# Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk

Assessment for the New Proposed Uses of

Cy prodinil : Addition of Aerial Applications to

Existing Crops for California

CYPRODINIL

CAS name: 4

- cyclopropyl

- 6

- methyl

- N

- phenyl

- 2

- pyrimidinamine

IUPAC name: 4

- cyclopropyl

- 6

- methyl

- N

- phenylpyrimidin

- 2

- amine

CAS No: 121552

- 61

- 2 ; PC Code: 28820 2

Prepared by:

José L. Meléndez, Chemist

James Felkel, Wildlife Biologist U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pesticide Programs

Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Environmental Risk Branch V

Ariel Rios Building (Mail Code 7507 P )

12 00 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20460 Reviewed by:

Jean Holmes, Risk Assessment Process Leader

Mah T. Shamim, Ph.D., Branch Chief

### 2 

## Table of C ontents

I. Executive Summary

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ Page 3

A. Nature of Ch emical Stressor

................................ ................................ ..................... Page 3

B. Potential Risks to Non

- target Organisms

................................ ............................. Page 3

C. Exposure Characterization

................................ ................................ ...................... Page 3

D. Effects Characterization

................................ ................................ ........................... Page 4

E. Data Gaps and Uncertainties

................................ ................................ ................... Page 5

II. Problem Formulation

................................ ................................ ................................ ............. Page 7

A. Stressor Source and Distribution

................................ ................................ ............ Page 7

B. Receptors

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... Page 9

C. Assessment Endpoints

................................ ................................ ............................ Page 1 1

D. Conceptual Model

................................ ................................ ................................ .... Page 1 2

E. Analysis Plan

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ Page 1 4

III. Analysis

................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ Page 1 7

A. Use Characterization

................................ ................................ .............................. Page 1 7

B. Exposure Characterization

................................ ................................ ..................... Page 19

C. Ecological Effects Characterization

................................ ................................ .......... Page 29

IV. Risk Characterization

................................ ................................ ................................ ............ Page 3 1

A. Risk Estimation

- Integration of Exposure and Effects Data

................................ . Page 3 1

B. Risk Description

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... Page 3 7

C. Description of Assumptions, Limitations, Uncertainties, Strengths and

Data Gaps

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. Page 4 5

V. Literature Cited

................................ ................................ ................................ ................... Page 4 8

VI. Appendices

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... Page 50

### 3 

### I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A . Nature of Chemical Stressor

Th is assessment addresses the risks of cyprodinil resulting from proposed aerial applications of

Switch TM 

### 62.5WG and Vangard ® WG in the state of California only, to berries, pistachio s

, strawberries, and tropical fruits ; and also proposed aerial a pplication of Vangard ® WG , in

California only, to grapes and pome fruits. Furthemore, it addresses the addition of nine crops or

crop groups to the label of Vanguard® WG . These crops or crop groups are already registered in

the preoduct SwitchTM 62.5 WG a t the same labe rates (with the exception of strawberries

. Cyprodinil ( 4

- cyclopropyl

- 6

- methyl

- N

- phenyl

- 2

- pyrimidinamine ; CAS No. 121552

- 61

- 2; PC

Code: 288202 ) is used in a variety of crops, including fruits, herbs, nuts and vegetables;

however, aerial ap plications are not currently allowed except for stone fruits and almonds in the

state of California only (Vangard ® WG label)

. Cyprodinil is the potential stressor in this

assessment . It is applied as a fungicide

, to control certain pests on various crops

. Its mode of

action is by interference with biosynthesis of methionine. It may also impede the secretion on

fungal hydrolytic enzymes

. The chemical is persistent to various routes of dissipation and it is

persistent in aquatic systems, where it partitio ns with the sediment. Furthermore, c yprodinil is

acutely very highly toxic to freshwater and estuarine/ marine invertebrates in water column

studies , and hence it is assumed that it is also toxic to sediment dwelling organisms. Aquatic

invertebrates in t he water column or sediments may be killed should exposure to bodies of water

occur (spray drift or runoff via erosion )

.



### B . Potential Risks to Non

- target Organisms

There is potential for risk to aquatic invertebrates. LOC’s have been exceeded for these

organisms in all categories (acute risk, risk that may be mitigated through restricted use, acute

endangered species risk, and chronic risk). The risk quotient ranges for estuarine/ marin e

invertebrates are 0.31

- 1.65 (acute) and 1.27

– 6.56 (chronic). For freshwater invertebrates, the

risk quotient ranges are 0.08

– 0.41 (acute) and 0.30

– 1.56 (chronic). For benthic organisms,

risk quotient ranges are 0.07

– 0. 35 (freshwater acute), 0.27

– 1. 38 (freshwater chronic), 0.27

–

1. 38 (estuarine/marine acute) and 1.12

– 5.82 (estuarine/marine chronic). Similar risks have been

previously identified with both Switch (e.g., 8/12/03 EFED review) and with Vangard (e.g.,

8/15/02 EFED review). T he addition of aerial application increases drift and thus aquatic

exposure and risk. Cyprodinil does not readily leach to ground water, however, there is potential

for surface water contamination by drift and runoff via erosion . Cyprodinil’s fate charac teristics

suggest that once it reaches surface water, residues in the sediment can persist for several months

to years and invertebrates, even in the water column, can be exposed continuously when residues

from sediment are redistributed throughout the wat er body. This type of chronic exposure is a

concern, because laboratory studies support chronic effects to both mysid shrimp and daphnids.



### C

. Exposure Characterization

The environmental fate database for cyprodinil is complete and no additional data are required at

this time. The major route of dissipation of cyprodinil in the field appears to be the aerobic soil

metabolism (22

- 50 days ) . Laboratory data supports that cyprodinil shows moderate ly slow to

very slow degradation patterns to other routes of dissipation. It is highly persistent in anaerobic

aquatic environments, and degrades slowly in aerobic aquatic environments (half

- lives of 10 6

- 612 days in river and pond systems). Aqueous and soil photolysis have been found to be minor

### 4 degradation pat hways for this chemical. Cyprodinil is stable to hydrolysis in the pH range of 5

- 9.

The results of the field studies were of the same order of magnitude than the aerobic soil

metabolism (CA half lives 42

- 47 days and NY half lives 14

- 28 days). Cyprodinil does not

readily leach to ground water, and appears to ha ve a relatively high affinity to bind to soil and

particulate matter, it is slightly mobil e (FAO classification; K d 

### range = 14.2

- 31.2 L/Kg; K OC 

### range = 1,550

- 2,030 L/Kg OC 

### ). Given the relatively low vapor pressure of cyprodinil ( 3.80 x 10

- 6



### mmHg) , its low Henry’s Law Constant ( 7.04 x 10

- 8 

### atm

- m 3 

### /mol) , and its tendency to bind to soils

and sediments, the chemical is not expected to volatilize readily from wet or dry surfaces in the

environment. F urthermore, cyprodinil is not expected to be a good leacher , except in vulnerable

sites (because of its very high persistence)

. The likely routes of exposure to aquatic environments

will be from spray drift and the contamination of surface waters from run

- off and erosion events.

Cyprodinil’s fate characteristics suggest that residues in the sediment can persist for several

months to years and aquatic animals, even in the water column, can be exposed continuously

when residues from the sediment are redistri buted throughout the water body by equilibration.

Based on reported pKa of 4.44, of the conjugated acid, cyprodinil, would primarily exist as a

neutral species in the environment

. Cyprodinil residues bioaccumulated only moderately, with

maximum BCF of 46 6, in the wh ole fish tissues. The rate of depuration was rapid. ≥97% of the

radioactivity depurated by the third day.

There is uncertainty about the transformation products of cyprodinil. It appears that only under

aerobic conditions there is degradation and littl e information was available about CGA

- 249287,

CGA

- 321915 and CGA

- 275535

. CGA

- 275535 shows less mobility than the parent ; it is slightly

mobile (FAO classification) . However the other degradates are more mobile than the parent.

They are mobile to moderat ely mobile : CGA

- 321915 and CGA

- 249287. CGA

- 275535 is the

degradate that may be persistent as the parent compound in the sediment, however, with no data

to show toxic effects of this degradate to any aquatic organism, the impact that it could have on

them is unknown.



### D. Effects Characterization

Cyprodinil toxicity has been assessed and/or described in previous reviews (e.g., 8/15/02 and

8/12/03 EFED reviews) and this new use assessment relies on these.

Fish

Cyprodinil is moderately toxic to freshwater fish on an acute basis (Rainbow trout 96

- hour LC 50 

### = 2410 ppb; Bluegill sunfish 96

- hour LC 50 

### = 3200 ppb). Cyprodinil is also moderately toxic to

estuarine/ marine fish on an acute basis (Sheepshe ad minnow 96

- hour LC 50 

### = 1250 ppb). An early

life stage mortality test with fathead minnows show that cyprodinil caused effects at the 460 ppb

concentration (LOAEC) and no effects at the 230 ppb concentration (NOAEC).

Invertebrates

Cyprodinil is very high ly toxic to freshwater invertebrates (Daphnid 48

- hour LC 50 

### = 32 ppb) on

an acute basis. A 21

- day Life

- cycle test with the Daphnid showed effects at the 19 ppb

concentration (LOAEC) and no effects at the 8 ppb concentration (NOAEC). Cyprodinil is

highly t oxic to the Eastern oyster (96

- hour EC 50 

### = 433 ppb) and very highly toxic to Mysid

Shrimp (96

- hour LC 50 

### = 8 ppb) on an acute basis. In a 28

- day life

- cycle test, cyprodinil caused

effects to Mysid Shrimp at the 3.7 ppb level (LOAEC) and no adverse effects w ere observed at

the 1.9 ppb concentration (NOAEC).

Aquatic Plants

### 5 Cyprodinil is moderately toxic to the freshwater Algae ( Anabaena flos

- Aquae 120

- hour EC 50 

### = 2250 ppb) on an acute basis. Cyprodinil is also moderately toxic to estuarine/ marine Algae

( Skel etonema costatum 120

- hour EC 50 

### = 1970 ppb).

Birds

Cyprodinil is practically non

- toxic to Bobwhite Quail (LD 50 

### >2000 mg/kg) and slightly toxic to

Mallard Duck (LD 50 

### >500 mg/kg) on an oral acute basis. On a sub

- acute dietary basis, it is also

practically no n

- toxic to Bobwhite Quail (LC 50 

### > 5200 ppm) and Mallard Duck (LC 50 

### > 5180

ppm). Results from the avian reproduction study with Mallard Duck, showed no effects at the

500 ppm concentration (NOAEC) and the lowest observed effect concentration (LOAEC) to be >

500 ppm. Results from the reproduction study with Bobwhite Quail, showed no effects at the 600

ppm concentration (NOAEC) ppm and the lowest observed effect concentration (LOAEC) to be

>600 ppm.

Mammals

Cyprodinil is practically non

- toxic to small mam mals (Rat LD 50 

### = 5000 mg/kg). A 10 month, 2

- Generation reproduction study suggests that cypr odinil causes no effects at the >1000 ppm

concentration (NOAEL).

Insects

Cyprodinil is practically non

- toxic (48

- hour LD 50 

### >784 micrograms/bee) to h oney bees.



### E. Data Gaps and Uncertainties Terrestrial Plants

In the seedling emergence and vegetative vigor plant tests, there were no EC 25 

### levels established,

due to lack of effect. Carrot was the most sensitive seedling emergence species tested with a 15%

effect for shoot weight. Cucumber was the most sensitive vegetative vigor species tested with 8%

effect for shoot length. This testing was done at a maximum rate of 0.5 lbs ai/A, applied 3 times

per year (maximum exposure for terrestrial plants = 1.5 lb ai/A). Since there was not enough

to xic effect on terrestrial plants in the Tier I test to produce an EC 25 

### , no risk quotients can be

calculated for this assessment.



### a. Environmental Fate and Exposure

There is uncertainty about the transformation products of cyprod inil. It appears that only under

aerobic conditions there is degradation and little information was available a bout CGA

- 249287,

CGA

- 321915 and CGA

- 275535 . HED has identified CGA

- 249287 as a degradate of concern.

For aerial applications, the estimation of spray drift corresponding to a buffer zone of 150 ft, was

quantitatively obtained from AgDRIFT® v2.01. However, there is uncertainty with respect to the

level of mitigation that the vegetative strip of 10 ft can provide for runoff. In certain scenari os,

runoff via erosion will predominate and will be the most important factor influencing the amount

of a chemical that a body of water may receive (rather than spray drift). The Tier II model

PRZM/EXAMS is unable to quantitatively estimate reduction in e xposure from the use of a

vegetative buffer. However, it is expected that the movement of soil particles through the

vegetative strip would be controlled, therefore mitigating the risk.



### 2. Ecological Effects

### 6 A chronic s ediment t oxicity s tud y with mar ine/estuarine invertebrates may provide confirmatory

data. Any study conducted should be with the marine/estuarine invertebrate Leptocheirus

plumulosus

. This is a 28

- day study that addresses survival, growth, and reproduction. Please

refer to the EPA gu idance manual EPA 600/R

- 01/020 (3/01), available on the EPA website. This

study should substantially reduce uncertainties in risk assessment for aquatic invertebrates

dwelling in or near sediments

, but may not change the overall risk assessment conclusion s.

In the absence of this study

, EFED relied on the principles of the equilibrium partition theory

(EqP), to estimate the potential for acute and chronic risk from porewater. This screening

approach has been s anctioned by the Office of Water (OW)

.

### 7 

### II. PROBLEM FORMULATION

A previous ecological risk assessment assessed the risks of cyprodinil use on bushberry subgroup,

caneberry, watercress and pistachio for the product Switch TM 62.5 WG (DP Barcodes: D278820;

D274576; D279062; D279448). They conclude d that “The maximum application rate of

cyprodinil for each crop is 0.328 lb a

. i

. /A, applied 4 times/year (1.31 lb cyprodinil/A/year). This

rate is lower than the maximum rate (1.407 lb cyprodinil /A/year) for the aerial use on almonds

and stone fruits (r efer to memo ‘ attached ’ ; DP Barcode D273197).” In the later memo , the

conclusions were, among others, “EFED’s evaluation of the fate and disposition of cyprodinil

shows that this compound is persistent, binds to particulate and sediment and has low soil

mobility (groundwater contamination appears to be low). However, aquifers that lie below areas

that have low organic content and coarse textured soils or shallow leaky aquifers could be prone

to contamination. Even though spray drift buffers can potential ly reduce the cyprodinil load into

surface waters, this compound’s high affinity to sorb to soil and particulate suggests that the

potential for runoff can be coupled with erosion. This stability and binding to particulate and

organic matter (aerobic and a naerobic conditions) suggests that cyprodinil residues in sediments

could contribute to a possible resuspension of compound through mixing and mass balance that

can extend toxic risk to aquatic invertebrates in the epibenthos (water just above the benthos) , as

well as those in the benthos, over an extended time period.” This particular assessment involves

the risks of cyprodinil resulting from aerial applications of Switch TM 

### 62.5WG in California to

berries, pistachio, strawberries and tropical fruits ; and Vangard ® WG also to grapes and pome

fruits. Furthemore, this assessment includes the addition of nine crops or crop groups to the label

of Vangard® WG. T he label rates of these crops or crop groups are the same or similar to those

of the existing product (SwitchTM 62.5 WG), th at have previously been assessed by EFED.

Therefore, t he major focus of this assessment is aerial applications of cyprodinil in the state of

California.



### A. Stressor Source and Distribution

1. Source and Intensity

The registrant, Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc.

, is requesting registration for their selective

fungicide , cyprodinil ( 4

- cyclopropyl

- 6

- methyl

- N

- phenyl

- 2

- pyrimidinamine ; CAS No. 121552

- 61

- 2; PC Code: 288202 )

, for aerial application to control certain fungal diseases in a variety of crops

in California. The maximum application rate is 0. 328 lb a

. i

. /A/ application in their product

SwitchTM 62.5 WG, and includes a 150 ft buffer to protect aquifers

. This is the maximum rate

proposed for most crops on the Vangard label as well, with some crops proposed for up to 0.469

lb a

. i

. /A, the current maximum rate for almonds and stone fruits. Cyprodinil is considered the

potential stressor. Following application, the only route of dissipation of the compound is aerobic

metabolism ( e specially in soils , but not in aquatic systems ). Furthermore, it may drift during

ap p lication , o r runoff via erosion for extended periods of time (months) . In aquatic environments

it is expected to partition with the sediment and persist in the benthos

. This stability and binding

to particulate and organic matter (aerobic and anaerobic conditions) suggests that cyprodinil

residues in sediments could contribute to a possible resuspension of the pesticide through mixing

and mass balance

, that can extend toxic risk to aquatic invertebrates in the epibenthos (water just

above the benthos), as well as th ose in the benthos, over an extended time period (many months

to a year or more )

. With aerial applications, the level of drift will be higher , increasing the

exposure.

### 8 

### 2. Physicochemical, Fate, and Transport Properties

The following are the most imp ortant physicochemical and fate characteristics of cyprodinil :

**•** Complete fate data base.

**•** Major route of exposure is ae robic metabolism (aerobic soil half

- lives 22

- 50 days).

**•** It is p ersistent to hydrolysis at three pH’s (5

- 9), in anaerobic media, and to photo lysis/

photodegradation in water and soil.

**•** Field results are of the same order of magnitude than the aerobic soil metabolism (14

- 47

days in CA and NY).

**•** Slightly mobile . A vulnerable area may be at potential risk of ground water

contamination , if the chemi cal is applied

, due to its very high persistence ( K

oc 

### average =

1,745 L/Kg OC 

### )

.

**•** Volatilization not expected (low vapor pressure and Henry’s Law const ant )

. Furthermore,

tendency to bind to soils, sediments and organic matter.

**•** There is relatively low bioaccum ulation potential, with rapid depuration.

**•** Major transformation products are CGA

- 249287 and CGA

- 321915.

**•** Based on reported pKa of the conjugated acid (4.44)

, cyprodinil

, would primarily exist as

a neutral species in the environment

.



### 3. Pesticide Type, Cl ass, and Mode of Action

Cyprodinil belongs to a group of fungicides commonly known as anilo pyrimidine f ungicides,

they act by inhibition of amino acids and protein synthesis < http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/PI131 >.

There are a number of pyrimidine derivatives with systemic fungicidal activity. Cyprodinil is

referred as a p yrimidinamine.

The active ingredient of this fungicide (cyprodinil) belon gs to a new chemical class of anilino

pyrimidines and exhibits a systematic mode of action with no cross resistance to currently used

disease control products. The systematic action of cyprodinil comes from its lipophilic properties.

It is easily absorbed into and across the cuticle and wax layers of leaves and fruits from where it

continuously distributes and penetrates into other plant parts. Biochemical studies indicate that

the mode of action for cyprodinil comes from its interference with biosynthesis of methionine. It

may also impede the secretion on fungal hydrolytic enzymes, thus resulting in impaired fungal

pathogenesis and growth < http://www.frac.info/frac/index.htm >

,

< www.frac.info/frac/publication/anhang/FRAC_Code_List2.pdf > and

< www.hortnet.co.nz/publications/nzpps/journal/52/nzp p52_176.pdf >



### 4. Overview of Pesticide Usage

Cyprodinil is registered as a fungicide for use in combination with fludioxonil (CAS No. 131341

-

86

- 1) in a product called Switch TM 62.5WG (37.5% cyprodinil, and 25.0% fludioxonil; EPA Reg.

No. 100

- 953). It is also used alone in Vangard® WG (75.0% cyprodinil; EPA Reg. No. 100

- 828). For SwitchTM 62.5 WG , t he maximum application rate per crop for beans, tropical fruits

, berries, brassica, carrot, herbs, leafy vegetables, onions, garlic, pistachio, strawberries, and

watercress is equivalent to 1.3 lb a.i./A /year cyprodinil and 0.9 lb a.i./A /year fludioxonil.

Cyprodinil is used for the control of certain diseases in fruits, herbs, nuts, and vegetables.

Currently, only ground applications are allowed, and a buffe r zone of 75 ft has been imposed to

protect aquatic areas such as lakes, reservoirs, rivers, permanent streams, marshes or natural

ponds, estuaries, and commercial fish ponds. At this time two aerial applications per season are

### 9 allowed on stone fruits and almonds only in California, and the buffer zone is increased to 150 ft.

Application season var ies according to the target pest. It is recommended that every two

applications, the grower used another fungicide so there is no development of resistance.

T he registrant is seeking approval of one aerial application per year for berries, pistachios,

strawberries, and tropical fruits with its product SwitchTM 62.5WG , and grapes and pome fruits

with its product Vangard, both in the state of California only

. According to USDA data (NASS

2006, USDA 2006), at least one type of crop from each of the crop groups listed on the label is

grown in C alifornia (please, refer to Tables III a and b)

.



### B. Receptors

For the screening

- level risk assessment of cyprodinil, toxicological data generated on

representative test species belonging to broad taxonomic groups are s ummarized, then utilized in

an assessment of risk for each group. These data are obtained from registrant

- submitted studies.

Table II.a gives examples of taxonomic groups and test species evaluated for ecological effects in

screening

- level risk assessment s for cyprodinil. Within each of these very broad taxonomic

groups, an acute and/or chronic measure of effect is selected from the available test data.



### Table II.a. Taxonomic Groups and Test Species Evaluated for Ecological Effects in

Screening

- Level R isk Assessments.

Taxonomic group Chemical Example(s) of representative species

Birds a Cyprodinil Mallard duck ( Anas platyrhynchos )

Bobwhite quail ( Colinus virginianus )

Mammals Cyprodinil Rat ( Rattus norvegicus )

Rabbit

Dog

Insects Cyprodinil Honey bee ( Apis mellifera L. )

Freshwater fish b Cyprodinil Bluegill sunfish ( Lepomis macrochirus )

Rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss )

Freshwater invertebrates Cyprodinil Water flea ( Daphnia magna )

Estuarine/marine fish Cyprodinil Sheepshead minnow

Estuarine/marine invertebrates

Cyprodinil Mysid shrimp

### 10 

### Table II.a. Taxonomic Groups and Test Species Evaluated for Ecological Effects in

Screening

- Level R isk Assessments.

Terrestrial plants c Cyprodinil Multiple species

Aquatic plants and algae Cyprodinil Blue

- green algae ( Anabaena flos

- aquae )

Marine diatom ( S keletonema costatum )

a Birds represent surrogates for amphibians (terrestrial phase) and reptiles.

b Freshwater fish may be surrogates for amphibians (aquatic phase).

c Four species of two families of monocots, of which one is corn; six species of at least four dicot families, of

which one is soybeans.



### 1. Ecological Effects

a. Aquatic Effects

For cyprodinil , effects on aquatic organisms are estimated from acute and chronic laboratory

studies submitted to the Agency. A cute toxicity data are available for freshwater fish [rainbow

trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss) and bluegill sunfish ( Lepomis macrochirus ) ] , and freshwater

invertebrates [water flea ( Daphnia magna )].

Reproductive or growth effects from chronic exposure are es timated from studies conducted with

freshwater fish and freshwater invertebrates.

For cyprodinil , toxicity data are available for aquatic non

- vascular plants ( blue

- green algae,

Anabaena flos

- aquae; Marine diatom ( Skeletonema costatum ))

.



### b. Terrestr ial Effects

Terrestrial exposure to birds, mammals and invertebrates can occur orally and via other routes

. Available cyprodinil toxicity studies allow the assessment of acute oral /dietary exposure of birds

and mammals. Studies are available to assess reproductive toxicity of cyprodinil. Effects on

mammals are estimated from acute and chronic laboratory studies reviewed by the Health Effects

Division (HED). S tudies (seedling emergence and vegetative vigor) are available to evaluate the

effects of cyprodinil to terrestrial plants

.



### 2. Ecosystems at Risk

Ecosystems that were considered at risk due to applications of Switch TM 62.5 WG and Vangard ®

WG included areas adj acent to application sites and water bodies adjacent to and downstream of

application sites. In addition, organisms that inhabit the application site were also considered to

be part of the ecosystems at risk. S pecific ecosystems of interest are freshwate r aquatic systems

### 11 ( e.g. wetlands, lakes, and streams), marine/estuarine aquatic systems ( e.g. estuaries) and

terrestrial systems ( e.g. forests). Ground applications of Switch and Vangard are currently on

accepted label s for applications across the nation ; Vangard has aerial use in California for

almonds and stone fruits only. Risks of aerial applications of cyprodinil are assessed for

ecosystems in California only.



### C. Assessment Endpoints

Assessment endpoints are defined as “explicit expressions of th e actual environmental value that

is to be protected.” Defining an assessment endpoint involves two steps: 1) identifying the valued

attributes of the environment that are considered to be at risk; and 2) operationally defining the

assessment endpoint in terms of an ecological entity (i.e., a community of fish and aquatic

invertebrates) and its attributes (i.e., survival and reproduction). Therefore, selection of the

assessment endpoints is based on valued entities (i.e., ecological receptors), the ecosys tems

potentially at risk, the migration pathways of pesticides, and the routes by which ecological

receptors are exposed to pesticide

- related contamination. The selection of clearly defined

assessment endpoints is important because they provide direction and boundaries in the risk

assessment for addressing risk management issues of concern. Assessment endpoints are

ultimately selected from the available toxicity studies, and are used as the measures of effects to

characterize potential ecological risks as sociated with exposure to dazomet.

To estimate exposure concentrations, this ecological risk assessment considers application s of

both Switch and Vangard at maximum application rate s for a wide variety of scenarios.

Likewise, the most sensitive toxicity endpoints are used from surrogate test species to estimate

treatment

- related direct effects on acute mortality and chronic reproductive, growth and survival

assessment endpoints. Toxicity tests are intended to determine effects of pesticide exposure on

bi rds, mammals, fish, terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates, and plants. These tests include short

term acute, subacute, and reproduction studies and are typically arranged in a hierarchical or

tiered system that progresses from basic laboratory tests to ap plied field studies. The toxicity

studies are used to evaluate the potential of a pesticide to cause adverse effects, to determine

whether further testing is required, and to determine the need for precautionary label statements

to minimize the potential adverse effects to non

- target animals and plants. A summary of

measures of effect selected to characterize potential ecological risks associated with exposure to

cyprodinil is provided in Table II.b.



### Table II. b . Summary of Possible Assessment Endpoints and Measures of Effect for MITC

Assessment Endpoint Measures of Effect

1. Abundance (i.e., survival, reproduction, and growth)

of individuals and populations of birds. 1a. Bobwhite quail/mallard acute oral LD 50

.

1 b . Avian subchronic/chronic inhala tion.

2. Abundance (i.e., survival, reproduction, and growth)

of individuals and populations of mammals. 2a. Laboratory rat acute oral LD 50

.

2 b . Laboratory rat development/reproduction chronic

NOAEL and LOAEL.

### 12 

### Table II. b . Summary of Possible Assessment Endpoints and Measures of Effect for MITC

3. Survival and reproduction of individu als and

communities of freshwater fish and invertebrates. 3a. Rainbow trout and bluegill acute LC 50

.

3b. Fathead minnow chronic (early

- life) NOAEC and

LOAEC.

3c. Water flea acute EC 50

.

3d. Water flea chronic (life

- cycle) LOAEC

4. Survival and repro duction of individuals and

communities of estuarine/marine fish and invertebrates. 4a. Sheepshead minnow acute LC 50

.

4b. Eastern oyster and mysid shrimp acute LC 50

.

4c. Mysid shrimp chronic (life

- cycle) NOAEC and

LOAEC (No studies)

5. Survival of bene ficial insect populations. 5a. Honeybee acute contact LD 50

.

6. Perpetuation of individuals and populations of non

target terrestrial and semi

- aquatic species (crops and

non

- crop plant species). 6a. Monocot and dicot seedling emergence and vegetative

vigor EC 25 values

.

7. Maintenance and growth of individuals and

populations of aquatic plants from standing crop or

biomass. 7a. Algal EC 50 values for growth rate and biomass

measurements.

LD 50 = Lethal dose to 50% of the test population.

NOAEC = No

- obs erved

- adverse

- effect concentration.

LOAEC = Lowest

- observed

- adverse

- effect concentration.

LC 50 (EC 50 ) = Lethal (effective) concentration to 50% of the test population.

LC 25 (EC 25 ) = Lethal (effective) concentration to 25% of the test population



### D. C onceptual Model

1. Risk Hypotheses

Risk hypotheses are specific assumptions about potential adverse effects (i.e., changes in

assessment endpoints) and may be based on th eory and logic, empirical data, mathematical

models, or probability models (EPA 1998). For this assessment, the risk is stressor

- initiated,

where the stressor is the release of cyprodinil to the environment. Cyprodinil is applied as a

water dispersible g ranule. It appears to be persistent and available for runoff for long periods of

time (months). Furthermore, bodies of water may be contaminated via spray drift. The major

emphasis initially appears to be on the aquatic invertebrates. The following ris k hypothesis is

presumed for this screening level assessment:

The agricultural uses of cyprodinil may involve potential exposure to terrestrial and

aquatic organisms. Based on cyprodinil ’s persistence, mode of action, direct toxicity and

po ssible indirec t effects to various food webs, the Agency assumes that this compound

has the potential to cause reduced survival , growth , and reproductive impairment to

terrestrial and aquatic animals and plants

, as a result of the proposed uses of the

pesticide

.

### 13 

### 2. D iagram

The conceptual site model shown in Figure 1 generically depicts the potential source of

cyprodinil release mechanisms, abiotic receiving media, biological receptor types, and effects

endpoints of potential concern. In order for a chemical to pose a n ecological risk, it must reach

ecological receptors in biologically significant concentrations. An exposure pathway is the

means by which a contaminant moves in the environment from a source to an ecological receptor.

For an ecological exposure pathway to be complete, it must have a source, a release mechanism,

an environmental transport medium, a point of exposure for ecological receptors, and a feasible

route of exposure. In addition, the potential mechanisms of transformation (i.e., which degradates

may form in the environment, in which media, and how much) must be known, especially for a

chemical whose metabolites/degradates are of greater toxicological concern )

. The assessment of

ecological exposure pathways, therefore, includes an examination of t he source and potential

migration pathways for constituents, and the determination of potential exposure routes (e.g.,

ingestion, inhalation, dermal absorption).

Ecological receptors that may potentially be exposed to cyprodinil include terrestrial and se mi

aquatic wildlife (i.e., mammals, birds, beneficial insects and reptiles), terrestrial and semi

- aquatic

plants, and soil invertebrates. In addition to terrestrial ecological receptors, aquatic receptors

(e.g., freshwater and estuarine/marine fish and in vertebrates, and amphibians) may also be

exposed to cyprodinil from the site of application to various watersheds and other aquatic

environments via runoff and/or spray drift.

The source and mechanism of release of cyprodinil are ground application via foliar spray, and

aerial application to agricultural crops only in the state of California . Movement to surface water

is expected from erosion and spray drift. Potential emission of volatile compounds is not

considered as a viable release mechanism for cy prodinil, since volatilization is not expected to be

a significant route of dissipation for this chemical. The potential aquatic receptors include

freshwater and estuarine/marine fish and invertebrates (water column and benthic), as well as

freshwater aqua tic plants and amphibians. Terrestrial receptors include mammals, birds, plants,

and nontarget invertebrates (e.g., beneficial insects). The predicted effects can be either direct or

indirect. Direct toxic effect s reflect morbidity and chronic effects on g rowth, development and

reproduction. Indirect effects suggest alterations in habitat or feeding that can eventually impact

the well being of the organism. All of these issues can have implications for population effects.

### 14 

### E. Analysis Plan

1. P reliminary Identification of Data Gaps

Given the persistence of cyprodinil in sediment, there is a need for chronic sediment testing, as

indicated earlier, to fully assess the potential for cyprodinil exposure and toxicity to aquatic

organisms living in/o r on the benthos. The Agency is estimating the potential for toxic risk from

sediment/porewater through the use of the PRZM/EXAMS model

, using the equilibrium

partitioning theory

.

Since cyprodinil sediment toxicity studies were not available, The Agency has estimated the

potential for toxic risk to aquatic benthic receptors. The basis for this estimation is grounded in

the equilibrium partitioning theory (EqP) that holds that a nonionic chemical in the sediment

partitions between sediment organic carbon, interstitial water (porewater) and benthic organisms.

At equilibrium, if the concentration in any one phase is known then the concentration in the

others can be predicted ( Di Toro et al. , 1991 ). Since, the PRZM/ EXAMS model uses

equilibrium partitioning i n order to predict concentrations of nonionic chemicals in porewater,

The Agency will rely on this scenario for generating porewater values for potential exposure to

benthic organisms. Porewater values ( μ g/L or ppb ) will be used in conjunction with acute

i nvertebrate effects values ( μ g/L) generated from standard water column testing. Di Toro et al.

, 1991 noted that “for nonionic organic chemicals, the concentration

- response relationship for the

biological effect of concern can most often be correlated with the interstitial water (porewater)

concentration ( μ g chemical/ L interstitial water) ...” This method is used and sanctioned by

### 15 EPA’s Offic e of Water and will be used by t he Agency as a screening method in the absence of

actual sediment toxicity data.



### 2. Measures to Evaluate Risk Hypotheses and Conceptual M odel

a. Measures of Exposure

**•** For aerial applications, t he measurement of the level of drift was performed with

the model AgDRIFT®, in the Tier I Aerial mode, which is capable to determine

the level of drift to the EXAMS standard pond from a predetermined buffer zone.

**•** For agricultural uses, exposure concentrations for aquatic ecosystems

assessments were estimated based on EF ED’s Tier 2 aquatic model

PRZM/EXAMS. A graphical user interface (pe4), developed by the EPA

< http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water >, was used to facilitate inputting

chemical and use specific parameters into the appropriate PRZM input files (inp)

and EXAMS chemical files. This approach employs PRZM, which simulates the

processes in the agricultural field, such as runoff and erosion, on a daily time

step. The runoff and erosion flux output dat a from PRZM are used as chemical

loadings to EXAMS, which simulates surface water in order to predict the EECs.

F ive PRZM field (crop) scenarios were modeled: CA almonds, CA citrus, CA

grapes, CA fruits and OR berries . An effort was made to cover as ma n y of the

crops as possibl e in the SwitchTM 62.5 WG label and to select crops

representative of the new aerial uses, using the highest application rates (see

additional notes below) . EECs for ecological risk assessment were determined

using a pond modeling scenario which describes a generic scenario for the

EXAMS component of the modeling exercise.

**•** Since cyprodinil binds to organic carbon (mean K OC 

### = 1,745 mg/L)

, and

eventually accumulates in aquatic sediment, toxic exposu re to organisms living

in this media is a concern. EFED has estimated cyprodinil sediment exposure to

benthic organisms by calculating pore water exposure values using the PRZM/

EXAMS model. Screening level RQs for sediment dwelling o rganisms were

estimated with an extrapolation method recommended by the Office of Water

(USEPA). This was based on the Agency Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment

Guidelines (ESG) under the Clean Water Act [CWA Section 304(a)(2)]. After

consultation with the OW, EFED adopted the equilibrium partitioning (EqP)

method to be used when sediment toxicity and exposure data are not available

(Appendix C ). The EqP theory holds that a nonionic compound in the sediment

partitions between sediment organic carbon, inter stitial (pore) water and benthic

organisms (Di Toro et al. , 1991, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000).

At equilibrium, if the concentration in any phase is known, then the concentration

in the other phases can be predicted through the organic/ car bon soil partition

coefficient. The EECs are calculated from the pore water concentration (an

output from PRZM/ EXAMS) through the K OC



### .

**•** Since only one aerial application is allowed, and the maximum number of

applications may be 3 or 4 , the EFED will run all aerial and all ground

applications to bracket the actual estimated environmental concentrations

(EECs).

