202

Organic carbon-normalized Freundlich coefficients (K FOC 

### ) 566, 402, 290, 515, 377, 388, 316, 1588, 1158, 1485, 787 mL/g oc 

### Moderate-slightly mobile MRID: 46235734, 43917235, 44780202 Field Dissipation

Terrestrial field dissipation halflife; leaching depth N/A No acceptable study MRID 

### 43917236-39 43970304 44996201

Fish Bioconcentration

Fish bioconcentration factors (BCF); depuration rate Not available No data were submitted Data requirement was waived because the K ow 

### , is <1000

### Page 10 of 43 

## 3.1. Transformation Products

The major degradate of dimethomorph in submitted environmental fate studies was CO 2 

### (aerobic soil metabolism, and anaerobic aerobic aquatic metabolism), and an unidentified degradate recovered at up to 16% of the applied radioactiv ity (aerobic and anaerobic aquatic metabolism). These unidentified residues will be added to th e TTR to characterize their impact. Absence of data on these degradates will be adding an uncerta inty to the risk assessment. Additional data such as (e.g. chemical structure, fa te data) could reduce such uncertainty. Minor degradates were isolate d, but no compounds were identif ied (aqueous photolysis and soil photolysis studies). 

# 4. Receptors

Tables 3 and 4 provide a summary of the aquatic and terrestrial taxonomic groups, respectively, and most sensitive surrogate species tested to characterize the potential acute and chronic ecological effects of dimethomorph. In addition, the tables provide a preliminary overview of the potential acute toxicity of dimethomorph by providing the acute toxicity clas sifications. Based on the available ecotoxicity information, dimethomorph is moderately toxic to freshwater fish however caused no immobility to freshwater invertebrates up to 10.6 mg/L. Dimethomorph is also slightly toxic to estuarine/marine fi sh but moderately toxi c to estuarine/marine invertebrates. On the terrestri al side, dimethomorph is practica lly non-toxic to birds, mammals, soil invertebrates, and terrestrial insects. More ec ological studies for terrest rial and aquatic plants have been submitted since the last risk assessm ent; thus, the toxicity of dimethomorph to terrestrial and aquatic plants is being reviewed at this time. Additional detail is included in the following tables. 

## 4.1. Effects to Aquatic Organisms

Table 3. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for Dimethomorph

Taxonomic

Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value (mg a.i./L) Acute Toxicity Classification or Adverse Effect Observed Source (Study classification)

Freshwater fish 1 Acute Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) LC 50 = 6.2 Moderately toxic 43917211 (Acceptable)

Chronic NOAEC <0.341 AffectedEndpoint: posthatch weight 44418104 (Supplemental)

Freshwater invertebrates Acute
Water Flea ( Daphnia magna ) EC 50 >10.6 No effects up to 10.6 mg a.i./L 45507202 (Supplemental)

Chronic NOAEC = 0.11 Affected Endpoint: length (growth) 44418105 (Acceptable)

Estuarine/marine fish Acute Sheepshead Minnow LC 50 = 11.3 Slightly toxic 44418101 (Acceptable)

### Page 11 of 43 Table 3. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for Dimethomorph

Taxonomic

Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value (mg a.i./L) Acute Toxicity Classification or Adverse Effect Observed Source (Study classification)

Chronic ( Cyprinodon variegatus ) NOAEC <0.063 Affected Endpoint: time to hatch 48326906 (Supplemental)

Estuarine/marine invertebrates Acute Eastern Oyster ( Crassostrea virginica ) EC 50 = 5.13 Moderately toxic 44418102 (Acceptable)

Chronic No data available.

Aquatic plants and algae Vascular Duckweed ( Lemna gibba ) -- -- Under review 2

Nonvascular Algae or diatom -- -- Under review 3

1 Freshwater fish may be surrogates for aquatic-phase amphibians.
2 MRID 44283402 is currently under re view to collect data on the most sensitive species and endpoints. MRID 45507203 has been reviewed and will be compared to MR ID 44283402 to select the most sensitive species and endpoints.
3 MRIDs 43917217, 44283402, and 47700328 are currently unde r review to collect data on the most sensitive species and endpoints. MRIDs 43917222 and 45507204 have been reviewed and will be compared to the MRIDs under review to select the most sensitive species and endpoints.



## 4.2. Effects to Terrestrial Organisms

Table 4. Summary of the Most Sensitive E ndpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for Dimethomorph Taxonomic

Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value Acute Toxicity Classification or Chronic Effects Observed Source (Study classification)

Birds 1 Acute

Bobwhite quail ( Colinus virginianus ) LD 50 > 2000 mg a.i./kgbw Practically nontoxic 43917206 (Acceptable)

Subacute Dietary LC 50 > 5310 mg a.i./kgdiet Practically nontoxic 43917208 (Acceptable)

Chronic NOAEC = 200 mg a.i./kg-diet LOAEC = 800 mg a.i./kg-diet Affected Endpoint: hatchling weight and adult female weight 44283403 (Acceptable)

Mammals Acute Oral Laboratory rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) LD 50 = 3600 mg a.i./kgbw (Females) Practically nontoxic 44283402

Chronic Laboratory rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) NOAEL = 300 mg a.i./kg-diet LOAEL = 1000 mg a.i./kg-diet Affected Endpoint: reproductive effects 42333920

Insects Acute Contact Honey bee ( Apis mellifera L. ) LD 50 > 50 μg a.i./bee Practically nontoxic 43917223 (Acceptable)

### Page 12 of 43 Table 4. Summary of the Most Sensitive E ndpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for Dimethomorph Taxonomic

Group Study Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value Acute Toxicity Classification or Chronic Effects Observed Source (Study classification)

Terrestrial plants Seedling Emergence Dicot -- -- Under review 2 Monocot -- -- Vegetative Vigor Dicot -- -- Under review 3 Monocot -- --
1 Birds represent surrogates for terrestrial-phase amphibians and reptiles.
2 MRID 47700329 is currently under re view to collect data on the most sensitive species and endpoints. MRID 44283401 has been reviewed and will be compared to the MRID 47700329 to select the most sensitive species and endpoints.
3 MRID 47700328 is currently under re view to collect data on the most sensitive species and endpoints. MRID 44283401 has been reviewed and will be compared to MR ID 47700328 to select the most sensitive species and endpoints. 

## 4.3. Ecological Incidents

The ecological incident information system (EIIS ) is an OPP database that houses ecological incidents that have been repor ted to the Agency. When ava ilable, EIIS includes date and location of an incident, type and magnitude of effects observed in various species, use(s) of pesticides known or suspected of contributing to the inci dent, and results of any chemical residue analysis or other analyses conducted during in cident investigation. EIIS incidents are categorized according to the certai nty that the incident resulted from pesticide exposure. The Avian Monitoring System (AIMS) is a database administered by the Amer ican Bird Conservancy that contains publicly available data on reported avian incidents involving pesticides. Many of the incidents listed in this data base are also in the EIIS.

