Page 1 of 46

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON D.C., 20460

PC Code: 122101

DP Barcode: 429077

MEMORANDUM December 9, 2015

Subject: Registration Review: Problem Formulation for Propiconazole

To: Linsey Walsh, Chemical Review Manager 

Avivah Jakob, Team Leader

Kelly Sherman, Branch Chief

Risk Management and Implementation Branch 3

Pesticide Re-Evaluation Division (7508P)

Sandra O’Neill, Chemical Review Manager

Rose Kyprianou, Team Leader

Lance Wormell, Branch Chief

Regulatory Management Branch 2

Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

From: Stephen Carey, Biologist

Ibrahim Abdel-Saheb, Ph.D., Environmental Scientist

Environmental Risk Branch 6

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

James Breithaupt, Agronomist

Daniel Cherry, Biologist

Siroos Mostaghimi, Ph.D., Senior Scientist 

Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch (RASSB)

Antimicrobials Division (7510P)

Through: Mark Corbin, Branch Chief

Monica Wait, RAPL

William P. Eckel, Ph.D., Senior Science Advisor

Nathan Miller, Biologist

Environmental Risk Branch 6

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

Laura Parsons, Associate Branch Chief

Risk Assessment and Science Support Branch (RASSB)

Antimicrobials Division (7510P)
Page 2 of 46

The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) and the Antimicrobials Division (AD) 

have completed the problem formulation (PF) for the environmental fate, ecological risk, and 

endangered species for the registration review of the triazole fungicide: Propiconazole (PC Code 

122101). 

Propiconazole is registered for use on a wide variety of agricultural and non-agricultural uses in 

many states. The agricultural uses include wheat, seed crops, rice, pecans, peaches, sweet corn, 

dry beans, peanuts, barley, and celery, and there are several pending proposed uses. The nonagricultural uses of propiconazole include turf, ornamentals, lawns, ground cover, and sod farms.

Propiconazole is also registered for antimicrobial uses including adhesives, paints, stains, 

coatings, rubber and plastic products, inks, metalworking fluids, lumber, log buildings, roof 

shingles, wood siding, millwork, plywood, wallboard, ceiling tiles, fencing, and textiles/canvas.

As the first stage of the risk assessment process for Registration Review, this problem 

formulation provides an overview of what is currently known about the environmental fate and 

ecological effects associated with the parent compound. It also describes the preliminary 

ecological risk hypothesis and analysis plan for evaluating and characterizing risk to non-target 

species and the environment in support of Registration Review.

Data Gaps – Conventional Uses

The ecological effects and environmental fate database is largely complete for propiconazole 

except for the following required studies under 40 CFR Part 158:

Environmental Fate:

- None.

Ecological Effects:

- Acceptable avian acute oral toxicity (Guideline 850.2100) data have not been submitted for a 

passerine species exposed to propiconazole, which is now required under the 40 CFR Part 158 

data requirements.

- Propiconazole may cause exposure of pollinators visiting off-site plants that are contaminated 

by spray drift. A complete set of toxicity data to honey bee adults and larvae have not been 

submitted for propiconazole and these data are needed to fulfill EPA’s recent policy on 

pollinator protection1

. A Tier I study on the toxicity of residues on foliage (OCSPP 850.3030) 

is not needed since results of the honey bee acute contact LD50 is >25 μg a.i./bee, above the 11 

μg a.i./bee trigger criterion. Thus, the following seven Tier I, II and III honey bee studies, yet 

to be submitted for propiconazole, are needed: 

o Honeybee larval acute oral toxicity study (following OECD 237, Tier I)

o Honey bee adult oral toxicity test (OECD 213, Tier I)

o Honeybee adult 10-day chronic oral (special study; Tier I)

 1 (Guidance for Assessing Pesticide Risks to Bees, 06.23.2014; signed by Donald Brady, Director, EFED; 

http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-

06/documents/pollinator_risk_assessment_guidance_06_19_14.pdf)
Page 3 of 46

o Honeybee larval repeated dose study (special study renamed as honeybee larval 

chronic oral toxicity study, Tier I) 

o Semi-field testing for pollinators (special study, Tier II). 

o Field testing for pollinators (OCSPP 850.3040, Tier III)

o Field trial of residues in pollen and nectar (special study, Tier III)

- Currently, an acute to chronic ratio (ACR) for estuarine/marine fish from the freshwater data 

is not appropriate because the acceptable acute and chronic studies used different freshwater 

species that prevented the calculations. EFED is in need of a fathead minnow acute toxicity 

study (OCSPP 850.1075) to obtain an acute toxicity value in order to calculate an ACR using 

freshwater data on the same species (e.g., fathead minnow) to estimate the No Observed 

Adverse Effect Concentration (NOAEC) for estuarine/marine fish. Without an acute toxicity 

study with the fathead minnow, chronic risk to estuarine/marine fish will be presumed.