### 16 ● The proposed label recommends to alternate fungicides with different modes of

action every two applications of cyprodinil, for certain crops, in order to avoid

resistance towards the chemical. The EFED replicated this recommendation by

changing the interval between application of the second to the third application to

14 days (equivalent to two applications of cyprodinil).



### b. Measures of Eff ect

Measures of ecological effects are obtained from a suite of registrant

- submitted guideline studies

conducted with a limited number of surrogate species. Surrogate test species of birds, mammals,

fish, aquatic and terrestrial invertebrates and plants are used to estimate treatment

- related direct

effects on acute mortality and chronic reproduction, growth, and survival of non

- target species.

The test species are not intended to be representative of the most sensitive species but rather were

selected bas ed on their ability to thrive under laboratory conditions. Toxicity testing does not

represent all species of birds, mammals, or aquatic organisms. Only a few surrogate species for

both freshwater fish and birds are used to represent all freshwater fish (2000+) and bird (680+)

species in the United States. Surrogate mammalian species include laboratory rats, rabbits and

dogs. Reptile and amphibian toxicity data are not available; consequently, this risk assessment

assumes that avian and reptilian toxici ties are similar and fish and amphibian toxicities are

similar. Consistent with EPA test guidelines, a variety of ecological effects data appropriate for

this assessment on technical grade cyprodinil that complies with good laboratory testing

requirements have been submitted. In addition, the Ecological Incident Information System

(EIIS) is searched to further refine the characterization of potential ecological effects associated

with exposure to cyprodinil . Toxicity tests include short

- term acute, subacu te, and

reproduction/chronic studies. These data are summarized in Section III.C

.



### c. Measures of Ecosystem and Receptor Characteristics

Ecological field studies studies of cyprodinil (i.e., in natural ecosystems) are not available. An

evaluation o f modeled EECs and calculated RQs will determine if direct effects to receptor

species could potentially result in effects at the higher levels of organization (i.e. population,

trophic level, community, ecosystem).

M odels used in this analysis include Tier II PRZM/EXAMS

, for the new aquatic exposure

assessment . Since the current terrestrial model (T

- Rex) does not discriminate between aerial and

ground applications, and cyprodinil has been previously shown to have low risk to terrestrial

wildlife, new m odel runs were not conducted . The receptors addressed by the aquatic and

terrestrial risk assessments are summarized in Figure II.a. For aquatic assessments, generally fish

and aquatic invertebrates in both freshwater and estuarine/marine environments are represented.

For terrestrial assessments, three different size classes of small mammals and three size classes of

birds are represented. I nformation regarding the toxicity data available for these various classes of

aquatic and terrestrial receptors is p rovided in Section III (Analysis)

.

### 17 

### III. ANALYSIS

A. Use Characterization

Cyprodinil ( CAS No. 121552

- 61

- 2 ) is registered as a fungicide for use in combination with

fludioxonil (CAS No. 131341

- 86

- 1) in a pro duct called SwitchTM 62.5WG (37.5% cyprodinil, and

25.0% fludioxonil; EPA Reg. No. 100

- 953). It is also used alone in Vangard® WG (75.0%

cyprodinil; EPA Reg. No. 100

- 828). Cyprodinil is currently used in a variety of crops, including

stone fruits (apricot s, tart cherries, nectarines, peaches, plums, prunes), pome fruits (apples,

crabapples, loquat, mayhaw, pears, quince) and grapes. In addition, cyprodinil may be applied to

almonds and pistachio. Furthermore, there are a variety of uses on numerous veget ables, beans,

berries, herbs, strawberries and watercress. These uses involve exposure around the entire

continental US, including coastal areas, where estuarine/marine environments may be

neighboring. Cyprodinil may be applied at planting, post

- planting , or foliar; the time of

application varies widely, depending on the target pest. The new aerial uses have the potential to

increase the exposure with cyprodinil to neighboring bodies of water substantially, by increasing

the level of drift. This assessm ent seeks to quantify this potential.

According to the “ Pesticide Use in U.S. Crop Production: 2002,” i n 2002, 120,906 lb a.i. were

applied nationally. The survey did not have earlier data for comparison because this is a

relatively new chemical in the m arket. The survey has data for several chemicals and comparison

against 1997 and 1992.

Table s III a and III b are summaries of all agricultural use patterns for cyprodinil. The highlighted

uses are those proposed new ones or proposed changes. The use inf ormation was obtained from

the proposed labels for SwitchTM 62.5 WG and Vangard® WG

.

Table III a . Summary use information for cyprodinil, based on Switch TM 62.5 WG label.

USE SINGLE

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A) NUMBER

OF APPS. SEASONAL

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A) INTERVAL

BETWEEN

APPS. (days) APP.

METHOD Pre

- Harvest

Interval

(days)

Beans (dried and

succulent) 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Berries 0.328 4 1.3 7 G,A* 0

Brassica (cole) leafy

vegetables 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Carrot 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Herbs 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Leafy Vegetables 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 0

Onions, Garlic 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Pistachio 0.32 8 4 1.3 14 G,A* 7

Strawberries 0.328 4 1.3 7 G,A* 0

### 18 Table III a . Summary use information for cyprodinil, based on Switch TM 62.5 WG label.

USE SINGLE

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A) NUMBER

OF APPS. SEASONAL

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A) INTERVAL

BETWEEN

APPS. (days) APP.

METHOD Pre

- Harvest

Interval

(days)

Tropical Fruits 0.328 4 1. 3 7 G,A* 0

Watercress 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 0

* One aerial application in California only.



### Table III b . Summary use information for cyprodinil, based on Vangard ® WG label. New

crops appear in bold.

USE SINGLE

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A) NUMBER

OF APPS. SEASONAL

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A) INTERVAL

BETWEEN

APPS. (days) APP.

METHOD Pre

- Harvest

Interval

(days)

Beans (dried and

succulent) 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Berries 0.328 4 1.3 7 G,A* 0

Brassica (cole) leafy

vegetables 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Carrot 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Herbs 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 7

Leafy Vegetables 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 0

Onions, Garlic 0.469 3@0.433 1.3 7 G 7

Pistachio 0.328 4 1.3 14 G,A* 7

Strawberries 0.469 3@0.433 1.3 7 G,A* 0

Tropical Fruits 0.328 5 1.7 7 G,A* 0

Watercress 0.328 4 1.3 7 G 0

Almonds 0.469 3 1.4 N S G,A* 7

Stone Fruits 0.469 3 1.4 NS G,A* 1

### 19 Table III b . Summary use information for cyprodinil, based on Vangard ® WG label. New

crops appear in bold.

USE SINGLE

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A) NUMBER

OF APPS. SEASONAL

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A) INTERVAL

BETWEEN

APPS. (days) APP.

METHOD Pre

- Harvest

Interval

(days)

Pome Fruits 0.234 6 1. 4 7 G,A* 72

Grapes 0.469 4 2.0 7 G,A* 7

* One aerial application in California only.

NS = Not specified



### B. Exposure Characterization

Selected physical and chemical properties of cyprodinil are listed in the following table.

Cyprodinil is non

- volatile and has a relatively low solubility in water (13 ppm at 20 ° C). It

degrades moderately under aerobic conditions. There are no other major routes of dissipation for

the chemical. The following table also provides information about the transformation products of

cyprodinil , in particular, their mobility

. Based on reported pKa of the conjugated acid, i n

moderately acidic to alkaline aqueous solutions

, typically expected in the environment (pH 6.0

- 8.5), cyp rodinil would primarily exist as a neutral species. It is expected to be predominantly in

the ionized form (protonated species) only in highly acidic aquatic environments (pH <4.4). T his

fungicide has a moderately high molecular weight (225.29 g/mol)

.

T able IV

. Summary of physical/chemical and environmental fate and transport properties

of cyprodinil.

PARAMETER VALUE(S) (units) SOURCE COMMENT

Chemical Name 4

- cyclopropyl

- 6

- methyl

- N

- phenyl

2

- pyrimidinamine Chemical Data

S heet (web) CAS name

4

- cyclop ropyl

- 6

- methyl

- N

phenylpyrimidin

- 2

- amine IUPAC name

Structure

Molecular Weight 225.29 g/mole Registrant Data

–

Physical State Powder with agglomerates at 20°C,

with a weak odor and beige color EPA Fact Sheet

--

Density at 20°C 1.21 g/cm 3 EP A Fact Sheet

--

### 20 T able IV

. Summary of physical/chemical and environmental fate and transport properties

of cyprodinil.

PARAMETER VALUE(S) (units) SOURCE COMMENT

Solubility (20 o C) 16

- 20 ppm @ pH 5; 13 ppm

@ pH 7; and 15 ppm @ pH 9 MRID: 43709003.

–

Vapor Pressure (20 o C) 3.80 x 10

- 6 **mmHg** MRID: 43709003.

–

Henry’s Law constant 7.04 x 10

- 8 atm

- m 3 /mole

--- Estimated from vapor

pres sure and water solubility.

pKa 4.44 Tomlin, C.D.S.

(ed.) The Pesticide Manual

- World

Compendium, 11 th ed.,

British Crop Protection

Council, Surrey, England

1997, p. 319

pH at 25°C 9.5 EPA Fact Sheet

**---**

Solubilities in g/l at 25 ° C In ethanol 16 0, acetone 610,

toluene 460, n

- hexane 30,

n

- octanol 160 Tomlin, C.D.S.

(ed.) **---**

Octanol

- Water Partition

Coefficient

(K OW , at 20 o C) l og P O/W = 3.9 @ pH 5; 4.0 @ pH 7;

and 4.0 @ pH 9

P O/W = 10,000 @ pH 7 MRID: 43709003.

–

Hydrolysis H alf

- life

(pH 5, 7, 9; (25 o C) Stable to hydrolysis at

pH 5, 7, and 9. MRID: 43709044. Stable at all pHs.

Aqueous Photolysis Half

- life

(pH 5) DT 50 = 22 days

In unsterilized water; suspected

microbial transformation instead

of photolysis. MRID: 439 08422.

---

Soil Photolysis Half

- life t 1/2 = 64

- 70 days Suspected

microbial transformation instead

of photodegradation. MRID: 43908423

and 43908424. –

Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half

- life LS t 1/2 = 40 and 50 days

SL t 1/2 = 22 and 31 days MRID: 439 08425,

43908426,

43709045, and

43709046. For the SL, the pattern was

biphasic, the half lives

reported include data from 0

to 21 days.

Anaerobic Soil Metabolism

Half

- life After aerobic incubation (half

- lives

of 16

- 98 days), during anaerobic

conditions, the compound was

stable MRID: 43908427

and 43908428 ---

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism

Half

- life Stable for 369 days. MRID: 44186406

. –

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism

Half

- life t 1/2 = 106

- 126 days for the Rhine

river; 165

- 178 days for the pond

s ystem from Switzerland, and 612

days for the pond system from

Denton, TX. MRID: 45518701,

45518702,

43908429, and

43908430

. _

Organic Carbon Partition

Coefficient (K OC ) (mL/g OC ) SL 2030

S 1770

L 1630

CL 1550 MRID: 43709047

. Low to slight mobility (FAO of

the UN classification).

### 21 T able IV

. Summary of physical/chemical and environmental fate and transport properties

of cyprodinil.

PARAMETER VALUE(S) (units) SOURCE COMMENT

Soil Partition Coefficient (K d )

(mL/g) SL 16.3

S 14.2

L 24.3

CL 31.2 MRID: 43709047

. –

Soil Partition Coefficient K d and

K OC

**CGA**

**- 249287**  K d K OC

SL 5.23 650

S 6.97 867

CL 3.48 173

L 3.88 260

LS 0.31 180 **(mL/g or**

**mL/** g OC **)** MRID 43908431 Moderately mobile

Soil Partition Coefficient K d and

K OC

**CGA**

**- 321915**  K d K OC

SL 2.52 313

S 1.45 180

CL 0.99 49.7

L 1.14 76.5

LS 0.25 14 7 **(mL/g or**

**mL/** g OC **)** MRID 43908432 Mobile to Moderately mobile

Soil Partition Coefficient K d and

K OC

**CGA**

**- 275535**  K d K OC

SL1 60.3 7500

S 26.7 3320

L1 32.1 2070

L2 33.3 2900

LS 4.39 2550

SL2 8.31 1810 **(mL/g or**

**mL/** g OC **)** MRID 44186407 Slightly mobile

Terrestrial Field Dissipation

Half

- life Applied to two plots, one w. 6

applications at 0.5 lb a.i./A, and

another at 3.0 lb a.i./A:

CA half

- lives 42 multiple applics.

47 days single applic. and NY 14 to

28 days.

Non

- linear first order half

- life was

35 days. First order half lives in

NY were 88

- 92 days. MRID: 44186408,

44186437,

44186409,

44186436

. _

Bioaccumulation in Fish Total residue:

Edible 100X

Non

- edible 777X

Whole fish 466X

BCF based on parent only:

Edible 33X

Non

- edible 90X

B etween 76 and 83% of the

radioactivity depurated after one

day; and >97% depurated by the

third day. MRID: 43924501.



### 1. Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization

### 22 

### a . Summary of Empirical D ata

Cyprodinil is stable to hydrolysis

, photolysis , and anaerobic biotransformation . Although aerobic

biotransformation might be a major route of dissipation, primary and secondary aero bic soil

metabolism half

- lives of ca. 30 and 440 days, respectively suggest that cyprodinil can also be

persistent in aerobic soil under certain circumstances . Cyprodinil has a relatively high affinity to

sorb to soils and does not volatilize from soil or water. Cyprodinil does not bioaccumulate in

fish. The major route of transport to surface water would be by erosion of cyprodinil sorbed to

soils or spray drift

.



### b. Degradation and Metabolism

Cyprodinil appears to be stable to hydrolysis

, and aqueous and soil photolysis

. Available fate

data indicate that cyprodinil is moderately persistent in the aerobic soil environment (t 1/2 

### = 22 to

50 days). In contrast, laboratory fate data for aquatic systems suggest that aquatic environments

can be conducive to cyprodinil persistence. Cyprodinil is stable in anaerobic aquatic systems and

can even persist in aerobic aquatic systems. Calculated half

- lives for the total aerobic sediment/

water systems were in the range of 106

- 178 days for river and pond samples obta ined from

Switzerland and 612 days for pond samples obtained from Texas. In these aquatic systems,

cyprodinil is expected to be highly persistent in the sediment rather than the water as suggested

from the observed partitioning from the water column where it had relatively short residence half

liv e s of 3

- 5 days for samples obtained from Switzerland and 8

- 29 days for samples obtained from

Texas. Data suggest that aerobic transformation in sediments is the major means of dissipation in

aquatic systems. It fo llows that persistence of cyprodinil is expected to be relatively high if the

sediment part of the aquatic system is anaerobic compared to aerobic sediment

.

The significant (> 10%) degradates of cyprodinil include the hydroxylated parent (CGA 275535

and C GA 304075) and 4

- cyclopropyl

- 6

- methyl

- 2

- amine

- pyrimidine (CGA 249287) generated as

a result of aerobic soil metabolism. CGA

- 249287 has been identified by HED as a degradate of

concern.



### c. Transport and Mobility

Data on mobility of cyprodinil indicate s that cyprodinil does not appear likely to leach

appreciably through the soil profile into groundwater sources ; however, cyprodinil may be very

persistent in anaerobic environments , which is a concern in vulnerable sites to groundwater

contamination

. Cyp rodinil has a relatively high affinity for soil ( average K

oc 

### = 1, 745 L Kg

- 1 

### ),

therefore, cyprodinil is likely to adhere to soil particles and move from application sites, and

reach surface waters and/or vulnerable shallow ground water as an aqueous species in runoff , but

most likely as sorbed species through erosion of soil particles

.



### d. Field Studies

Field dissipation studies were conducted in New York and in California. In these studies, a

wettable powder formulation was applied to two sets of bare g round plots; one set was treated at

0.5 lb a.i/Acre for 6 applications at 7

- day intervals and the second set was treated at 3.0 lb a.i./A

in a single application. Calculated field dissipation half

- lives (DT 50 

### ) for multiple application trials

were 42 to 47 days for those conducted in California (CA) and 14 to 28 days for those conducted

in New York (NY). A range of DT 50 

### ’s of 88

- 92 days was calculated for the single application

trials.

### 23 In these studies, parent did not leach below the top 6" of the soil

. Deg radates detected in the top

6" were CGA

- 249287 and CGA

- 321 915 at CA; and only CGA

- 249287 in NY. At lower depths

(6

- 12"), CGA

- 321915 only was detected at California site, between 60 to 240 days post

treatment.



### e. Bioaccumulation

14 

### C

- Cyprodinil residue s did not significantly accumulate in bluegill sunfish exposed to 14 

### C

Cyprodinil at 0.105 ppm in a flow

- through system for 28 days. Maximum BCFs, as a function of

total radioactive residues present, were 100, 777, and 466, in the edible, non

- edible, and w hole

fish tissues , respectively

. Between 76 and 83% of the radioactivity depurated after one day; and

>97% depurated by the third day.



### 2. Measures of Aquatic Exposure

a. Aquatic Exposure Modeling

For agricultural uses, exposure concentrations for aquatic ecosystems assessments were estimated

based on EFED’s Tier II aquatic model s PRZM V3.12 Beta and EXAMS V2.98.04

. A graphical

user interface (pe4 v01 ), developed by the EPA < http://www.epa.g ov/oppefed1/models/water >,

was used to facilitate inputting chemical and use specific parameters into the appropriate PRZM

input files (inp) and EXAMS chemical files. The Pesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM) field or

orchard crop scenario is the basic file w hich describes the local or regional climatological

information, soil hydrology, soil characteristics, crop characteristics, and the pesticide properties

necessary to determine pesticide loadings to ground or surface water. This basic file constitutes

the first part of the “exposure scenario.” It simulates the processes in the agricultural field, such

as runoff and erosion, on a daily time step. The runoff and erosion flux output data from PRZM

are used as chemical loadings to EXAMS (Exposure Analysis Mo deling System), which

simulates surface water in order to predict the Estimated Environmental Concentrations ( EECs )

. The PRZM scenario s selected for modeling were Oregon berries (representative of all berries and

strawberries in California)

, California al monds ( surrogate for pistachios)

, California lettuce

( representative of Leafy Vegetables)

, California Fruits (representative of Pome F ruits) and

California citrus (representative of Spanish lime

, a member of the Tropical Fruits) . EECs for

ecological risk assessment were determined using a pond modeling scenario which describes a

standard scenario for the EXAMS component of the modeling exercise (EXAMS Mississippi

pond).

To determine the level of spray drift for a buffer zone of 150 ft imposed in the label for this

chemical, the model AgDRIFT® v 2.01 was utilized. A simple calculation was performed with

the “toolbox” Deposition Assessment with the Tier II level of AgDRIFT® and the following

assumptions: d rop size distribution ASAE Fine to Medium (D V0.5 

### = 25 4.72 μ m ; D V0.9 

### = 443.58

μ m ) , w ind s peed of 10 mph and b oom height of 10 ft . The level of drift (fraction) obtained was

0.039 (3.9%). The level of drift for ground applications was kept at a conservative 1%.

The proposed label recommends to alternate fun gicides with different modes of action every two

applications of cyprodinil, for certain crops, in order to avoid resistance towards the chemical.

The EFED replicated this recommendation by changing the interval between application of the

second to the th ird application. The interval chosen was 14 days (equivalent to two applications

### 24 of cyprodinil). EFED recognizes that some fungicides may have a longer or shorter interval

between application; however, 14 days appeared to be a good compromise.

Following is a table of input parameters for cyprodinil

. The table provides comments which

explain how each input parameter was selected according to the EFED guidance dated 2/28/02.

The output files from PRZM/EXAMS appear in the Appendix A

. The Appendix also pr ovides

further information about the models PRZM, EXAMS, and AGDRIFT®

.

Table A. Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS:

Parameter (units) VALUE(S) SOURCES COMMENTS

Output File Name varies with crop

--- ---

Chemical Name Cyprodinil Label

--- Crop Nam e almond (pistachio),

citrus (Spanish lime),

berries (all berries

and strawberries)

, grapes, fruits Proposed Label s SwitchTM 62.5WG

Fungicide (EPA Reg. No.

100

- 953) and Vangard®

WG (EPA Reg. No. 100

- 828)

Application Rate Rate in Kg a.i./ha:

CA almonds 0.367

CA citrus 0.367

CA fruits 0.262

CA grapes 0.525

OR berries 0.489 Label Rate in lb a.i./A:

CA almonds 0.328

CA cit rus 0.328

CA fruits 0.234

CA grapes 0.469

OR berries 0.437

Day of Application (day

month) CA almonds 15

- 03

CA citrus 01

- 02

CA fruits 01

- 04

CA grapes 13

- 07

OR berries 07

- 05 Estimated from

metadata file and

label, or other

sources of

information. CA almond is surrogate

scenario for pistachio. OR

berries covers all berries and

strawberries.

Number of Applications

Allowed 1 aerial application

per crop

CA almond 4

CA citrus 4

CA fruits 5

CA grapes 4

OR berries 3 Label

---

Minim um Interval between

Applicati ons (days) CA almonds

– 14

CA citrus

– 7

CA fruits

– 7

CA grapes

– 7

OR berries 7 Label Recommends to alternate

with another fungicide after

every two applications.

K OC ( mL/g OC ) 1,745 MRID: 437090

- 47 Represents the average K OC value among four values

ranging from 1550 to 2030

ml/g. The K OC model was

utilized; it describes better

the mobility of cyprodinil.

Aerobic Soil Metabolism

(days) 44.3 MRID: 439084

- 26 Represents the 90 th

percentile of the upper

confidence bound on the

mean of four half

- life

va lues: 40, 50, 22, 31 days;

mean = 35.75 days; std. dev.

= 10.40 days

Incorporation Depth 0.0 in Label

---

### 25 Table A. Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS:

Parameter (units) VALUE(S) SOURCES COMMENTS

Method of Application

Ground or Aerial Label

---

Buffer Zone (ft.) 150 Label

--- Application Efficiency

(fraction) 0.95 aerial; 0.99

ground --- E FED guidance on input

parameters for PRZM /

EXAMS dated 2/28/02

Spray Drift (fraction) 0.039 aerial; 0.010

ground AgDRIFT® Tier II result obtained from

AgDRIFT® V2.01

. Consistent with an

application with a wind

speed of 10 mph , a boom

height of 10 ft and a droplet

size of ASAE Fine to

Medium

. Solubility in Water (ppm)

At 20°C 130 MRID 437090

- 03 10X the actual solubility as

per EFED guidance on input

parameters for PRZM /

EXAMS , dated 2/28/02

. Aerobic Aquatic

Metabolism (days) 382.3 MRID 439084

- 26,

439084

- 29, 439084

- 30, 455187

- 01 &

455187

- 02 Represents the 90 th

percentile of the upper

confidence bound on the

mean of five half

- life

values: 106, 126, 165, 178

and 612 days; mean =

237.40 days; std. dev. =

211.41days

Anaerobic Aquatic

Metabolism (days) Stabl e MRID 441864

- 06

---

Hydrolysis at pH 7 Stable MRID 437090

- 44

--- Aqueous Photolysis @ pH

7 and 25°C (days) Stable MRID 439084

- 22

---

Molecular Weight (g/mol) 225.29 Registrant Data

--- Vapor Pressure (torr or

mmHg) 3.80 x 10

- 6 MRID 437090

- 03

---

Henr y’s Law Constant

(atm

- m 3 /mol) 7.04 x 10

- 8 Calculated from

solubility and vapor

pressure. ---

Environment pond298.exv

--- Default for pond scenario,

as opposed to index

reservoir. Field Size Pond

---

Runoff N one

--- ---

PRZM Scenario CAalmond_NirrigC.t xt

CAcitrus _NirrigC.txt

CAfruit _NirrigC.txt

CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt

ORberriesOP.txt --- Selected to be representative

of crops existent and new

crops, taking into

consideration geographical

areas in the state of

California , and availability of

PRZM scenarios.

Metfile Scenario CAalmond w23232.dvf

CAcitrus w23155.dvf

CAfruit w93193.dvf

CA g rape w93193.dvf

ORberries w24232.dvf --- As suggested by the shell

(pe4 V01 ).

### 26 Table A. Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS:

Parameter (units) VALUE(S) SOURCES COMMENTS

CAM (Chemical

Application Method) 2

--- Linear foliar based on crop

canopy

IPSCND 1

--- pesticid e remaining on

foliage is converted to

surface application to the

top soil layer

FEXTRC, Foliar extraction 0.5

--- EFED guidance on input

parameters for

PRZM/EXAMS dated

2/28/02

PLDKRT, Decay rate on

foliage (day

- 1 ) 0

--- EFED guidance on input

parameter s for

PRZM/EXAMS dated

2/28/02

PLVKRT, Volatilization

rate from foliage 0

--- EFED guidance on input

parameters for

PRZM/EXAMS dated

2/28/02

UPTKF, Uptake factor 0

--- EFED guidance on input

parameters for

PRZM/EXAMS dated

2/28/02

Write Benthic Pore Wat er

Concentrations? Yes

--- Necessary to calculate the

benthic organisms risk

quotients.



### Table B provides the EECs of cyprodinil in the water column. The highest peak EEC was

obtained from the OR berries aerial scenario. In contrast, the peak EEC for the OR berries

ground scenario, was lower than all of the ground scenarios except for CA fruit ground. The next

highest EEC corresponds to CA grapes aerial, which has the next lowest ground peak EEC (CA

grapes ground). It is also noted that the 21

- day and 60

- day values decreased very littl e from the Selection of PRZM scenarios and limitations :

The aerial crops assessed included all berries, tropical fruits, strawberries, grapes and pome fruits.

Among the tropica l fruits the Spanish lime was modeled with the CA citrus scenario, but the

model represented also lychee, longan, rambutan and pulasan. Grapes were represented with the

CA grapes scenario. Pome fruits (apples, crabapples, loquat, mayhaw, pears, quince) w ere

modeled with the CA fruits scenario. This scenario is suitable to represent non

- citrus fruits, such

as pome fruits. To represent strawberries and all berries (berries, bushberries, caneberries,

juneberries, lingonberries, salal), the EFED selected th e OR berries scenario. O regon is a

contiguous state (to California), and the scenario was the best representation available. There are

some considerations and uncertainties related to the scenario. The OR berries scenario is set to

represent blackberrie s. It is located in the NE of the state of Oregon. The weather patterns may

not be exactly those observed in California. However, because the scenario is in a contiguous

state one would expect that the general weather patterns would not differ extremely from those of

California . Furthermore, the soils may be similar a s well ( that is, conducive to growing of

berries). Therefore, the EFED still considers the scenario suitable for a Tier II screening level

risk analysis. In addition, the EFED included st rawberries in the group of crops covered by the

OR berries scenario. Since the single application rate for strawberries is higher than for other

berries in the label of Vangard, the rate for strawberries was utilized in the modeling of all

berries. The h igher rate will cover the use rates for other berries.

### 27 peak value. The reader is reminded that cyprodinil is persistent under aerobic and anaerobic

aquatic metabolism.

Table B. Estimated Environmental Concentrations of Cyprodinil in the Water Column in ppb

Scenario Peak 21

- day 60

- day

CA almonds ground 4.83 4.38 4.08

CA almonds aerial 9.48 9.09 8.78

CA citrus ground

– 5 4.56 4.45 4.41

CA citrus aerial

– 5 9.94 9.54 9.44

CA citrus ground

– 4 4.23 4.12 4.05

CA citrus aerial

– 4 8.80 8.39 8.10

CA grapes ground 3.85 3.68 3.58

CA grapes aer ial 11.00 10.37 9.78

CA fruits ground 2.51 2.42 2.31

CA fruits aerial 7.76 7.42 7.15

OR berries ground 3.40 3.26 3.13

OR berries aerial 13.17 12.47 11.88



### Equilibrium Partitioning and Concentration in the Sediment/Pore water

A s mentioned previously, c yprodinil is a lipophilic compound that can adsorb readily to

particulate and sediment, thus possibly limiting its exposure to aquatic life in the water column

but increasing toxic exposure in the benthos. Sediment can act as a res ervoir for lipophilic

persistent compounds. The sediment and particulate likely adsorb a high percentage of cyprodinil

TGAI, as indicated by its relatively high K OC 

### . Therefore, coupled with cyprodinil ’s persistence in

aerobic and anaerobic aquatic enviro nments, sediment bound cyprodinil TGAI could present a

toxicity risk for benthic aquatic life and aquatic ecosystems in general.

Therefore, in order to assess this potential for pesticide risk to aquatic benthic systems, the

Environmental Fate and Effec ts Division (EFED) of the Office of Pesticides Program (OPP) has

adopted the method used by the Office of Water that relies on equilibrium partitioning (EqP) of

chemicals. The EqP theory is based on the hydrophobicity and concentrations of the chemical

nor malized to organic carbon (OC) in sediment (De Toro et al. 1991) and holds that a nonionic

chemical in sediment partitions between sediment organic carbon, interstitial (pore) water and

benthic organisms. At equilibrium, if the concentration in any phase i s known, then the

concentration in the other phases can be predicted. A key component to this theory is the

chemicals organic carbon coefficient (K OC 

### ), which is constant for every chemical and represents

the ratio of the chemical concentration in water to the concentration in organic carbon. The

document, “ Technical Basis for the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines

(ESGs) for the Protection of Benthic Organisms: Nonionic Organics” ( Di Toro, et al. 1991 )

, demonstrates that biological r esponses of benthic organisms to nonionic organic chemicals in

sediments are different when the sediment concentrations are expressed on a dry weight basis, but

similar when expressed on a u g chemical/g organic carbon basis ( u g/g

oc 

### ). Similar responses were

also observed across sediments when interstitial water concentrations were used to normalize

biological availability. The Technical Basis Document further demonstrates that if the toxic effect

concentration in water is known (e.g., LC 50 

### ), the effect conce ntration in sediment on a u g/g

oc 

### basis

can be predicted by multiplying the effect concentration in water by the chemical K

oc 

### .

(LC 50 

### u g/L x Koc L/K g

oc 

### x 1 K g

oc 

### /1000g

oc 

### = LC 50 

### u g/g

oc 

### )

### 28 Since, EFED uses a deterministic method for its scree ning level risk assessment, the calculation

of risk quotient values (RQ) is important for assessing possible risk. The RQ values are calculated

by taking the ratio of the estimated exposure concentrations (EEC) to the toxicity effect value

(e.g., LC 50 

### , NOA EC). The EEC values a re model generated (e.g., PRZM/ EXAMS) and reflect

peer evaluated and approved scenarios for assessing pesticide exposure to an aquatic

e nvironment. However, the PRZM/ EXAMS output produces water column EEC values, as well

as pore water EEC values. Therefore, to assess possible toxic pesticide exposure to aquatic

organisms from sed iments, EFED is using the PRZM/ EXAMS to generate EECs for pore water

model based on the principles of the equilibrium partitioning theory

, b y relying on pore w ater

output values.

The calculations that rely on pore water can be calculated by dividing the PRZM/EXAMS output

value for pore water concentrations by the dissolved concentrations in the water column that

caused toxicity in bioassays using cyprodinil TG AI (e.g., LC 50 

### ).

RQ benthic organisms 

### = EEC pore water μ g/L / LC50 μ g / L

Additional details on the equilibrium partitioning theory can be found in Appendix C

.

Table C provides the EECs for the pore water. The peak EECs follow a similar trend than the

peak EECs for the water column; however, they are approximately 20

- 30% smaller in magnitude.

The 21

- day and the 60

- day EECs did not change over time, compared to the peak EEC.

Table C. Estimated Environmental Concentrations of Cy prodinil in the Pore Water in ppb

Scenario Peak 21

- day 60

- day

CA almonds ground 3.70 3.70 3.69

CA almonds aerial 8.26 8.26 8.23

CA citrus ground

– 5 4.25 4.25 4.25

CA citrus aerial

– 5 8.87 8.87 8.85

CA citrus ground

– 4 3.90 3.89 3.89

CA citrus aerial

– 4 7.58 7.58 7.56

CA grapes ground 3.38 3.38 3.37

CA grapes aerial 9.06 9.06 9.02

CA fruits ground 2.12 2.12 2.12

CA fruits aerial 6.57 6.57 6.54

OR berries ground 3.00 3.00 2.99

OR berries aerial 11.05 11.05 11.02



### b. Aquatic Exposur e Monitoring (Field Data)

No data were identified to provide information on surface water or groundwater monitoring of

cyprodinil

. Databases searched inclu ded NAWQA Pesticide National Synthesis Project

, STORET and Pesticides in Groundwater Database.



### 3 . Measures of Terrestrial Exposure

a. Modeling of Exposure for Non

- Target Terrestrial Animals

The focus of this risk assessment is the potential increased aquatic risk resulting from the addition

of aerial application. The current terrestrial model (T

- REX) does not discriminate between

### 29 ground and aerial application, and thus would not be able to demonstrate what risk changes would

occur with this label change. Further, all previous cyprodinil terres trial modeling has shown very

low risk to terrestrial wildlife, far below Levels of Concern. Thus, this review simply relies on

this prior modeling and results rather than generate new modeling of terrestrial exposure

.



### b. Exposure Modeling for Non

- Tar get Terrestrial Plants

There is no risk assessment for terrestrial plants since no EC25 values are available.



### C. Ecological Effects Characterization

This review relies on previous risk assessments (e.g., 8/15/02 Vangard assessment and 8/12/03

Switch a ssessment) for all cyprodinil (single ai/technical) toxicity information.



### 1 . Aquatic Effects

a. Aquatic Animals

Fish

Cyprodinil is moderately toxic to freshwater fish on an acute basis ( r ainbow trout 96

- hour LC 50 

### = 2410 ppb; b luegill sunfish 96

- h our LC 50 

### = 3200 ppb). Cyprodinil is also moderately toxic to

estuarine/ marine fish on an acute basis (s heepshead minnow 96

- hour LC 50 

### = 1250 ppb). An early

life stage mortality test with fathead minnows show that cyprodinil caused effects at the 460 ppb

c oncentration (LOAEC) and no effects at the 230 ppb concentration (NOAEC).

Invertebrates

Cyprodinil is very highly toxic to freshwater invertebrates ( d aphnid 48

- hour LC 50 

### = 32 ppb) on an

acute basis. A 21

- day Life

- cycle test with the d aphnid showed effect s at the 19 ppb concentration

(LOAEC) and no effects at the 8 ppb concentration (NOAEC). Cyprodinil is highly toxic to the

e astern oyster (96

- hour EC 50 

### = 433 ppb) and very highly toxic to m ysid s hrimp (96

- hour LC 50 

### = 8

ppb) on an acute basis. In a 28

- day life

- cycle test, cyprodinil caused effects to m ysid s hrimp at

the 3.7 ppb level (LOAEC) and no adverse effects were observed at the 1.9 ppb concentration

(NOAEC).



### b. Aquatic Plants

a. Terrestrial Animals Aquatic Plants

Cyprodinil is moderately toxic to the freshwater a lgae ( Anabaena flos

- Aquae 120

- hour EC 50 

### = 2250 ppb) on an acute basis. Cyprodinil is also moderately toxic to estuarine/ marine a lgae

( Skeletonema costatum 120

- hour EC 50 

### = 1970 ppb).



### 2. Terrestrial Effects

Cyprodinil is practically non

- toxic to b obwhite q uail (LD 50 

### >2000 mg/kg) and slightly toxic to

m allard d uck (LD 50 

### >500 mg/kg) on an oral acute basis. On a sub

- acute dietary basis, it is also

practically non

- toxic to b obwhite q uai l (LC 50 

### > 5200 ppm) and m allard d uck (LC 50 

### > 5180 ppm).

Results from the avian reproduction study with m allard d uck showed no effects at the 500 ppm Birds

### 30 concentration (NOAEC) and the lowest observed effect concentration (LOAEC) to be > 500 ppm.

Results from t he reproduction study with b obwhite q uail showed no effects at the 600 ppm

concentration (NOAEC) ppm and the lowest observed effect concentration (LOAEC) to be >600

ppm.