There are no reported incidents for dimethomorph in the EIIS or AIMS databases, as well as no reports of aggregate incide nts as of October 2012. The absence of reported incidents should not be construed as the absence of incidents. Inci dent reports for non-target organisms typically provide information only on mortal ity events and plant damage. S ublethal effects in organisms such as abnormal behavior, reduced growth a nd/or impaired reproduction are rarely reported, except for some phytotoxic effects in terrestrial plants. EPA's changes in the registrant reporting requirements for incidents in 1998 may also account for a reduced number of reported incidents. 

# 5. Exposure Pathways of Concern

The environmental fate and toxicity profile for Dimethomorph suggests that direct spray, spray drift, leaching and runoff represent the likely exposure pathwa ys for terrestrial and aquatic nontarget organisms. Drinking wate r and inhalation exposure pathways were screened using the SIP (Screening Imbibition Program) and STIR (Scr eening Tool for Inhalation Risk) screening methods and were found to be exposure pathwa ys of low concern (no LOC exceedances are expected). SIP and STIR ar e described in detail at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/ models/terrestrial/index.htm and the modeling can be found in the Appendix C.

### Page 13 of 43 

# 6. Analysis Plan

6.1. Stressors of Concern

Ecological Risk Assessment

Based on available toxicity data, it appears th at the only stressor of ecological concern for terrestrial and aquatic organism s is dimethomorph; however, an unidentified degradate recovered at up to 16% of the applied radioactivity was obs erved and no data on the unidentified degradate is available to determine whether the degradate is of concern or not. Therefore, all risk calculations will be based on two approaches to determine whether the unidentified degradate may be of potential concern: for parent dime thomorph alone (for terres trial exposure) and for parent dimethomorph plus the unidentified degrad ate, assuming the degradate is stable and as toxic as the parent (for aquatic exposure). Absence of data on th ese degradates will be adding an uncertainty to the risk assessment. Additional data such as (e.g. chemical structure, fate data) could reduce such uncertainty.

Drinking Water

The drinking water assessments conducted to suppor t future human health risk assessments of dimethomorph will incorporate model estimates of dimethomorph residues of concern, which is the parent compound only since the degradates were deemed to not be of tox concern by HED. If the registrant choose to submit data on pare nt and degradates, the chemical dimethomorph residues of concern may be reevaluated.


## 6.2. Measures of Exposure

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

.



## 6.3. Measures of Effect

Toxicity data presented in Section 4 of this problem formulation w ill be used to calculate risk quotients. Any additional information submitted by th e registrant or found in the open literature prior to conduct of the risk assessment also wi ll be considered. The open literature studies are identified using EPA’s ECOTOXicol ogy database (ECOTOX) (USEPA, 2007 c ), which employs a literature search engine for lo cating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife. The publically avai lable database is available at www.epa.gov/ecotox/

. 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 speci es that are sensitive to the chemicals and from changes in structure and functional charac teristics of the affected communities.

### Page 14 of 43 

## 6.4. Endangered Species Assessments

Consistent with the Agency’s responsibility under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Agency will evaluate risks to Federally-listed th reatened and/or endangere d (listed) species from registered uses of pesticides in registration re view. The process for evaluating potential risks to listed species is further described at http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/enda nger/litstatus/riskasses.htm

. 

## 6.5. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

Dimethomorph was not included in the first grou p of 67 chemicals issued an order to conduct Tier 1 EDSP testing. For additional information the EDSP program, visit http://www.epa.gov/endo/

. 

# 7. Environmental Fate and Ecological Effects Data

7.1. Environmental Fate

Even though, the registrant did submit thr ee studies (an aerobic soil metabolism MRID# 48326903, 04, and aerobic aquatic metabolism st udy MRID# 48326905), the terrestrial field dissipation studies are still mi ssing. The TFD is a keystone study that allows for direct comparison of the conceptual model of pesticide be havior derived from labor atory data with real world applications in the field. Without thes e data, EFED has no way to confirm that the predicted behavior will happen. However, without the TFD EFED will assume that the conceptual model built off of lab fate data is co rrect and reflect the real world condition of the TFD.

Table 5 identifies environmental fate studies by MRID that offer data for each guideline requirement, as well as study classi fications and whether or not furt her data are needed in order to support risk assessment.

Table 5. Submitted Environmental Fate Data for Dimethomorph

OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk

assessment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data 835.2120 Hydrolysis MRID : 43917226 Acceptable No --

835.2240 Aqueous photolysis MRID 43917227 Acceptable No --

835.2410 Soil photolysis MRID 43917228 Acceptable No --

### Page 15 of 43 OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk

assessment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data 835.4100 Aerobic soil metabolism MRID 43917229 43917230 Acceptable No --

835.4200 Anaerobic soil metabolism MRID 48326903 48326904 Supplemental No While anaerobic soil metabolism data are required according the 40 CFR 158.1300, these data are not used in exposure. Therefore, these data would likely have little impact on the risk conclusions 835.4300 Aerobic aquatic metabolism MRID 43917233 48326905 Supplemental No Even though this study provides supplemental information towards the aerobic aquatic metabolism guideline; these data can be used in a quantitative RA 835.4400 Anaerobic aquatic metabolism MRID 43917233 Supplemental No Even though this study provides supplemental information towards the aerobic aquatic metabolism guideline; these data can be used in a quantitative RA 835.1230 835.1240 Adsorption/ desorption and leaching MRID: 46235734, 43917235, 44780202 Acceptable No --

835.6100 Terrestrial field dissipation MRID 43917236-39 43970304 44996201 Unacceptable Yes The TFD study allows for direct comparison of the conceptual model of pesticide behavior derived from laboratory data with real world applications in the field. Without these data, EFED has no way to confirm that the predicted behavior will happen. Storage Stability Study (TFD) 44996201 Unacceptable

850.1730 Fish bioconcentrat ion MRID 44996202 Unacceptable No Data requirement was waived because the K ow , is <1000

### Page 16 of 43 OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk

assessment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data Environmental Chemistry Method: Water 850.6100 Analytical method in
water No data submitted NA Yes An ECM and ILV are needed with associated LOQ and LOD for all major degradates for water. In the absence of independently validated environmental chemistry methods, submitted environmental fate and ecological effects data may not be reviewable and entities outside theAgency may lack chemicalspecific methods for analyses in environmental compartments. Independently validated environmental chemistry methods will be used to evaluate any newly submitted environmental fate and ecological effects data and will be made available for enforcement and monitoring purposes at the federal, state, and local levels.

### Page 17 of 43 OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk

assessment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data Environmental Chemistry Method: Soil 850.6100 Analytical method in soil No data submitted NA Yes An ECM and ILV are needed with associated LOQ and LOD for all major degradates for soil. In the absence of independently validated environmental chemistry methods, submitted environmental fate and ecological effects data may not be reviewable and entities outside theAgency may lack chemicalspecific methods for analyses in environmental compartments. Independently validated environmental chemistry methods will be used to evaluate any newly submitted environmental fate and ecological effects data and will be made available for enforcement and monitoring purposes at the federal, state, and local levels. 