Mammals

Cyprodinil is practically non

- toxic to small mammals ( r at LD 50 

### = 5000 mg/k g). A 10 month, 2

- Generation reproduction study suggests that cyprodinil causes no effects at the >1000 ppm

concentration (NOAEL).

Insects

Cyprodinil is practically non

- toxic (48

- hour LD 50 

### >784 micrograms/bee) to h oney bees.



### b. Terrestrial Plants

In the seedling emergence and vegetative vigor plant tests, there were no EC 25 

### levels established,

due to lack of effect. Carrot was the most sensitive seedling emergence species tested with a 15%

effect for shoot weight. Cucumber was the most sensitiv e vegetative vigor species tested with 8%

effect for shoot length. This testing was done at a maximum rate of 0.5 lbs ai/A, applied 3 times

per year (maximum exposure for terrestrial plants = 1.5 lb ai/A). Since there was not enough

toxic effect on terr estrial plants in the Tier I test to produce an EC 25 

### , no risk quotients can be

calculated for this assessment.



### 3

. Formulated Product Data

Six (6) acute studies have been submitted on the formulation Switch 62.5 WG, which contains

37.6% cyprodinil and 25 .1% fludioxonil. T hree of these are considered invalid, in part due to

poor recovery of one or both of the active ingredients (rainbow trout, MRID 456493

- 03; bluegill,

MRID 456493

- 02; daphnid, MRID 456493

- 01). R eviews of the remaining two aquatic tests

( mysid, MRID 457345

- 01; duckweed, MRID 458081

- 01) and a honey bee study (MRID 456493

- 04) indicate that these are considered Acceptable (Core).

R eview of the mysid study indicates a 96

- hour LC 50 

### of 51 (33

- 97) ppb of cyprodinil in this

formulation. Techni cal cyprodinil (99.2% ai) has a lower LC 50 

### (8 ppb), which will be used for

risk assessment. There thus does not appear to be any synergism between active ingredients in

the formulation. R eview of the duckweed study indicates an EC 50 

### of 1.3 ppm cyprodinil. B oth

this toxicity value and other aquatic plant toxicity values are all far above expected EECs and

thus no LOCs for aquatic plants would be exceeded

. Results of the honey bee study indicate that

the Switch formulation is considered practically non

- to xic to honey bees on an acute contact basis

( LD 50 

### > 200 ug/bee).

### 31 

### IV. RISK CHARACTERIZATION

Risk characterization provides the final step in the risk assessment process. In this step, exposure

and effects characterization are integrated to provide an e stimate of risk relative to established

levels of concern (LOC). The results are then interpreted for the risk manager through a risk

description and synthesized into an overall conclusion.



### A. Risk Estimation

- Integration of Exposure and Effects Data

A deterministic approach is used to evaluate the likelihood of adverse ecological effects to non

target species. In this approach, risk quotients (RQs) are calculated by d ividing exposure

estimates (EECs) by ecotoxicity values for non

- target species, both acute and chronic.

RQ = EXPOSURE/TOXICITY

RQs are then compared to OPP's levels of concern (LOCs). These LOCs are criteria used by OPP

to indicate potential risk t o non

- target organisms and the need to consider regulatory action. The

criteria indicate that a pesticide used as directed has the potential to cause adverse effects on non

target organisms. LOCs currently address the following risk presumption categorie s: (1) acute

- potential for acute risk is high, regulatory action may be warranted in addition to restricted use

classification (2) acute restricted use

- the potential for acute risk is high, but this may be

mitigated through restricted use classificatio n (3) acute endangered species

- the potential for

acute risk to endangered species is high, regulatory action may be warranted, and (4) chronic risk

- the potential for chronic risk is high, regulatory action may be warranted. Currently, EFED

does not p erform assessments for chronic risk to plants, acute or chronic risks to non

- target

insects, or chronic risk from granular/bait formulations to mammalian or avian species.

The ecotoxicity test values (i.e., measurement endpoints) used in the acute and chr onic risk

quotients are derived from the results of required studies. Examples of ecotoxicity values derived

from the results of short

- term laboratory studies that assess acute effects are: (1) LC 50 

### (fish) (2)

LD 50 

### (birds and mammals) (3) EC 50 

### (aquatic pl ants and aquatic invertebrates) and (4) EC 25 

### (terrestrial plants). An example of a toxicity test effect level derived from the results of long

- term

laboratory study that assesses chronic effects is: NOAEC (birds, fish and aquatic invertebrates).

Risk pres umptions, along with the corresponding RQs and LOCs are tabulated below:



### TABLE IV.a. Risk Presumptions for Terrestrial Animals

Risk Presumption RQ LOC

Birds:

Acute Risk EEC 1 /LC 50 or LD 50 /sqft 2 or LD50/day 3 0.5

Acute Restricted Use EEC/LC 50 or LD 50 /s qft or LD50/day (or LD50 < 50

mg/kg) 0.2

Acute Endangered Species EEC/LC 50 or LD 50 /sqft or LD 50 /day 0.1

Chronic Risk EEC/NOAEC 1

Wild Mammals:

Acute Risk EEC/LC 50 or LD 50 /sqft or LD 50 /day 0.5

### 32 

### TABLE IV.a. Risk Presumptions for Terrestrial Animals

Risk Presumption RQ LOC

Acute Restricted Use EEC/LC 50 or LD 50 /sqft or LD 50 /day (o r LD 50 < 50

mg/kg) 0.2

Acute Endangered Species EEC/LC50 or LD 50 /sqft or LD 50 /day 0.1

Chronic Risk EEC/NOAEC 1

1 Estimated Environmental Concentration (ppm) on avian/mammalian food items

2 ( mg/ft ) / LD 50 * wt. of bird

3 ( mg of toxicant consumed/da y)/ LD 50 * wt. of bird



### TABLE IV.b. Risk Presumptions for Aquatic Animals

Risk Presumption RQ LOC

Acute Risk EEC 1 /LC 50 or EC 50 0.5

Acute Restricted Use EEC/LC 50 or EC 50 0.1

Acute Endangered Species EEC/LC 50 or EC 50 0.05

Chronic Risk EEC/ NOA EC 1

1 EEC = (ppm or ppb) in water



### TABLE IV.c. Risk Presumptions for Plants

Risk Presumption RQ LOC

Terrestrial and Semi

- Aquatic Plants:

Acute Risk EEC 1 /EC 25 1

Acute Endangered Species EEC/EC 05 or NOAEC 1

Aquatic Plants:

Acute Risk EEC 2 /EC 50 1

Acute Endangered Species EEC/EC 05 or NOAEC 1

1 EEC = lbs ai/A

2 EEC = (ppb/ppm) in water

### 33 

### 1. Non

- target Aquatic Animals and Plants

a. Fish and Invertebrates

Non

- target Aquatic Animals

Table 1. Risk Quotients for Freshwater Fish and Invertebrates. The calculations were based on the following: for

freshwater fish an LC 50 of 2410 ppb for rainbow trout and NOAEC of 230 ppb for fathead minnow; for

freshwater invertebrates an LC 50 of 32 ppb for daphnid and NOAEC of of 8 ppb for daphnid.

Application

Rate

lb a.i./A/ Year

Method Crop

(number of days

between

applications) Peak

EEC

(ppb) 21

- day

EEC

(ppb) 60

- day

EEC

(ppb) Acute RQ

(Pe ak EEC

/ LC 50 ) for

Fish Acute RQ

(Peak EEC /

LC 50 ) for

Invertebrates Chronic

RQ (60

- day

EEC/

NOAEC)

for Fish Chronic RQ

(21

- day EEC/

NOAEC) for

Invertebrates

0.328 applied

4 times

Ground Spray CA almond

(7)

(1 % drift) 4.83 4.38 4.08 <0.0 1 0.15 0.02 0.55

0.328 applied

4 times

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA almond

(7 )

( 3.9 % drift) 9.48 9.09 8.78 <0.0 1 0.30 0.04 1.14

0.328 applied

4 times

Ground Spray CA citrus

(7)

(1 % drift) 4.23 4.12 4.05 <0.01 0.13 0.02 0.52

0.328 ap plied

4 times

Aerial Spray CA citrus

(7 )

( 3.9 % drift) 8.80 8.39 8.10 <0.01 0.28 0.04 1.05

0.328 applied

5 times

Ground Spray CA citrus

(7)

(1 % drift) 4.56 4.45 4.41

<0.0 1 0.14 0.02 0.56

0.328 applied

5 times

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA ci trus

(7 )

( 3.9 % drift) 9.94 9.54 9.44

<0.0 1 0.31 0.04 1.19

0.433 applied

3 times

Ground Spray OR berries

(7) 3.40 3.26 3.13 <0.01 0.11 0.01 0.41

0.433 applied

3 times

Aerial Spray OR berries

(7) 13.17 12.47 11.88

0.01 0.41 0.05 1.56

Ground Spray CA grapes

Vangard Only 3.85 3.68 3.58

<0.01 0.12 0.02 0.46

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA grapes

Vangard Only 11.00 10.37 9.78

<0.01 0.34 0.04 1.30

Ground Spray CA fruits

Vangard Only 2.51 2.42 2.31

<0.01 0.08 0.01 0.30

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA frui ts

Vangard Only 7.76 7.42 7.15

<0.01 0.24 0.03 0.93

Risk Presumptions for Aquatic Animals and LOCs

Risk Presumption LOC

### 34 Acute Risk

Acute Restricted Use

Acute Endangered Species

Chronic Risk > 0.5

> 0.1

> 0.05

> 1

### 35 Table 2. Risk quotients for estuarine/marine fish and aquatic invertebrates. The calculations were based on the

following: for estuarine/marine fish an LC 50 of 1250 ppb for sheephead minnow, and for estuarine/ marine

invertebrates an LC 50 of 8 ppb for mysid shrimp and a NOAEC o f 1.9 ppb for mysid shrimp.

Application

Rate

lb a.i./A/ Year

Method Crop

(number of days

between

applications) Peak

EEC

(ppb) 21

- day

EEC

(ppb) Acute RQ

(Peak EEC

/ LC 50 ) for

Fish Acute RQ

(Peak EEC /

LC 50 ) for

Invertebrates Chronic RQ

(21

- day EEC/

NOAEC) for

Invertebrates

0.328 applied

4 times

Ground Spray CA almond

(7 )

(1 % drift) 4.83 4.38 <0.0 1 0.60 2.31

0.328 applied

4 times

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA almond

(7 )

(3.9 % drift) 9.48 9.09 0.01 1.19 4.78

0.328 applie d

4 times

Ground Spray CA citrus

(7 )

(1 % drift) 4.23 4.12 <0.01 0.53 2.17

0.328 applied

4 times

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA citrus

(7 )

(1 % drift) 8.80 8.39 0.01 1.10 4.42

0.328 applied

5 times

Ground Spray CA citrus

(7 )

(1 % drift) 4.56 4.45

<0.0 1 0.57 2.34

0.328 applied

5 times

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA citrus

(7 )

( 3.9 % drift) 9.94 9.54

0.01 1.24 5.02

0.433 applied

3 times

Ground Spray OR berries

(7) 3.40 3.26 <0.01 0.43 1.72

0.433 applied

3 times

Aerial Spray OR berries

(7) 13.1 7 12.47 0.01 1.65 6.56

Ground Spray CA grapes

Vangard Only 3.85 3.68 <0.01 0.48 1.94

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA grapes

Vangard Only 11.00 10.37 0.01 1.38 5.46

Ground Spray CA fruits

Vangard Only 2.51 2.42 <0.01 0.31 1.27

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA fr uits

Vangard Only 7.76 7.42 0.01 0.97 3.91

Risk Presumptions for Aquatic Animals and LOCs

Risk Presumption LOC

Acute Risk

Acute Restricted Use

Acute Endangered Species

Chronic Risk > 0.5

> 0.1

> 0.05

> 1

### 36 

### b. Benthic Organisms

In the absence of a marine/estuarine chronic sediment toxicity study, EFED relied on the

principles of the equilibrium partition theory (EqP), to estimate the potential for acute and chronic

risk from porewater. This screening approach has been sanctione d by the Office of Water (OW).

A quatic EECs were generated for sediment pore water concentrations (see Exposure

Characterization, II.B. above). T hese concentrations are then compared to the toxicity values for

the most sensitive aquatic organisms. Tabl e 3 presents the risk quotients resulting from this

comparison.

Table 3. Risk quotients for benthic invertebrates. The calculations were based on the following: for

freshwater invertebrates, an LC 50 of 32 ppb for daphnids and NOAEC of 8 ppb for daphn ids; for estuarine/

marine invertebrates an LC 50 of 8 ppb for mysid shrimp and a NOAEC of 1.9 ppb for mysid shrimp.

Application

Rate

lb a.i./A/ Year

Method Crop

(number of

days between

applications) Peak

EEC

(ppb) 21

- day

EEC

(ppb) Acute RQ

(Pe ak EEC /

LC 50 ) for

Freshwater

Invertebrates Chronic RQ

(21

- day EEC/

NOAEC) for

Freshwater

Invertebrates Acute RQ

(Peak EEC /

LC 50 ) for

Est./marine

Invertebrates Chronic RQ

(21

- day EEC/

NOAEC) for

Est./marine

Invertebrates

0.328 applied

4 times

Gr ound Spray CA almond

(7 )

(1 % drift) 3.70 3.70 0.12 0.46 0.46 1.95

0.328 applied

4 times

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA almond

(7 )

(3.9 % drift) 8.26 8.26 0.26 1.03 1.03 4.35

0.328 applied

4 times

Ground Spray CA citrus

(7 )

(1 % drift) 3.9 0 3.89 0.12 0.49 0.49 2.05

0.328 applied

4 times

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA citrus

(7 )

(1 % drift) 7.58 7.58 0.24 0.95 0.95 3.99

0.328 applied

5 times

Ground Spray CA citrus

(7 )

(1 % drift) 4.25 4.25 0.13 0.53 0.53 2.24

0.328 applied

5 times

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA citrus

(7 )

( 3.9 % drift) 8.87 8.87 0.28 1.11 1.11 4.67

0.433 applied

3 times

Ground Spray OR berries

(7) 3.00 3.00 0.09 0.38 0.38 1.58

0.433 applied

3 times

Aerial Spray OR berries

(7) 11.05 11.05 0.35 1 .38 1.38 5.82

Ground Spray CA grapes

Vangard Only 3.38 3.38 0.11 0.42 0.42 1.78

Aerial Spray

(150 ft) CA grapes

Vangard Only 9.06 9.06 0.28 1.13 1.13 4.77

Ground Spray CA fruits

Vangard Only 2.12 2.12 0.07 0.27 0.27 1.12

Aeria l Spray

(150 ft) CA fruits

Vangard Only 6.57 6.57 0.21 0.82 0.82 3.46

### 37 Risk Presumptions for Aquatic Animals and LOCs

Risk Presumption LOC

Acute Risk

Acute Restricted Use

Acute Endangered Species

Chronic Risk > 0.5

> 0.1

> 0.05

> 1



### b. Aqu atic Plants

Given the highest peak EEC of 13.17 ppb (OR berries) and lowest toxicity endpoint (538 ppb

NOAEC for freshwater algae), the highest risk quotient would be 0.02 (acute endangered species)

for aquatic plants. This is far below the LOC of 1, and thus all aquatic plant risk quotients are

also far below LOCs.



### 2. Non

- target Terrestrial Animals

As discussed earlier, the current terrestrial model (T

- REX) does not discriminate between ground

and aerial application, and thus would not be able to d emonstrate what risk changes would occur

with this label change. Further, all previous cyprodinil terrestrial modeling has shown very low

risk to terrestrial wildlife, far below Levels of Concern. Thus, this review simply relies on this

prior modeling an d results rather than generate new modeling of terrestrial exposure, with new

risk quotients.



### B. Risk Description

- Interpretation of Direct Effects

The risk hypothesis states that the use of cyprodinil as a fungicide for foliar spray use is likely t o

expose terrestrial and aquatic animals and plants, with resulting adverse effects. Based on

available ecotoxicity data and predicted environmental exposures, this ecological risk assessment

supports the presumption of direct risk to aquatic organisms.



### 1. Risks to Aquatic Organisms

a. Animals

The principal risks identified for aquatic animals are acute and chronic risk to freshwater and

estuarine/marine invertebrates. Based on water column EECs, a cute LOCs are exceeded for both

freshwater and estuarin e/marine invertebrates for all scenarios modeled. Chronic LOCs are

exceeded for estuarine/marine invertebrates for all scenarios and are exceeded for freshwater

invertebrates for five scenarios. Based on pore water EECs, a cute LOCs are exceeded for both

freshwater benthic and estuarine/marine benthic invertebrates for all scenarios modeled. Chronic

LOCs are exceeded for estuarine/marine benthic invertebrates for all scenarios and are exceeded

for freshwater benthic invertebrates for four scenarios. Thus, r isks are to both invertebrates that

inhabit the water column and those that inhabit benthic sediments.

LOC’s have been exceeded for aquatic invertebrates in all categories (acute risk, risk that may be

mitigated through restricted use, acute endangered species risk, and chronic risk). Across all

### 38 modeled scenarios, t he risk quotient ranges for estuarine/ marine invertebrates are 0.31

- 1.65

(acute) and 1.27

– 6.56 (chronic). For freshwater invertebrates, the risk quotient ranges are 0.08

– 0.41 (acute) and 0.30

– 1.56 (chronic). For benthic organisms, risk quotient ranges are 0.07

– 0.35 (freshwater acute), 0.27

– 1.38 (freshwater chronic), 0.27

– 1.38 (estuarine/marine acute) and

1.12

– 5.82 (estuarine/marine chronic).

The highest risk quotients across all sites modeled are for estuarine/marine invertebrates. This is

true for both acute and chronic risk , as seen in the RQ tables earlier and the ranges listed above.

As discussed earlier, all scenarios were run with all air and all ground applicat ions, to bracket

estimated residues (a maximum of one aerial application is allowed by proposed labels). The

Oregon berry scenario (used to model for berries and strawberries) with all air applications is the

scenario producing the highest RQs, while the California fruits scenario (used to model pome

fruits) with all ground applications produced the lowest RQs. Even the se very lowest RQs

(which are lower than potentially expected, since up to one aerial application is proposed) exceed

several LOCs (fresh water acute ES LOC for water column and pore water; estuarine/marine acute

ES and RU LOC and chronic LOC for water column and pore water ). The highest RQs (OR

berries/all air) exceed nearly all LOCs, and by larger amounts (freshwater acute ES and RU LOCs

and chronic LOC for water column and pore water; estuarine/marine acute ES, RU, and acute risk

and chronic LOC for water column and pore water).

Similar risks have been previously identified with both Switch (e.g., 8/12/03 EFED review) and

with Vangard ( e.g., 8/15/02 EFED review). The addition of aerial application increases drift and

thus aquatic exposure and risk. Cyprodinil does not readily leach to ground water ; however, there

is potential for surface water contamination by drift and run

- off events. Cyprodinil’s fate

characteristics suggest that once it reaches surface water, residues in the sediment can persist for

several months to years and invertebrates, even in the water column, can be exposed continuously

when residues from sediment are redist ributed throughout the water body. This type of chronic

exposure is a concern, because laboratory studies support chronic effects to both mysid shrimp

and daphnids.

A chronic s ediment t oxicity s tud y with marine/estuarine invertebrates may provide confi rmatory

data. Any study conducted should be with the marine/estuarine invertebrate Leptocheirus

plumulosus

. This is a 28

- day study that addresses survival, growth, and reproduction. Please

refer to the EPA guidance manual EPA 600/R

- 01/020 (3/01), availa ble on the EPA website. This

study should substantially reduce uncertainties in risk assessment for aquatic invertebrates

dwelling in or near sediments

, but may not change the overall risk assessment conclusions.

Additionally, the proposed labels of cypr odinil products (SwitchTM 62.5WG and Vangard® WG)

impose numerous important measures (Refer to Appendix F ) to reduce the levels of spray drift

and runoff. They include buffer zones (150 ft between crop and water body for aerial application

and 75 ft for gr ound applications ) to reduce spray drift and a 10 ft vegetative filter strip to reduce

runoff via erosion

. For aerial applications, EFED quantif ied the reduction in spray drift due to the

buffer zone

, utilizing the model AgDRIFT®

, calculat ing the correspo nding drift using the Tier II

level of the model

. For ground applications, the EFED, used the standard 1%. T here is high

uncertainty as to how much the 10 ft vegetative strip is able to reduce the level of erosion during

a heavy rain event. In the case of cyprodinil, the chemical persists in aquatic environments, but,

if it is retained for extended periods in the buffer zone or in the vegetative strip, it may degrade to

less toxic products (aerobic soil metabolism 22

- 50 days; terrestrial field dissipatio n 14

- 47 days)

, reducing the risk to aquatic organisms. It is noted that cyprodinil has a relatively high tendency

to bind to soil/sediments, and it may runoff via erosion. Therefore, a vegetative strip may be able

to retain the eroded particles if it is well maintained

.

### 39 The labels for SwitchTM 62.5WG and Vangard® WG include numerous additional stringent

measures of precaution to avoid spray drift and to protect any adjacent body of water (Refer to

Appendix F ). Over all, the most important aspect about t hem is that they are intended to reduce

exposure. Furthermore, they are mandatory

, as opposed to recommendations ( e.g. “ Do not apply



### 3. Review of Incident Data when gusts or sustained winds exceed 10 mph”). Sometimes , labels have measurements of

precaution that are pr esented as re commendations only, or they ar more l e nient.

In short, it has been found that there are two major sources of uncertainties: those related to the

stringent label restrictions imposed in cyprodinil products to prevent spray drift and runoff and

erosion

, i ncluding a buffer zone and a vegetative strip; and the uncertainties related to the

limitations of modeling, surrounding the calculation of the risk quotient due to the fact that the

modeling involved all aerial and all ground applications

. Due to these u ncertainties, i t appears

that the actual risk posed by cyprodinil could be lower than predicted by the models.

This assessment has indicated that aquatic areas adjacent to field s where cyprodinil is applied

may be at risk should exposure occur. This risk would be greater for aerial applications, and the

organisms at greater risk are aquatic invertebrates.



### b. Plants

Neither acute risk quotients for non

- endangered species or endangered species exceed LOCs.



### 2. Risks to Terrestrial Organisms

a. Terrestrial Animals

As discussed earlier, the current terrestrial model (T

- REX) does not discriminate between ground

and aerial application s , and thus would not be able to demonstrate what risk changes would occur

with this label change. Further, a ll previous cyprodinil terrestrial modeling has shown very low

risk to terrestrial wildlife, far below Levels of Concern. Thus, this review simply relies on this

prior modeling and results rather than generate new modeling of terrestrial exposure, with ne w

risk quotients.



### b. Terrestrial and Semi

- aquatic Plants

There is no risk assessment for terrestrial plants since no EC25 values are available.

EFED’s Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS) contains information on two crop

incidents related to cyprodinil , where the treated crop was reportedly adversely affected. O ne

incident (I007644

- 024) reportedly involved the product Vangard and 7 acres of grapes in

California, in 1998

. The second incident (I014597

- 045) reportedly involved the product Switch

and 60 acres of strawberries in Florida, in 2002.

### 40 

### 4. Endocrine Effects

Under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended by the Food Quality

Protection Act (FQPA), EPA is required to develop a screening program to determine whether

certain substances (including all pesticide active and other ingredients) “may have an effect in

humans that is similar to an effect produced by a naturally

- occurring estrogen, or other such

endocrine effects as the Administrat or may designate.” Following the recommendations of its

Endocrine Disruptor Screening and Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC), EPA determined

that there was scientific basis for including, as part of the program, the androgen

- and thyroid

hormone systems, in addition to the estrogen hormone system. EPA also adopted EDSTAC’s

recommendation that the Program include evaluations of potential effects in wildlife. For

pesticide chemicals, EPA will use FIFRA, to the extent that effects in wildlife may help

dete rmine whether a substance may have an effect in humans, and the FFDCA authority to

require the wildlife evaluations. As the science develops and the resources allow, screening of

additional hormone systems may be added to the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

(EDSP). Reproductive effects have been seen in some available reproduction studies with

cyprodinil.



### 5. Threatened and Endangered Species Concerns

a. Action Area

For listed species assessment purposes, the action area is considered to be the area affected

directly or indirectly by the Federal action and not merely the immediate area involved in the

action. At the initial screening

- level, the risk assessment considers broadly described taxonomic

groups and so conservatively assumes that li sted species within those broad groups are collocated

with the pesticide treatment area. This means that terrestrial plants and wildlife are assumed to be

located on or adjacent to the treated site and aquatic organisms are assumed to be located in a

surf ace water body adjacent to the treated site. The assessment also assumes that the listed

species are located within an assumed area which has the relatively highest potential exposure to

the pesticide, and that exposures are likely to decrease with distan ce from the treatment area.

Section II.A.4 of this risk assessment presents the pesticide use sites that are employed to

establish initial location of species with treatment areas.

If the assumptions associated with the screening

- level action area resu lt in RQs that are below the

listed species LOCs, a "no effect" determination conclusion may be made with respect to listed

species in that taxa (for direct effects), and no further refinement of the action area is necessary

(assumptions include a complete data set for that taxa). Furthermore, RQs below the listed

species LOCs for a given taxonomic group indicate no concern for indirect effects upon listed

species that depend upon the taxonomic group covered by the RQ as a resource. However, in

situation s where the screening assumptions lead to RQs in excess of the listed species LOCs for a

given taxonomic group, a potential for a "may affect" conclusion exists and may be associated

with direct effects on listed species belonging to that taxonomic group o r may extend to indirect

effects upon listed species that depend upon that taxonomic group as a resource. In such cases,

additional information on the biology of listed species, the locations of these species, and the

locations of use sites could be consi dered along with available information on the fate and

transport properties of the pesticide to determine the extent to which screening assumptions

regarding an action area apply to a particular listed organism. These subsequent refinement steps

could con sider how this information would impact the action area for a particular listed organism

### 41 and may potentially include areas of exposure that are downwind and downstream of the pesticide

use site.



### b. Taxonomic Groups Potentially at Risk

i . Discussio n of Risk Quotients

The preliminary risk assessment for endangered species indicates that under the application

scenarios evaluated, potential exposure to cyprodinil resulted in RQs that exceed the Endangered

Species LOCs for the following taxonomic group s:

• freshwater invertebrates

• estuarine/marine invertebrates

Should estimated exposure levels occur in proximity to listed resources, the available screening

level information suggests a potential concern for direct effects on listed species within thes e

taxonomic groups listed above associated with the use of cyprodinil as described in Section

II.A.4.



### ii

. Probit Dose Response Relationship

An analysis has been conducted of the probability of individual mortality at an LOC of 0.05, the

acute endan gered species LOC for aquatic animals. It is recognized that extrapolation of very

low probability events is associated with considerable uncertainty in the resulting estimates. The

analysis uses the EFED spreadsheet IECv1.1.xls, developed by EFED (USEPA, 2004).

For freshwater invertebrates, a daphnid LC 50 

### of 32 ppb (MRID 43709013) is used for the

assessment of acute risk from exposure to cyprodinil. A probit slope (5.8) and 95% confidence

interval (3.7

– 7.9), rounded off, with probit LC 50 

### of 34.1 ppb are provided in the DER for the

data set. Based on these inputs and an assumption of a probit dose response relationship, the IEC

spreadsheet indicates an estimated chance of individual mortality associated with the listed

species LOC of 0. 05 , the acute t oxic endpoint for aquatic animals , of approximately one in

4.46 E+ 13 . To explore possible bounds to this estimate, the upper and lower values for the mean

slope estimate were used to calculate upper and lower estimates of the effects probability

associated with the listed species LOC. These values are approximately one in 1.35 E+0 6 and one

in 2.26 E+ 24

.

For estuarine/marine invertebrates , an LC50 of 8 ppb (MRID 4 3908409 ) is used to evaluate the

risk of acute exposure cyprodinil

. A probit slope (9.1) and 95 % confidence interval (5.6

– 12.5),

rounded off, are provided in the DER for the data set. Based on these inputs and an assumption

of a probit dose response relationship, the IEC spreadsheet indicates an estimated chance of

individual mortality associated with the listed species LOC of 0.05, the acute toxic endpoint for

aquatic animals, of approximately one in 8.19E+31. To explore possible bounds to this estimate,

the upper and lower values for the mean slope estimate were used to calculate upper and lowe r

estimates of the effects probability associated with the listed species LOC. These values are

approximately one in 6.25E+12 and one in 1.10E+59.



### c. Data Related to Under

- represented Taxa

### 42 No data are currently available in EFED that would indicate t hat taxa under

- represented among

those used for risk quotient calculations are more sensitive to cyprodinil

.



### d. Implications of Sublethal Effects

Chronic studies are available for freshwater fish and invertebrates , estuarine/marine invertebrates,

bir ds, and mammals

. T he calculated RQs for freshwater invertebrates and estuarine/marine

invertebrates exceed c hronic LOCs.



### e. Indirect Effects Analysis

Pesticides have the potential to exert indirect effects upon the listed organisms by, for example,

perturbing forage or prey availability, altering the extent of nesting habitat, and creating gaps in

the food chain. In conducting a screen for indirect effects, direct effect LOCs for each taxonomic

group are used to make inferences concerning the potent ial for indirect effects upon listed species

that rely upon non

- endangered organisms in these taxonomic groups as resources critical to their

life cycle. Species specific concerns for cyprodinil indirect effects to listed organisms will

require a determin ation of the coincidence of cyprodinil use with locations of listed species and

the biologically based resources upon which they depend.

Based on the proposed usage of cyprodinil, the screening level risk assessment shows that there is

a concern for indir ect effects to listed species that may depend upon other taxonomic group s for

their survival. As described above, acute RQs for freshwater invertebrates and estuarine/marine

invertebrates exceed endangered species LOCs

. Therefore, the nature of the toxic ological

endpoint, Services

- provided “species profiles”, and further evaluation of the geographical and

temporal nature of the exposure will need to be considered to determine if a rationale for a “not

likely to adversely effect” determination is possible. Indirect effects analyses for organisms that

depend on freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates as a critical component of their resource

needs are described in further detail below.

Freshwater Invertebrates

- Acute and chronic endangered species LOCs were exceeded for

freshwater invertebrates based on modeled residues of cyprodinil. Therefore there is the potential

for adverse indirect effects on those listed species that eat or otherwise depend on freshwater

invertebrates

.

Estuarine/marine inve rtebrates

- Acute and chronic endangered species LOCs were exceeded for

freshwater invertebrates based on modeled residues of cyprodinil. Therefore there is the potential

for adverse indirect effects on those listed species that eat or otherwise depend on freshwater

invertebrates.



### f. Critical Habitat

In the evaluation of pesticide effects on designated critical habitat, consideration is given to the

physical and biological features (constituent elements) of a critical habitat identified by the U.S

Fis h and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Services as essential to the conservation of a

listed species and which may require special management considerations or protection. The

evaluation of impacts for a screening level pesticide risk assessment focu ses on the biological

features that are constituent elements and is accomplished using the screening

- level taxonomic

analysis (RQs) and listed species levels of concern that are used to evaluate direct and indirect

effects to listed organisms.

### 43 The screeni ng

- level risk assessment has identified potential concerns for indirect effects on listed

species for those organisms dependant upon freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates based

on specific LOC exceedances for acute effects to listed species. In li ght of the potential for

indirect effects, the next step for EPA and the Service(s) is to identify which listed species and

critical habitat are potentially implicated. Analytically, the identification of such species and

critical habitat can occur in eit her of two ways. First, the agencies could determine whether the

action area overlaps critical habitat or the occupied range of any listed species. If so, EPA would

examine whether the pesticide's potential impacts on non

- endangered species would affect the

listed species indirectly or directly affect a constituent element of the critical habitat.

Alternatively, the agencies could determine which listed species depend on biological resources,

or have constituent elements that fall into, the taxa that may be directly or indirectly impacted by

the pesticide. Then EPA would determine whether use of the pesticide overlaps the critical

habitat or the occupied range of those listed species. At present, the information reviewed by

EPA does not permit use of ei ther analytical approach to make a definitive identification of

species that are potentially impacted indirectly or critical habitats that is potentially impacted

directly by the use of the pesticide. EPA and the Service(s) are working together to conduct the

necessary analysis.



### g. Co

- occurrence Analysis

Since the Endangered Species LOCs for freshwater invertebrates and estuarine/marine

invertebrates are exceeded for the use of cyprodinil, the LOCATES program was run for all

taxonomic groups, due to the p otential for indirect effects. Potential indirect effects could

include, for example, effects upon any aquatic or terrestrial organisms that might consume

aquatic invertebrates. See the above section on indirect effects for additional details.

Inf ormation from LOCATES is provided in Appendix E

.

This is a screening assessment only. LOCATES identifies those federally

- listed species that are

located in the same county as the identified crop is located. A refined assessment will be needed

to deter mine which species are actually located in sufficiently close proximity to the potential

treatment sites that they could be potentially exposed.

The registrant must provide information on the proximity of all federally listed species to the

cyprodinil u se sites. This requirement may be satisfied in one of three ways: 1) having

membership in the FIFRA Endangered Species Task Force (Pesticide Registration [PR] Notice

2000

- 2); 2) citing FIFRA Endangered Species Task Force data; or 3) independently producing

these data, provided the information is of sufficient quality to meet FIFRA requirements. The

information will be used by the OPP Endangered Species Protection Program to develop

recommendations to avoid adverse effects to listed species.



### h. Summary T able

Table IV k. Listed species risks associated with direct or indirect effects due to applications of

cyprodinil to one or more use sites, if organisms in listed taxa are exposed (direct effects) or are

dependent on other organisms that are exposed (ind irect effects). Risks are based on available

data. See text for additional details. Requested data may result in additional potential direct

effects.

### 44 Listed Taxon Direct Effects Indirect Effects 6



### Terrestrial and semi

- aquatic

plants

– monocots No 1 

### Yes

Terrestrial and semi

- aquatic

plants

– dicots No 1 

### Yes

Terrestrial Invertebrates No 1 

### Yes

Birds No 1 

### Yes

Terrestrial phase amphibians 2 

### No 1 

### Yes

Reptiles 2 

### No 1 

### Yes

Mammals No 1 

### Yes

Aquatic non

- vascular plants* No 1 

### Yes

Aquatic vascular plants No 1 

### Yes

Fresh water fish No 1 

### Yes

Aquatic phase amphibians 3 

### No 1 

### Yes

Freshwater crustaceans Yes Yes

Mollusks Yes Yes

Marine/estuarine fish No 1 

### Yes

Marine/estuarine crustaceans Yes Yes

* At the present time no aquatic non

- vascular plants are included in Federal listi ngs of threatened and endangered

species. The taxonomic group is included here for the purposes of evaluating potential contributions to indirect

effects to other taxa and as a record of exceedances should future listings of non

- vascular aquatic plants wa rrant

additional evaluation of Federal actions.

1 At the present time, LOC exceedances (re direct effects) appear to be restricted to freshwater and estuarine/marine

invertebrates. Additional data from the open literature (e.g., ECOTOX) or the registrant could potentially change

this assessment.

2 Risk assessment is based on avian assessment.

3 Risk assessment is based on freshwater fish assessment.

4 Indirect effects are considered possible for every taxonomic group when one or more direct effect LOCs are

met/exceeded. Listed species could be affected by the loss of other species that they depend on for food, cover,

### 45 Table IV k. Listed species risks associated with direct or indirect effects due to applications of

cyprodinil to one or more use sites, if organisms in listed taxa are exposed (direct effects) or are

dependent on other organisms that are exposed (ind irect effects). Risks are based on available

data. See text for additional details. Requested data may result in additional potential direct

effects.