### Analytical method in aquatic media No data submitted NA



## 7.2. Effects

Tables 6 and 7 identify ecological effects studies by MR ID that offer data for each guideline requirement, as well as study classi fications and whether or not furt her data are needed in order to support risk assessment. Rationale for the additional data requested is presented below.

 Dimethomorph has outdoor uses that may result in exposure to fish. Significant reductions in the post-hatch weight and hatchling success of freshwater (MRID 44418104) and estuarine/marine fish (MRID 48326906), respectively, were observed at all test levels as low as 34 and 63 μg a.i./L, respectively, that a No Effect concentration (NOAEC) could not be produced to assess the risk to fish on a chroni c basis. A NOAEC of 25 μg a.i./L at the level of the modeled 60-day EEC from the FL cabba ge scenario (D316329) w ould result in a LOC exceedance. An ELS study with freshwater fish, specifically the rainbow trout, is requested to be repeated with lower concentrations to produce an NOAEC. Currently, an ACR for estuarine/marine fish from the freshwater data is not appropriate because the acceptable acute and chronic studies used different freshwater species that prevented the calculations. Instead of asking for another ELS study using estuarine/ma rine fish with lower doses to produce an

### Page 18 of 43 

### NOAEC to assess chronic risk to estuary fish, EFED is only asking that the rainbow trout ELS study be repeated with lower doses to pr oduce an NOAEC in order to calculate an ACR using freshwater data on the same species (e.g., rainbow trout) to estimate the NOAEC for estuarine/marine fish. Without a repeated ELS st udy with the rainbow tr out, chronic risk to both freshwater and estuarine/marine fish will be presumed.

 Acceptable acute avian acute oral toxicity data were not submitted for a passerine species exposed to dimethomorph, which is now required under the 40 CFR Part 158 data requirements. However, in the most recent risk assessment that stated while the ‘RQ <0.15’ of a 20 gram, small-sized, bird that eat short grass exceeds the Agency’s acute listed species LOC of 0.1, this ‘RQ’ is expect ed to be lower than the LOC because none of the other bird RQs exceeded the LOC and a non-definitive endpoint ( i.e., LD50 value >2,000 mg/kg-bw) based on the bobwhite quail was used to calculate that ‘RQ’ which resulted in exceeding the LOC where no mortality or other signs of toxicity were observe d at the highest level tested. Though the available bobwhite quail study indi cates dimethomorph has low toxicity to upland game bird species, it is uncertain whethe r passerines may be more or less sensitive to this chemical as a result of their higher metabolic rate and differing metabolic pathways. Given the predicted ‘RQ’ of <0.15 that exce eded the LOC for small-sized birds, EFED cannot preclude the potential risk to passerines which are small- sized birds. An avian oral toxicity study is needed for a passerine speci es. A passerine study protocol must be submitted for review by the Agency prio r to initiation of the study.

Table 6. Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for Dimethomorph

OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk assessment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data

850.1010 Freshwater invertebrate acute toxicity 45507202 43917213 47700317 Supplemental Invalid Under review No --

850.1025 850.1035 Estuarine/Marine invertebrate acute toxicity 44418102 44418103 Acceptable Supplemental No --

850.1075 Freshwater fish acute toxicity 43917211 43917209 43917210 45507201 47700316 Acceptable Invalid Supplemental Supplemental Under review No --

850.1075 Estuarine/Marine fish acute toxicity 44418101 Acceptable No --

850.1300 Freshwater invertebrate life cycle 44418105 43917214 43917229 Acceptable Supplemental Invalid No --

### Page 19 of 43 Table 6. Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for Dimethomorph

OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk assessment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data

850.1350 Estuarine/Marine invertebrates life cycle (None) N/A No No data is available for estuarine/marine invertebrates. However, EFED is not asking for a chronic study and will use the freshwater data to make a conservative assumption of sensitivity for estuarine/marine invertebrates

850.1400 Freshwater fish early-life stage 44418104 45765501 Supplemental Acceptable Yes An early-life stage fish study with specifically the rainbow trout at lower doses is necessary for risk assessment. Without data, risk would be presumed for freshwater fish, including listed species.

850.1400 Estuarine/Marine fish early-life stage 48326906 Supplemental No An early-life stage study with sheepshead minnow at lower doses is necessary for risk assessment since a NOAEC could not be determined. However, EFED is not asking for another study and will use the freshwater data to make a conservative assumption of sensitivity for estuarine/marine fish. 850.1500 Fish life cycle (None) (N/A) No -- 850.4400 Aquatic plant growth: Tier II vascular plants 45507203 44283402 Acceptable Under review No Additional data are not requested at this time. A review on the newly submitted aquatic plant studies since the last risk assessment is conducted to evaluate whether the new endpoints are more sensitive than the previous studies. If the new studies are found to be less sensitive, the available endpoints used in previous risk assessments will remain unchanged. 850.5400 Aquatic Plant Growth: Tier II algae 43917222 45507204 43917217 44283402 47700315 Acceptable Invalid Under review Under review Under review No

### Page 20 of 43 Table 7. Submitted Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data for Dimethomorph

OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed for risk assessment? Current Additional Data Need

850.2100 Avian oral toxicity 43917205 43917206 47700314 Acceptable Acceptable Under review Yes A passerine bird study is necessary to satisfy standard data requirement. Without data, risk would be presumed for small-sized birds, including listed species. 850.2200 Avian dietary toxicity 43917207 43917208 Acceptable Acceptable No --

850.2300 Avian reproduction 44283403 44283404 Acceptable Supplemental No --

Nonguideline Avian inhalation (None) (N/A) No --

850.3020 Honey bee
acute contact toxicity 43917223 47700318 Acceptable Under review No --

850.3030 Honey bee residue on foliage (None) (N/A) No --

850.3040 Field testing for pollinators (None) (N/A) No --

850.4100 Terrestrial plant toxicity: Tier I or II seedling
emergence 44283401 47700329 Acceptable Under review No Additional data are not requested at this time. A review on the newly submitted terrestrial plant studies since the last risk assessment is conducted to evaluate whether the new endpoints are more sensitive than the previous studies. If the new studies are found to be less sensitive, the available endpoints used in previous risk assessments will remain unchanged. 850.4150 Terrestrial plant toxicity: Tier I or II vegetative vigor 44283401 47700328 Acceptable Under review No

### Page 21 of 43 

# 8. References

Tomlin, C.D.S. (ed.). The Pesticide Manual - World Compendium, 11th ed., British Crop Protection Council, Surrey, England 1997, p. 416.
USEPA 2011. EFED Drinking Water Assessment for: The amended directions for use of Dimethomorph in Brassica leafy, and bulb vegetables ; and dimethomorph new use on leafy vegetables; and new ai Ametoctradin coformulated with dimet homorph for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment. D387377, 387371, 382099, 382109, July 25, 2011.
USEPA 2006. EFED IR-4 Registration for Dimet homorph (ACROBAT 50WP) for use on Brassica Head and Stem Subgroup to control blight ( Phytophthora ssp ) and downy mildew ( Pseudoperonospora cubensis ). D316329. October 6, 2006.
USEPA 2011. Revised Ecological Risk Assessment for the Proposed National use of Dimethomorph on Grape. D387380. December 13, 2011.