Listed Taxon Direct Effects Indirect Effects 6

and/or reproduction. This is only a screening assessment. A refined assessment will consider the specifics of the

food, cover, and reproduc tio n needs of each listed species.



### C. Description of Assumptions, Limitations, Uncertainties, Strengths, and

Data Gaps

1. Uncertainties, Assumptions , and Limitations Associated with Models

Extrapolating the risk conclusions from the standard pond scenario modeled by PRZM/EXAMS

may either underestimate or overest imate the potential risks. Major uncertainties with the

standard runoff scenario are associated with the physical construct of the watershed and

representation of vulnerable aquatic environments for different geographic regions. The

physicochemical propert ies (pH, redox conditions, etc.) of the standard farm pond are based on a

Georgia farm pond. These properties are likely to be regionally specific because of local

hydrogeological conditions. Any alteration in water quality parameters may impact the

enviro nmental behavior of the pesticide. The farm pond represents a well mixed, static water

body. Because the farm pond is a static water body (no flow

- through), it does not account for

pesticide removal through flow through or accidental water releases. Howe ver, the lack of water

flow in the farm pond provides an environmental condition for accumulation of persistent

pesticides. The assumption of uniform mixing does not account for stratification due to

thermoclines (e.g., seasonal stratification in deep wate r bodies). Additionally, the physical

construct of the standard runoff scenario assumes a watershed:pond area ratio of 10. This ratio is

recommended to maintain a sustainable pond in the Southeastern United States. The use of higher

watershed:pond ratios ( as recommended for sustainable ponds in drier regions of the United

States) may lead to higher pesticide concentrations when compared to the standard

watershed:pond ratio.

The standard pond scenario assumes that uniform environmental and management condit ions

exist over the standard 10 hectare watershed. Soils can vary substantially across even small areas,

and thus, this variation is not reflected in the model simulations. Additionally, the impact of

unique soil characteristics (e.g., fragipan) and soil m anagement practices (e.g., tile drainage) are

not considered in the standard runoff scenario. The assumption of uniform site and management

conditions is not expected to represent some site

- specific conditions. Extrapolating the risk

conclusions from the s tandard pond scenario to other aquatic habitats (e.g., marshes, streams,

creeks, and shallow rivers, intermittent aquatic areas) may either underestimate or overestimate

the potential risks in those habitats.



### 2. Uncertainties, Assumptions, and Limitatio ns Associated with the Toxicity

Data

### 46 There are a number of areas of uncertainty in the terrestrial and the aquatic organism risk

assessments that could po tentially cause an underestimation of risk. Use of toxicity data on

representative species does not provide information on the potential variability in susceptibility to

acute and chronic exposures. For screening terrestrial risk assessments, a generic bi rd or mammal

is assumed to occupy either the treated field or adjacent areas receiving the pesticide at a rate

commensurate with the treatment rate on the field. The actual habitat requirements of any

particular terrestrial species are not considered, and it is assumed that species occupy, exclusively

and permanently, the treated area being modeled. This assumption leads to a maximum level of

exposure in the risk assessment. Second, for the aquatic organism risk assessment, there are

uncertainties associ ated with the PRZM/EXAMS model, input values, and scenarios including the

use of surrogate scenarios; however these uncertainties cannot be quantified. The potential

impacts of these uncertainties are outlined in the Aquatic Exposure and Risk Assessment an d the

Terrestrial Exposure and Risk Assessment sections of this document.

Although the screening risk assessment relies on a selected toxicity endpoint from the most

sensitive species tested, it does not necessarily mean that the selected toxicity endpoin ts reflect

sensitivity of the most sensitive species existing in a given environment. The relative position of

the most sensitive species tested in the distribution of all possible species is a function of the

overall variability among species to a partic ular chemical. In the case of listed species, there is

uncertainty regarding the relationship of the listed species' sensitivity and the most sensitive

species tested. Surrogates were used to predict potential risks for species with no data (i.e.,

reptil es and amphibians). It was assumed that the use of surrogate effects data is sufficiently

conservative to apply the broad of species within taxonomic groups. If other species are more or

less sensitive to cyprodinil than the surrogates, risks may be under

- or overestimated,

respectively.



### 3. Uncertainties and Assumptions Associated with Gaps in Fate and Toxicity

Data

Additional uncertainty results from the lack of information and/or data concerning the fate and

dissipation of cyprodinil in environmental compartments.

There are no monitoring studies for cyprodinil in groundwater or surface water; therefore, the

exposure of aquatic species is based entirel y on the modeled data. Surface water monitoring data

would be useful in order to determine how well the modeled results fit measured levels of

cyprodinil in aquatic environments following its application to crops at appropriate rates. While

acceptable st udies are available to assess the acute toxicity of cyprodinil to freshwater fish and

invertebrates, toxicity data are not available to determine the potential sediment toxicity of

cyprodinil to aquatic invertebrates.

A chronic s ediment t oxicity s tud y wi th marine/estuarine invertebrates may provide confirmatory

data. Any study conducted should be with the marine/estuarine invertebrate Leptocheirus

plumulosus

. This is a 28

- day study that addresses survival, growth, and reproduction. Please

refer to the EPA guidance manual EPA 600/R

- 01/020 (3/01), available on the EPA website. This

study should substantially reduce uncertainties in risk assessment for aquatic invertebrates

dwelling in or near sediments

, but may not change the overall risk assessment conc lusions.

In the absence of this study, EFED relied on the principles of the equilibrium partition theory

(EqP), to estimate the potential for acute and chronic risk from porewater. This screening

approach has been sanctioned by the Office of Water (OW).

### 47 The screening assessment does not consider dermal exposure through contact with contaminated

water or soil. Data which address dermal exposure of wildlife to pesticides in a quantitative

fashion are extremely limited. The Agency is actively pursuing m odeling techniques to account

for dermal exposure via direct application and by incidental contact.

### 48 

### V. LITERATURE CITED

A. Fate Bibliography

1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. FAO PESTICIDE DISPOSAL

SERIES 8. Assessing Soil C ontamination: A Reference Manual. Appendix 2.

Parameters of pesticides that influence processes in the soil. Editorial Group, FAO

Information Division: Rome, 2000.

http://www.fao.org/DOCR EP/003/X2570E/X2570E00.htm

2. Gianessi, L and N. Reigner. 2006. “Pesticide Use in U.S. Crop Production: 2002, With

Comparison to 1992 & 1997: Fungicides and Herbicides.” CropLife Foundation, Crop

Protection Research Institute, in the Web available at http://www.croplifefoundation.org/

3. US EPA; Pesticide Fact Sheet. Cyprodinil. Registration. April 6 , 199 8 . Washington, DC:

USEPA, Off Prev Pest Tox Sub (7501C). Available at

http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/factsheets/cyprodinil.pdf

. 4. PRZM 3.12 beta. 1998. Surface Water Model, Version 3.12 Beta. Environmental Fate

and Effects Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Washington, D.C.. Information downloaded from the website

http//www.epa.gov/ ceampubl/gwater/przm3/index.htm

. 5. U.S. EPA. 2002. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance for Selecting Input

Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides, Version II.

Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. 21 pp.

6. Di Toro DM, Zarba CS, Hansen DJ, Berry WJ, Swartz RC, Cowan CE, Pavlou SP, Allen

HE Th omas NA, Paquin PR. 1991. Technical basis for establishing sediment quality

criteria for nonionic organic chemicals using equilibrium partitioning. Environ Toxicol

Chem 10:1541

- 1583

7. Burns, Lawrence, 1997. Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS): User Man ual

and System Documentation. Ecosystem Research Division, National Exposure Research

Laboratory. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA.

8. EXAMS. 2002. Surface Water Model, Version 2.98.04. Environmental Fate and Effects

Division, Office of Pe sticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Washington, D.C.

9. Schocken, M.J. 1995. 14 

### C

- [Pyrimidinyl]

- CGA

- 219417

- soil photolysis. SLI Study #

1781.0994.6452.721. Unpublished study performed by Springborn Laboratories, Inc.,

Wareham, MA and s ubmitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation, Greensboro, NC. (MRID#

43908423)

10. Schocken, M.J. 1995. 14 

### C

- [Phenyl] CGA

- 219417

- soil photolysis. SLI Study #

1781.0994.6453.721. Unpublished study performed by Springborn Laboratories, Inc.,

Wareham, MA and submitte d by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation, Greensboro, NC. (MRID#

43908424)

11. Schäffer, A. 1993. Degradation of pyrimidyl

- labelled CGA

- 219417 in Collombey soil

under aerobic conditions at 20 **°** C. Project #: 91AS07. Unpublished study performed and

submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation, Greensboro, NC. (MRID# 43908425)

12. Kitschmann, P. 1994. Degradation of phenyl

- labelled CGA

- 219417 in Collombey soil

under aerobic conditions at 20 **°** C. Project #: 93PK03. Unpublished study performed and

submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation, Gr eensboro, NC. (MRID# 43908426)

### 49 13. Concha, M. 1995. Anaerobic soil metabolism of 14 

### C

- pyrimidyl CGA

- 219417.

Laboratory Study #: 538W. Unpublished study performed by PTRL West Inc.,

Richmond, CA and submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation, Greensboro, NC. (MRID#

43908427)

14. Concha, M. 1995. Anaerobic soil metabolism of 14 

### C

- phenyl CGA

- 219417. Laboratory

Study #: 539W. Unpublished study performed by PTRL West Inc., Richmond, CA and

submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation, Greensboro, NC. (MRID# 43908428)

15. Ye, Maochun, 1995. Soil adsorption/desorption of pyrimidinyl

14 

### C

- CGA

- 249287 by the

batch equilibrium method. Unpublished study performed by Centre Analytical

Laboratories, Inc., State College, PA and submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation,

Greensboro, NC. (MRID# 43908 431)

16. Ye, Maochun, 1995. Soil adsorption/desorption of pyrimidinyl

14 

### C

- CGA

- 321915 by the

batch equilibrium method. Unpublished study performed by Centre Analytical

Laboratories, Inc., State College, PA and submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation,

Greensboro, NC. (MRID# 43908432)

17. Ye, Maochun, 1996. Soil adsorption/desorption of pyrimidinyl

14 

### C

- CGA

- 275535 by the

batch equilibrium method. Unpublished study performed by Centre Analytical

Laboratories, Inc., State College, PA and submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corpor ation,

Greensboro, NC. (MRID# 44186407)

18. Atkins, R. H. April 10, 1995. Hydrolysis of pyrimidinyl[ 14 

### C]CGA

- 219417 in aqueous

buffered solutions at pH 5, 7, and 9. Unpublished study (PTRL Project No.: 830)

performed by PTRL East, Inc. Richmond, KY. Submitte d by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation

Greensboro, NC. Ciba

- Geigy Study No.: 0041

- 94 (MRID# 43709044)

19. Concha, M. June 14, 1995. Aerobic soil metabolism of[ 14 

### C

- (phenyl)]CGA

- 219417 in a

sandy loam. Unpublished study Laboratory No. 444W) performed by PTRL West, Inc.

Richmond, CA. Submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation Greensboro, NC. Sponsor Study

No.: 072

- 94. 362 pp. (MRID# 43709045)

20. Concha, M. June 14, 1995. Aerobic soil metabolism of[ 14 

### C

- (pyrimidinyl)]CGA

- 219417

in a sandy loam. Unpublished study (Laboratory No. 445W) performed by PTRL West,

Inc. Richmond, CA. Submitted by Ciba

- Geigy Corporation Greensboro, NC. Sponsor

Study No.: 0449

- 93. 344 pp. (MRID# 43709046)

21. Van Dijk, A. July 28, 1994. Accumulation and elimination of [U

14 

### C

- phenyl]

- CGA

219417 by bluegil l sunfish in a dynamic flow

- through system. Laboratory Project

Identification RCC Project 322277. Unpublished study performed by RCC

Umweltchemie AG., Itingen, Switz. and submitted by Ciba

- Geigy, Basle Switz. 161 pp.

(MRID# 43924501)

22. Ye, M. May 25, 199 5. Soil adsorption/desorption of [ 14 

### C

- pyrimidinyl]

- CGA

- 219417 by

batch equilibrium method. Unpublished study (Laboratory No. 003

- 17) performed by

Centre Analytical Laboratories, Inc., State College PA. Submitted by Ciba

- Geigy

Corporation Greensboro, NC. Sponsor Study No.: 365

- 94. 153 pp. (MRID# 43709047)

23. Sandberg, C.L. 1995. Terrestrial f ield dissipation of CGA

- 219417 in California. Ciba

Geigy Study #178

- 94 and ABC/Pan Ag Study #94387 (MRID# 43908436). Belcher, T.I.

1996. Addendum to the final repo rt (MRID# 44186409)

24. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Pesticides in Ground Water Data Base

– A

Compilation of Monitoring Studies:1971

- 1991, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and

Toxic Substances, EPA 734

- 12

- 92

- 001

25. Judy, D. and Manuli, 1995. Dissi pation of CGA

- 219417 in soil under field conditions in

New York (MRID# 43908437). Judy, D. and Manuli, 1996. Addendum #1 to the final

report (MRID# 44186408).

26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk

Assessment, Risk Asse ssment Forum EPA/630/R

- 95/002F

### 50 

### VI. APPENDICES

Appendix A. Information About PRZM/EXAMS and AgDRIFT® , Run Inputs and

Outputs

Bac kground Information About PRZM and EXAMS:

The Tier II aquatic model e mploys PRZM (Pesticide Root Zone Model; version 3.12 Beta

compiled May 24, 2001) and EXAMS (Exposure Analysis Modeling System; version 2.98.04,

compiled November 12, 2002). PRZM simulates processes such like runoff and erosion from an

agricultural field o n a daily time step. The runoff and erosion flux output data from PRZM are

used as chemical loadings to the EXAMS surface water program in order to predict the EECs. A

graphical user interface (pe4v01.pl) developed by the EPA ( http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1 /

models/water ) was used to facilitate inputting chemical and use specific parameters into the

appropriate PRZM input files (inp) and EXAMS chemical files.

PRZM is a one

- dimensional, dynamic, compartmental model that can be used to simulate

chemical movem ent in unsaturated soil systems within and immediately below the plant root

zone. It has two major components: hydrology (and hydraulics) and chemical transport. The

hydrologic component for calculating runoff and erosion is based on the Soil Conservati on Service curve number technique and the Universal Soil Loss Equation. Evapotranspiration is

estimated either directly from pan evaporation data, or based on an empirical formula. Water

movement is simulated by the use of generalized soil para meters, i ncluding field capacity, wilting

point, and saturation water content.

The chemical transport component can simulate pesticides or other chemicals. For pesticides, the

transport component can simulate pesticide applica tion on the soil or on the plant f oliage.

Biodegradation can also be considered in the root zone. Dissolved, adsorbed, and vapor

- phase

concentrations in the soil are estimated by simultaneously considering the processes of pesticide

uptake by plants, surface runoff, erosion, decay, volat ilization, foliar washoff, advection,

dispersion, and retarda tion. For nitrogen, simulation of surface applications, atmospheric

deposition, and septic effluent discharge may all be simulated.

EXAMS is a model that has a set of process modules that link fundamental chemical properties to

limnological processes that control the kinetics and transport of chemicals in aquatic systems. It

provides facilities for steady state or long

- term evaluation of chronic chemical discharges, initial

value approaches for studying short

- term contaminant releases, and full kinetic simulations that

allow for monthly variation in mean climatological factors, and changes in contaminant loadings

on daily time scales. It is fairly and relatively complex model that requires more input variables,

ranging from hydro

- geological and weather data to pesticide physicochemical properties,

mobility coefficients, and degradation rate constants in the aqueous and sediment phases.

The PRZM scenarios selected for modeling were California gr apes, California almonds,

California fruits, California lettuce and California onions. EECs for ecological risk assessment

were determined using a pond modeling scenario which describes a generic scenario for the

EXAMS component of the modeling exercise ( Mississippi standard pond).

Background Information About AgDRIFT®

The AgDRIFT® model is used to generate deposition values in a tiered approach. Results from

the Spray Drift Task Force , a consortium of industry groups and other interested parties that

w orked together in the development of AgDRIFT® (SDTF)

, were used to confirm the model :

### 51 results at each of the different levels of analysis. The aerial tiers consist of a mathematical model.

For example, AgDRIFT® predicts the motion of spray material releas ed from aircraft; including

the mean position of the material and the position variance about the mean as a result of turbulent

fluctuations, pointing tow ard a prediction of spray drift (from the User’s Manual). Three major

variables control the level of drift: the wind speed (it is assumed that the wind is in the direction

of the pond, more wind speeds favor drift), the boom height (the higher, the more the level of

drift), and the droplet size (smaller droplets drift more). If more refinement are desir ed, the spray

volume is another variable that observations show that have a relatively high effect on the level of

drift (smaller volumes favor drift). In order to obtain the level of drift assigned to a particular

buffer zone, the model provides a “toolb ox” named Aquatic Assessment. In the toolbox, one can

define the standard ecological pond, and obtain the level of drift for any particular buffer zone as

a fraction.

Estimated Environmental Concentrations of Cyprodinil in the Water Column in ppb

Scena rio Peak 21

- day 60

- day

CA almonds ground 4.83 4.38 4.08

CA almonds aerial 9.48 9.09 8.78

CA citrus ground

– 4 4.23 4.12 4.05

CA citrus aerial

– 4 8.80 8.39 8.10

CA grapes ground 3.85 3.68 3.58

CA grapes aerial 11.00 10.37 9.78

CA fruits ground 2.5 1 2.42 2.31

CA fruits aerial 7.76 7.42 7.15

OR berries ground 3.40 3.26 3.13

OR berries aerial 13.17 12.47 11.88

Estimated Environmental Concentrations of Cyprodinil in the Pore Water in ppb

Scenario Peak 21

- day 60

- day

CA almonds ground 3.70 3.70 3 .69

CA almonds aerial 8.26 8.26 8.23

CA citrus ground

– 4 3.90 3.89 3.89

CA citrus aerial

– 4 7.58 7.58 7.56

CA grapes ground 3.38 3.38 3.37

CA grapes aerial 9.06 9.06 9.02

CA fruits ground 2.12 2.12 2.12

CA fruits aerial 6.57 6.57 6.54

OR berrie s ground 3.00 3.00 2.99

OR berries aerial 11.05 11.05 11.02

Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS:

Parameter

(units) VALUE(S) SOURCE

S COMMENTS

Output File

Name varies with crop

--- ---

Chemical

Name Cyprodinil Label

---

Crop Name almond (pistachi o),

citrus, grapes, pome

fruits , berries Label SwitchTM

62.5WG

Fungicide

(EPA Reg. No.

### 52 Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS:

Parameter

(units) VALUE(S) SOURCE

S COMMENTS

100

- 953) and

Vangard® WG

(EPA Reg. No.

100

- 828)

Application

Rate Rate in Kg a.i./ha:

CA almonds 0.367

CA citrus 0.367

CA grapes 0.525

CA fruits 0.262

OR berries 0.489 L abel Rate in lb

a.i./A:

CA almonds

0.328

CA citrus

0.328

CA grapes

0.469

CA fruits 0.234

OR berries

0.437

Day of

Application

(day

- month) CA almonds 15

- 03

CA citrus 01

- 02

CA grapes 13

- 07

CA fruits 01

- 04

OR berries 07

- 05 Estimated

from

metadata

file and

lab el, or

other

sources of

informatio

n. CA almond is

surrogate

scenario for

pistachio.

CA fruits

scenario is

surrogate for

pome fruits.

Number of

Applications

Allowed CA almond 4

CA citrus 4

CA grapes 4

CA fruits 6

OR berries 3 Label Label for

SwitchTM 62.5

WG or

Vangard® WG

Fungicides

Minim Interval

between

Applications

(days) CA almonds

– 14

CA citrus

– 7

CA grapes

– 7

CA fruits

– 7

OR berries 7 Label Recommends

to alternate

with another

fungicide after

every two

applications.

This

recommendatio

n does not

appear for

grapes,

pistachios or

pome fruits.

K OC 1,745 MRID:

437090

- 47 Represents the

average K OC value among

four values

ranging from

1550 to 2030

ml/g. The K OC

model was

utilized; it

describes better

the mobility of

### 53 Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS:

Parameter

(units) VALUE(S) SOURCE

S COMMENTS

cyprodinil

. Aerobic Soil

Metabolism

(days) 44.3 MRID:

439084

- 26 Represents the

90 th percentile

of the upper

confidence

bound on the

mean of four

half

- life values:

40, 50, 22, 31

days; mean =

35.75 days; std.

dev. = 10.40

days

Incorporation

Depth 0.0 in Label

---

Method of

Application Ground or Aerial Label

---

Buffer Zone

(ft.) 150 Label

---

Application

Efficiency

(fraction) 0.95 aerial; 0.99

ground --- EFED guidance

on input

parameters for

PRZM/EXAM

S dated 2/28/02

Spray Drift

(fraction) 0.039 aerial; 0.010

gr ound AgDRIFT

® Consistent with

an applicatio n

with a wind

speed of ≤10

mph.

Solubility in

Water (ppm)

At 20°C 130 MRID

437090

- 03 10X the actual

solubility as

per EFED

guidance on

input

parameters for

PRZM/EXAM

S.

Aerobic

Aquatic

Metabolism

(days) 382.3 MRID

439084

- 26,

439084

- 29,

439084

- 30,

455187

- 01

& 455187

-

02 Represents the

90 th percentile

of the upper

confidence

bound on the

mean of five

half

- life values:

106, 126, 165,

178 and 612

days; mean =

237.40 days;

std. dev. =

211.41days

Anaerobic

Aquatic

Metabolism Stable MRID

441864

- 06 ---

### 54 Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS:

Parameter

(units) VALUE(S) SOURCE

S COMMENTS

(days)

Hydrolysis at

pH 7 Stable MRID

437090

- 44 ---

Aqueous

Photolysis @

pH 7 and 25°C

(days) Stable MRID

439084

- 22 ---

Molecular

Weight

(g/mol) 225.29 Registrant

Data ---

Vapor

Pressure (torr

or mmHg) 3.80 x 10

- 6 MRID

437090

- 03 ---

Henry’s Law

Constant

(atm

- m 3 /mol) 7.04 x 10

- 8 Calculated

from

solubility

and vapor

pressure. ---

Environment pond298.exv

--- Default for

pond scenario,

as opposed to

index reservoir. Field Size Pond

---

Runoff none

--- - --

PRZM

Scenario CAgrapes_NirrigC.t

xt

CAalmond_NirrigC.txt

CAfruit_NirrigC.txt

CAcitrus_NirrigC.tx

t

ORberriesOP.txt --- Selected to be

representative

of crops

existent and

new crops,

taking into

consideration

geographical

areas in the

state of

California.

Metfile

Scenario CAGrape

w93193.dvf

CAalmond

w23232.dvf

CAfruit w93193.dvf

CAcitrus

w23155.dvf

ORberries w24232.dvf --- As suggested

by the shell

(pe4).

CAM

(Chemical

Application

Method) 2

--- Linear foliar

based on crop

canopy

IPSCND 1

--- pesticide

r emaining on

foliage is

converted to

surface

application to

the top soil

### 55 Input Parameters Utilized in PRZM/EXAMS:

Parameter

(units) VALUE(S) SOURCE

S COMMENTS

layer

FEXTRC,

Foliar

extraction 0.5

--- EFED guidance

on input

parameters for

PRZM/EXAM

S dated 2/28/02

PLDKRT,

Decay rate on

foliage (day

- 1 ) 0

--- EFED guidance

on input

parameters f or

PRZM/EXAM

S dated 2/28/02

PLVKRT,

Volatilization

rate from

foliage 0

--- EFED guidance

on input

parameters for

PRZM/EXAM

S dated 2/28/02

UPTKF,

Uptake factor 0

--- EFED guidance

on input

parameters for

PRZM/EXAM

S dated 2/28/02

Write Benthic

Pore Water

Concentrations

? Yes

--- Necessary to

calculate the

benthic

organisms risk

quotients.



### PRZM/EXAMS OUTPUT FILES

**POME FRUIT AERIAL**

stored as Cypomefr.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAfruit_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14 :02

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w93193.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:24

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.982 1.883 1.659 1.373 1.227 0 .7105

1962 2.784 2.684 2.459 2.171 2.018 1.483

1963 3.479 3.376 3.15 2.856 2.697 2.147

1964 4.053 3.951 3.725 3.432 3.27 2.715

1965 4.587 4.483 4.257 3.961 3.799 3.227

1966 5.012 4.908 4.681 4.383 4.216 3.65

1967 5.867 5.744 5.543 5.174 4.949 4.212

1968 5. 897 5.792 5.564 5.262 5.087 4.507

### 56 1969 6.361 6.252 6.022 5.719 5.546 4.914

1970 6.584 6.476 6.247 5.939 5.761 5.148

1971 6.788 6.684 6.456 6.154 5.975 5.339

1972 6.89 6.783 6.555 6.248 6.067 5.458

1973 7.057 6.948 6.718 6.408 6.224 5.599

1974 7.157 7.049 6 .82 6.511 6.328 5.694

1975 7.258 7.149 6.92 6.61 6.429 5.796

1976 7.397 7.288 7.059 6.75 6.57 5.998

1977 7.583 7.479 7.251 6.948 6.76 6.105

1978 7.621 7.511 7.281 6.97 6.782 6.116

1979 7.571 7.462 7.232 6.922 6.736 6.079

1980 7.561 7.454 7.226 6.92 6.74 6. 079

1981 7.548 7.439 7.209 6.896 6.698 6.032

1982 7.526 7.418 7.188 6.88 6.7 6.083

1983 8.565 8.403 8.113 7.494 7.243 6.415

1984 7.86 7.747 7.516 7.201 7.01 6.333

1985 7.743 7.636 7.407 7.099 6.905 6.25

1986 7.673 7.564 7.334 7.022 6.832 6.187

1987 7.696 7 .587 7.358 7.049 6.864 6.235

1988 7.761 7.651 7.421 7.106 6.912 6.214

1989 7.649 7.542 7.313 7.007 6.824 6.184

1990 7.649 7.543 7.314 7.154 7 6.299

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 8.565 8.403 8.113 7.494 7.243 6.415

0.0645161290322581 7.86 7.747 7.516 7.201 7.01 6.333

0.0967741935483871 7.761 7.651 7.421 7.154 7 6.299

0.129032258064516 7.743 7.636 7.407 7.106 6.912 6.25

0.161290322580645 7.696 7.587 7.358 7.099 6.905 6.235

0.193548387096774 7.673 7.564 7.334 7. 049 6.864 6.214

0.225806451612903 7.649 7.543 7.314 7.022 6.832 6.187

0.258064516129032 7.649 7.542 7.313 7.007 6.824 6.184

0.290322580645161 7.621 7.511 7.281 6.97 6.782 6.116

0.32258064516129 7.583 7.479 7.251 6.948 6.76 6.105

0.354838709677419 7.571 7.4 62 7.232 6.922 6.74 6.083

0.387096774193548 7.561 7.454 7.226 6.92 6.736 6.079

0.419354838709677 7.548 7.439 7.209 6.896 6.7 6.079

0.451612903225806 7.526 7.418 7.188 6.88 6.698 6.032

0.483870967741936 7.397 7.288 7.059 6.75 6.57 5.998

0.516129032258065 7. 258 7.149 6.92 6.61 6.429 5.796

0.548387096774194 7.157 7.049 6.82 6.511 6.328 5.694

0.580645161290323 7.057 6.948 6.718 6.408 6.224 5.599

0.612903225806452 6.89 6.783 6.555 6.248 6.067 5.458

0.645161290322581 6.788 6.684 6.456 6.154 5.975 5.339

0.67741935 483871 6.584 6.476 6.247 5.939 5.761 5.148

0.709677419354839 6.361 6.252 6.022 5.719 5.546 4.914

0.741935483870968 5.897 5.792 5.564 5.262 5.087 4.507

0.774193548387097 5.867 5.744 5.543 5.174 4.949 4.212

0.806451612903226 5.012 4.908 4.681 4.383 4.216 3.6 5

0.838709677419355 4.587 4.483 4.257 3.961 3.799 3.227

0.870967741935484 4.053 3.951 3.725 3.432 3.27 2.715

0.903225806451613 3.479 3.376 3.15 2.856 2.697 2.147

0.935483870967742 2.784 2.684 2.459 2.171 2.018 1.483

0.967741935483871 1.982 1.883 1.659 1.37 3 1.227 0.7105

### 57 0.1 7.7592 7.6495 7.4196 7.1492 6.9912

6.2941

Average of yearly averages: 5.10695

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypomefr

Metfile: w93193.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAfruit_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS e nvironment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Ko c 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.2 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 intege r See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.262 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 01

- 04 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 4 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 5 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(aver age of entire run)

stored as Cypomefrben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAfruit_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:02

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

### 58 Metfile: w93193.dvf modified Wedd ay, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:24

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.8435 0.8435 0.843 0.8396 0.8354 0.5416

1962 1.629 1.629 1.628 1.622 1.614 1.323

1963 2.301 2.301 2.3 2.292 2.282 1.991

1964 2.875 2.875 2.8 73 2.862 2.849 2.565

1965 3.4 3.4 3.398 3.386 3.371 3.087

1966 3.827 3.826 3.825 3.811 3.793 3.512

1967 4.452 4.452 4.45 4.434 4.412 4.051

1968 4.697 4.697 4.694 4.676 4.653 4.375

1969 5.129 5.129 5.127 5.11 5.087 4.776

1970 5.369 5.369 5.367 5.347 5.322 5 .022

1971 5.578 5.578 5.575 5.556 5.529 5.226

1972 5.684 5.684 5.681 5.66 5.633 5.345

1973 5.842 5.842 5.839 5.817 5.79 5.496

1974 5.943 5.942 5.939 5.918 5.89 5.589

1975 6.031 6.031 6.028 6.008 5.982 5.684

1976 6.173 6.173 6.17 6.15 6.123 5.851

1977 6.384 6.383 6.38 6.355 6.324 6.016

1978 6.386 6.386 6.383 6.36 6.329 6.018

1979 6.363 6.362 6.359 6.335 6.304 5.997

1980 6.352 6.351 6.348 6.327 6.297 5.984

1981 6.332 6.332 6.328 6.301 6.266 5.952

1982 6.306 6.306 6.303 6.283 6.255 5.961

1983 6.729 6.729 6.726 6.702 6.67 6.262

1984 6.644 6.644 6.64 6.615 6.581 6.263

1985 6.541 6.541 6.537 6.51 6.475 6.166

1986 6.462 6.462 6.459 6.434 6.402 6.099

1987 6.494 6.494 6.491 6.467 6.438 6.137

1988 6.505 6.505 6.502 6.479 6.447 6.12

1989 6.452 6.451 6.448 6.425 6.394 6 .094

1990 6.578 6.577 6.574 6.547 6.513 6.175

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 6.729 6.729 6.726 6.702 6.67 6.263

0.0645161290322581 6.644 6.644 6.64 6.615 6.581 6.262

0.0967741935483871 6.578 6.577 6.574 6.547 6.513 6.175

0.129032258064516 6.541 6.541 6.537 6.51 6.475 6.166

0.161290322580645 6.505 6.505 6.502 6.479 6.447 6.137

0.193548387096774 6.494 6.494 6.491 6.467 6.438 6.12

0.225806451612903 6.462 6.462 6.459 6.434 6.402 6.099

0.258064516129032 6.452 6.451 6.448 6.425 6.394 6.094

0.290322580645161 6.386 6.386 6.383 6.36 6.329 6.018

0.32258064516129 6.384 6.383 6.38 6.355 6.324 6.016

0.354838709677419 6.363 6.362 6.359 6.335 6.304 5.997

0.387096774193548 6.352 6.351 6.348 6.327 6.297 5.984

0.419354838709677 6.332 6.332 6.328 6.301 6.266 5.961

0.451612903225806 6.306 6.306 6.303 6.283 6.255 5.952

0.483870967741936 6.173 6.173 6.17 6.15 6.123 5.851

0.516129032258065 6.031 6.031 6.028 6.008 5.982 5.684

0.548387096774194 5.943 5.942 5.939 5.918 5.89 5.589

0.58064 5161290323 5.842 5.842 5.839 5.817 5.79 5.496

0.612903225806452 5.684 5.684 5.681 5.66 5.633 5.345

0.645161290322581 5.578 5.578 5.575 5.556 5.529 5.226

### 59 0.67741935483871 5.369 5.369 5.367 5.347 5.322 5.022

0.709677419354839 5.129 5.129 5.127 5.11 5.087 4.7 76

0.741935483870968 4.697 4.697 4.694 4.676 4.653 4.375

0.774193548387097 4.452 4.452 4.45 4.434 4.412 4.051

0.806451612903226 3.827 3.826 3.825 3.811 3.793 3.512

0.838709677419355 3.4 3.4 3.398 3.386 3.371 3.087

0.870967741935484 2.875 2.875 2.873 2.862 2.849 2.565

0.903225806451613 2.301 2.301 2.3 2.292 2.282 1.991

0.935483870967742 1.629 1.629 1.628 1.622 1.614 1.323

0.967741935483871 0.8435 0.8435 0.843 0.8396 0.8354

0.5416

0.1 6.5743 6.5734 6.5703 6.5433 6.5092

6.1741

Average of yearly averages:

4.98928666666667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypomefr

Metfile: w93193.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAfruit_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Valu e Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbac w 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.2 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.262 kg/ha

A pplication Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 01

- 04 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 int erval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 4 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 5 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Re cord 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

### 60 PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**POME FRUIT GROUND**

stored as Cypomefr.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PR ZM environment: CAfruit_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:02

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w93193.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:24

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year P eak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.508 0.4826 0.4252 0.3518 0.3145 0.186

1962 0.7469 0.7211 0.6635 0.5896 0.5498

0.4126

1963 0.9453 0.9186 0.8605 0.7831 0.7415

0.5996

1964 1.087 1.061 1.003 0.9277 0.8861 0.7528

1965 1.262 1.235 1.177 1.101 1.059 0.9098

1966 1.37 1.343 1.285 1.208 1.165 1.031

1967 2.039 1.981 1.927 1.737 1.638 1.342

1968 1.764 1.737 1.679 1.6 1.554 1.42

1969 2.027 1.996 1.939 1.866 1.813 1.626

1970 2.063 2.035 1.976 1.895 1.847 1.693

1971 2.119 2.092 2.033 1.954 1.906 1.734

1972 2. 096 2.068 2.009 1.929 1.881 1.732

1973 2.15 2.121 2.062 1.982 1.931 1.765

1974 2.15 2.122 2.063 1.983 1.934 1.771

1975 2.151 2.123 2.064 1.983 1.935 1.766

1976 2.277 2.243 2.135 2.015 1.975 1.86

1977 2.306 2.279 2.22 2.142 2.091 1.916

1978 2.326 2.296 2.23 6 2.159 2.104 1.919

1979 2.265 2.237 2.178 2.098 2.047 1.871

1980 2.253 2.225 2.166 2.087 2.039 1.863

1981 2.223 2.194 2.135 2.054 1.999 1.819

1982 2.193 2.165 2.105 2.025 1.978 1.839

1983 3.374 3.277 3.04 2.677 2.538 2.159

1984 2.519 2.489 2.429 2.348 2.2 94 2.11

1985 2.433 2.405 2.346 2.267 2.214 2.037

1986 2.368 2.339 2.28 2.2 2.147 1.979

1987 2.399 2.371 2.312 2.233 2.181 2.018

1988 2.422 2.391 2.339 2.241 2.18 1.973

1989 2.311 2.283 2.224 2.145 2.095 1.927

1990 2.759 2.704 2.524 2.319 2.265 2.03

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 3.374 3.277 3.04 2.677 2.538 2.159