### Page 22 of 43 

# Appendices

Appendix A.

Summary of Dimethomorph Use Information

Use Site Application Method Type Desc Formulat ion Desc Maximum Single Application Rate Max # Apps / CC A . I. Max App Rate/C C Max # Apps / Year A. I. Max App Rate/Y

ear Minimum Retreatme nt Interval

BEANS, SUCCULENT (LIMA) Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

BEANS, SUCCULENT (LIMA) Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

BEANS, SUCCULENT (LIMA) Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

BRASSICA (HEAD AND STEM) VEGETABLES Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

BRASSICA (HEAD AND STEM) VEGETABLES Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

BRASSICA (HEAD AND STEM) VEGETABLES Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

BULB VEGETABLES Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

BULB VEGETABLES Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 14 d

BULB VEGETABLES Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

BULB VEGETABLES Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 14 d

BULB VEGETABLES Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

### Page 23 of 43 RATE

BULB VEGETABLES Chemigation. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 14 d

CONIFERS (PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES) Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

CONIFERS (PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES) Directed spray. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

CONIFERS (PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES) High volume spray (dilute). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

CONIFERS (PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES) Hydroponic treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

CONIFERS (PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES) Low volume spray (concentrate). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

CONIFERS (PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES) Soil drench treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

CONIFERS (PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES) Ultra low volume. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

CUCURBIT VEGETABLES Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 4 .78 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

CUCURBIT VEGETABLES Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 4 .78 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

CUCURBIT VEGETABLES Chemigation. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 4 .78 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

FRUITING VEGETABLES Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

FRUITING VEGETABLES Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

### Page 24 of 43 S (DRY FLOWABL E)

FRUITING VEGETABLES Chemigation. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

GINSENG (MEDICINAL) Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

GINSENG (MEDICINAL) Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

GINSENG (MEDICINAL) Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

GINSENG (MEDICINAL) Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

GRAPES Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 4 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

GRAPES Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 4 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

GRAPES Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 4 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

HOPS Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .5866 lb / a NS NS 10 d

HOPS Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .5866 lb / a NS NS 10 d

HOPS Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .5866 lb / a NS NS 10 d

HOPS Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .5866 lb / a NS NS 10 d

LEAFY VEGETABLES Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

LEAFY VEGETABLES Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

LEAFY VEGETABLES Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 3 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d
ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Spray. WETTABL E .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a 20/YR NS 7 d

### Page 25 of 43 POWDER

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Chemigation. WETTABL E POWDER .2 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Directed spray. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Directed spray. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Drench. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .2025 lb / a NS NS 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES High volume spray (dilute). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES High volume spray (dilute). WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Hydroponic treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Hydroponic treatment. WETTABL E POWDER .2 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Low volume spray (concentrate). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Low volume spray (concentrate). WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Soil drench treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Soil drench treatment. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Spray. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .2025 lb / a NS NS 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Spray. WETTABL E POWDER .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Ultra low volume. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES Ultra low volume. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

### Page 26 of 43 ORNAMENTAL GROUND COVER Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL GROUND COVER Directed spray. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL GROUND COVER High volume spray (dilute). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL GROUND COVER Hydroponic treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL GROUND COVER Low volume spray (concentrate). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL GROUND COVER Soil drench treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL GROUND COVER Ultra low volume. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Spray. WETTABL E POWDER .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Chemigation. WETTABL E POWDER .2 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Directed spray. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Directed spray. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Drench. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .2025 lb / a NS NS 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS High volume spray (dilute). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS High volume spray (dilute). WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Hydroponic treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Hydroponic treatment. WETTABL E POWDER .2 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Low volume spray (concentrate). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

### Page 27 of 43 RATE

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Low volume spray (concentrate). WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Soil drench treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Soil drench treatment. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Spray. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .2025 lb / a NS NS 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Spray. WETTABL E POWDER .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Ultra low volume. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS Ultra low volume. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Chemigation. WETTABL E POWDER .2 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Directed spray. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Directed spray. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS High volume spray (dilute). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS High volume spray (dilute). WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Hydroponic treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Hydroponic treatment. WETTABL E POWDER .2 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Low volume spray (concentrate). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Low volume spray (concentrate). WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Soil drench treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

### Page 28 of 43 ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Soil drench treatment. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Ultra low volume. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS Ultra low volume. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Spray. WETTABL E POWDER .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Chemigation. WETTABL E POWDER .2 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 28 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Directed spray. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Directed spray. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Drench. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .2025 lb / a NS NS 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES High volume spray (dilute). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES High volume spray (dilute). WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Hydroponic treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1995 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Hydroponic treatment. WETTABL E POWDER .2 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 14 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Low volume spray (concentrate). EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Low volume spray (concentrate). WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Soil drench treatment. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Soil drench treatment. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 50 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Spray. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .2025 lb / a NS NS 20/YR NS 7 d

### Page 29 of 43 ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Spray. WETTABL E POWDER .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a 20/YR NS 7 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Ultra low volume. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .3992 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES Ultra low volume. WETTABL E POWDER .4 lb / 100 gal NS NS NS NS 10 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a NS .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Spray. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a NS NS 5 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Spray. WETTABL E POWDER .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a NS NS 5 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a NS .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a NS .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Chemigation. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Chemigation. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a NS NS 5 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Chemigation. WETTABL E POWDER .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a NS NS 5 d

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Spray. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a NS NS 5 d

### Page 30 of 43 E)

POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Spray. WETTABL E POWDER .2025 lb / a NS 1.0125 lb / a NS NS 5 d

TARO Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

TARO Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

TARO Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

TOMATO Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a NS .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

TOMATO Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

TOMATO Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a NS .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

TOMATO Broadcast. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

TOMATO Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a NS .9777 lb / a NS NS 5 d

TOMATO Chemigation. WATER DISPERSI BLE GRANULE S (DRY FLOWABL E) .195 lb / a 5 .975 lb /

a NS NS 7 d

TURNIP (GREENS) Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

TURNIP (GREENS) Broadcast. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

TURNIP (GREENS) Chemigation. EMULSIFI ABLE CONCENT RATE .1955 lb / a 5 .9777 lb / a NS NS 7 d

### Page 31 of 43 

# Appendix B. OPPIN Bibliography

268800 Dimethomorph Eco Effects Bibliography 9/14/11

850.2100 Avian Acute Oral Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

47700314 Zok, S. (2008) BAS 651 00 F - Acute Toxicity in the Bobwhite Quail (Colinus virginianus) After Single Oral Ad ministration (LD50). Project Number: 2008/1003798/OCR, 2008/1003798, 11W0166/065062. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 44 p.
43917205 Phillips, C.; Roberts, N. (1996) The Acut e Oral Toxicity (LD50) of CME to the Mallard Duck: (Amended Report): Lab Project Number: CMK 15/86919. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre, Ltd. 20 p.
43917206 Roberts, N.; Phillips, C. (1996) The Acut e Oral Toxicity (LD50) of CME 151 to the Bobwhite Quail: (Amended Report): Lab Project Number: CMK 14/861226. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre, Ltd. 22 p. 