0.0645161290322581 2.759 2.704 2.524 2.348 2.294 2.11

0.0967741935483871 2.519 2.489 2.429 2.319 2.265 2.037

0.129032258064516 2.433 2.405 2.346 2.26 7 2.214 2.03

### 61 0.161290322580645 2.422 2.391 2.339 2.241 2.181 2.018

0.193548387096774 2.399 2.371 2.312 2.233 2.18 1.979

0.225806451612903 2.368 2.339 2.28 2.2 2.147 1.973

0.258064516129032 2.326 2.296 2.236 2.159 2.104 1.927

0.290322580645161 2.311 2.283 2 .224 2.145 2.095 1.919

0.32258064516129 2.306 2.279 2.22 2.142 2.091 1.916

0.354838709677419 2.277 2.243 2.178 2.098 2.047 1.871

0.387096774193548 2.265 2.237 2.166 2.087 2.039 1.863

0.419354838709677 2.253 2.225 2.135 2.054 1.999 1.86

0.451612903225806 2. 223 2.194 2.135 2.025 1.978 1.839

0.483870967741936 2.193 2.165 2.105 2.015 1.975 1.819

0.516129032258065 2.151 2.123 2.064 1.983 1.935 1.771

0.548387096774194 2.15 2.122 2.063 1.983 1.934 1.766

0.580645161290323 2.15 2.121 2.062 1.982 1.931 1.765

0.612903 225806452 2.119 2.092 2.033 1.954 1.906 1.734

0.645161290322581 2.096 2.068 2.009 1.929 1.881 1.732

0.67741935483871 2.063 2.035 1.976 1.895 1.847 1.693

0.709677419354839 2.039 1.996 1.939 1.866 1.813 1.626

0.741935483870968 2.027 1.981 1.927 1.737 1.638 1 .42

0.774193548387097 1.764 1.737 1.679 1.6 1.554 1.342

0.806451612903226 1.37 1.343 1.285 1.208 1.165 1.031

0.838709677419355 1.262 1.235 1.177 1.101 1.059 0.9098

0.870967741935484 1.087 1.061 1.003 0.9277 0.8861 0.7528

0.903225806451613 0.9453 0.9186 0.8 605 0.7831

0.7415 0.5996

0.935483870967742 0.7469 0.7211 0.6635 0.5896

0.5498 0.4126

0.967741935483871 0.508 0.4826 0.4252 0.3518 0.3145

0.186

0.1 2.5104 2.4806 2.4207 2.3138 2.2599

2.0363

Average of yearly averages:

1.60202666666667

Inputs generate d by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypomefr

Metfile: w93193.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAfruit_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aqu atic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.2 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

### 62 Application Rate: TAPP 0.262 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 01

- 04 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete lin e for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 4 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 5 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as Cypomefrben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAfruit_NirrigC.txt modified Thuda y, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:02

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w93193.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:24

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.222 9 0.2227 0.2197 0.2153 0.2142

0.1397

1962 0.4495 0.4495 0.4493 0.4475 0.4454

0.3682

1963 0.6382 0.6381 0.6378 0.6355 0.6327 0.555

1964 0.7844 0.7844 0.784 0.7811 0.7774 0.7086

1965 0.9529 0.9529 0.9525 0.9493 0.945 0.8707

1966 1.065 1.065 1.065 1.061 1.056 0.9856

1967 1.426 1.426 1.425 1.42 1.413 1.27

1968 1.455 1.455 1.454 1.448 1.441 1.376

1969 1.688 1.688 1.687 1.681 1.674 1.576

1970 1.748 1.748 1.747 1.741 1.732 1.649

1971 1.804 1.804 1.803 1.797 1.789 1.706

1972 1.785 1.785 1.784 1.778 1.769 1.697

1973 1.836 1.836 1.835 1.828 1.82 1.74

1974 1.837 1.837 1.836 1.829 1.82 1.741

1975 1.834 1.834 1.833 1.827 1.819 1.74

1976 1.882 1.882 1.882 1.88 1.867 1.796

1977 1.997 1.997 1.996 1.988 1.979 1.896

1978 1.993 1.993 1.992 1.985 1.975 1.887

1979 1.954 1.954 1. 953 1.946 1.937 1.854

1980 1.94 1.94 1.939 1.932 1.924 1.835

### 63 1981 1.906 1.906 1.905 1.897 1.887 1.8

1982 1.877 1.877 1.877 1.871 1.862 1.793

1983 2.279 2.279 2.278 2.27 2.259 2.07

1984 2.205 2.205 2.204 2.196 2.185 2.097

1985 2.124 2.124 2.123 2.114 2.103 2.018

1986 2.055 2.055 2.054 2.046 2.037 1.954

1987 2.09 2.09 2.089 2.081 2.072 1.988

1988 2.062 2.062 2.061 2.054 2.044 1.947

1989 2.003 2.003 2.002 1.994 1.985 1.906

1990 2.126 2.126 2.125 2.116 2.104 1.972

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 2.279 2.279 2.278 2.27 2.259 2.097

0.0645161290322581 2.205 2.205 2.204 2.196 2.185 2.07

0.0967741935483871 2.126 2.126 2.125 2.116 2.104 2.018

0.129032258064516 2.124 2.124 2.123 2.114 2.103 1.988

0.161290322580645 2.09 2.0 9 2.089 2.081 2.072 1.972

0.193548387096774 2.062 2.062 2.061 2.054 2.044 1.954

0.225806451612903 2.055 2.055 2.054 2.046 2.037 1.947

0.258064516129032 2.003 2.003 2.002 1.994 1.985 1.906

0.290322580645161 1.997 1.997 1.996 1.988 1.979 1.896

0.322580645161 29 1.993 1.993 1.992 1.985 1.975 1.887

0.354838709677419 1.954 1.954 1.953 1.946 1.937 1.854

0.387096774193548 1.94 1.94 1.939 1.932 1.924 1.835

0.419354838709677 1.906 1.906 1.905 1.897 1.887 1.8

0.451612903225806 1.882 1.882 1.882 1.88 1.867 1.796

0.4838 70967741936 1.877 1.877 1.877 1.871 1.862 1.793

0.516129032258065 1.837 1.837 1.836 1.829 1.82 1.741

0.548387096774194 1.836 1.836 1.835 1.828 1.82 1.74

0.580645161290323 1.834 1.834 1.833 1.827 1.819 1.74

0.612903225806452 1.804 1.804 1.803 1.797 1.789 1. 706

0.645161290322581 1.785 1.785 1.784 1.778 1.769 1.697

0.67741935483871 1.748 1.748 1.747 1.741 1.732 1.649

0.709677419354839 1.688 1.688 1.687 1.681 1.674 1.576

0.741935483870968 1.455 1.455 1.454 1.448 1.441 1.376

0.774193548387097 1.426 1.426 1.425 1 .42 1.413 1.27

0.806451612903226 1.065 1.065 1.065 1.061 1.056 0.9856

0.838709677419355 0.9529 0.9529 0.9525 0.9493 0.945

0.8707

0.870967741935484 0.7844 0.7844 0.784 0.7811 0.7774

0.7086

0.903225806451613 0.6382 0.6381 0.6378 0.6355

0.6327 0.555

0.9354838 70967742 0.4495 0.4495 0.4493 0.4475

0.4454 0.3682

0.967741935483871 0.2229 0.2227 0.2197 0.2153

0.2142 0.1397

0.1 2.1258 2.1258 2.1248 2.1158 2.1039 2.015

Average of yearly averages:

1.56452666666667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypomefr

### 64 Metfile: w93193.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAfruit_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Cons t. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Half ife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.2 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.262 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 f raction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 01

- 04 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 inte rval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 4 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 5 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

F EXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**PISTACHIO AERIAL**

stored as Cyppista.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAalmond_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

a t 08:13:20

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:22

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.637 1.564 1.33 1.118 1 .021 0.6986

1962 8.185 7.774 6.491 5.106 4.449 2.307

### 65 1963 5.6 5.516 5.242 5.046 5.031 4.438

1964 5.856 5.779 5.528 5.302 5.208 4.816

1965 6.199 6.12 5.866 5.643 5.564 5.145

1966 6.39 6.312 6.056 5.828 5.747 5.372

1967 7.006 6.924 6.658 6.431 6.407 5.864

19 68 7.021 6.943 6.683 6.448 6.376 5.949

1969 7.312 7.229 6.962 6.736 6.707 6.19

1970 7.365 7.285 7.024 6.795 6.733 6.359

1971 7.717 7.639 7.379 7.144 7.074 6.621

1972 7.695 7.615 7.354 7.12 7.056 6.634

1973 7.78 7.699 7.432 7.197 7.153 6.715

1974 7.846 7.76 7 7.506 7.277 7.205 6.784

1975 7.965 7.883 7.612 7.379 7.359 6.835

1976 7.884 7.801 7.529 7.295 7.261 6.778

1977 7.878 7.8 7.538 7.297 7.232 6.792

1978 8.023 7.941 7.675 7.446 7.393 6.939

1979 8.125 8.043 7.775 7.541 7.51 7.028

1980 8.14 8.06 7.801 7.57 7. 507 7.052

1981 8.278 8.197 7.922 7.677 7.66 7.209

1982 9.813 9.661 9.427 9.053 8.928 8.06

1983 9.508 9.417 9.119 8.911 8.805 8.256

1984 9.197 9.114 8.844 8.612 8.582 8.084

1985 9.001 8.92 8.647 8.4 8.365 7.907

1986 9.003 8.921 8.651 8.412 8.375 7.883

1987 8.815 8.733 8.464 8.231 8.195 7.728

1988 8.824 8.739 8.456 8.215 8.164 7.631

1989 8.629 8.548 8.281 8.044 8.005 7.613

1990 10.12 9.952 9.415 8.803 8.582 7.941

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 10.12 9.952 9.427 9.053 8.928 8.256

0.0645161290322581 9.813 9.661 9.415 8.911 8.805 8.084

0.0967741935483871 9.508 9.417 9.119 8.803 8.582 8.06

0.129032258064516 9.197 9.114 8.844 8.612 8.582 7.941

0.161290322580645 9.003 8.921 8.651 8.412 8.375 7.907

0.193548387096774 9.0 01 8.92 8.647 8.4 8.365 7.883

0.225806451612903 8.824 8.739 8.464 8.231 8.195 7.728

0.258064516129032 8.815 8.733 8.456 8.215 8.164 7.631

0.290322580645161 8.629 8.548 8.281 8.044 8.005 7.613

0.32258064516129 8.278 8.197 7.922 7.677 7.66 7.209

0.3548387096 77419 8.185 8.06 7.801 7.57 7.51 7.052

0.387096774193548 8.14 8.043 7.775 7.541 7.507 7.028

0.419354838709677 8.125 7.941 7.675 7.446 7.393 6.939

0.451612903225806 8.023 7.883 7.612 7.379 7.359 6.835

0.483870967741936 7.965 7.801 7.538 7.297 7.261 6.792

0. 516129032258065 7.884 7.8 7.529 7.295 7.232 6.784

0.548387096774194 7.878 7.774 7.506 7.277 7.205 6.778

0.580645161290323 7.846 7.767 7.432 7.197 7.153 6.715

0.612903225806452 7.78 7.699 7.379 7.144 7.074 6.634

0.645161290322581 7.717 7.639 7.354 7.12 7.05 6 6.621

0.67741935483871 7.695 7.615 7.024 6.795 6.733 6.359

0.709677419354839 7.365 7.285 6.962 6.736 6.707 6.19

0.741935483870968 7.312 7.229 6.683 6.448 6.407 5.949

0.774193548387097 7.021 6.943 6.658 6.431 6.376 5.864

0.806451612903226 7.006 6.924 6.49 1 5.828 5.747 5.372

0.838709677419355 6.39 6.312 6.056 5.643 5.564 5.145

### 66 0.870967741935484 6.199 6.12 5.866 5.302 5.208 4.816

0.903225806451613 5.856 5.779 5.528 5.106 5.031 4.438

0.935483870967742 5.6 5.516 5.242 5.046 4.449 2.307

0.967741935483871 1.637 1.564 1.33 1.118 1.021 0.6986

0.1 9.4769 9.3867 9.0915 8.7839 8.582 8.0481

Average of yearly averages:

6.45428666666667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cyppista

Metfile: w23232.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAal mond_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.2 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- l ife

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 15

- 03 dd/mm o r dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 42 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSC ND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as Cyppistaben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAalmond_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:13:20

### 67 EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:22

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yea rly

1961 0.8883 0.8862 0.8614 0.7992 0.788 0.5148

1962 3.517 3.515 3.493 3.338 2.946 1.762

1963 4.603 4.603 4.601 4.588 4.571 4.204

1964 4.957 4.956 4.954 4.939 4.92 4.679

1965 5.29 5.29 5.288 5.272 5.254 5.008

1966 5.492 5.492 5.49 5.474 5.454 5.232

1967 6.058 6.058 6.056 6.037 6.013 5.705

1968 6.114 6.114 6.111 6.093 6.069 5.839

1969 6.378 6.378 6.376 6.357 6.332 6.05

1970 6.467 6.467 6.464 6.445 6.419 6.199

1971 6.802 6.802 6.799 6.779 6.753 6.508

1972 6.79 6.79 6.787 6.766 6.74 6.516

1973 6.881 6.881 6. 878 6.856 6.828 6.601

1974 6.934 6.934 6.932 6.922 6.904 6.671

1975 7.05 7.05 7.046 7.024 6.996 6.729

1976 6.976 6.976 6.973 6.951 6.922 6.682

1977 6.958 6.958 6.955 6.934 6.908 6.673

1978 7.108 7.108 7.105 7.085 7.058 6.812

1979 7.211 7.211 7.208 7.186 7. 158 6.905

1980 7.229 7.229 7.226 7.206 7.18 6.941

1981 7.342 7.342 7.338 7.315 7.287 7.04

1982 8.265 8.265 8.262 8.24 8.212 7.773

1983 8.474 8.474 8.47 8.447 8.416 8.121

1984 8.309 8.309 8.305 8.28 8.248 8.011

1985 8.086 8.086 8.082 8.056 8.024 7.795

1986 8.088 8.088 8.085 8.06 8.029 7.784

1987 7.921 7.921 7.918 7.895 7.866 7.637

1988 7.86 7.86 7.856 7.831 7.797 7.531

1989 7.722 7.721 7.718 7.695 7.665 7.475

1990 8.206 8.206 8.202 8.175 8.141 7.77

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 8.474 8.474 8.47 8.447 8.416 8.121

0.0645161290322581 8.309 8.309 8.305 8.28 8.248 8.011

0.0967741935483871 8.265 8.265 8.262 8.24 8.212 7.795

0.129032258064516 8.206 8.206 8.202 8.175 8.141 7.784

0.161290322580645 8.088 8.088 8.085 8.06 8.029 7.773

0.193548387096774 8.086 8.086 8.082 8.056 8.024 7.77

0.225806451612903 7.921 7.921 7.918 7.895 7.866 7.637

0.258064516129032 7.86 7.86 7.856 7.831 7.797 7.531

0.290322580645161 7.722 7.721 7.718 7.695 7.665 7.475

0.32258064516129 7.342 7.342 7 .338 7.315 7.287 7.04

0.354838709677419 7.229 7.229 7.226 7.206 7.18 6.941

0.387096774193548 7.211 7.211 7.208 7.186 7.158 6.905

0.419354838709677 7.108 7.108 7.105 7.085 7.058 6.812

0.451612903225806 7.05 7.05 7.046 7.024 6.996 6.729

0.483870967741936 6.9 76 6.976 6.973 6.951 6.922 6.682

0.516129032258065 6.958 6.958 6.955 6.934 6.908 6.673

0.548387096774194 6.934 6.934 6.932 6.922 6.904 6.671

0.580645161290323 6.881 6.881 6.878 6.856 6.828 6.601

### 68 0.612903225806452 6.802 6.802 6.799 6.779 6.753 6.516

0.64516 1290322581 6.79 6.79 6.787 6.766 6.74 6.508

0.67741935483871 6.467 6.467 6.464 6.445 6.419 6.199

0.709677419354839 6.378 6.378 6.376 6.357 6.332 6.05

0.741935483870968 6.114 6.114 6.111 6.093 6.069 5.839

0.774193548387097 6.058 6.058 6.056 6.037 6.013 5.70 5

0.806451612903226 5.492 5.492 5.49 5.474 5.454 5.232

0.838709677419355 5.29 5.29 5.288 5.272 5.254 5.008

0.870967741935484 4.957 4.956 4.954 4.939 4.92 4.679

0.903225806451613 4.603 4.603 4.601 4.588 4.571 4.204

0.935483870967742 3.517 3.515 3.493 3.338 2.946 1.762

0.967741935483871 0.8883 0.8862 0.8614 0.7992 0.788

0.5148

0.1 8.2591 8.2591 8.256 8.2335 8.2049 7.7939

Average of yearly averages:

6.30559333333334

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cyppist a

Metfile: w23232.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAalmond_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pres sure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.2 da ys Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 15

- 03 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 42 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

### 69 Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**PISTACHIO GROUND**

stored as Cyppista.out

Chem ical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAalmond_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:13:20

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:22

Water segment concentr ations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.8363 0.7966 0.672 0.418 0.3432 0.207

1962 7.405 6.977 5.642 4.202 3.517 1.329

1963 3.821 3.757 3.574 3.471 3.41 3.053

1964 3.307 3.286 3.214 3.149 3.15 3.019

1965 3.289 3.266 3.191 3.152 3.14 2.987

1966 3.151 3.13 3.076 2.993 2.996 2.896

1967 3.611 3.572 3.482 3.403 3.373 3.119

1968 3.263 3.242 3.167 3.102 3.106 2.965

1969 3.507 3.465 3.333 3.257 3.218 2.996

1970 3.884 3.817 3.613 3.22 3.079 2.993

1971 3.399 3.377 3.304 3.239 3.24 3.093

1972 3 .231 3.209 3.136 3.072 3.073 2.957

1973 3.198 3.176 3.101 3.05 3.054 2.92

1974 3.137 3.116 3.044 2.985 2.978 2.869

1975 3.258 3.225 3.149 3.05 3.044 2.829

1976 3.022 2.999 2.921 2.885 2.872 2.707

1977 2.921 2.9 2.828 2.762 2.764 2.635

1978 3.013 2.99 2.915 2.867 2.857 2.723

1979 3.097 3.068 2.976 2.909 2.912 2.744

1980 3.005 2.984 2.913 2.851 2.851 2.711

1981 3.444 3.394 3.243 3.064 2.961 2.817

1982 5.143 5.049 4.765 4.39 4.223 3.642

1983 4.274 4.246 4.181 4.091 4.01 3.794

1984 3.944 3.921 3.847 3.804 3.805 3.632

1985 3.712 3.691 3.613 3.561 3.563 3.426

1986 3.697 3.675 3.599 3.554 3.559 3.38

1987 3.494 3.472 3.396 3.347 3.352 3.197

1988 3.476 3.45 3.384 3.34 3.294 3.099

1989 3.562 3.517 3.375 3.231 3.187 3.067

1990 4.897 4.779 4.403 3.97 3.809 3.392

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 7.405 6.977 5.642 4.39 4.223 3.794

0.0645161290322581 5.143 5.049 4.765 4.202 4.01 3.642

0.0967741935483871 4.897 4.779 4.403 4.091 3.809 3.632

0.129032258064516 4.274 4.246 4.181 3.97 3.805 3.426

0.161290322580645 3.944 3.921 3.847 3.804 3.563 3.392

0.193548387096774 3.884 3.817 3.613 3.561 3.559 3.38

0.225806451612903 3.821 3.757 3.613 3.554 3.517 3.197

0.258064516129032 3.712 3.691 3.599 3.471 3.41 3.119

### 70 0.290322580645161 3.697 3.675 3.574 3.403 3.373 3.099

0.32258064516129 3.611 3.572 3.482 3.347 3.352 3.093

0.354838709677419 3.562 3.517 3.396 3.34 3.294 3.067

0.387096774193548 3.507 3.472 3.384 3.257 3.24 3.053

0.419354838709677 3.494 3.465 3.375 3.239 3.218 3.019

0.451612903225806 3.476 3.45 3.333 3.231 3.187 2.996

0.483870967741936 3.444 3.394 3.304 3.22 3.15 2.993

0.516129032258065 3.399 3.377 3.243 3.152 3.14 2.987

0.548387096774194 3.307 3.286 3.214 3.149 3.106 2.965

0.580645161290323 3.289 3.266 3.191 3.102 3.079 2.957

0.612903 225806452 3.263 3.242 3.167 3.072 3.073 2.92

0.645161290322581 3.258 3.225 3.149 3.064 3.054 2.896

0.67741935483871 3.231 3.209 3.136 3.05 3.044 2.869

0.709677419354839 3.198 3.176 3.101 3.05 2.996 2.829

0.741935483870968 3.151 3.13 3.076 2.993 2.978 2.817

0.774193548387097 3.137 3.116 3.044 2.985 2.961 2.744

0.806451612903226 3.097 3.068 2.976 2.909 2.912 2.723

0.838709677419355 3.022 2.999 2.921 2.885 2.872 2.711

0.870967741935484 3.013 2.99 2.915 2.867 2.857 2.707

0.903225806451613 3.005 2.984 2.913 2.85 1 2.851 2.635

0.935483870967742 2.921 2.9 2.828 2.762 2.764 1.329

0.967741935483871 0.8363 0.7966 0.672 0.418 0.3432 0.207

0.1 4.8347 4.7257 4.3808 4.0789 3.8086

3.6114

Average of yearly averages: 2.9066

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

D ata used for this run:

Output File: Cyppista

Metfile: w23232.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAalmond_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.2 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0. 01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 15

- 03 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 42 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

### 71 Interval 3 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

st ored as Cyppistaben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAalmond_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:13:20

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04:22

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.3377 0.3354 0.3083 0.2404 0.2257

0.1379

1962 2.552 2.55 2.525 2.358 1.943 0.8796

1963 3.137 3.137 3.135 3.127 3.116 2.925

1964 3.072 3.072 3.071 3.062 3.053 2.98 5

1965 3.042 3.042 3.041 3.033 3.023 2.95

1966 2.921 2.921 2.919 2.911 2.902 2.85

1967 3.207 3.207 3.205 3.197 3.185 3.052

1968 3.029 3.029 3.028 3.018 3.009 2.945

1969 3.074 3.074 3.073 3.065 3.054 2.943

1970 3.046 3.044 3.01 2.977 2.968 2.915

1971 3.16 3 .16 3.159 3.15 3.141 3.067

1972 2.998 2.998 2.997 2.988 2.979 2.923

1973 2.969 2.969 2.967 2.958 2.949 2.884

1974 2.905 2.905 2.904 2.901 2.897 2.84

1975 2.913 2.913 2.912 2.903 2.893 2.798

1976 2.781 2.781 2.78 2.771 2.762 2.687

1977 2.68 2.68 2.679 2.671 2.662 2.597

1978 2.767 2.767 2.766 2.758 2.749 2.671

1979 2.798 2.798 2.797 2.789 2.779 2.697

1980 2.767 2.767 2.766 2.759 2.749 2.68

1981 2.869 2.868 2.858 2.806 2.796 2.72

1982 3.734 3.734 3.733 3.723 3.71 3.434

1983 3.875 3.875 3.873 3.863 3.849 3.73

1 984 3.723 3.723 3.722 3.712 3.707 3.626

1985 3.478 3.478 3.477 3.466 3.458 3.391

1986 3.459 3.459 3.458 3.448 3.439 3.354

1987 3.268 3.268 3.267 3.257 3.25 3.18

1988 3.185 3.185 3.184 3.174 3.161 3.067

1989 3.065 3.065 3.064 3.062 3.058 3.004

1990 3.533 3. 533 3.532 3.52 3.505 3.288

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 3.875 3.875 3.873 3.863 3.849 3.73

0.0645161290322581 3.734 3.734 3.733 3.723 3.71 3.626

0.0967741935483871 3.723 3.723 3.722 3.712 3.707 3.434

0.1290 32258064516 3.533 3.533 3.532 3.52 3.505 3.391

0.161290322580645 3.478 3.478 3.477 3.466 3.458 3.354

0.193548387096774 3.459 3.459 3.458 3.448 3.439 3.288

0.225806451612903 3.268 3.268 3.267 3.257 3.25 3.18

0.258064516129032 3.207 3.207 3.205 3.197 3.185 3 .067

0.290322580645161 3.185 3.185 3.184 3.174 3.161 3.067

0.32258064516129 3.16 3.16 3.159 3.15 3.141 3.052

0.354838709677419 3.137 3.137 3.135 3.127 3.116 3.004

0.387096774193548 3.074 3.074 3.073 3.065 3.058 2.985

0.419354838709677 3.072 3.072 3.071 3.0 62 3.054 2.95

0.451612903225806 3.065 3.065 3.064 3.062 3.053 2.945

0.483870967741936 3.046 3.044 3.041 3.033 3.023 2.943

0.516129032258065 3.042 3.042 3.028 3.018 3.009 2.925

0.548387096774194 3.029 3.029 3.01 2.988 2.979 2.923

0.580645161290323 2.998 2.9 98 2.997 2.977 2.968 2.915

0.612903225806452 2.969 2.969 2.967 2.958 2.949 2.884

0.645161290322581 2.921 2.921 2.919 2.911 2.902 2.85

0.67741935483871 2.913 2.913 2.912 2.903 2.897 2.84

0.709677419354839 2.905 2.905 2.904 2.901 2.893 2.798

0.74193548387096 8 2.869 2.868 2.858 2.806 2.796 2.72

0.774193548387097 2.798 2.798 2.797 2.789 2.779 2.697

0.806451612903226 2.781 2.781 2.78 2.771 2.762 2.687

0.838709677419355 2.767 2.767 2.766 2.759 2.749 2.68

0.870967741935484 2.767 2.767 2.766 2.758 2.749 2.671

0.903 225806451613 2.68 2.68 2.679 2.671 2.662 2.597

0.935483870967742 2.552 2.55 2.525 2.358 1.943 0.8796

0.967741935483871 0.3377 0.3354 0.3083 0.2404

0.2257 0.1379

0.1 3.704 3.704 3.703 3.6928 3.6868 3.4297

Average of yearly averages:

2.84068333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cyppista

Metfile: w23232.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAalmond_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

M olecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfi fe

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.2 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

### 73 Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficie ncy: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 15

- 03 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 42 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 14 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**CA CITRUS (TROPICAL FRUITS) AERIAL 5 APPLICATIONS**

stored as Cypcitru.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:54

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modifie d Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23155.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:20

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.948 1.866 1.611 1.49 1.368 1.037

1962 5.185 4.967 4.695 4.076 3.723 2.8 37

1963 5.193 5.054 4.83 4.485 4.291 3.698

1964 5.289 5.204 4.938 4.825 4.685 4.159

1965 5.696 5.61 5.343 5.23 5.093 4.552

1966 6.472 6.347 5.955 5.798 5.626 4.99

1967 6.484 6.395 6.123 6.013 5.887 5.282

1968 6.721 6.618 6.338 6.234 6.092 5.463

1969 7.173 7.072 6.755 6.548 6.406 5.723

1970 7.267 7.173 6.905 6.757 6.593 5.874

1971 7.245 7.151 6.873 6.765 6.619 5.987

1972 7.394 7.291 6.998 6.896 6.754 6.089

1973 7.779 7.662 7.354 7.208 7.069 6.289

1974 7.611 7.513 7.359 7.201 7.057 6.341

1975 7.784 7.676 7.35 2 7.254 7.099 6.386

1976 7.724 7.621 7.335 7.233 7.092 6.378

1977 7.715 7.612 7.326 7.245 7.123 6.412

1978 18.11 17.37 15.3 12.85 11.91 9.424

1979 10.42 10.32 10.02 9.921 9.781 8.859

1980 9.968 9.864 9.569 9.47 9.331 8.52

1981 9.711 9.608 9.317 9.216 9.076 8.206

1982 9.392 9.288 8.99 8.893 8.753 7.92

### 74 1983 9.539 9.415 9.105 8.932 8.752 7.924

1984 9.159 9.058 8.773 8.669 8.526 7.741

1985 9.018 8.916 8.631 8.529 8.385 7.617

1986 8.898 8.795 8.505 8.404 8.264 7.518

1987 8.939 8.834 8.53 8.426 8.298 7.508

1988 8 .74 8.636 8.331 8.231 8.094 7.289

1989 8.511 8.409 8.105 8.007 7.866 7.084

1990 8.343 8.242 7.948 7.847 7.705 6.924

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 18.11 17.37 15.3 12.85 11.91 9.424

0.0645161290322581 10.42 1 0.32 10.02 9.921 9.781 8.859

0.0967741935483871 9.968 9.864 9.569 9.47 9.331 8.52

0.129032258064516 9.711 9.608 9.317 9.216 9.076 8.206

0.161290322580645 9.539 9.415 9.105 8.932 8.753 7.924

0.193548387096774 9.392 9.288 8.99 8.893 8.752 7.92

0.225806451612 903 9.159 9.058 8.773 8.669 8.526 7.741

0.258064516129032 9.018 8.916 8.631 8.529 8.385 7.617

0.290322580645161 8.939 8.834 8.53 8.426 8.298 7.518

0.32258064516129 8.898 8.795 8.505 8.404 8.264 7.508

0.354838709677419 8.74 8.636 8.331 8.231 8.094 7.289

0.3 87096774193548 8.511 8.409 8.105 8.007 7.866 7.084

0.419354838709677 8.343 8.242 7.948 7.847 7.705 6.924

0.451612903225806 7.784 7.676 7.359 7.254 7.123 6.412

0.483870967741936 7.779 7.662 7.354 7.245 7.099 6.386

0.516129032258065 7.724 7.621 7.352 7.233 7 .092 6.378

0.548387096774194 7.715 7.612 7.335 7.208 7.069 6.341

0.580645161290323 7.611 7.513 7.326 7.201 7.057 6.289

0.612903225806452 7.394 7.291 6.998 6.896 6.754 6.089

0.645161290322581 7.267 7.173 6.905 6.765 6.619 5.987

0.67741935483871 7.245 7.151 6.873 6.757 6.593 5.874

0.709677419354839 7.173 7.072 6.755 6.548 6.406 5.723

0.741935483870968 6.721 6.618 6.338 6.234 6.092 5.463

0.774193548387097 6.484 6.395 6.123 6.013 5.887 5.282

0.806451612903226 6.472 6.347 5.955 5.798 5.626 4.99

0.838709677419355 5.696 5.61 5.343 5.23 5.093 4.552

0.870967741935484 5.289 5.204 4.938 4.825 4.685 4.159

0.903225806451613 5.193 5.054 4.83 4.485 4.291 3.698

0.935483870967742 5.185 4.967 4.695 4.076 3.723 2.837

0.967741935483871 1.948 1.866 1.611 1.49 1.368 1.037

0.1 9. 9423 9.8384 9.5438 9.4446 9.3055

8.4886

Average of yearly averages:

6.33436666666667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypcitru

Metfile: w23155.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment f ile: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

### 75 Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM m anual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 02

- 01 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 4 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as Cypcitruben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM env ironment: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:54

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23155.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:20

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.006 1.006 1.006 1.003 0.999 0.8461

1962 2.851 2.851 2.85 2.843 2.832 2.471

1963 3.772 3.772 3.771 3.762 3.749 3.48

1964 4.29 4.29 4.288 4.279 4.266 4.014

1965 4.696 4.696 4.694 4.684 4.669 4.409

1966 5.169 5.169 5. 167 5.154 5.136 4.835

1967 5.478 5.478 5.477 5.466 5.451 5.151

1968 5.686 5.686 5.684 5.671 5.654 5.343

1969 5.97 5.969 5.968 5.953 5.934 5.593

1970 6.153 6.153 6.151 6.138 6.118 5.759

1971 6.209 6.209 6.207 6.193 6.177 5.867

### 76 1972 6.339 6.339 6.337 6.322 6 .301 5.977

1973 6.585 6.585 6.583 6.567 6.544 6.165

1974 6.637 6.637 6.634 6.619 6.597 6.231

1975 6.675 6.675 6.673 6.66 6.64 6.28

1976 6.679 6.679 6.677 6.663 6.642 6.283

1977 6.712 6.712 6.71 6.693 6.672 6.309

1978 9.722 9.721 9.717 9.69 9.654 8.757

1979 9.342 9.342 9.339 9.319 9.29 8.81

1980 8.899 8.899 8.897 8.879 8.855 8.441

1981 8.644 8.644 8.641 8.622 8.596 8.144

1982 8.323 8.323 8.32 8.302 8.276 7.847

1983 8.25 8.25 8.248 8.232 8.209 7.801

1984 8.096 8.096 8.094 8.078 8.055 7.653

1985 7.952 7.952 7. 95 7.931 7.908 7.517

1986 7.84 7.84 7.837 7.821 7.799 7.421

1987 7.834 7.834 7.831 7.812 7.787 7.4

1988 7.679 7.679 7.676 7.658 7.633 7.225

1989 7.45 7.45 7.447 7.426 7.4 7.008

1990 7.289 7.289 7.286 7.267 7.242 6.849

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 9.722 9.721 9.717 9.69 9.654 8.81

0.0645161290322581 9.342 9.342 9.339 9.319 9.29 8.757

0.0967741935483871 8.899 8.899 8.897 8.879 8.855 8.441

0.129032258064516 8.644 8.644 8.641 8.622 8.596 8.144

0.161290322580645 8.323 8.323 8.32 8.302 8.276 7.847

0.193548387096774 8.25 8.25 8.248 8.232 8.209 7.801

0.225806451612903 8.096 8.096 8.094 8.078 8.055 7.653

0.258064516129032 7.952 7.952 7.95 7.931 7.908 7.517

0.290322580645161 7.84 7.84 7.837 7.821 7.799 7.421

0.32258064 516129 7.834 7.834 7.831 7.812 7.787 7.4

0.354838709677419 7.679 7.679 7.676 7.658 7.633 7.225

0.387096774193548 7.45 7.45 7.447 7.426 7.4 7.008

0.419354838709677 7.289 7.289 7.286 7.267 7.242 6.849

0.451612903225806 6.712 6.712 6.71 6.693 6.672 6.309

0.48 3870967741936 6.679 6.679 6.677 6.663 6.642 6.283

0.516129032258065 6.675 6.675 6.673 6.66 6.64 6.28

0.548387096774194 6.637 6.637 6.634 6.619 6.597 6.231

0.580645161290323 6.585 6.585 6.583 6.567 6.544 6.165

0.612903225806452 6.339 6.339 6.337 6.322 6.301 5.977

0.645161290322581 6.209 6.209 6.207 6.193 6.177 5.867

0.67741935483871 6.153 6.153 6.151 6.138 6.118 5.759

0.709677419354839 5.97 5.969 5.968 5.953 5.934 5.593

0.741935483870968 5.686 5.686 5.684 5.671 5.654 5.343

0.774193548387097 5.478 5.478 5.477 5.466 5.451 5.151

0.806451612903226 5.169 5.169 5.167 5.154 5.136 4.835

0.838709677419355 4.696 4.696 4.694 4.684 4.669 4.409

0.870967741935484 4.29 4.29 4.288 4.279 4.266 4.014

0.903225806451613 3.772 3.772 3.771 3.762 3.749 3.48

0.935483870967742 2.851 2.851 2.85 2.843 2.832 2.471

0.967741935483871 1.006 1.006 1.006 1.003 0.999 0.8461

0.1 8.8735 8.8735 8.8714 8.8533 8.8291

8.4113

Average of yearly averages:

6.19620333333333

### 77 Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypcitru

Metfile: w23155.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/ mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metaboli sm asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fraction of application r ate applied to pond

Application Date Date 02

- 01 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 4 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**CA CITRUS GROUND 5 Applications**

stored as Cypcitru.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:54

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23155.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:20

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

### 78 Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.4994 0.4785 0.413 0.382 0.3508 0.2658

1962 3.585 3.4 2.988 2.429 2.159 1.488

1963 2.841 2.753 2 .531 2.251 2.137 1.82

1964 2.16 2.134 2.062 2.036 1.999 1.813

1965 2.148 2.122 2.053 2.025 1.991 1.814

1966 2.572 2.521 2.358 2.243 2.169 1.927

1967 2.27 2.244 2.171 2.144 2.12 1.932

1968 2.256 2.229 2.151 2.126 2.09 1.893

1969 2.504 2.465 2.356 2.226 2.18 4 1.958

1970 2.546 2.504 2.402 2.299 2.238 1.99

1971 2.301 2.275 2.201 2.175 2.138 1.976

1972 2.313 2.286 2.208 2.181 2.145 1.968

1973 2.62 2.579 2.503 2.445 2.384 2.092

1974 2.557 2.525 2.422 2.336 2.299 2.078

1975 2.488 2.456 2.36 2.316 2.269 2.049

1976 2.357 2.331 2.253 2.228 2.193 1.983

1977 2.344 2.321 2.246 2.203 2.186 1.984

1978 13.3 12.59 10.54 8.092 7.234 5.115

1979 5.081 5.053 4.974 4.934 4.902 4.49

1980 4.591 4.563 4.484 4.448 4.417 4.077

1981 4.232 4.205 4.127 4.094 4.06 3.711

1982 3.882 3.854 3 .776 3.745 3.711 3.394

1983 4 3.952 3.876 3.762 3.683 3.331

1984 3.539 3.512 3.434 3.405 3.37 3.088

1985 3.332 3.305 3.227 3.199 3.164 2.899

1986 3.156 3.129 3.051 3.022 2.988 2.74

1987 3.134 3.104 3.025 2.992 2.966 2.686

1988 2.932 2.905 2.827 2.796 2.762 2.505

1989 2.762 2.736 2.657 2.628 2.592 2.35

1990 2.628 2.601 2.523 2.496 2.46 2.224

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 13.3 12.59 10.54 8.092 7.234 5.115

0.0645161290322581 5.081 5.053 4.974 4.934 4.902 4.49

0 .0967741935483871 4.591 4.563 4.484 4.448 4.417 4.077

0.129032258064516 4.232 4.205 4.127 4.094 4.06 3.711

0.161290322580645 4 3.952 3.876 3.762 3.711 3.394

0.193548387096774 3.882 3.854 3.776 3.745 3.683 3.331

0.225806451612903 3.585 3.512 3.434 3.405 3.3 7 3.088

0.258064516129032 3.539 3.4 3.227 3.199 3.164 2.899

0.290322580645161 3.332 3.305 3.051 3.022 2.988 2.74

0.32258064516129 3.156 3.129 3.025 2.992 2.966 2.686

0.354838709677419 3.134 3.104 2.988 2.796 2.762 2.505

0.387096774193548 2.932 2.905 2.827 2.628 2.592 2.35

0.419354838709677 2.841 2.753 2.657 2.496 2.46 2.224

0.451612903225806 2.762 2.736 2.531 2.445 2.384 2.092

0.483870967741936 2.628 2.601 2.523 2.429 2.299 2.078

0.516129032258065 2.62 2.579 2.503 2.336 2.269 2.049

0.548387096774194 2.572 2 .525 2.422 2.316 2.238 1.99

0.580645161290323 2.557 2.521 2.402 2.299 2.193 1.984

0.612903225806452 2.546 2.504 2.36 2.251 2.186 1.983

0.645161290322581 2.504 2.465 2.358 2.243 2.184 1.976

0.67741935483871 2.488 2.456 2.356 2.228 2.169 1.968

0.709677419354 839 2.357 2.331 2.253 2.226 2.159 1.958

### 79 0.741935483870968 2.344 2.321 2.246 2.203 2.145 1.932

0.774193548387097 2.313 2.286 2.208 2.181 2.138 1.927

0.806451612903226 2.301 2.275 2.201 2.175 2.137 1.893

0.838709677419355 2.27 2.244 2.171 2.144 2.12 1.82

0.8 70967741935484 2.256 2.229 2.151 2.126 2.09 1.814

0.903225806451613 2.16 2.134 2.062 2.036 1.999 1.813

0.935483870967742 2.148 2.122 2.053 2.025 1.991 1.488

0.967741935483871 0.4994 0.4785 0.413 0.382 0.3508

0.2658

0.1 4.5551 4.5272 4.4483 4.4126 4.3813

4 .0404

Average of yearly averages:

2.45469333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypcitru

Metfile: w23155.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cy prodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Ha lf

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 02

- 01 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or dele te line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 4 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

### 80 Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as Cypcitruben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt modi fied Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:54

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23155.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:20

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.258 0.258 0.2579 0.2572 0.2562 0.217

1962 1.5 1.5 1.499 1.495 1.489 1.248

1963 1.87 1.87 1.87 1.865 1.859 1.728

1964 1.89 1.89 1.889 1.885 1.88 1.787

1965 1.884 1.884 1.884 1.88 1.875 1.785

1966 2.002 2.002 2.002 1.996 1.99 1.877

1967 2.01 2.01 2.00 9 2.005 2 1.903

1968 1.981 1.981 1.98 1.976 1.97 1.87

1969 2.046 2.046 2.045 2.04 2.033 1.918

1970 2.089 2.089 2.088 2.084 2.077 1.955

1971 2.028 2.028 2.027 2.023 2.02 1.944

1972 2.035 2.035 2.034 2.03 2.023 1.939

1973 2.186 2.186 2.186 2.18 2.173 2.044

1 974 2.175 2.175 2.174 2.169 2.161 2.044

1975 2.148 2.148 2.147 2.143 2.137 2.025

1976 2.084 2.084 2.083 2.079 2.072 1.965

1977 2.074 2.074 2.073 2.068 2.06 1.953

1978 5.224 5.224 5.221 5.206 5.184 4.496

1979 4.773 4.773 4.772 4.763 4.752 4.516

1980 4.29 4. 29 4.289 4.281 4.271 4.084

1981 3.937 3.937 3.936 3.928 3.918 3.724

1982 3.589 3.589 3.588 3.581 3.571 3.397

1983 3.477 3.477 3.476 3.469 3.46 3.292

1984 3.25 3.25 3.249 3.243 3.234 3.083

1985 3.044 3.044 3.043 3.036 3.028 2.887

1986 2.872 2.872 2.871 2.86 6 2.858 2.727

1987 2.808 2.808 2.807 2.8 2.792 2.657

1988 2.651 2.651 2.651 2.644 2.636 2.501

1989 2.482 2.482 2.481 2.475 2.466 2.341

1990 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.344 2.336 2.214

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 5.22 4 5.224 5.221 5.206 5.184 4.516

0.0645161290322581 4.773 4.773 4.772 4.763 4.752 4.496

0.0967741935483871 4.29 4.29 4.289 4.281 4.271 4.084

0.129032258064516 3.937 3.937 3.936 3.928 3.918 3.724

0.161290322580645 3.589 3.589 3.588 3.581 3.571 3.397

0.193548 387096774 3.477 3.477 3.476 3.469 3.46 3.292

0.225806451612903 3.25 3.25 3.249 3.243 3.234 3.083

0.258064516129032 3.044 3.044 3.043 3.036 3.028 2.887

0.290322580645161 2.872 2.872 2.871 2.866 2.858 2.727

### 81 0.32258064516129 2.808 2.808 2.807 2.8 2.792 2.657

0.354838709677419 2.651 2.651 2.651 2.644 2.636 2.501

0.387096774193548 2.482 2.482 2.481 2.475 2.466 2.341

0.419354838709677 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.344 2.336 2.214

0.451612903225806 2.186 2.186 2.186 2.18 2.173 2.044

0.483870967741936 2.175 2.175 2.174 2.169 2. 161 2.044

0.516129032258065 2.148 2.148 2.147 2.143 2.137 2.025

0.548387096774194 2.089 2.089 2.088 2.084 2.077 1.965

0.580645161290323 2.084 2.084 2.083 2.079 2.072 1.955

0.612903225806452 2.074 2.074 2.073 2.068 2.06 1.953

0.645161290322581 2.046 2.046 2 .045 2.04 2.033 1.944

0.67741935483871 2.035 2.035 2.034 2.03 2.023 1.939

0.709677419354839 2.028 2.028 2.027 2.023 2.02 1.918

0.741935483870968 2.01 2.01 2.009 2.005 2 1.903

0.774193548387097 2.002 2.002 2.002 1.996 1.99 1.877

0.806451612903226 1.981 1.98 1 1.98 1.976 1.97 1.87

0.838709677419355 1.89 1.89 1.889 1.885 1.88 1.787

0.870967741935484 1.884 1.884 1.884 1.88 1.875 1.785

0.903225806451613 1.87 1.87 1.87 1.865 1.859 1.728

0.935483870967742 1.5 1.5 1.499 1.495 1.489 1.248

0.967741935483871 0.258 0.25 8 0.2579 0.2572 0.2562 0.217

0.1 4.2547 4.2547 4.2537 4.2457 4.2357 4.048

Average of yearly averages:

2.40403333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypcitru

Metfile: w23155.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAcit rus_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- li fe

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 02

- 01 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

### 82 Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 4 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**California Citrus (Sp anish lime, tropical fruits) Ground, 4** 

**applications**

stored as Cypcitru.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:54

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metf ile: w23155.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:20

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.4949 0.4698 0.3928 0.3181 0.2926 0.217

1962 3.382 3.206 2.784 2.209 1.958 1.343

1963 2.602 2.521 2.265 1.983 1.8 84 1.616

1964 1.971 1.945 1.868 1.792 1.761 1.589

1965 1.941 1.915 1.837 1.762 1.733 1.57

1966 2.344 2.292 2.13 1.945 1.879 1.665

1967 2.017 1.992 1.914 1.839 1.808 1.644

1968 1.99 1.963 1.885 1.81 1.777 1.598

1969 2.095 2.064 1.965 1.882 1.846 1.653

1970 2.259 2.217 2.085 1.948 1.893 1.681

1971 2.016 1.99 1.913 1.837 1.804 1.652

1972 2.01 1.983 1.906 1.829 1.795 1.634

1973 2.299 2.258 2.178 2.081 2.01 1.751

1974 2.068 2.042 1.964 1.936 1.904 1.722

1975 2.158 2.126 2.03 1.925 1.889 1.696

1976 2.032 2.005 1. 928 1.852 1.819 1.634

1977 1.976 1.95 1.872 1.803 1.791 1.626

1978 12.93 12.22 10.15 7.67 6.821 4.751

1979 4.746 4.719 4.64 4.566 4.524 4.133

1980 4.264 4.236 4.157 4.083 4.043 3.723

1981 3.906 3.879 3.8 3.725 3.687 3.361

1982 3.56 3.533 3.454 3.378 3.341 3.047

1983 3.678 3.63 3.555 3.38 3.3 2.98

1984 3.214 3.188 3.11 3.034 2.997 2.739

1985 3.008 2.981 2.903 2.827 2.792 2.549

1986 2.832 2.805 2.727 2.652 2.616 2.39

1987 2.804 2.774 2.695 2.638 2.591 2.331

1988 2.606 2.58 2.501 2.426 2.389 2.157

1989 2.444 2 .418 2.34 2.264 2.227 2.009

### 83 1990 2.315 2.288 2.211 2.135 2.1 1.888

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 12.93 12.22 10.15 7.67 6.821 4.751

0.0645161290322581 4.746 4.719 4.64 4.566 4.524 4.133

0.0967741935483871 4. 264 4.236 4.157 4.083 4.043 3.723

0.129032258064516 3.906 3.879 3.8 3.725 3.687 3.361

0.161290322580645 3.678 3.63 3.555 3.38 3.341 3.047

0.193548387096774 3.56 3.533 3.454 3.378 3.3 2.98

0.225806451612903 3.382 3.206 3.11 3.034 2.997 2.739

0.2580645161290 32 3.214 3.188 2.903 2.827 2.792 2.549

0.290322580645161 3.008 2.981 2.784 2.652 2.616 2.39

0.32258064516129 2.832 2.805 2.727 2.638 2.591 2.331

0.354838709677419 2.804 2.774 2.695 2.426 2.389 2.157

0.387096774193548 2.606 2.58 2.501 2.264 2.227 2.009

0.41 9354838709677 2.602 2.521 2.34 2.209 2.1 1.888

0.451612903225806 2.444 2.418 2.265 2.135 2.01 1.751

0.483870967741936 2.344 2.292 2.211 2.081 1.958 1.722

0.516129032258065 2.315 2.288 2.178 1.983 1.904 1.696

0.548387096774194 2.299 2.258 2.13 1.948 1.893 1 .681

0.580645161290323 2.259 2.217 2.085 1.945 1.889 1.665

0.612903225806452 2.158 2.126 2.03 1.936 1.884 1.653

0.645161290322581 2.095 2.064 1.965 1.925 1.879 1.652

0.67741935483871 2.068 2.042 1.964 1.882 1.846 1.644

0.709677419354839 2.032 2.005 1.928 1 .852 1.819 1.634

0.741935483870968 2.017 1.992 1.914 1.839 1.808 1.634

0.774193548387097 2.016 1.99 1.913 1.837 1.804 1.626

0.806451612903226 2.01 1.983 1.906 1.829 1.795 1.616

0.838709677419355 1.99 1.963 1.885 1.81 1.791 1.598

0.870967741935484 1.976 1.9 5 1.872 1.803 1.777 1.589

0.903225806451613 1.971 1.945 1.868 1.792 1.761 1.57

0.935483870967742 1.941 1.915 1.837 1.762 1.733 1.343

0.967741935483871 0.4949 0.4698 0.3928 0.3181

0.2926 0.217

0.1 4.2282 4.2003 4.1213 4.0472 4.0074

3.6868

Average of y early averages:

2.14496666666667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypcitru

Metfile: w23155.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Va riable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

### 84 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TA PP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 02

- 01 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as Cypcitruben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:54

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 Aug ust 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23155.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:20

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.2072 0.2072 0.2071 0.2066 0.2058

0.1779

1962 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.346 1.341 1.122

1963 1. 66 1.66 1.66 1.656 1.651 1.539

1964 1.659 1.659 1.659 1.656 1.651 1.569

1965 1.632 1.632 1.631 1.629 1.626 1.548

1966 1.732 1.732 1.731 1.727 1.721 1.623

1967 1.71 1.71 1.709 1.707 1.704 1.623

1968 1.676 1.676 1.676 1.672 1.668 1.581

1969 1.726 1.726 1.725 1.721 1.716 1.619

1970 1.764 1.764 1.764 1.76 1.755 1.652

1971 1.704 1.704 1.703 1.7 1.695 1.628

1972 1.695 1.695 1.694 1.69 1.685 1.612

1973 1.828 1.828 1.828 1.824 1.818 1.709

1974 1.802 1.802 1.802 1.798 1.792 1.697

1975 1.778 1.778 1.778 1.775 1.77 1. 675

1976 1.719 1.719 1.719 1.716 1.711 1.62

1977 1.698 1.698 1.697 1.693 1.687 1.602

1978 4.841 4.841 4.839 4.824 4.804 4.138

1979 4.41 4.41 4.409 4.401 4.39 4.164

### 85 1980 3.931 3.931 3.93 3.924 3.915 3.736

1981 3.578 3.578 3.577 3.571 3.562 3.378

1982 3.232 3.232 3.231 3.226 3.219 3.055

1983 3.114 3.114 3.113 3.107 3.1 2.948

1984 2.89 2.89 2.889 2.884 2.877 2.738

1985 2.683 2.683 2.683 2.678 2.671 2.543

1986 2.512 2.512 2.512 2.507 2.501 2.383

1987 2.442 2.442 2.441 2.436 2.43 2.309

1988 2.291 2.291 2.29 2.28 5 2.278 2.157

1989 2.128 2.128 2.127 2.122 2.116 2.004

1990 2.001 2.001 2 1.995 1.989 1.882

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 4.841 4.841 4.839 4.824 4.804 4.164

0.0645161290322581 4.41 4.41 4.409 4.401 4.39 4.1 38

0.0967741935483871 3.931 3.931 3.93 3.924 3.915 3.736

0.129032258064516 3.578 3.578 3.577 3.571 3.562 3.378

0.161290322580645 3.232 3.232 3.231 3.226 3.219 3.055

0.193548387096774 3.114 3.114 3.113 3.107 3.1 2.948

0.225806451612903 2.89 2.89 2.889 2.884 2.877 2.738

0.258064516129032 2.683 2.683 2.683 2.678 2.671 2.543

0.290322580645161 2.512 2.512 2.512 2.507 2.501 2.383

0.32258064516129 2.442 2.442 2.441 2.436 2.43 2.309

0.354838709677419 2.291 2.291 2.29 2.285 2.278 2.157

0.387096774193548 2.128 2.128 2.127 2.122 2.116 2.004

0.419354838709677 2.001 2.001 2 1.995 1.989 1.882

0.451612903225806 1.828 1.828 1.828 1.824 1.818 1.709

0.483870967741936 1.802 1.802 1.802 1.798 1.792 1.697

0.516129032258065 1.778 1.778 1.778 1.775 1.77 1.675

0.548387096774194 1.7 64 1.764 1.764 1.76 1.755 1.652

0.580645161290323 1.732 1.732 1.731 1.727 1.721 1.628

0.612903225806452 1.726 1.726 1.725 1.721 1.716 1.623

0.645161290322581 1.719 1.719 1.719 1.716 1.711 1.623

0.67741935483871 1.71 1.71 1.709 1.707 1.704 1.62

0.7096774193 54839 1.704 1.704 1.703 1.7 1.695 1.619

0.741935483870968 1.698 1.698 1.697 1.693 1.687 1.612

0.774193548387097 1.695 1.695 1.694 1.69 1.685 1.602

0.806451612903226 1.676 1.676 1.676 1.672 1.668 1.581

0.838709677419355 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.656 1.651 1.569

0.87 0967741935484 1.659 1.659 1.659 1.656 1.651 1.548

0.903225806451613 1.632 1.632 1.631 1.629 1.626 1.539

0.935483870967742 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.346 1.341 1.122

0.967741935483871 0.2072 0.2072 0.2071 0.2066

0.2058 0.1779

0.1 3.8957 3.8957 3.8947 3.8887 3.8797

3 .7002

Average of yearly averages:

2.10106333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypcitru

Metfile: w23155.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt

### 86 EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cy prodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Ha lf

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 02

- 01 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or dele te line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Re s. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**California Citrus (Spanish lime, tropical fruits) Aerial, 4**

**applications**

stored as Cypcitru.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt mo dified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:54

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23155.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:20

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.931 1.833 1.532 1.241 1.142 0.8463

1962 4.856 4.646 4.269 3.503 3.188 2.428

1963 4.713 4.581 4.18 3.794 3.621 3.124

1964 4.754 4.654 4.353 4.059 3.95 3.471

1965 5.059 4.959 4.658 4.363 4.254 3.766

1966 5.74 5.616 5.226 4.824 4.678 4.121

1967 5.669 5 .57 5.268 4.974 4.862 4.33

### 87 1968 5.843 5.741 5.438 5.143 5.024 4.461

1969 5.983 5.883 5.609 5.376 5.259 4.67

1970 6.24 6.137 5.904 5.547 5.419 4.794

1971 6.251 6.152 5.85 5.555 5.436 4.868

1972 6.356 6.254 5.951 5.655 5.529 4.938

1973 6.705 6.589 6.281 5.95 1 5.808 5.114

1974 6.532 6.432 6.13 5.863 5.762 5.139

1975 6.674 6.567 6.239 5.921 5.801 5.172

1976 6.606 6.504 6.201 5.906 5.786 5.157

1977 6.591 6.489 6.186 5.891 5.795 5.175

1978 16.95 16.21 14.04 11.41 10.5 8.18

1979 9.277 9.176 8.873 8.58 8.448 7.615

1980 8.828 8.725 8.421 8.128 8.001 7.266

1981 8.553 8.451 8.148 7.855 7.729 6.949

1982 8.236 8.133 7.829 7.533 7.408 6.662

1983 8.376 8.253 7.944 7.54 7.39 6.65

1984 7.981 7.88 7.578 7.283 7.159 6.458

1985 7.83 7.728 7.425 7.129 7.007 6.322

1986 7.699 7.59 7 7.294 7.002 6.877 6.212

1987 7.722 7.617 7.313 7.031 6.896 6.19

1988 7.527 7.424 7.121 6.827 6.696 5.986

1989 7.32 7.218 6.914 6.619 6.488 5.799

1990 7.165 7.063 6.761 6.467 6.339 5.652

Sorted results

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

0.03225 8064516129 16.95 16.21 14.04 11.41 10.5 8.18

0.0645161290322581 9.277 9.176 8.873 8.58 8.448 7.615

0.0967741935483871 8.828 8.725 8.421 8.128 8.001 7.266

0.129032258064516 8.553 8.451 8.148 7.855 7.729 6.949

0.161290322580645 8.376 8.253 7.944 7.54 7.408 6 .662

0.193548387096774 8.236 8.133 7.829 7.533 7.39 6.65

0.225806451612903 7.981 7.88 7.578 7.283 7.159 6.458

0.258064516129032 7.83 7.728 7.425 7.129 7.007 6.322

0.290322580645161 7.722 7.617 7.313 7.031 6.896 6.212

0.32258064516129 7.699 7.597 7.294 7.00 2 6.877 6.19

0.354838709677419 7.527 7.424 7.121 6.827 6.696 5.986

0.387096774193548 7.32 7.218 6.914 6.619 6.488 5.799

0.419354838709677 7.165 7.063 6.761 6.467 6.339 5.652

0.451612903225806 6.705 6.589 6.281 5.951 5.808 5.175

0.483870967741936 6.674 6.56 7 6.239 5.921 5.801 5.172

0.516129032258065 6.606 6.504 6.201 5.906 5.795 5.157

0.548387096774194 6.591 6.489 6.186 5.891 5.786 5.139

0.580645161290323 6.532 6.432 6.13 5.863 5.762 5.114

0.612903225806452 6.356 6.254 5.951 5.655 5.529 4.938

0.6451612903225 81 6.251 6.152 5.904 5.555 5.436 4.868

0.67741935483871 6.24 6.137 5.85 5.547 5.419 4.794

0.709677419354839 5.983 5.883 5.609 5.376 5.259 4.67

0.741935483870968 5.843 5.741 5.438 5.143 5.024 4.461

0.774193548387097 5.74 5.616 5.268 4.974 4.862 4.33

0.80645 1612903226 5.669 5.57 5.226 4.824 4.678 4.121

0.838709677419355 5.059 4.959 4.658 4.363 4.254 3.766

0.870967741935484 4.856 4.654 4.353 4.059 3.95 3.471

0.903225806451613 4.754 4.646 4.269 3.794 3.621 3.124

0.935483870967742 4.713 4.581 4.18 3.503 3.188 2. 428

0.967741935483871 1.931 1.833 1.532 1.241 1.142 0.8463

### 88 0.1 8.8005 8.6976 8.3937 8.1007 7.9738

7.2343

Average of yearly averages: 5.25051

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypcitru

Metfile: w23155.dv f

PRZM scenario: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 to rr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysi s: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Da te Date 02

- 01 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Recor d 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as Cypcitruben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CA citrus_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:14:54

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w23155.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:20

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Da y 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

### 89 1961 0.8079 0.8079 0.8076 0.8056 0.8027

0.6938

1962 2.427 2.427 2.426 2.42 2.411 2.108

1963 3.179 3.179 3.178 3.171 3.161 2.945

1964 3.578 3.578 3.577 3.57 3.56 3.356

1965 3.882 3.882 3.881 3.874 3.863 3.653

1966 4.268 4.268 4.267 4. 256 4.242 3.995

1967 4.485 4.485 4.484 4.478 4.469 4.228

1968 4.646 4.646 4.644 4.634 4.621 4.366

1969 4.868 4.868 4.866 4.856 4.842 4.565

1970 5.021 5.021 5.019 5.009 4.994 4.7

1971 5.054 5.054 5.053 5.042 5.028 4.774

1972 5.147 5.146 5.145 5.133 5.118 4. 849

1973 5.354 5.354 5.352 5.34 5.324 5.011

1974 5.378 5.378 5.376 5.364 5.348 5.053

1975 5.407 5.407 5.405 5.395 5.381 5.086

1976 5.403 5.403 5.402 5.391 5.376 5.081

1977 5.414 5.414 5.412 5.399 5.386 5.094

1978 8.41 8.41 8.406 8.383 8.351 7.533

1979 8.04 8 8.048 8.045 8.03 8.008 7.584

1980 7.605 7.605 7.603 7.589 7.57 7.21

1981 7.333 7.333 7.331 7.317 7.297 6.906

1982 7.013 7.013 7.011 6.998 6.979 6.609

1983 6.928 6.928 6.926 6.913 6.896 6.55

1984 6.763 6.763 6.762 6.749 6.732 6.391

1985 6.609 6.609 6.607 6.594 6.575 6.246

1986 6.487 6.487 6.485 6.473 6.456 6.137

1987 6.466 6.465 6.464 6.45 6.431 6.103

1988 6.318 6.318 6.316 6.302 6.283 5.937

1989 6.109 6.109 6.107 6.092 6.072 5.74

1990 5.959 5.959 5.957 5.943 5.924 5.594

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 8.41 8.41 8.406 8.383 8.351 7.584

0.0645161290322581 8.048 8.048 8.045 8.03 8.008 7.533

0.0967741935483871 7.605 7.605 7.603 7.589 7.57 7.21

0.129032258064516 7.333 7.333 7.331 7.317 7.297 6.906

0.161290322580645 7.013 7.013 7.011 6.998 6.979 6.609

0.193548387096774 6.928 6.928 6.926 6.913 6.896 6.55

0.225806451612903 6.763 6.763 6.762 6.749 6.732 6.391

0.258064516129032 6.609 6.609 6.607 6.594 6.575 6.246

0.290322580645161 6.487 6.487 6.485 6.473 6.456 6.137

0.32 258064516129 6.466 6.465 6.464 6.45 6.431 6.103

0.354838709677419 6.318 6.318 6.316 6.302 6.283 5.937

0.387096774193548 6.109 6.109 6.107 6.092 6.072 5.74

0.419354838709677 5.959 5.959 5.957 5.943 5.924 5.594

0.451612903225806 5.414 5.414 5.412 5.399 5.386 5.094

0.483870967741936 5.407 5.407 5.405 5.395 5.381 5.086

0.516129032258065 5.403 5.403 5.402 5.391 5.376 5.081

0.548387096774194 5.378 5.378 5.376 5.364 5.348 5.053

0.580645161290323 5.354 5.354 5.352 5.34 5.324 5.011

0.612903225806452 5.147 5.146 5.14 5 5.133 5.118 4.849

0.645161290322581 5.054 5.054 5.053 5.042 5.028 4.774

0.67741935483871 5.021 5.021 5.019 5.009 4.994 4.7

0.709677419354839 4.868 4.868 4.866 4.856 4.842 4.565

0.741935483870968 4.646 4.646 4.644 4.634 4.621 4.366

### 90 0.774193548387097 4.485 4.485 4.484 4.478 4.469 4.228

0.806451612903226 4.268 4.268 4.267 4.256 4.242 3.995

0.838709677419355 3.882 3.882 3.881 3.874 3.863 3.653

0.870967741935484 3.578 3.578 3.577 3.57 3.56 3.356

0.903225806451613 3.179 3.179 3.178 3.171 3.161 2.945

0.935483870 967742 2.427 2.427 2.426 2.42 2.411 2.108

0.967741935483871 0.8079 0.8079 0.8076 0.8056

0.8027 0.6938

0.1 7.5778 7.5778 7.5758 7.5618 7.5427

7.1796

Average of yearly averages:

5.13659333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used fo r this run:

Output File: Cypcitru

Metfile: w23155.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAcitrus_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henr y 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aer obic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.367 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fractio n of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 02

- 01 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

### 91 **CA GRAPE AERIA L** 

stored as PdCAgrap.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:13:38

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w93193.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09 :04:24

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 3.028 2.856 2.415 1.894 1.669 0.6776

1962 4.173 3.999 3.558 3.029 2.797 1.84

1963 5.1 4.925 4.483 3.947 3.705 2.796

1964 5.855 5.679 5.237 4.698 4.457 3.617

1965 6. 636 6.459 6.015 5.471 5.229 4.377

1966 7.179 6.999 6.552 5.995 5.745 4.962

1967 7.796 7.615 7.169 6.608 6.35 5.586

1968 8.115 7.94 7.498 6.952 6.705 5.991

1969 8.929 8.75 8.306 7.745 7.483 6.764

1970 9.237 9.058 8.613 8.053 7.795 7.12

1971 9.55 9.368 8.921 8.353 8.093 7.4

1972 9.672 9.491 9.045 8.479 8.219 7.588

1973 9.998 9.819 9.373 8.81 8.549 7.859

1974 10.09 9.914 9.468 8.896 8.624 7.977

1975 10.29 10.11 9.665 9.1 8.828 8.123

1976 10.5 10.36 9.927 9.45 9.361 8.554

1977 10.97 10.79 10.34 9.76 9.492 8.878

1978 11.03 10.84 10.39 9.875 9.633 8.987

1979 11 10.81 10.37 9.786 9.506 8.886

1980 10.93 10.74 10.3 9.725 9.457 8.825

1981 10.77 10.59 10.14 9.56 9.292 8.701

1982 10.8 10.62 10.17 9.595 9.424 8.792

1983 11.24 11.05 10.6 9.996 9.722 9.12

1984 10.95 10.77 10.32 9.733 9.457 8.899

1985 10.8 10.62 10.17 9.608 9.348 8.757

1986 10.77 10.58 10.13 9.543 9.282 8.676

1987 10.95 10.76 10.31 9.726 9.451 8.81

1988 10.76 10.58 10.13 9.562 9.295 8.671

1989 10.7 10.52 10.07 9.504 9.284 8.631

1990 10.74 10.56 10.11 9.54 9. 272 8.651

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 11.24 11.05 10.6 9.996 9.722 9.12

0.0645161290322581 11.03 10.84 10.39 9.875 9.633 8.987

0.0967741935483871 11 10.81 10.37 9.786 9.506 8.899

0.129032258064516 10.97 10 .79 10.34 9.76 9.492 8.886

0.161290322580645 10.95 10.77 10.32 9.733 9.457 8.878

0.193548387096774 10.95 10.76 10.31 9.726 9.457 8.825

0.225806451612903 10.93 10.74 10.3 9.725 9.451 8.81

0.258064516129032 10.8 10.62 10.17 9.608 9.424 8.792

0.29032258064516 1 10.8 10.62 10.17 9.595 9.361 8.757

0.32258064516129 10.77 10.59 10.14 9.562 9.348 8.701

0.354838709677419 10.77 10.58 10.13 9.56 9.295 8.676

0.387096774193548 10.76 10.58 10.13 9.543 9.292 8.671

### 92 0.419354838709677 10.74 10.56 10.11 9.54 9.284 8.651

0.4516 12903225806 10.7 10.52 10.07 9.504 9.282 8.631

0.483870967741936 10.5 10.36 9.927 9.45 9.272 8.554

0.516129032258065 10.29 10.11 9.665 9.1 8.828 8.123

0.548387096774194 10.09 9.914 9.468 8.896 8.624 7.977

0.580645161290323 9.998 9.819 9.373 8.81 8.549 7.85 9

0.612903225806452 9.672 9.491 9.045 8.479 8.219 7.588

0.645161290322581 9.55 9.368 8.921 8.353 8.093 7.4

0.67741935483871 9.237 9.058 8.613 8.053 7.795 7.12

0.709677419354839 8.929 8.75 8.306 7.745 7.483 6.764

0.741935483870968 8.115 7.94 7.498 6.952 6.7 05 5.991

0.774193548387097 7.796 7.615 7.169 6.608 6.35 5.586

0.806451612903226 7.179 6.999 6.552 5.995 5.745 4.962

0.838709677419355 6.636 6.459 6.015 5.471 5.229 4.377

0.870967741935484 5.855 5.679 5.237 4.698 4.457 3.617

0.903225806451613 5.1 4.925 4.48 3 3.947 3.705 2.796

0.935483870967742 4.173 3.999 3.558 3.029 2.797 1.84

0.967741935483871 3.028 2.856 2.415 1.894 1.669 0.6776

0.1 10.997 10.808 10.367 9.7834 9.5046

8.8977

Average of yearly averages: 7.15052

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2 003

Data used for this run:

Output File: PdCAgrap

Metfile: w93193.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry' s Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.525 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift D RFT 0.039 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 13

- 07 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Inte rval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

### 93 UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as PdCAgrapben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:13:38

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w93193.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:24

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.174 1.173 1.164 1.133 1.123 0.4386

1962 2.234 2.234 2.233 2.229 2.224 1.612

1963 3.145 3.145 3.144 3.138 3.136 2.572

1964 3.979 3.979 3.978 3.965 3.943 3.398

1965 4.679 4.679 4.677 4.667 4.656 4.186

1966 5.229 5.227 5.207 5.194 5.179 4.765

1967 5.841 5.841 5.838 5.821 5.802 5.411

1968 6.256 6.256 6.253 6.229 6.204 5.79

1969 6.972 6.972 6.969 6.95 6.929 6.554

1970 7.297 7.297 7.293 7.274 7.252 6.93

1971 7.602 7 .602 7.599 7.578 7.554 7.248

1972 7.737 7.737 7.735 7.702 7.688 7.41

1973 8.052 8.051 8.048 8.027 8.003 7.717

1974 8.147 8.147 8.143 8.116 8.094 7.826

1975 8.327 8.327 8.323 8.299 8.273 7.974

1976 8.923 8.923 8.921 8.91 8.868 8.277

1977 9.036 9.036 9.032 9 .004 8.972 8.756

1978 9.138 9.138 9.134 9.11 9.083 8.828

1979 9.064 9.063 9.059 9.026 8.99 8.783

1980 9.002 9.001 8.997 8.969 8.936 8.699

1981 8.858 8.858 8.853 8.824 8.792 8.595

1982 8.941 8.94 8.926 8.907 8.899 8.586

1983 9.271 9.271 9.266 9.235 9.201 8. 969

1984 9.052 9.051 9.046 9.011 8.974 8.808

1985 8.898 8.898 8.895 8.869 8.839 8.642

1986 8.82 8.82 8.817 8.792 8.762 8.546

1987 8.975 8.975 8.971 8.943 8.91 8.669

1988 8.848 8.848 8.843 8.815 8.782 8.558

1989 8.78 8.78 8.776 8.763 8.742 8.501

1990 8.819 8.819 8.815 8.787 8.754 8.525

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 9.271 9.271 9.266 9.235 9.201 8.969