### 850.2200 Avian Dietary Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

43917207 Phillips, C.; Roberts, N.; Anderson, A. et al. (1996) The Dietary Toxicity (LD50) of CME 151 to the Mallard Duck: (Amended Report): Lab Project Number: CMK 19/871028. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre, Ltd. 33 p.
43917208 Phillips, C.; Roberts, N.; Anderson, A. et al. (1996) The Dietary Toxicity (LD50) of CME 151 to the Bobwhite Quail: (Amended Report): Lab Project Number: CMK 18/871027. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre, Ltd. 33 p. 

### 850.2300 Avian Reproduction

MRID Citation Reference

44283403 Troup, R.; Christensen, G.; Taliaferro, M.; et al. (1997) Pilot Dietary Toxicity and Avian Reproduction Studies with Dimethomorph Technical (CL 336379) in the Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus): Lab Project Number: 954-96-169: 954-96-170: 954-96- 165. Unpublished study prepared by EBA, Inc. 575 p.
44283404 Troup, R.; Taliaferro, M.; Miller, V. (1997) Pilot Dietary Toxicity and Avian Reproduction Studies with Dimethomorph Technical (CL 336379) in the Mallard Duck (Anas platyrhynchos): Lab Project Number: 954-96-167: 954-96-168: CY-151. Unpublished study prepared by EBA, Inc. 532 p. 

### 850.1075 Fish Acute Toxicity, Freshwater and Estuarine/Marine

MRID Citation Reference

46818701 Jatzek, J. (2006) BAS 551 09 F: Acute Toxicity Study on the Rainbow Trout (Onchorhynchus mykiss) in a Static System over 96 Hours. Project Number: 12F0411/045074, 2006/1010690. Unpublished study prepared by BASF

### Page 32 of 43 Aktiengesellschaft, Experimental Toxicology and Ecology. 45 p.

47700316 Zok, S. (2007) BAS 651 00 F - Acute Toxicity Study on the Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a Static System over 96 Hours. Project Number: 2007/1018902/OCR, 2007/1018902, 12F0166/065037. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 48 p.
43917209 Douglas, M.; Handley, J.; MacDonald, I. (1996) The Acute Toxicity of CME 151 to Bluegill Sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus): (A mended Report): Lab Project Number: CMK 28/88229. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre, Ltd. 22 p.
43917210 Ellgehausen, H.; Vogel, W. (1986) 96-Hour Acute Toxicity Study (LD50) with CME 151 in the Carp: Lab Project Number: 068163. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie AG. 33 p.
43917211 Ellgehausen, H.; Vogel, W. (1986) 96-Hour Acute Toxicity Study (LC50) with CME 151 in the Rainbow Trout: Lab Project Number: 068152. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie AG. 33 p.
43917215 Toy, R. (1991) CME 151/Mancozeb 90/600 g/kg WP (SYS50586): Acute Toxicity to Salmo Gairdneri and Daphnia magna: Lab Project Number: SBGR.90.159: 4467. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 37 p.
43917216 Toy, R.; Gray, A. (1991) Dimethomorph: CME 151/Mancozeb 90/600 g/kg WP (SYS50579): Acute Toxicity to Oncorhynchus mykiss and Daphnia magna: Lab Project Number: SBGR.90.250: 4901. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 34 p.
43917217 Toy, R.; Gray, A. (1992) Dimethomorph: Acute Toxicity of Dimethomorph/Mancozeb 75/667 g/kg WP (SYS50588 R) to Oncorhynchus mykiss, Daphnia magna and Selenastrum capricornutum: Lab Project Number: SBGR.92.177: 5640. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 42 p.
45507201 Mitchell, G.; Boeri, R.; Wyskiel, D. et al. (2001) Acute Toxicity of BAS 550 F (AC 336379, Dimethomorph) to Bluegill Sunfish, Lepomis macrochirus Under Flow-Through Test Conditions: Lab Project Number: ECO-00-312. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 59 p. {OPPTS 850.1075}
44418101 Mitchell, G.; Christensen, G.; Magazu, J. (1997) Acute Toxicity of AC 336379(Dimethomorph) to the Sheepshead Minnow (Cyprinodon variegatus) under FlowThrough Test Conditions: (Final Report): Lab Project Number: ECO-96-306: 1182-AC: 954-95-144. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Labs, Inc.; and American Cyanamid Co. 108 p. {OPPTS 850.1075}



### 850.1010 Aquatic Invertebra te Acute Toxicity, Freshwater

MRID Citation Reference

47700317 Zok, S. (2007) BAS 651 00 F - Determination of the Acute Effect on the Swimming Ability of the Water Flea Daphnia magna STRAUS. Project Number: 2007/1053424/OCR, 2007/1053424, 50E0166/063176. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 41 p.
43917213 Ellgehausen, H. (1986) 48-Hour Acute Toxicity of CME 151 to Daphnia magna: (OECD Immobilization Test): Lab Project Number: 068128. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie AG. 21 p.
43917215 Toy, R. (1991) CME 151/Mancozeb 90/600 g/kg WP (SYS50586): Acute Toxicity to Salmo Gairdneri and Daphnia magna: Lab Project Number: SBGR.90.159: 4467.

### Page 33 of 43 Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 37 p.
43917216 Toy, R.; Gray, A. (1991) Dimethomorph: CME 151/Mancozeb 90/600 g/kg WP (SYS50579): Acute Toxicity to Oncorhynchus mykiss and Daphnia magna: Lab Project Number: SBGR.90.250: 4901. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 34 p.
43917217 Toy, R.; Gray, A. (1992) Dimethomorph: Acute Toxicity of Dimethomorph/Mancozeb 75/667 g/kg WP (SYS50588 R) to Oncorhynchus mykiss, Daphnia magna and Selenastrum capricornutum: Lab Project Number: SBGR.92.177: 5640. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 42 p.
45507202 Mitchell, G.; Boeri, R.; Wyskiel, D. et al. (2001) Acute Toxicity of BAS 550 F (AC 336379, Dimethomorph) to Daphnia magna Under Static Test Conditions: Lab Project Number: ECO-00-314. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 54 p. {OPPTS 850.1010}



### 850.1035/850.1025 Aquatic Invertebrate Ac ute Toxicity, Estuarine/Marine

MRID Citation Reference

44418102 Mitchell, G.; Christensen, G.; Magazu, J. (1997) Effect of AC 336379 (Dimethomorph) on New Shell Growth in the Eastern Oyster (Crassostrea virginica) Under Flow-Through Test Conditions: (Final Report): Lab Project Number: ECO-96-305: 1181-AC: 954-96- 305. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Labs, Inc.; and American Cyanamid Co. 106 p. {OPPTS 850.1025}
44418103 Mitchell, G.; Christensen, G.; Magazu, J. (1997) Acute Toxicity of AC 336379 (Dimethomorph) to the Mysid (Mysidopsis bahia) Under Flow-Through Test Conditions: (Final Report): Lab Project Number: ECO-96-304: 1180-AC: 954-95-144. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Labs, Inc.; and American Cyanamid Co. 106 p. {OPPTS 850.1035} 

### 850.1300 Aquatic Invertebra te Life Cycle, Freshwater

MRID Citation Reference

43917214 Memmert, U.; Knoch, E. (1996) Influence of Dimethomorph on Survival and Reproduction of Daphnia magna in a Semistatic Test (22 Days): (amended Report): Lab Project Number: 328410: 328421. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie GmbH. 47 p.
43917219 Toy, R.; Gray, A. (1991) Dimethomorph: CME 151/Mancozeb 90/600 g/kg WP (SYS50579): Chronic Toxicity to Daphnia magna: Lab Project Number: SBGR.91.010: 4698. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 42 p.
44418105 Mitchell, G.; Christensen, G.; Murrell, H. (1997) Chronic Toxicity of AC 336,379 (Dimethomorph) Technical During the Complete Life-Cycle of Daphnia magna Under Flow-Through Test Conditions: Lab Project Number: ECO-96-275: 43364: 954-96- 275. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs, Inc.; and American Cyanamid Co. 245 p. {OPPTS 850.1300}

### Page 34 of 43 

### 850.1400 Fish Early-Life Stage , Freshwater and Estuarine/Marine

MRID Citation Reference

44418104 Mitchell, G.; Christensen, G.; Rhodes, J. (1997) Toxicity of AC 336,379 (Dimethomorph) Technical During the Early Life-Stages of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): (Final Report): Lab Project Number: ECO-96-274: 43365: 954-96-274. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs, Inc.; and American Cyanamid Co. 217 p. {OPPTS 850.1400}
45765501 Zok, S. (2002) BAS 550 F--Early Life-Stage Toxicity Test on the Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas): Final Report: Lab Project Number: 51F0271/015108: 2002/1011268. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 95 p. {OPPTS 850.1400}
48326906 Hicks, S. (2010) BAS 550 F: Early Life-Stage Toxicity Test with the Sheepshead Minnow, Cyprinodon variegatus, Under Flow-Through Conditions. Project Number: 2010/7012691, 65140, 375482. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Laboratories, Inc. 94 p. 

### 850.1730 Aquatic org. accumula tion (check Fate studies 165-5)

MRID Citation Reference

44996202 Zulalian, J. (1999) Dimethomorph (AC 336379): Uptake, Depuration, Bioconcentration and Metabolism of Carbon-14 Labeled AC 336379 in Bluegill Sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus) Under Flow-Through Conditions: Lab Project Number: MET 99-005: M98F379M01: 44560. Unpublished study prepared by American Cyanamid Co. 632 p. {OPPTS 850.1730}



### 850.1770 Sediment Acute T oxicity, Freshwater Benthos

MRID Citation Reference

48326907 Wisk, J. (1998) Assessment of Potential Risk of Aquatic Sediment Degradate of Dimethomorph to Sediment-Dwelling Aquatic Invertebrates. Project Number: DK/570/002. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Agro Research. 8 p.



### 850.4100 Terrestrial Plant Toxicit y, Tier I and II (Seedling Emergence)

MRID Citation Reference

44283401 Chetram, R.; Christensen, G.; Goodman, V. et al. (1997) Nontarget Terrestrial Plant Phytotoxicity Studies Using a 9%/60% WP Co-formulation of AC 336379 (Dimethomorph) and Mancozeb: (Final Report): Lab Project Number: 954-96-107: 954- 96-108: 954-96-149. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Laboratories California. 250 p.

47700329 Porch, J.; Krueger, H.; Kendall, T.; et al. (2009) BAS 651 00 F: A Toxicity Test to Determine the Effects of the Test Substanc e on Seedling Emergence of Ten Species of Plants. Project Number: 2009/7004734/OCR, 2009/7004734, 147/241. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 119 p.

### Page 35 of 43 

### 850.4150 Terrestrial Plant Toxicity, Tier 1 or Tier II (Vegetative Vigor)

MRID Citation Reference

47700328 Porch, J.; Krueger, H.; Kendall, T.; et al. (2009) BAS 651 00 F: A Toxicity Test to Determine the Effects of the Test Substanc e on Vegetative Vigor of Ten Species of Plants. Project Number: 2009/7004735/OCR, 2009/7004735, 147/242. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 169 p.



### 850.4400 Aquatic Plant Toxicity, Tiers 1 and II

MRID Citation Reference

45507203 Junker, M. (2001) Effect of BAS 550 01 F on the Growth of Lemna gibba: Lab Project Number: 64718. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 29 p. {OPPTS 850.4400}



### 850.5400 Algal Toxicity, Tiers 1 and II

MRID Citation Reference

47700315 Zok, S. (2008) BAS 651 00 F - Determination of the Inhibitory Effect on the Cell Multiplication of the Unicellular Green Algae Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata KORSHIKOV. Project Number: 2007/1056995/OCR, 2007/1056995, 60E0166/063177. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 48 p.
43917217 Toy, R.; Gray, A. (1992) Dimethomorph: Acute Toxicity of Dimethomorph/Mancozeb 75/667 g/kg WP (SYS50588 R) to Oncorhynchus mykiss, Daphnia magna and Selenastrum capricornutum: Lab Project Number: SBGR.92.177: 5640. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 42 p.
43917222 Ellgehausen, H. (1987) Acute Toxicity of CME 151 to Scenedesmus subspicatus: (OECD Algae Growth Inhibition Test): Lab Project Number: 068141. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie AG. 22 p.
44283402 Canez, V.; Christensen, G.; Hughes, J. ; et al. (1997) Effects of a 9%/60% WP Coformulation of AC 336379 (Dimethomorph) and Mancozeb on the Growth of Navicula pelliculosa, Selenastrum capricornutum, An abaena flos-aquae, Skeletonema costatum, and Lemna gibba: (Final Report): Lab Project Number: 954-96-113: 954-96-166: 954-96- 111. Unpublished study prepared by Carolina Ecotox. Inc. 457 p.
45507204 Werner, D. (2001) BAS 550 01 F--Determination of the Inhibitory Effect on the Cell Multiplication of Unicellular Green Algae: Lab Project Number: 01/0274/60/1. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 28 p. {OPPTS 850.5400}



### 850.3020 Honey Bee Acute Contact Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

47700318 Muether-Paul, J. (2006) Assessment of Side Effects of BAS 651 00 F to the Honey Bee, Apis mellifera L. in the Laboratory. Proj ect Number: 2006/1012042/OCR, 2006/1012042, 20061234/01/BLEU. Unpublished study prepared by Eurofins - GAB GmbH. 30 p.

### Page 36 of 43 43917223 Harrison, E.; Hillaby, J. (1989) The Acute Topical and Oral Toxicity of CME 151 (WL127294) to the Honey Bee, Apis mellifera L: Lab Project Number: SBGR.88.218: 4014. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 28 p.