0.0645161290322581 9.138 9.138 9.134 9.11 9.083 8.828

0.0967741935483871 9.064 9.063 9.059 9.026 8.99 8.808

0.1 29032258064516 9.052 9.051 9.046 9.011 8.974 8.783

### 94 0.161290322580645 9.036 9.036 9.032 9.004 8.972 8.756

0.193548387096774 9.002 9.001 8.997 8.969 8.936 8.699

0.225806451612903 8.975 8.975 8.971 8.943 8.91 8.669

0.258064516129032 8.941 8.94 8.926 8.91 8.89 9 8.642

0.290322580645161 8.923 8.923 8.921 8.907 8.868 8.595

0.32258064516129 8.898 8.898 8.895 8.869 8.839 8.586

0.354838709677419 8.858 8.858 8.853 8.824 8.792 8.558

0.387096774193548 8.848 8.848 8.843 8.815 8.782 8.546

0.419354838709677 8.82 8.82 8.817 8.792 8.762 8.525

0.451612903225806 8.819 8.819 8.815 8.787 8.754 8.501

0.483870967741936 8.78 8.78 8.776 8.763 8.742 8.277

0.516129032258065 8.327 8.327 8.323 8.299 8.273 7.974

0.548387096774194 8.147 8.147 8.143 8.116 8.094 7.826

0.580645161290323 8.052 8.051 8.048 8.027 8.003 7.717

0.612903225806452 7.737 7.737 7.735 7.702 7.688 7.41

0.645161290322581 7.602 7.602 7.599 7.578 7.554 7.248

0.67741935483871 7.297 7.297 7.293 7.274 7.252 6.93

0.709677419354839 6.972 6.972 6.969 6.95 6.929 6.554

0.74193548387 0968 6.256 6.256 6.253 6.229 6.204 5.79

0.774193548387097 5.841 5.841 5.838 5.821 5.802 5.411

0.806451612903226 5.229 5.227 5.207 5.194 5.179 4.765

0.838709677419355 4.679 4.679 4.677 4.667 4.656 4.186

0.870967741935484 3.979 3.979 3.978 3.965 3.943 3.398

0.903225806451613 3.145 3.145 3.144 3.138 3.136 2.572

0.935483870967742 2.234 2.234 2.233 2.229 2.224 1.612

0.967741935483871 1.174 1.173 1.164 1.133 1.123 0.4386

0.1 9.0628 9.0618 9.0577 9.0245 8.9884

8.8055

Average of yearly averages:

6.98578666666 667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: PdCAgrap

Metfile: w93193.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comme nts

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.525 kg/ha

Application Ef ficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.039 fraction of application rate applied to pond

### 95 Application Date Date 13

- 07 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none non e, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**CA GRAPE GROUND**

stored as PdCAgrap.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:13:38

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16: 33:30

Metfile: w93193.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:24

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.7755 0.7314 0.6184 0.485 0.4276 0.1884

1962 1.187 1.142 1.029 0.8927 0.8323 0.5959

1963 1.468 1.423 1. 309 1.17 1.107 0.8931

1964 1.671 1.631 1.547 1.44 1.357 1.14

1965 1.973 1.928 1.814 1.672 1.609 1.409

1966 2.265 2.222 2.084 1.796 1.73 1.571

1967 2.388 2.341 2.226 2.079 2.011 1.841

1968 2.606 2.563 2.431 2.301 2.19 1.943

1969 2.958 2.911 2.797 2.649 2.57 9 2.443

1970 3.053 3.006 2.892 2.744 2.676 2.567

1971 3.163 3.115 3 2.849 2.781 2.642

1972 3.343 3.296 3.145 2.949 2.826 2.66

1973 3.299 3.253 3.138 2.989 2.92 2.779

1974 3.264 3.217 3.102 2.951 2.879 2.771

1975 3.303 3.257 3.142 2.993 2.921 2.771

1976 4.9 15 4.781 4.359 3.903 3.752 3.058

1977 3.805 3.757 3.641 3.486 3.415 3.316

1978 3.854 3.805 3.689 3.595 3.551 3.418

1979 3.802 3.754 3.639 3.482 3.406 3.296

1980 3.724 3.677 3.562 3.408 3.337 3.221

1981 3.592 3.544 3.428 3.274 3.203 3.096

1982 3.677 3.65 3. 518 3.473 3.423 3.147

1983 3.936 3.886 3.769 3.608 3.556 3.454

1984 3.751 3.702 3.587 3.432 3.355 3.271

1985 3.615 3.568 3.454 3.305 3.236 3.136

1986 3.851 3.795 3.385 3.227 3.159 3.06

1987 3.688 3.639 3.522 3.365 3.302 3.182

### 96 1988 3.513 3.466 3.351 3.2 3.1 3 3.008

1989 3.427 3.38 3.265 3.12 3.094 2.946

1990 3.448 3.401 3.286 3.134 3.063 2.942

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 4.915 4.781 4.359 3.903 3.752 3.454

0.0645161290322581 3.936 3.886 3.769 3.608 3.556 3.41 8

0.0967741935483871 3.854 3.805 3.689 3.595 3.551 3.316

0.129032258064516 3.851 3.795 3.641 3.486 3.423 3.296

0.161290322580645 3.805 3.757 3.639 3.482 3.415 3.271

0.193548387096774 3.802 3.754 3.587 3.473 3.406 3.221

0.225806451612903 3.751 3.702 3.562 3 .432 3.355 3.182

0.258064516129032 3.724 3.677 3.522 3.408 3.337 3.147

0.290322580645161 3.688 3.65 3.518 3.365 3.302 3.136

0.32258064516129 3.677 3.639 3.454 3.305 3.236 3.096

0.354838709677419 3.615 3.568 3.428 3.274 3.203 3.06

0.387096774193548 3.592 3. 544 3.385 3.227 3.159 3.058

0.419354838709677 3.513 3.466 3.351 3.2 3.13 3.008

0.451612903225806 3.448 3.401 3.286 3.134 3.094 2.946

0.483870967741936 3.427 3.38 3.265 3.12 3.063 2.942

0.516129032258065 3.343 3.296 3.145 2.993 2.921 2.779

0.548387096774194 3.303 3.257 3.142 2.989 2.92 2.771

0.580645161290323 3.299 3.253 3.138 2.951 2.879 2.771

0.612903225806452 3.264 3.217 3.102 2.949 2.826 2.66

0.645161290322581 3.163 3.115 3 2.849 2.781 2.642

0.67741935483871 3.053 3.006 2.892 2.744 2.676 2.567

0.70967741 9354839 2.958 2.911 2.797 2.649 2.579 2.443

0.741935483870968 2.606 2.563 2.431 2.301 2.19 1.943

0.774193548387097 2.388 2.341 2.226 2.079 2.011 1.841

0.806451612903226 2.265 2.222 2.084 1.796 1.73 1.571

0.838709677419355 1.973 1.928 1.814 1.672 1.609 1.40 9

0.870967741935484 1.671 1.631 1.547 1.44 1.357 1.14

0.903225806451613 1.468 1.423 1.309 1.17 1.107 0.8931

0.935483870967742 1.187 1.142 1.029 0.8927 0.8323 0.5959

0.967741935483871 0.7755 0.7314 0.6184 0.485 0.4276

0.1884

0.1 3.8537 3.804 3.6842 3.5841 3.5382 3.314

Average of yearly averages:

2.52551333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: PdCAgrap

Metfile: w93193.dvf

PRZM scenario: CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical N ame: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

### 97 Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.525 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 13

- 07 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for In dex Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as PdCAgrapben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004

at 08:13:38

EXAMS environment: pond2 98.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w93193.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:24

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.3588 0.3579 0.3465 0.3123 0.3026

0.1161

1962 0.6884 0.6 884 0.6882 0.6867 0.6851

0.5249

1963 0.9873 0.9873 0.9864 0.9767 0.9721

0.8192

1964 1.301 1.3 1.297 1.271 1.237 1.063

1965 1.471 1.471 1.47 1.467 1.464 1.355

1966 1.705 1.703 1.669 1.609 1.602 1.499

1967 1.888 1.888 1.887 1.881 1.875 1.788

1968 2.111 2.11 2.099 2.053 2.009 1.861

1969 2.459 2.459 2.458 2.451 2.443 2.352

1970 2.604 2.601 2.577 2.552 2.544 2.486

1971 2.669 2.669 2.668 2.66 2.651 2.603

1972 2.77 2.769 2.76 2.693 2.663 2.587

1973 2.805 2.805 2.804 2.796 2.787 2.745

1974 2.776 2.776 2.775 2.766 2 .757 2.72

1975 2.803 2.803 2.802 2.794 2.785 2.737

### 98 1976 3.382 3.382 3.381 3.364 3.294 2.889

1977 3.38 3.38 3.378 3.369 3.359 3.287

1978 3.418 3.418 3.416 3.407 3.398 3.346

1979 3.376 3.375 3.373 3.366 3.357 3.281

1980 3.242 3.242 3.24 3.229 3.221 3.187

198 1 3.133 3.132 3.132 3.127 3.122 3.073

1982 3.309 3.305 3.28 3.229 3.194 3.04

1983 3.445 3.445 3.444 3.438 3.431 3.39

1984 3.373 3.372 3.368 3.356 3.345 3.256

1985 3.193 3.193 3.193 3.186 3.178 3.112

1986 3.072 3.072 3.068 3.062 3.059 3.015

1987 3.192 3.192 3.191 3.186 3.18 3.133

1988 3.072 3.071 3.065 3.053 3.043 2.987

1989 2.961 2.961 2.96 2.954 2.949 2.908

1990 2.963 2.963 2.962 2.952 2.942 2.907

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 3.445 3.445 3.444 3.438 3.431 3 .39

0.0645161290322581 3.418 3.418 3.416 3.407 3.398 3.346

0.0967741935483871 3.382 3.382 3.381 3.369 3.359 3.287

0.129032258064516 3.38 3.38 3.378 3.366 3.357 3.281

0.161290322580645 3.376 3.375 3.373 3.364 3.345 3.256

0.193548387096774 3.373 3.372 3.368 3.356 3.294 3.187

0.225806451612903 3.309 3.305 3.28 3.229 3.221 3.133

0.258064516129032 3.242 3.242 3.24 3.229 3.194 3.112

0.290322580645161 3.193 3.193 3.193 3.186 3.18 3.073

0.32258064516129 3.192 3.192 3.191 3.186 3.178 3.04

0.354838709677419 3.133 3.1 32 3.132 3.127 3.122 3.015

0.387096774193548 3.072 3.072 3.068 3.062 3.059 2.987

0.419354838709677 3.072 3.071 3.065 3.053 3.043 2.908

0.451612903225806 2.963 2.963 2.962 2.954 2.949 2.907

0.483870967741936 2.961 2.961 2.96 2.952 2.942 2.889

0.516129032258 065 2.805 2.805 2.804 2.796 2.787 2.745

0.548387096774194 2.803 2.803 2.802 2.794 2.785 2.737

0.580645161290323 2.776 2.776 2.775 2.766 2.757 2.72

0.612903225806452 2.77 2.769 2.76 2.693 2.663 2.603

0.645161290322581 2.669 2.669 2.668 2.66 2.651 2.587

0.67 741935483871 2.604 2.601 2.577 2.552 2.544 2.486

0.709677419354839 2.459 2.459 2.458 2.451 2.443 2.352

0.741935483870968 2.111 2.11 2.099 2.053 2.009 1.861

0.774193548387097 1.888 1.888 1.887 1.881 1.875 1.788

0.806451612903226 1.705 1.703 1.669 1.609 1.60 2 1.499

0.838709677419355 1.471 1.471 1.47 1.467 1.464 1.355

0.870967741935484 1.301 1.3 1.297 1.271 1.237 1.063

0.903225806451613 0.9873 0.9873 0.9864 0.9767

0.9721 0.8192

0.935483870967742 0.6884 0.6884 0.6882 0.6867

0.6851 0.5249

0.967741935483871 0.358 8 0.3579 0.3465 0.3123

0.3026 0.1161

0.1 3.3818 3.3818 3.3807 3.3687 3.3588

3.2864

Average of yearly averages:

2.46890666666667

### 99 Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: PdCAgrap

Metfile: w93193.dvf

PRZM scenar io: CAgrapes_NirrigC.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 day s Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.525 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 13

- 07 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**OR berries ground**

stored as Cypallbe.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: O RberriesOP.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at

17:17:16

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w24232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:06:10

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 6 0 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 0.5966 0.5624 0.4596 0.3571 0.3145

0.1651

### 100 1962 0.8119 0.7776 0.6747 0.5688 0.5239

0.3856

1963 1.037 1.003 0.8995 0.792 0.7466 0.6039

1964 1.229 1.195 1.091 0.9821 0.9354 0.7877

1965 1.407 1.372 1.269 1.17 1.122 0.9729

1966 1.576 1. 541 1.438 1.325 1.277 1.132

1967 1.714 1.679 1.576 1.461 1.412 1.263

1968 1.849 1.814 1.726 1.616 1.562 1.428

1969 2.015 1.979 1.875 1.826 1.796 1.645

1970 2.251 2.216 2.112 1.994 1.94 1.793

1971 2.325 2.29 2.186 2.081 2.032 1.901

1972 2.72 2.67 2.544 2.36 2.282 2.058

1973 2.59 2.554 2.45 2.332 2.277 2.137

1974 2.654 2.619 2.515 2.396 2.341 2.192

1975 2.692 2.656 2.552 2.434 2.38 2.229

1976 2.726 2.69 2.586 2.47 2.416 2.256

1977 2.744 2.707 2.603 2.479 2.423 2.266

1978 3.077 3.025 2.916 2.713 2.627 2.386

19 79 2.891 2.855 2.75 2.63 2.572 2.453

1980 2.968 2.933 2.829 2.726 2.672 2.513

1981 3.055 3.031 2.925 2.861 2.8 2.625

1982 3.143 3.107 3.003 2.88 2.821 2.666

1983 3.119 3.082 2.978 2.859 2.807 2.658

1984 3.116 3.08 2.987 2.939 2.885 2.705

1985 3.732 3.691 3 .493 3.26 3.181 2.901

1986 3.4 3.364 3.259 3.135 3.08 2.923

1987 3.382 3.349 3.241 3.11 3.103 2.955

1988 3.462 3.426 3.322 3.202 3.14 2.982

1989 3.388 3.351 3.247 3.123 3.063 2.915

1990 3.357 3.329 3.225 3.102 3.039 2.882

Sorted results

Prob. Peak 96 hr 2 1 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

0.032258064516129 3.732 3.691 3.493 3.26 3.181 2.982

0.0645161290322581 3.462 3.426 3.322 3.202 3.14 2.955

0.0967741935483871 3.4 3.364 3.259 3.135 3.103 2.923

0.129032258064516 3.388 3.351 3.247 3.123 3.08 2.915

0.16129032258064 5 3.382 3.349 3.241 3.11 3.063 2.901

0.193548387096774 3.357 3.329 3.225 3.102 3.039 2.882

0.225806451612903 3.143 3.107 3.003 2.939 2.885 2.705

0.258064516129032 3.119 3.082 2.987 2.88 2.821 2.666

0.290322580645161 3.116 3.08 2.978 2.861 2.807 2.658

0.322 58064516129 3.077 3.031 2.925 2.859 2.8 2.625

0.354838709677419 3.055 3.025 2.916 2.726 2.672 2.513

0.387096774193548 2.968 2.933 2.829 2.713 2.627 2.453

0.419354838709677 2.891 2.855 2.75 2.63 2.572 2.386

0.451612903225806 2.744 2.707 2.603 2.479 2.423 2. 266

0.483870967741936 2.726 2.69 2.586 2.47 2.416 2.256

0.516129032258065 2.72 2.67 2.552 2.434 2.38 2.229

0.548387096774194 2.692 2.656 2.544 2.396 2.341 2.192

0.580645161290323 2.654 2.619 2.515 2.36 2.282 2.137

0.612903225806452 2.59 2.554 2.45 2.332 2. 277 2.058

0.645161290322581 2.325 2.29 2.186 2.081 2.032 1.901

0.67741935483871 2.251 2.216 2.112 1.994 1.94 1.793

0.709677419354839 2.015 1.979 1.875 1.826 1.796 1.645

0.741935483870968 1.849 1.814 1.726 1.616 1.562 1.428

0.774193548387097 1.714 1.679 1.5 76 1.461 1.412 1.263

### 101 0.806451612903226 1.576 1.541 1.438 1.325 1.277 1.132

0.838709677419355 1.407 1.372 1.269 1.17 1.122 0.9729

0.870967741935484 1.229 1.195 1.091 0.9821 0.9354 0.7877

0.903225806451613 1.037 1.003 0.8995 0.792 0.7466 0.6039

0.93548387096 7742 0.8119 0.7776 0.6747 0.5688

0.5239 0.3856

0.967741935483871 0.5966 0.5624 0.4596 0.3571

0.3145 0.1651

0.1 3.3988 3.3627 3.2578 3.1338 3.1007

2.9222

Average of yearly averages:

2.02597333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data us ed for this run:

Output File: Cypallbe

Metfile: w24232.dvf

PRZM scenario: ORberriesOP.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henr y 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aer obic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.489 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 07

- 05 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IP SCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as Cypallbeben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

### 102 PRZM environment: ORberriesOP.txt mod ified Satday, 12 October 2002 at

17:17:16

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w24232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:06:10

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yea rly

1961 0.2138 0.2135 0.2114 0.2093 0.2085

0.1212

1962 0.4444 0.4443 0.4423 0.4333 0.4276 0.335

1963 0.6446 0.6446 0.6444 0.6407 0.6357 0.556

1964 0.8229 0.8228 0.8226 0.8207 0.8184

0.7425

1965 1.008 1.008 1.007 1.005 1.002 0.9238

1966 1.164 1.164 1.164 1 .161 1.158 1.086

1967 1.299 1.299 1.298 1.295 1.29 1.22

1968 1.465 1.465 1.464 1.463 1.46 1.368

1969 1.699 1.699 1.697 1.694 1.69 1.578

1970 1.829 1.828 1.828 1.823 1.818 1.752

1971 1.918 1.918 1.917 1.916 1.914 1.847

1972 2.124 2.124 2.123 2.118 2.111 2.0 04

1973 2.165 2.165 2.164 2.159 2.153 2.09

1974 2.228 2.228 2.227 2.222 2.216 2.151

1975 2.265 2.265 2.265 2.26 2.253 2.188

1976 2.3 2.3 2.299 2.294 2.288 2.22

1977 2.307 2.307 2.306 2.301 2.294 2.227

1978 2.458 2.458 2.457 2.451 2.443 2.329

1979 2.463 2.4 63 2.462 2.456 2.449 2.403

1980 2.553 2.553 2.552 2.546 2.539 2.468

1981 2.661 2.661 2.66 2.654 2.646 2.558

1982 2.711 2.711 2.71 2.704 2.696 2.63

1983 2.688 2.688 2.688 2.683 2.677 2.617

1984 2.751 2.751 2.75 2.743 2.735 2.65

1985 3.005 3.005 3.004 2.996 2.987 2.825

1986 2.969 2.969 2.968 2.962 2.955 2.892

1987 3.004 3.004 3.003 2.996 2.987 2.893

1988 3.031 3.031 3.03 3.023 3.014 2.947

1989 2.956 2.956 2.955 2.949 2.94 2.879

1990 2.93 2.93 2.929 2.922 2.913 2.847

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 3.031 3.031 3.03 3.023 3.014 2.947

0.0645161290322581 3.005 3.005 3.004 2.996 2.987 2.893

0.0967741935483871 3.004 3.004 3.003 2.996 2.987 2.892

0.129032258064516 2.969 2.969 2.968 2.962 2.955 2.879

0.161290322580645 2.9 56 2.956 2.955 2.949 2.94 2.847

0.193548387096774 2.93 2.93 2.929 2.922 2.913 2.825

0.225806451612903 2.751 2.751 2.75 2.743 2.735 2.65

0.258064516129032 2.711 2.711 2.71 2.704 2.696 2.63

0.290322580645161 2.688 2.688 2.688 2.683 2.677 2.617

0.322580645161 29 2.661 2.661 2.66 2.654 2.646 2.558

0.354838709677419 2.553 2.553 2.552 2.546 2.539 2.468

0.387096774193548 2.463 2.463 2.462 2.456 2.449 2.403

0.419354838709677 2.458 2.458 2.457 2.451 2.443 2.329

0.451612903225806 2.307 2.307 2.306 2.301 2.294 2.227

### 103 0. 483870967741936 2.3 2.3 2.299 2.294 2.288 2.22

0.516129032258065 2.265 2.265 2.265 2.26 2.253 2.188

0.548387096774194 2.228 2.228 2.227 2.222 2.216 2.151

0.580645161290323 2.165 2.165 2.164 2.159 2.153 2.09

0.612903225806452 2.124 2.124 2.123 2.118 2.111 2 .004

0.645161290322581 1.918 1.918 1.917 1.916 1.914 1.847

0.67741935483871 1.829 1.828 1.828 1.823 1.818 1.752

0.709677419354839 1.699 1.699 1.697 1.694 1.69 1.578

0.741935483870968 1.465 1.465 1.464 1.463 1.46 1.368

0.774193548387097 1.299 1.299 1.298 1. 295 1.29 1.22

0.806451612903226 1.164 1.164 1.164 1.161 1.158 1.086

0.838709677419355 1.008 1.008 1.007 1.005 1.002 0.9238

0.870967741935484 0.8229 0.8228 0.8226 0.8207

0.8184 0.7425

0.903225806451613 0.6446 0.6446 0.6444 0.6407

0.6357 0.556

0.935483870967 742 0.4444 0.4443 0.4423 0.4333

0.4276 0.335

0.967741935483871 0.2138 0.2135 0.2114 0.2093

0.2085 0.1212

0.1 3.0005 3.0005 2.9995 2.9926 2.9838

2.8907

Average of yearly averages: 1.97825

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypallbe

Metfile: w24232.dvf

PRZM scenario: ORberriesOP.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 a tm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil M etabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.489 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of applica tion rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 07

- 05 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

### 104 UPT KF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

**OR berries aerial**

stored as Cypallbe.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: ORberriesOP.tx t modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at

17:17:16

EXAMS environment: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w24232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:06:10

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 2.986 2.815 2.301 1.782 1.562 0.8045

1962 3.974 3.802 3.288 2.76 2.535 1.783

1963 4.892 4.719 4.204 3.67 3.444 2.685

1964 5.711 5.538 5.022 4.48 4.247 3.483

1965 6.458 6.284 5.769 5.232 4.996 4.225

1966 7.13 6.956 6.439 5.882 5.646 4.879

1967 7 .72 7.545 7.028 6.46 6.219 5.436

1968 8.245 8.07 7.556 7.009 6.762 5.999

1969 8.778 8.601 8.083 7.573 7.346 6.586

1970 9.362 9.187 8.669 8.09 7.837 7.067

1971 9.75 9.574 9.057 8.502 8.255 7.486

1972 10.41 10.22 9.665 9.037 8.758 7.912

1973 10.55 10.37 9.85 6 9.279 9.021 8.254

1974 10.84 10.67 10.15 9.566 9.309 8.524

1975 11.08 10.91 10.39 9.812 9.555 8.769

1976 11.33 11.15 10.63 10.06 9.803 9.009

1977 11.56 11.39 10.87 10.28 10.02 9.219

1978 12.02 11.83 11.31 10.63 10.33 9.47

1979 11.99 11.81 11.29 10.7 10.4 3 9.686

1980 12.2 12.02 11.51 10.94 10.68 9.879

1981 12.36 12.19 11.67 11.18 10.92 10.11

1982 12.6 12.42 11.9 11.3 11.03 10.24

1983 12.63 12.45 11.93 11.35 11.09 10.3

1984 12.71 12.53 12.01 11.5 11.24 10.42

1985 12.88 12.71 12.3 11.88 11.59 10.7

1986 13.12 12.94 12.42 11.82 11.55 10.76

1987 13.08 12.91 12.38 11.79 11.59 10.82

1988 13.24 13.06 12.54 11.96 11.68 10.88

1989 13.17 13 12.48 11.88 11.61 10.83

1990 13.18 13.01 12.49 11.89 11.61 10.81

Sorted results

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

0.0 32258064516129 13.24 13.06 12.54 11.96 11.68 10.88

0.0645161290322581 13.18 13.01 12.49 11.89 11.61 10.83

0.0967741935483871 13.17 13 12.48 11.88 11.61 10.82

### 105 0.129032258064516 13.12 12.94 12.42 11.88 11.59 10.81

0.161290322580645 13.08 12.91 12.38 11.82 11 .59 10.76

0.193548387096774 12.88 12.71 12.3 11.79 11.55 10.7

0.225806451612903 12.71 12.53 12.01 11.5 11.24 10.42

0.258064516129032 12.63 12.45 11.93 11.35 11.09 10.3

0.290322580645161 12.6 12.42 11.9 11.3 11.03 10.24

0.32258064516129 12.36 12.19 11.67 11 .18 10.92 10.11

0.354838709677419 12.2 12.02 11.51 10.94 10.68 9.879

0.387096774193548 12.02 11.83 11.31 10.7 10.43 9.686

0.419354838709677 11.99 11.81 11.29 10.63 10.33 9.47

0.451612903225806 11.56 11.39 10.87 10.28 10.02 9.219

0.483870967741936 11.33 11. 15 10.63 10.06 9.803 9.009

0.516129032258065 11.08 10.91 10.39 9.812 9.555 8.769

0.548387096774194 10.84 10.67 10.15 9.566 9.309 8.524

0.580645161290323 10.55 10.37 9.856 9.279 9.021 8.254

0.612903225806452 10.41 10.22 9.665 9.037 8.758 7.912

0.64516129032 2581 9.75 9.574 9.057 8.502 8.255 7.486

0.67741935483871 9.362 9.187 8.669 8.09 7.837 7.067

0.709677419354839 8.778 8.601 8.083 7.573 7.346 6.586

0.741935483870968 8.245 8.07 7.556 7.009 6.762 5.999

0.774193548387097 7.72 7.545 7.028 6.46 6.219 5.436

0.806 451612903226 7.13 6.956 6.439 5.882 5.646 4.879

0.838709677419355 6.458 6.284 5.769 5.232 4.996 4.225

0.870967741935484 5.711 5.538 5.022 4.48 4.247 3.483

0.903225806451613 4.892 4.719 4.204 3.67 3.444 2.685

0.935483870967742 3.974 3.802 3.288 2.76 2.535 1 .783

0.967741935483871 2.986 2.815 2.301 1.782 1.562 0.8045

0.1 13.165 12.994 12.474 11.88 11.608 10.819

Average of yearly averages: 7.90085

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypallbe

Metfile: w24232.dv f

PRZM scenario: ORberriesOP.txt

EXAMS environment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

So lubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 1745 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.489 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.05 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Dat e 07

- 05 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

### 106 Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

stored as Cypallbeben.out

Chemical: Cyprodinil

PRZM environment: ORberriesOP.txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at

17:17:16

EXAMS environme nt: pond298.exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at

16:33:30

Metfile: w24232.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:06:10

Benthic segment concentrations (ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly

1961 1.028 1.028 1.028 1.026 1.023 0.5959

1962 1.987 1.987 1.986 1.982 1.977 1.57

1963 2.888 2.888 2.887 2.881 2.873 2.478

1964 3.687 3.687 3.686 3.677 3.667 3.282

1965 4.43 4.43 4.429 4.418 4.405 4.023

1966 5.082 5.082 5.08 5.068 5.053 4.684

1967 5.654 5.654 5.652 5.637 5.618 5.252

1968 6.184 6.184 6.182 6. 167 6.154 5.792

1969 6.774 6.774 6.772 6.757 6.739 6.375

1970 7.274 7.274 7.271 7.253 7.231 6.883

1971 7.678 7.678 7.675 7.657 7.636 7.289

1972 8.151 8.151 8.148 8.128 8.103 7.716

1973 8.456 8.456 8.453 8.432 8.408 8.066

1974 8.738 8.738 8.735 8.715 8.69 8 .346

1975 8.981 8.98 8.978 8.957 8.932 8.588

1976 9.223 9.223 9.22 9.2 9.174 8.827

1977 9.439 9.439 9.436 9.415 9.387 9.041

1978 9.722 9.721 9.718 9.694 9.664 9.279

1979 9.877 9.877 9.874 9.849 9.819 9.499

1980 10.1 10.1 10.1 10.07 10.04 9.694

1981 10.32 1 0.32 10.32 10.3 10.27 9.907

1982 10.47 10.47 10.46 10.44 10.41 10.07

1983 10.51 10.51 10.51 10.49 10.46 10.13

1984 10.65 10.65 10.65 10.62 10.59 10.23

1985 10.98 10.98 10.97 10.95 10.91 10.49

1986 10.99 10.99 10.99 10.97 10.93 10.61

1987 11.01 11 11 10.98 10.96 10.63

1988 11.12 11.12 11.12 11.09 11.05 10.72

1989 11.05 11.05 11.05 11.02 10.99 10.67

1990 11.06 11.06 11.05 11.03 10.99 10.65

Sorted results

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

0.032258064516129 11.12 11.12 11.12 11.09 11.05 10.72

0.0645 161290322581 11.06 11.06 11.05 11.03 10.99 10.67

0.0967741935483871 11.05 11.05 11.05 11.02 10.99 10.65

0.129032258064516 11.01 11 11 10.98 10.96 10.63

0.161290322580645 10.99 10.99 10.99 10.97 10.93 10.61

0.193548387096774 10.98 10.98 10.97 10.95 10.91 10 .49

0.225806451612903 10.65 10.65 10.65 10.62 10.59 10.23

0.258064516129032 10.51 10.51 10.51 10.49 10.46 10.13

0.290322580645161 10.47 10.47 10.46 10.44 10.41 10.07

0.32258064516129 10.32 10.32 10.32 10.3 10.27 9.907

0.354838709677419 10.1 10.1 10.1 10.07 10.04 9.694

0.387096774193548 9.877 9.877 9.874 9.849 9.819 9.499

0.419354838709677 9.722 9.721 9.718 9.694 9.664 9.279

0.451612903225806 9.439 9.439 9.436 9.415 9.387 9.041

0.483870967741936 9.223 9.223 9.22 9.2 9.174 8.827

0.516129032258065 8.981 8.98 8 .978 8.957 8.932 8.588

0.548387096774194 8.738 8.738 8.735 8.715 8.69 8.346

0.580645161290323 8.456 8.456 8.453 8.432 8.408 8.066

0.612903225806452 8.151 8.151 8.148 8.128 8.103 7.716

0.645161290322581 7.678 7.678 7.675 7.657 7.636 7.289

0.67741935483871 7 .274 7.274 7.271 7.253 7.231 6.883

0.709677419354839 6.774 6.774 6.772 6.757 6.739 6.375

0.741935483870968 6.184 6.184 6.182 6.167 6.154 5.792

0.774193548387097 5.654 5.654 5.652 5.637 5.618 5.252

0.806451612903226 5.082 5.082 5.08 5.068 5.053 4.684

0.8387 09677419355 4.43 4.43 4.429 4.418 4.405 4.023

0.870967741935484 3.687 3.687 3.686 3.677 3.667 3.282

0.903225806451613 2.888 2.888 2.887 2.881 2.873 2.478

0.935483870967742 1.987 1.987 1.986 1.982 1.977 1.57

0.967741935483871 1.028 1.028 1.028 1.026 1.023 0 .5959

0.1 11.046 11.045 11.045 11.016 10.987

10.648

Average of yearly averages:

7.71289666666667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl

- 8

- August

- 2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Cypallbe

Metfile: w24232.dvf

PRZM scenario: ORberriesOP.txt

EXAMS envir onment file: pond298.exv

Chemical Name: Cyprodinil

Description Variable Name Value Units Comments

Molecular weight mwt 225.29 g/mol

Henry's Law Const. henry 7.04e

- 8 atm

- m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure vapr 3.80e

- 6 torr

Solubility sol 130 mg/L

Kd Kd mg/L

Koc Koc 17 45 mg/L

Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half

- life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 382.3 days Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 44.3 days Halfife

Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half

- life

### 108 Method: CAM 2 integer Se e PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm

Application Rate: TAPP 0.489 kg/ha

Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.95 fraction

Spray Drift DRFT 0.05 fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date Date 07

- 05 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd

- mm or dd

- mmm

I nterval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single

app.

Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 1

UPTKF 0

Record 18: PLVKRT 0

PLDKRT 0

FEXTRC 0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond

Flag for ru noff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or

total(average of entire run)

### 109 

### Appendix B: Environmental Fate Studies

Table B

- 1. Selected data reviews from data evaluation records (DERs) for photolysis,

anaerobic aquatic and mobility stud ies.

Study Review Summary 1

Photolysis

in natural

waters Phototransformation of dual labelled cyprodinil was studied in unsterilized natural bond water

system from Denton, Texas (MRID 439084

- 22). No significant transformation of cyprodinil took

place in th e dark controls as parent compound ranged from 97

- 100% during the 30

- day study. In

contrast, Phototransformation of cyprodinil in the irradiated samples followed a biphasic pattern

with very slow transformation taking place during the first nine days of i rradiation (parent

decreased to 93% of the applied), followed by an increased rate from day 9 to 30 (parent decreased

to 14% of the applied). A DT 50 of 22 days was reported based on a visual extrapolation from a

curve fitted to the data The authors of the study suggested that the biphasic transformation pattern

was the result of autocatalytic indirect photolysis mechanism, but did not expand on this

hypothesis. Therefore, previous review 1 concluded that “based on calculated DT 50 and observed

transformation pattern, photolysis of cyprodinil would not be considered a major pathway of

dissipation in natural waters”.

Photolysis

on Soils Cyprodinil present on soil surfaces did not degrade significantly by exposure to photon energy in

two studies conducted using the same soil and two different 14 C

- label positions (MRIDs 43908

- 23

and 439084

- 24). In these studies, irradiated half

- lives were 64

- 70 days compared to 86 to 160 days

for the dark controls. Calculated half

- lives of 64

- 70 days were largely attributed to mic robial

processes. Thus, it was concluded that photo degradation on wet soil surfaces is not a major

transformation process for cyprodinil.

Anaerobic

aquatic Concentrations of cyprodinil in the whole system declined marginally in the 369 days of the study,

from 94.4% to 89.6% of quantified radioactivity. A half

- life of 3,465 days was estimated for the

system assuming first order kinetics. No transformation products were quantified at levels greater

than 0.3% of initial measured dose in water, sediment or a s volatile organic compounds (MRID

441864

- 06). Redox potentials and dissolved O 2 of water measured just above the water/sediment

interface indicated anaerobic conditions throughout the study. Mean recovery of radioactivity was

97.4±2.8% with values from 92 .8

- 101.9% of applied amounts. Parent compound was determined

to account for >98% of the radioactivity in water and > 94% of the radioactivity in the sediment.

Mobility Mobility of Degradates:

(a) CGA

- 249287: was shown to be mobile to moderately mobile in a loamy sand soil from TX, a

clay loam soil and a loam soil from NY, in a sandy loam soil from CA, and a sandy soil from GA.

Adsorption K d ’s were 0.31, 3.48, 3.88, 5.23, and 6.97 for the loamy sand, clay loam, loam, sandy

loam and sand soils, respect ively. Corresponding adsorption K

oc 's were 180, 173, 260, 650, and

867 (MRID 439084

- 31).

(b) CGA

- 321915: was shown to be highly mobile to moderately mobile in five soils from CA, GA,

NY and TX. Adsorption K d ’s were 0.25, 0.99, 1.14, 1.45, and 2.52 for th e loamy sand, clay loam,

loam, sand and sandy loam soils, respectively. Corresponding adsorption K

oc 's were 147, 50, 76,

180 and 313 (MRID 439084

- 32).

(c) CGA

- 275535: was shown to be slightly mobile in six soils from CA, GA, NY and TX.

Adsorption K d ’s w ere 4.39, 8.31, 26.7, 32.1 and 33.3, 60.3 in a loamy sand, sandy loam, sandy

soil, two loamy soils, and sandy loam soils, respectively. Corresponding adsorption K

oc 's were

1,810

- 7,500 (MRID 441864

- 07).

1 Summary and conclusions were derived from US EPA/C anada PMRA Joint Review of March 1998

### 110 Table B

- 2 Summary of the soil characteristics, results and calculated half

- lives for four

aerobic soil studies.