### Non-Guideline Earthworm Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

47700319 Vertesi, A. (2008) Acute Toxicity of BAS 651 00 F on Earthworms (Eisenia fetida) in Artificial Soil with 5% Peat (Includi ng Amendment No. 1). Project Number: 2008/7019535/OCR, 2008/7019535, 07/417/125G. Unpublished study prepared by LAB International Research Centre Hungary, Ltd. 36 p.

47700320 Friedrich, S. (2007) Sublethal Toxicity of BAS 651 00 F to the Earthworm Eisenia fetida in Artificial Soil with 5% Peat. Project Number: 2007/1037735/OCR, 2007/1037735, 250141. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Labor fuer Biologische und Chemische. 29 p.
43917225 Ellgehausen, H. (1986) Acute Toxicity (LC50) Study of CME 151 to Earthworms: Lab Project Number: 068130. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie AG. 15
p.



### Non-Guideline Study Selections

MRID Citation Reference
43917224 Harrison, E. (1990) The Toxicity of Dimethomorph to the Predatory Mite Phytoseiulus persimilis: Lab Project Number: SBGR.89.272. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 27 p.

47700326 Schulz, L. (2009) Effects of BAS 651 00 F on the Activity of Soil Microflora (Carbon Transformation Test) (Including Amendment No. 1). Project Number: 2009/7003694/OCR, 2009/7003694, 250153. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Labor fuer Biologis che und Chemische. 31 p.

47700327 Schulz, L. (2009) Effects of BAS 651 00 F on the Activity of Soil Microflora (Nitrogen Transformation Test) (Including Amendment No. 1). Project Number: 2009/7003695/OCR, 2009/7003695, 250105. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Labor fuer Biologis che und Chemische. 33 p.
45007307 Boczon, L. (1996) Eye Irritation Study in Albino Rabbits with AC 336,379 50 WP Formulation. Unpublished study prepared by American Cyanamid Company. 111 p.

47700322 Sipos, K. (2009) Effect of BAS 651 00 F on the Predatory Mite (Typhlodromus pyri) in a Laboratory Trial (Including Am endment No. 1). Project Number: 2009/7006311/OCR, 2009/7006311, 07/417/335RA. Unpublished study prepared by LAB Research, Ltd. 34 p.

47700323 Sipos, K. (2007) Effect of BAS 651 00 F on the Parasitic Wasp (Aphidius rhopalosiphi) in a Laboratory Trial. Project Number: 2007/1035598/OCR, 2007/1035598, 07/417/335FD. Unpublished study prepared by LAB International Research Centre Hungary, Ltd. 30 p.

47700324 Sipos, K. (2008) Effect of BAS 651 00 F on the Parasitic Wasp (Aphidius rhopalosiphi) in an Extended Laboratory Trial (Incl uding Amendment No. 1). Project Number: 2008/7019536/OCR, 2008/7019536, 07/417/351FD. Unpublished study prepared by LAB Research, Ltd. 41 p.

### Page 37 of 43 47700325 Roehlig, U. (2008) Effects of BAS 651 00 F on the Green Lacewing Chrysoperla carnea STEPH. Under Laborat ory Conditions - Rate-Response-Test. Project Number: 2008/1012070/OCR, 2008/1012070, 250114. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Labor fuer Biologis che und Chemische. 29 p.

47700321 Friedrich, S. (2007) Effects of BAS 651 00 F on the Reproduction of the Collembolans folsomia candida in Artificial Soil with 5% Peat. Project Number: 2007/1037736/OCR, 2007/1037736. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Labor fuer Biologische und Chemische. 24 p.
43917212 Memmert, U.; Knoch, E. (1996) Toxicity of Dimethomorph to Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a Prolonged Flow-Through-Test (21 Days): (Amended Report): Lab Project Number: 328432: 328443. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie GmbH Co. KG. 50 p.
43917218 Toy, R.; Gray, A. (1991) Dimethomorph: CME 151/Mancozeb 90/600 g/kg WP (SYS50579): Prolonged Toxicity to Rainbow Trout: Lab Project Number: SBGR.91.058: 4699. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 29 p.



## 268800 Dimethomorph Fate Chemistry Bibliography

161-1 Hydrolysis

MRID Citation Reference

43917226 2069475 Ochsenbein, U. (1989) Hydrolysis Determination of (carbon 14)-Dimethomorph (CME 151) at Different pH Values: Lab Project Number: 223830. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie AG. 71 p.



### 161-2 Photodegradation-water

MRID Citation Reference

43917227 2069476 van Dijk, A. (1990) Photodegradation Study of (carbon 14)-Dimethomoprh (CME 151) in Water: Lab Project Number: 211421. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie AG. 74 p.



### 161-3 Photodegradation-soil

MRID Citation Reference

43917228 2069477 van Dijk, A. (1989) Photodegradation Study of (carbon 14)-Dimethomorph (CME 151) on Soil: Lab Project Number: 211410. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie AG. 56 p.



### 162-1 Aerobic soil metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

43917229 2069478 Schluter, H. (1990) (Chlorophenyl-(carbon 14))-Dimethomorph: Degradation in Soil

### Page 38 of 43 Under Aerobic Conditions: Lab Project Number: SHGR.90.003. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 52 p.

43917230 2069479 Edwards, V.; Standen, M. (1990) Dimethomorph (Morpholine-(carbon 14)): Degradation in Soil Under Aerobic Conditions: Lab Project Number: SBGR.90.002: 4043. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 32 p.



### 162-2 Anaerobic soil metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

43917231 2069480 Thiele, J. (1990) (Chlorophenyl-(carbon 14))-Dimethomorph: Degradation in Soil Under Anaerobic Conditions: Lab Project Number: SHGR.89.069: CUE 1/88. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 62 p.

43917232 2069481 Edwards, V.; Standen, M. (1990) Dimethomorph (Morpholine-(carbon 14)): Degradation in Soil Under Anaerobic Conditions: Lab Project Number: SBGR.89.215: 4043: 4044. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd. 40 p.

44780201 2069486 2069494-memo 2069495-memo Meyers, C. (1998) AC 336379 (Dimethomorph): Anaerobic Soil Metabolism: Lab Project Number: ENV 96-114: E-96-014. Unpublished study prepared by American Cyanamid Company. 240 p.
48326903 2069483 Edwards, V.; Standen, M. (1990) Dimethomorph [Morpholine-Carbon 14)]: Degradation in Soil under Anaerobic Conditions. Project Number: SBGR/89/215, DK/123/050. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Research Ltd., London. 41 p.

48326904 DER not located Theile, J. (1990) [Chlorophenyl-(Carbon 14)]-Dimethomorph: Degradation in Soil under Anaerobic Conditions. Project Number: SHGR/89/069, DK/123/049. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung Gmbh. 63 p. 

### 162-3 Anaerobic aquatic metab.

MRID Citation Reference

43917233 2069482 Knoch, E. (1993) Dimethomorph Degradation and Metabolism in Aquatic Systems: Lab Project Number: 276805. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie GmbH & Co., KG. 91 p. 