Item Study MRID Number

439084

- 25 439084

- 26 437090

- 46 437090

- 45

Soil Collombey loamy sand Hanford san dy loam

Characteristics pH 7.2 and 1.9% organic carbon pH 7.2 and 1.9% organic carbon

14 C label position Pyrimidinyl

- ring Phenyl

- ring Pyrimidinyl

- ring Phenyl

- ring

Study length 180 days 154 days 363 days 364 days

System Open flow

- through Open flow

- through Static Static

Material Balance 97.7 ± 1.3% 96.4 ± 4.3% 100.2 ± 2.6% 96.5 ± 2.8%

Parent Decreased steadily

to 5% @

termination Decreased steadily

to 12% @

termination Decreased steadily

to 43% @

termination Decreased steadily

to 34% @

termination

Bound residue Increased steadily

from <1% @ day 0

through 42% @ day

28 to reach a Max.

of 71% @

termination Increased steadily

from 1% @ day 0

through 29% @ day

28 to reach a Max.

of 67% @

termination Increased from 3%

@ day 0 through

25% @ day 28 to

rea ch a Max. of

31% @ termination Increased from 3%

@ day 0 through

26% @ day 28 to

reach a Max. of

42% @ termination

Volatilized

materials CO 2 : Max. 14% @

termination CO 2 : Max. 18% @

termination CO 2 : Max. 3% @

termination and

volatile organic

compounds

(VOC s): Maxi. <1% CO 2 : Max. 10% @

termination and

volatile organic

compounds

(VOCs): Maxi. <1%

Calculated t 1/2 (Calculated by

EFED except as

indicated) 40 days (R 2 = 0.96) 50 days (R 2 = 0.999) 22 days for the 1 st

21 days (1 st / rapid

phase, R 2 = 0.88);

433 day s from 28

- 363 days (2 nd /slow

phase, R 2 = 0.65);

and 365 days for the

whole period 1

. 31 days for the 1 st

28 days (1 st /rapid

phase, R 2 = 0.98);

433 days from 59

- 364 days (2 nd /slow

phase, R 2 = 0.59);

and 267 days for the

whole period 1

.

Pathway Refer to Fig ure B

- 1 in this Appendix. B

1 Summary and calculations stated derived mainly from US EPA/Canada PMRA Joint Review of March

1998



### Summary of Abiotic and Biotic Fate Studies

The individual fate studies are summarized hereunder. More details for most of th e fate studies

are included in Tables B

- 1 to B

- 6.

### 111 Hydrolysis

In a 32

- day study (MRID 437090

- 44) cyprodinil was found to be stable to hydrolysis at pH 5, 7

and 9. In the laboratory ≥93.9% of the radioactivity remained as parent 32 days after dosing.

Because cyprodinil did not hydrolyze or hydrolyzed very slowly in the buffer solutions, a half

- life

at each pH could not be determined. The results indicate that hydrol ysis would not be considered

a major environmental route of dissipation for this chemical.

Phototransformation

Aqueous photodegradation was examined in a natural unsterilized water and on surface soil

systems irradiated with artificial light sources (MRID 439084

- 22 and MRIDs 439084

- 23/24). A

DT 50 

### of 22 days was reported for cyprodinil in the aqueous system and half

- lives of 64

- 70 days

were reported for the soil system. Phototransformation was not considered to be a major pathway

of dissipation of cyprodinil in both systems. This conclusion was based on observed

transformation pattern in the aqueous system and on the possibility that microbial rather than

photodegradation had occurred on the soil surfaces (Table B

- 1, Append ix B).

Aerobic soil metabolism

Two soils were used in conducting four aerobic soil studies using cyprodinil labeled at two

different 14 

### C

- positions: one in the phenyl

- ring and the other in the pyrimidinyl

- ring. The two soils

were Collombey loamy sand (MRID 439084

- 25/26) and Hanford sandy loam (MRIDs 437090

- 46/45). EFED calculated first order half

- lives for Collombey soil were 40 and 50 days whereas

registrant suggested biphasic degradation for Hanford soil. In the latter soil, registrant calculated

first order half

- lives were in the range of 22

- 31 days for the 3

- 4

- week 1 st 

### rapid phase and 433

days for the 2 nd 

### slow phase; half

- lives ranged from 365

- 267 days for the whole period of the two

experiments. Close examination of data presented for the last two studies revealed the existence

of large differences in residue data between replicates for at least three sample intervals. These

differences may have been a result of using a static system in the experiment for Hanford soil

compared to the continuous open flow system used in Collombey soil. Therefore, EFED

calculated first order half

- lives of 40 and 50 days were considered to be more representative for

the natural environment and were used for modeling.

In the four aerobic soil experiments, the total maximum transformation products reached

concentrations of 4

- 26% after 21 to 270 days posttreatment and declined to concentration levels

of 3

- 23% at the termination of the experiments. Major identified degradates included pyrimid inyl

amine (CGA

- 249287) and three types of hydroxylated cyprodinil: CGA

- 275535, CGA

- 304075,

and CGA

- 304076. Individual concentrations for the most major degradates were not determined,

however total concentration data suggested that concentrations were <10 % of the applied parent

except CGA

- 249287 which reached 11.2% at study termination (363 days).

Details reported on half

- lives and transformation products are shown in Tables B

- 2 and B

- 3

(Appendix B) while the structure of the transformation products as w ell as the suggested

degradation pathways are shown in Figure B

- 1.

Anaerobic soil metabolism

Cyprodinil did not degrade when incubated under anaerobic conditions after a period of aerobic

pre

- incubation. Calculated ha lf

- lives for the aerobic pre

- incubation period were 98 days (R 2



### =

### 112 0.83) from MRID 439084

- 27 and 16 days (R 2 

### = 0.76) from MRID 439084

- 28.

Aerobic and anaerobic sediment/water systems

The fate of cyprodinil was examined using sediment/water systems at aerobic conditions. Three

sediment/water systems were used including one river system (the Rhine river, Switzerland) and

one pond system from Switzerland (MRIDs 455187

- 01/02) in addition to one pond system from

Denton, Texas (MRIDs 439084

- 29/30). For each system, parent cyprodinil was labeled in the

phenyl

- ring for one experiment and in the pyrimidinyl

- ring in the other, a total of six

experiments.

The transformation rates of cyprodinil in the to tal sediment/water system were determined and

appeared to follow first order kinetics, with estimated t 1/2 

### of 106

- 126 days for the Rhine river

system, 165

- 178 days for the pond system from Switzerland, and 612 days for the pond system

from Denton, Texas. P yrimidinyl

- labeled cyprodinil was considered to be stable in the same pond

system Texas as only minimum degradation occurred (Tables B

- 4 and B

- 5, Appendix B).

In the examined aquatic systems, cyprodinil partitioned from the water column with a water

colum n residence half

- life of 3 days in the Rhine river sediment/water system, and 5 and 8

- 29

days in the pond systems from Switzerland and Texas, respectively. Partitioning of cyprodinil

from the water column into the sediment is shown for the Texas pond syste m in Figure B

- 2

(Appendix B).

Transformation products were reported to form in some of the water and sediment phases. Some

of these products were identified in the sediment phase such as CGA

- 249287 and CGA

- 275535

(6

- 14% and <1% of the applied radioactivi ty, respectively) and some were not identified in both

the sediment and the water phases (<1% and <7% of the applied radioactivity, respectively).

Details reported on the aerobic aquatic studies are included in Tables B

- 4 and B

- 5 (Appendix B).

In an anaer obic aquatic study, concentrations of cyprodinil in the whole system declined

marginally in the 369 days of the study, from 94.4% to 89.6% of quantified radioactivity. A half

life of 3,465 days was estimated for the system assuming first order kinetics. Mo re details

reported on the anaerobic aquatic study are included in Table B

- 1 (Appendix B).

Mobility

Parent cyprodinil showed to be slightly mobile and to have a high affinity for sorption to soil

particles in batch equilibrium studie s with four soils. Adsorption was correlated with organic

matter content of the soils. The sandy loam soil had a K d 

### of 16.3 and a K

oc 

### of 2,030. The sandy

soil showed a K d 

### of 14.2 and a K

oc 

### of 1,770. The clay loam soil had a K d 

### of 31.2 and a K

oc 

### of

1,550 and the loam soil had a K d 

### of 24.3 and a K

oc 

### of 1,630 (MRID 437090

- 47). Varied results

was obtained for the major cyprodinil transformation products. These results are summarized in

Table B

- 1 (Appendix B).

In two soil column leaching experiments, radioact ive residues of cyprodinil were not very mobile

in columns of loamy sand and silt loam soils. The bulk of the applied radioactivity remained on

the top 2 cm. About 1% of the radioactivity was recovered in the leachate with small amounts

recovered throughou t the column (MRID 439084

- 33 and 439084

- 34).

### 113 Field dissipation

Field dissipation studies were conducted in New York (MRID 441864

- 08 and 441864

- 37) and in

California (MRID 441864

- 09 and 441864

- 36). In these studies, a wetta ble powder formulation

was applied to two sets of bare ground plots; one set was treated at 0.5 lb a.i/Acre for 6

applications at 7

- day intervals and the second set was treated at 3.0 lb ai/A in a single application.

Calculated field dissipation half

- lives (DT 50 

### ) for multiple application trials were 42 to 47 days for

those conducted in California (CA) and 14 to 28 days for those conducted in New York (NY). A

range of DT 50 

### ’s of 88

- 92 days was calculated for the single application trials.

In these studies, p arent did not leach below the top 6" of the soil at both CA and NY trials as it

was not detected at CA trials and was detected in only minor amounts (0.011 to 0.05 ppm) at

random intervals at NY trials. Degradates detected in the top 6" were CGA

- 249287 and CGA

321915 at CA; and only CGA

- 249287 at NY. CGA

- 249287 (K d 

### = 0.25

- 02.5 and K

oc 

### = 50

- 313)

reached peak concentrations of 0.03 ppm in CA and 0.086 ppm in NY and declined to less than

the detection limit in CA and to 0.043 ppm in NY. At lower depths ( 6

- 12" ), CGA

- 321915 was

detected at California site, between 60 to 240 days post treatment, and within a concentration

range of 0.011

- 0.016 ppm, while CGA

- 249287 was not detected at both NY and CA trials.

Bioaccumulation

Although cy prodinil n

- Octanol/H 2 

### O partition coefficient indicates that it is likely to

bioaccumulate (Log P O/W 

### = 3.9

- 4.0; MRID 43709003), 14 

### C

- Cyprodinil residues did not

significantly accumulate in bluegill sunfish exposed to 14 

### C

- Cyprodinil at 0.105 ppm in a flow

thr ough system for 28 days. Maximum concentrations of cyprodinil were 3.5 ppm in the edible

fish parts and 9.9 ppm in the nonedible tissue. 14 

### C

- Cyprodinil residue equivalents in the fish

tissue during depuration ranged from 17.4 ppm at the start to 0.14 ppm 14 days later. Between 76

and 83% of the radioactivity depurated after one day; and >97% depurated by the third day.

Maximum BCFs, as a function of radioactive residues present, were 100, 777, and 466,

respectively, in the edible, non

- edible, and whole fish tissues. Maximum bioconcentration factors

as a function of parent cyprodinil were 33 and 90 in the edible and non

- edible tissues,

respectively (MRID 43924501).

### 114 Table B

- 3. Summary of the results obtained for transformation products formed in four

ae robic soil studies.

Item Study MRID Number

439084

- 25 439084

- 26 437090

- 46 437090

- 45

Soil Collombey loamy sand Hanford sandy loam

Total

metabolites Reached a

maximum (max.) of

14% @ days 61 and

90 and declined to

9% @ termination Reached a max. of

4% @ day 91and

declined to 3% @

termination Reached a max. of

26% @ day 270 and

declined to 23% @

termination Reached a max. of

17% @ day 21 and

declined to 14% @

termination

Major

metabolites (1) CGA

- 249287

(Pyrimidinyl amine):

decreased from a

max. of 10% @ day

45 to 3% @

termination None (1) CGA

- 249287

(Pyrimidinyl amine):

reached a maxi. of

11% @ termination

(2) Three

hydroxylated parent

designated as CGA

275535, CGA

304075, and CGA

304076: in total, it

decreased from a

max. of 8% @ day 7

to 2% @

terminatio n Three hydroxylated

parent designated as

CGA

- 275535, CGA

304075, and CGA

304076: in total, it

decreased from a

max. of 13% @ day

14 to 4

- 6% @ day

273 and termination

Minor

metabolites (1) Hydroxy

pyrimidine (a

phenolic derivative

of Pyrimidinyl

amine): reached a

max. of 4%

(2) The symmetrical

dimer of hydroxy

pyrimidine with an

ether like O bridge:

reached a max. of

1%

(3) One un

- identified

metabolite: reached

a max. of 2% Six: minor

metabolites: reached

a max. of ≥1% each.

Identification by

GS

- MS was not

successful but were

identified by

retention times at

3:35, 4:50, 17:40,

18:20, 20:10, 21:15,

24:00, 24:50, and

25:25 given in

minutes: seconds. (1) Two to three

polar un

- identified

compound elut ed at

3.0

- 3.5 minutes: in

total, it reached a

max. of 5%

(2) A mixture of un

identified compound:

in total, it reached a

max. of 7% (1) Multiple un

identified polar

compound eluted at

3.0

- 3.5 minutes: in

total, it reached a

max. of 6%

(2) A mixture of un

identified compound:

in total, it reached a

max. of 5%

(3) A mixture of un

identified compounds

+ CGA

- 73330, all

eluted at 3.0

- 3.5

minutes: in total, it

reached a max. of

1%

Structure For chemical structures, refer to Figure B

- 1 in this Appendix. B

### 115 NH

N N

CH3

Parent Cyprodinil

NH

2

N N

CH3

Pyrimidine Amine

(CGA-249287) N N

CH

3

CGA-275535 (meta hydroxylate) N H

OH



# +

OH

N N

CH3

Hydroxy Pyrimidine N N

CH

3

CGA-304075 (para-hydroxlate) N H

OH

N N

Symmetrical Dimer of Hydroxy Pyrimidine CH

3 N O N

CH

3 N N

CH

3

CGA-304076 N H

OH 

# +

Volatilized Materials (Mainly CO2)

Figure B

- 1. Aerobic soil transformation pathway for cyprodinil.

### 116 Table B

- 4 Summary for aerobic aquatic studies conducted using river and pond systems

from Switzerland 1



### .

Item Study MRID Number

455187

- 01 455187

- 02

System type Rhine river Natural pond Rhine river Natural pond

Characteristics River sediment: Sandy loam (Sand:Silt:Clay= 69:25:6%); 1.0% O.C; pH 7; and CEC=9

Pond sediment: Loam (Sand:Silt:Clay= 39:44:17%); 1.3 % O.C; pH 6.5; and CEC=13

14 C label position Phenyl

- ring Pyrimidinyl

- ring

Study length 260 days

Aerobicity Systems equilibrated for 3 weeks prior to addition of cyprodinil. During the equilibration

and study O2 an pH were monitored in the water and red ox potential was monitored in the

sediment of one control flask. Aerobic conditions were maintained by continuous

ventilation with moistened air flow. Monitoring indicated aerobicity was maintained in the

water column while visual observation of the sedime nt indicated presence of aerobic and

anaerobic layers in flasks at the end of the study period.

Volatile traps Three traps 2N NaOH, ethylene glycol, and 2N H 2 SO 4

Material Balance 91.7

- 103% 90.4

- 101.5% 94.5

- 104.8% 91.8

- 104.4%

Extractable Parent Decrease d to 32% Decreased to 56% Decreased to 33% Decreased to 36%

Bound residue Increased to 48% Increased to 30% Increased to 39% Increased to 45%

Volatilized

materials Maximum 11%

(mainly CO 2 ) Maximum 5%

(mainly CO 2 ) Maximum 4%

(mainly CO 2 ) Maximum 3%

(mainl y CO 2 )

Metabolites In the water phase

only: One (un

identified)

accounting for

≤6.7% of applied

radioactivity In the water phase

only: One (un

identified)

accounting for

≤3.2% of applied

radioactivity In the sediment

phase only: CGA

249287 (Max. of

14.2%) ; and three

Un

- identified (Max.

<7%) In the sediment

phase only: CGA

249287 (Max. of

6%); and three Un

identified (Max.

<4%)

Partitioning of

parent from water

to sediment DT 50 in water 3

days (decreased to

5% by 21 days) DT 50 in water 5

days (decreased to

14% by 21 days) DT 50 in water 3

days (decreased to

8% by 21 days) DT 50 in water 5

days (decreased to

19% by 21 days)

Calculated first

order t 1/2 for the

whole system

(sediment+water) 126 days 178 days 106 days 165 days

1 Summary and calculations st ated derived mainly from US EPA/Canada PMRA Joint Review of March

1998

### 117 Table B

- 5 Summary for aerobic aquatic studies conducted using a pond system from

Denton, Texas.

Item Study MRID Number

439084

- 30 439084

- 29

Characteristics Water pH 7.8 and total d issolved solids 672 ppm; sediment texture loamy sand, pH 8.3, organic

carbon 0.35%

14 C label position Phenyl

- ring Pyrimidinyl

- ring

Study length 31 days

Aerobicity levels of dissolve oxygen were less than half of that expected to occur in natural well a erated

ponds

Material Balance 98.4±1.0% 97±3%

Extractable Parent 69% of the applied at study termination 91% of the applied at study termination

Bound residue 3% of the applied at study termination 3% of the applied at study termination

Volatilized

m aterials Maximum 0.6% of the applied at study

termination (mainly CO 2 ) Maximum 0.07% of the applied at study

termination (mainly CO 2 )

Metabolites In the water phase: Un

- identified (Max.

0.2%)

In the sediment phase: CGA

- 275535 (Max

0.1% at 30 days) and two un

- identified (Max.

<1.3 % in total) None detected

Partitioning of

parent from water

to sediment t 1/2 in water 29 days (decreased to 27% by

experiment termination) t 1/2 in water 9 days (decreased to 6% by

experiment termination)

Calculated first

ord er t 1/2 for the

whole system

(sediment+water) EFED calculate= 612 days Stable: determination of half

- life was not

made because no bio

- transformation was

observed in this experiment in both the water

and the sediment phases of the system

### 118 Figure B

- 2 . Partitioning of materials (mainly parent) between the sediment/water phases in

two aerobic aquatic studies using a water/sediment system from Texas (MRID s 439084

- 29/30). 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Time (days) 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% As % of Applied Parent

Radioactivity (mainly parent)

Radioactivity (mainly parent) Water phase (study 1)

Water phase (study 2) Sediment phase (study 2)

Sediment phase (study 1) Radioactivity (mainly parent)

Radioactivity (mainly parent)

### 119 

### Appendix C. Sediment Calculations and Assumptions

Screening Level RQ values ( Sediment)

Contamination of sediments is a widespread ecological problem that can pose a potential risk to a

wide variety of aquatic organisms and aquatic ecosystems. All aquatic life has some contact

either direct or indirect with sediments as a media for habitat and or a source of food. This is an

ecologically important habitat where significant densities and diversities of benthic and

epibenthic species occur. Embryonic life stages and gametes of infaunal, epibenthic and water

column species of a variety of commercially important fisheries can also be found directly in

contact with sediments (e.g., salmon, trout, clams, oysters) during critical stages of their

development. A wide host of fish and aquatic invertebrates live in or on the benthos in direct o r

close proximity of sediments. Because of the widely accepted recognition that sediments serve as

a dynamic media for aquatic ecosystems, government organizations, as well as industry have

come to realize that sediments can act as a repository for many co ntaminants, especially those

that are lipophilic. This recognition of the potential for problem is manifest through examples of

deleterious effects from contaminated sediments and their significant impact on commercial

fisheries (e.g., TBT and effects to s hell fish), ecosystem diversity (e.g., TBT and endocrine

effects to mollusks), and possible impact to endangered species (e.g., salmo n ides in the Pacific

Northwest). State and federal regulatory agencies currently rely on several assessment tools in

order to evaluate the toxic effects of contaminated sediments on marine and freshwater

communities that include measures of chemical concentration, bioaccumulation, and biological

toxicity. The combination of defining exposure and effects can provide a first ste p for an

integrative approach to defining sediment quality and the potential for risk to ecosystems and

populations. Sediment toxicity tests are considered to be a powerful assessment tool that help to

define the potential for acute and chronic risk to aqu atic systems from contaminated sediment

exposure. The use of sediment testing and sediment evaluation can often complete the risk picture

for many compounds that are present in the water column for a relatively short time. Laboratory

t ests on cyprodinil , h ave shown that water column exposure declines over a short period but that

sediment exposure increases (sediment receives cyp rodinil bound particulate from the water

column). The potential for cyp rodinil risk to aquatic invertebrates via sediment exposure suggests

indirect effects to fish populations that are dependent upon invertebrates in the food chain, as well

as direct effects to fish life stages that may be in direct contact with this media. The magnitude of

these effects can be compounded since cyp ro dinil is persistent in aquatic systems . Sediment test

can facilitate the use of relatively sensitive life stages (e.g., 2nd and third instar for chironomus)

in addressing toxicity from this media. Acute sediment test s can measure effects that include

survi val, growth and emergence, while chronic studies can add important information on

reproduction.

The risk quotients (RQ) for sediment dwelling organisms were estimated with an extrapolation

method recommended by the USEPA Office of Water (OW). This was ba sed on the Agency ’s

Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines (ESG) under the Clean Water Act [CWA Section

304(a)(2)]. Often t he Agency is faced with the problem of assessing risk to aquatic systems from

compounds that readily bind to particulate and e ventually accumulate in the sediment. This issue

is more problematic if sediment toxicity date and/or monitoring information are also not

available. Therefore, in order to address this concern, The Agency has consulted with the OW,

and adopted a method for extrapolating exposure values (i.e., bulk sediment and porewater) that

relies on the equilibrium partitioning (EqP) of nonionic compounds in sediment. The EqP theory

holds that a nonionic chemical in sediment partitions between sediment organic carbon,

in terstitial (pore) water and benthic organisms. At equilibrium, if the concentration in any phase

is known, then the concentration in the other phases can be predicted through the organic/carbon

### 120 soil partition coefficient (K OC 

### ). In order to generate exposur e concentrations from sediment

(ug/ K g OC 

### ) and porewater (ug/L) for calculating RQs, The Agency relies on the output from the

PRZM/EXAMS model. The effects components, are standard water column toxicity endpoints

(e.g., worst case LC50, NOAEC). This extrapol ation method is useful for estimating potential

sediment exposure values, as well as sediment toxicity values that can be used in a screening

level risk assessment.

Rationale for EqP Use in t he Agency Assessing Risk to Sediment Organisms

Cyprodinil is a lipophilic compound with relatively high Koc and Ko/w values

, that can adsorb

readily to particulate and sediment with resulting exposure to benthic aquatic life through

respiration, ingestion, dermal contact, as well as indirect impact to other species t hrough food

chain alterations. Since, sediment can act as a reservoir for th is compound , the bioavailability to

aquatic organisms living in this medium is a concern that t he Agency is trying to address through

consultation with the EPA Office of Water (OW ).

Under the Clean Water Act (CWA Section 304(a)(2) the Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) and the States are expected to develop programs for protecting the chemical, physical, and

biological integrity of the nation’s waters. In order to meet the obje ctives of the CWA, EPA’s

Office of water (OW) has periodically issued ambient water quality criteria (WQC). However,

toxic contaminants in bottom sediments of lakes, rivers, wetlands, and coastal waters can also

create potential for environmental degradati on even if water column contamination values are low

and comply with the Agencies water quality criteria. In order to evaluate this possible concern the

OW also calculates Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines (ESG).

Pesticide compounds that bind readily to particulate and organic carbon may have a limited

exposure to aquatic organisms in the water column. However, this increase in particulate

- bound

pesticides can result in an accumulation of compounds in or on the sediment that may have the

potent ial for toxic impact to benthic and epibenthic aquatic organisms (e.g., early life stage of

many invertebrates and fish, as well as crabs and shrimp). However, evaluating the risk to aquatic

life from this exposure becomes problematic especially if there i s a lack of adequate sediment

toxicity and exposure data. Therefore, in order to assess this potential for pesticide risk to aquatic

benthic systems, the Environmental Fate and Effects Division (The Agency) of the Office of

Pesticides Program (OPP) has ado pted the method used by the OW that relies on the theory of

equilibrium partitioning (EqP) of chemicals. This theory is based on the hydrophobicity and

concentrations of the chemical normalized to organic carbon (OC) in sediment (De Toro et al.

1991) and h olds that a nonionic chemical in sediment partitions between sediment organic

carbon, interstitial (pore) water and benthic organisms. At equilibrium, if the concentration in any

phase is known, then the concentration in the other phases can be predicted. A key component to

this theory is the chemicals organic carbon coefficient (Koc), which is constant for every

chemical and represents the ratio of the chemical concentration in water to the concentration in

organic carbon. The document, “Technical Basis fo r the Derivation of Equilibrium Partitioning

Sediment Guidelines (ESGs) for the Protection of Benthic Organisms: Nonionic Organics”

(USEPA, 2000), demonstrates that biological responses of benthic organisms to nonionic organic

chemicals in sediments are di fferent when the sediment concentrations are expressed on a dry

weight basis, but similar when expressed on a ug chemical/g organic carbon basis (ug/goc).

Similar responses were also observed across sediments when interstitial water concentrations

were use d to normalize biological availability. The Technical Basis Document further

demonstrates that if the toxic effect concentration in water is known (e.g., LC50), the effect

concentration in sediment on a ug/goc basis can be predicted by multiplying the effe ct

concentration in water by the chemical Koc.

### 121 (LC50 ug/L x K OC 

### L/ K g OC 

### x 1 K g OC 

### /1000g OC 

### = LC50 ug/g OC 

### )

Since, The Agency uses a deterministic method for its screening level risk assessment, the

calculation of risk quotient values (RQ) is important for assessing possible risk. The RQ values

are calculated by taking the ratio of the estimated exposure concentrations (EEC) to the toxicity

effect value (e.g., LC50, NOAEC). The EEC values are model generated (e.g., PRZM/ EXAMS)

and reflect p eer evaluated and approved scenarios for assessing pesticide exposure to an aquatic

environment. However, the PRZM/EXAMS output produces water column EEC values, as well

as sediment and porewater EEC values. Therefore, in order to assess possible toxic pes ticide

exposure to aquatic organisms from sediments, The Agency is using the PRZM/EXAMS model

which incorporates the principles of the equilibrium partitioning theory, in order to generate

EECs from sediment and porewater. By relying on sediment and/or por ewater output values, The

Agenc y has two ways for calculating RQ values for sediments by using porewater exposure

values and bulk sediment values. RQ values can be produced by using the PRZM/ EXAMS EEC

output value for sediment as follows:

EEC sediment ug/ug OC 

### / LC50 ug/g OC



### The calculations that rely on porewater can be calculated by dividing the PRZM/EXAMS output

value for porewater concentrations by the dissolved concentrations in the water column that

caused toxicity in bioassays (e.g., LC50).

EEC porewater ug/L / LC50 ugL

Assumptions of the equilibrium partitioning model

Three principle observations that underlie the equilibrium partitioning (EqP) approach:

1. The concentrations of nonionic organic chemicals in sediments (e xpressed on an organic

carbon basis) and in interstitial waters correlate with observed biological effects on

sediment

- dwelling organisms across a range of sediments.

2. Partitioning models can relate sediment concentrations for nonionic organic chemicals on

an organic carbon basis to freely

- dissolved concentrations in interstitial water.

3. The distribution of sensitivities of benthic organisms is similar to that of water column

species.

The EqP approach assumes that the partitioning of a chemical between sed iment organic carbon

and interstitial water is at or near equilibrium. Another assumption is that the concentration in

either phase can be predictive using appropriate partition coefficient and the measured

concentration in the other phase. Furthermore, it is assumed that organisms receive equivalent

exposure from water

- only exposures or from any equilibrated phase (interstitial water via

respiration; from sediment via ingestion or other sediment integument exchange). The final

assumption is that for non ionic compounds, effect concentrations in sediments on an organic

carbon basis can be predicted using the organic carbon partition coefficient (Koc) and effects

concentrations in the water.

This method to estimate the risk to sediment dwelling organisms h a s certain uncertainties. First,

it appears that the exposure may be underestimated because it assumes that the only source of

contact of cyprodinil to the sediment dwellers is the pore water; however, these organisms may be

in constant contact with the s ediments and even feed from them or from other small organisms

that are contaminated. Second, the sensitivity of the sediment dwellers towards cyprodinil is

### 122 assumed to be similar to that of water column dwellers in the absence of data, adding uncertainty

to the calculation. Finally, some organisms dwell in the sediment only partially, (e.g. tadpoles)

and the risk is very uncertain in those cases.

### 123 Appendix D.

Table D1 . Environmenta l Fate D ata R equirements for C yprodinil

Guideline Number Data Requirement MRID Study

Classification 1 Are

Additional

Data Needed

for Risk

Assessment

### 124 Table D1 . Environmenta l Fate D ata R equirements for C yprodinil

Guideline Number Data Requirement MRID Study

Classification 1 Are

Additional

Data Needed

for Risk

Assessment

§ 161

- 1 Hydrolysis 43709044 Core No

§ 161

- 2 Photodegradation in

Water 43908422 Core No

§ 161

- 3 Photodegradation on Soil 43908423 and

43908424 Cor e No

§ 161

- 4 Photodegradation in Air NA Waived No

§ 162

- 1 Aerobic Soil Metabolism 43908425,

43908426,

43709045, and

43709046 Core No

§ 162

- 2 Anaerobic Soil

Metabolism 43908427 and

43908428 Core No

§ 162

- 3 Anaerobic Aquatic

Metabolism 44186406 C ore No

§ 162

- 4 Aerobic Aquatic

Metabolism 45518701,

45518702,

43908429, and

43908430 Core No

§ 163

- 1 Leaching

Adsorption/Desorption

(Parent and Degradates) 43709047

, 43908431

, 43908432, and

44186407 Core No

§ 163

- 2 Laboratory Volatility NA N/A No

§ 163

- 3 Field Volatility NA N/A No

§ 164

- 1 Terrestrial Field

Dissipation 44186408,

44186437,

44186409,

44186436 Copy No

§ 164

- 2 Aquatic Field Dissipation NA N/A No

§ 164

- 3 Forestry Dissipation NA N/A No

§ 164

- 4 Combined application

Produc ts and Tank Mixes

Dissipation N/A to EFED N/A to EFED N/A to EFED

§ 165

- 4 Accumulation in Fish 43924501 Core No

§ 165

- 5 Accumulation

– Aquatic NA

- - - - No

### 125 Table D1 . Environmenta l Fate D ata R equirements for C yprodinil

Guideline Number Data Requirement MRID Study

Classification 1 Are

Additional

Data Needed

for Risk

Assessment

Non

- target Organisms

§ 166

- 1 Groundwater

– Small

Prospective NA CR No

§ 201

- 1 Droplet Size Spectrum

- - - - - - - - 2

- - - -

§ 202

- 1 Spray Drift Field

Evaluation - - - - - - - - 2

- - - -

1 Core: study satisfies guideline; Supplemental: study is scientifically sound, but does not satisfy guideline; Invalid:

study is not sc ientifically sound and does not satisfy guideline.

2.The registrant is a member of the Spray Drift Task Force and is not required to do these guideline studies.



### Table D

- 2 Status of Ecological Data Submissions for Cyprodinil 1



### .

Guideline

Number Study Are additional

data needed

for risk

assessment? MRID

Number Study

Classification

71

- 1 Avian Oral LD 50 No 437090

- 08 Core

437090

- 07 Supplemental

71

- 2 Avian Dietary LC 50 No 437090

- 09 Core

437090

- 10 Core

71

- 4 Avian Reproduction No 439084

- 04 Cor e

439084

- 05 Core

72

- 1 Freshwater Fish LC 50 No 437090

- 12 Core

439084

- 06 Core

72

- 2 Freshwater Invertebrate Acute

LC 50 No 437090

- 13 Core

72

- 3 (a) Estuarine/Marine Fish LC 50 No 439084

- 07 Core

72

- 3 (b) Estuarine/Marine Mollusk EC 50 No 439084

- 08 Cor e

72

- 3 (c) Estuarine/Marine Shrimp EC 50 No 439084

- 09 Core

72

- 4 (a) Freshwater Fish Early Life

Stage No 439084

- 11 Core

### 126 Guideline

Number Study Are additional

data needed

for risk

assessment? MRID

Number Study

Classification

72

- 4 (b)* Estuarine Fish Early Life

Stage N/R N/R N/R

72

- 4 (c) Estuarine Invertebrate Life

Cycle No 439084

- 09 Core

72

- 4 (d) Fresh water Invertebrate Life

Cycle No 439084

- 12 Core

72

- 5* Freshwater Fish Full Life

- Cycle N/R N/R N/R

81

- 1 Acute Mammalian LD 50 No 437090

- 34 Core

83

- 5 2

- generation mammalian

reproduction No 437090

- 34 Core

12 2

- 1 (a) Seed Germ./Seedling Emergence No 442754

- 03 Core

12 2

- 1(b) Vegetative Vigor No 442754

- 03 Core

123

- 2 Aquatic Plant Growth No 439084

- 15 Core

144

- 1 Honey Bee Acute Contact LD 50 No 437090

- 04 Core

1 Information is largely from prior review by Ellis, et. al. (8/15/02)

*Study is not required at th is time (N/R)

### 127 

### Appendix F . Measurements of Precaution

OBSERVE THE FOLLOWING PRECAUTIONS WHEN SPRAYING IN THE VICINITY OF

AQUATIC AREAS SUCH AS LAKES, RESERVOIRS, R IVERS, PERMANENT STREAMS,

MARSHES OR NATURAL PONDS, ESTUARIES, AND COMMERCIAL FISH FARM

PONDS.

**•** Do not apply within 75 ft of bodies of water such as lakes, reservoirs, rivers, permanent

streams, natural ponds, marshes, or estuaries.

**•** For all plantings withi n 150 ft of bodies of water as described above, spray crops from

outside the planting away from the bodies of water.

**•** Shut off the sprayer when at row ends.

**•** Spray last three rows windward of aquatic areas using nozzles on one side only, with

spray directed away from aquatic areas.

**•** Do not cultivate within 10 ft of aquatic areas as to allow a vegetative filter strip.

**•** Do not apply when weather conditions favor drift to aquatic areas. Do not apply when

gusts or sustained winds exceed 10 mph.

**•** Do not apply during temperature inversion. Mist or fog may indicate the presence of an

inversion in humid areas.

Aerial Spray Recommendations

Aerial use in California only. Make no more than one aerial application per season.

**•** Do not apply by air within 150 ft of lakes, reservoirs, rivers, permanent streams, marshes

or natural ponds, estuaries and commercial fish ponds.

**•** Mount the spray boom on the aircraft so as to minimize the drift caused by wing tip

vortices. Use the minimum practical boom length, and do not exceed 75 % of wing span

or rotor diameter.

**•** Use the largest droplet size consistent with good pest control. Formation of very small

droplets may be minimized by appropriate nozzle selection, by orientating nozzles away

from the air stream as much as possible, and b y avoiding excessive spray boom pressure.

**•** Release the spray at the lowest height consistent with pest control and flight safety.

Avoid applications more than 10 feet above the crop canopy.

**•** Reduce risk of exposure to aquatic areas by avoiding applications when wind direction is

toward the aquatic area.

**•** Do not apply when weather conditions favor drift to aquatic areas. Do not apply when

gusts or sustained winds exceed 10 mph.

**•** Low humidity and high temperatures increase the evaporation rate of spray droplets and

therefore, the likehood of increased spray drift to aquatic area. Avoid spraying during

conditions of low humidity and/or high temperatures.

**•** Do not apply during a temperature inversion. Mist or fog may indicate the presence of an

inversion in humid areas.