### 162-4 Aerobic aquatic metab.

MRID Citation Reference

43917233 2069482 2069493-
summary Knoch, E. (1993) Dimethomorph Degradation and Metabolism in Aquatic Systems: Lab Project Number: 276805. Unpublished study prepared by R C C Umweltchemie GmbH & Co., KG. 91 p.

48326905 DER not located Ebert, D. (2002) Degradation of BAS 550 F (Dimethomorph) in Water/Sediment - Systems under Aerobic Conditions. Project Number: 97149, 2002/1000201. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 102 p.



### 163-1 Leach/adsorp/desorption

### Page 39 of 43 MRID Citation Reference

43917234 2069483 Eichler, D. (1988) Soil Adsorption/Desorption Study with Dimethomorph (CME 151): Lab Project Number: CU 87/377A: 31/8/88. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 30 p.

43917235 2069484 Haas-Jobelius, M. (1991) (Chlorophenyl-(carbon 14)-Dimethomorph (CME 151) Soil Adsorption/Desorption: Lab Project Number: SHGR.90.011: CUE 90/8. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 50 p.

44780202 2069485 2069487 2069494-95

memos An, D. (1998) Dimethomorph (AC 336379): Adsorption/Desorption on Soils: Lab Project Number: ENV 98-002: E-98-002. Unpublished study prepared by American Cyanamid Company. 77 p.


### 164-1 Terrestrial field dissipation

MRID Citation Reference

43917236 2069493-not reviewed Thiele, J. (1990) Soil Dissipation of Dimethomorph (CME 151) Under Field Conditions I: Lab Project Number: SHGR.89.066: CU 88/516. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 24 p.

43917237 2069493-not reviewed Thiele, J. (1990) Soil Dissipation of Dimethomorph (CME 151) Under Field Conditions II: Lab Project Number: SHGR.89.068: CU 88/516. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 24 p.

43917238 2069493-not reviewed Thiele, J. (1991) Soil Dissipation of Dimethomorph (CME 151) Under Field Conditions III: Lab Project Number: SHGR.90.007: CUE 3/89. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 25 p.

43917239 2069493-not reviewed Thiele, J. (1991) Soil Dissipation of Dimethomorph (CME 151) Under Field Conditions V: Lab Project Number: SHGR.90.009: CU 90/6: FAMS 006-01. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 45 p.

43970304 2069493-not reviewed Thiele, J.; Buch, T. (1991) Soil Dissipation of Dimethomorph (CME 151) Under Field Conditions IV: Lab Project Number: SHGR.90.008: CUE 4/89. Unpublished study prepared by Shell Forschung GmbH. 47 p.
44996201 2069488 Babbit, B.; Kleiner, A.; Lennon, G. (1999) Dissipation of Soil Residues of Dimethomorph: Lab Project Number: RES 99-073. 02: RES 99-081: RES 97-012. Unpublished study prepared by Am erican Cyanamid Co. 593 p.



### 165-5 Fish Bioaccumulation 44996202 2069489 Zulalian, J. 1999. Dimethomorph (AC 336379): Uptake, depuration, bioconcentration and metabolism of carbon-14 labeled AC 336379 in bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macvochirus) under flow-through conditions. Report No.: MET 99-005. Unpublished study performed by American Cyanamid Co mpany, Princeton, NJ (analytical phase); and ABC Laboratories, Inc., Columbia, MO (in-life phase); and submitted by American Cyanamid Company, Princeton, NJ. 

### 166-1 Ground water-small prospective

MRID Citation Reference

### Page 40 of 43 45721301 Inert Allen, R. (2002) (I nert Ingredient): Ground and Surf ace Water Exposure Concentrations Following Use of Foramsulfuron SC Herbicide in Turf: Lab Project Number: B003937. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis Environmental Science. 7 p.



### Non Guideline Selections

47700326 Not registered Mixture with 119201 Schulz, L. (2009) Effects of BAS 651 00 F on the Activity of Soil Microflora (Carbon Transformation Test) (Including Amendment No. 1). Project Number: 2009/7003694/OCR, 2009/7003694, 250153. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Labor fuer Biologis che und Chemische. 31 p.

47700327 Not registered Mixture with 119201 Schulz, L. (2009) Effects of BAS 651 00 F on the Activity of Soil Microflora (Nitrogen Transformation Test) (Including Amendment No. 1). Project Number: 2009/7003695/OCR, 2009/7003695, 250105. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Labor fuer Biologis che und Chemische. 33 p.

47700330 Not registered Mixture with 119201 Bitterlich; Kaltz, S. (2007) Evaluation of Physical and Chemical Properties According to Directive 94/37/EC (67/548/EC Annex V). Project Number: 2006/1035539/OCR, 2006/1035539, SIK/NR/06/2896. Unpublished study prepared by BASF Aktiengesellschaft. 12 p.

N.A. 2069491 and 2069493 Fate Data Summary

N/A 2069490 Appendix

### Page 41 of 43 

# Appendix C. SIP and STIR results

Table C.1. SIP Inputs Parameter Value Chemical name Dimethomorph Solubility (in water at 25 o C; mg/L) 18

Mammalian LD 50 (mg/kg-bw) 3600 Mammalian test species laboratory rat Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Mammalian NOAEL (mg/kg-bw) 300 Mammalian test species laboratory rat Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Avian LD 50 (mg/kg-bw) 2000 Avian test species northern bobwhite quail Body weight (g) of "other" avian species Mineau scaling factor 1.15

Mallard NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 800 Bobwhite quail NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 200 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 C.2. Mammalian Results Parameter Acute Chronic Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 3.0960 3.0960 Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 2768.9780 230.7482 Ratio of exposure to toxicity 0.0011 0.0134

Conclusion* Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential

concern for mammals Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential

concern for mammals

Table C.3. Avian Results Parameter Acute Chronic Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 14.5800 14.5800 Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 17800.0000 21.2597 Ratio of exposure to acute toxicity 0.0008 0.6858

Conclusion* Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential concern for birds Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential concern for birds

### Page 42 of 43 *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.



# Welcome to the EFED Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk This tool is designed to provide the risk assesso r 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 Chem ical Information
Enter Chemical Name Dimethomorph Enter Chemical Use fungicide Is the Application a Spray? (enter y or n) y If Spray What Type (enter ground or air) ground Enter Chemical Molecu lar Weight (g/mole) 387.86 Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 7.30E-09 Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 0.2

Toxicity Properties
Bird Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 2000 Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15 Enter Tested Bird Weight (kg) 0.178 Mammal Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 3600 Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC 50 (mg/L) 4.24 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 ) 1.52E-04 Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.92E-05 Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.31E+01 Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.46E-06 Exposure not Likely Significant Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.11E-02 Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.61E-03 Exposure not Likely Significant

### Page 43 of 43 

### Results Mammalian (0.015 kg ) Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.52E-04 Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.41E-05 Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 2.52E+02 Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 9.54E-08 Exposure not Likely Significant Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.66E-02 Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.05E-04 Exposure not Likely Significant