However, EFED has no reservations if a Fish Early Life-Stage chronic toxicity study 

(OCSPP 850.1400) with an estuarine/marine fish is submitted instead of the fathead minnow 

acute toxicity study to get the NOAEC directly for estuarine/marine fish. 

- Acceptable avian reproduction toxicity data (OSCPP 850.2300) were not submitted for a 

waterfowl species exposed to propiconazole. A new avian reproduction toxicity study for 

mallard ducks is necessary to satisfy standard data requirements since the previously 

submitted mallard reproduction study submitted was classified as invalid.

Data Gaps—Antimicrobial Uses

Environmental Fate:

- Guideline 850.3300: Activated sludge respiration inhibition (ASRI)

- Guidelines 835.3110, 835.3220, 835.3240, 835.3280 (WWTP biodegradation studies)2

- Guideline 835.1110, Activated Sludge Sorption Isotherm (ASSI)3

 

Ecological Effects:

- The chemical and physical properties of propiconazole indicate that it may pose risk to 

sediment-dwelling invertebrates when used as an antimicrobial pesticide. To assess the 

toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of propiconazole in sediment fauna, the Agency 

requires three whole sediment chronic invertebrate studies: two in freshwater and one in 

saltwater. These are special studies for which there is not yet a guideline number. 

 1 The results of the Activated Sludge Respiration Inhibition Test (ASRI) will determine which of these four 

biodegradation tests is/are anticipated to be required. 

• If the ASRI test EC50 is less than or equal to 20 mg/L, then either the (i) Biodegradation in Activated Sludge 

Study or (ii) Simulation Test - Aerobic Sewage Treatment: A. Activated Sludge Units or (iii) the Porous Pot 

Test is required. If the ASRI test EC50 is greater than 20 mg/L, then the registrant must conduct either: (i) 

Ready Biodegradability or (ii) a) Biodegradation in Activated Sludge or b) Simulation Test - Aerobic Sewage 

Treatment: A. Activated Sludge Units or c) the Porous Pot Test. 

• If the Ready Biodegradability study is conducted and passes, then no further testing is required. If, however, the 

antimicrobial fails the Ready Biodegradability study, then the a) Biodegradation in Activated Sludge or b) 

Simulation Test - Aerobic Sewage Treatment: A. Activated Sludge Units, or c) the Porous Pot study is required.

3 The log Kow is greater than 3 (3.72), and ASSI data are required.
Page 4 of 46

Problem Formulation of the Environmental Fate and 

Ecological Risk in Support of the Registration Review 

of Propiconazole

[1-[[2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-propyl-1,3-dioxolan-2-yl]methyl]-1H-1,2,4-

triazole]

CAS Registry No.: 60207-90-1

PC Code: 122101

Prepared by:

Environmental Fate and Effects Division:

Environmental Risk Branch VI

Stephen Carey, Biologist

Ibrahim Abdel-Saheb, Ph.D., Environmental Scientist

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pesticide Programs

Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Environmental Risk Branch VI

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Mail Code 7507P

Washington, DC 20460

Antimicrobials Division:

Risk Assessment and Science Support 

Branch

James Breithaupt, Agronomist

Daniel Cherry, Biologist

Siroos Mostaghimi, Ph.D, Senior Scientist

Reviewed by:

Laura Parsons, Associate Branch Chief

Reviewed by:

William P. Eckel, Ph.D., Senior Science Advisor

Nathan Miller, Biologist

Monica Wait, RAPL

Mark Corbin, ERB6 Chief

December 9, 2015

Office of Chemical Safety 

and Pollution Prevention
Page 5 of 46

Contents

1. Introduction.............................................................................................................................. 6

2. Conclusions.............................................................................................................................. 7

2.1. Ecological Risk Assessments........................................................................................... 7

2.3. Clean Water Act Programs............................................................................................... 7

3. Environmental Fate and Transport........................................................................................... 8

3.1. Transformation Products................................................................................................. 10

4. Receptors.................................................................................................................................. 8

4.1. Effects to Aquatic Organisms......................................................................................... 10

4.2. Effects to Terrestrial Organisms..................................................................................... 11

4.3. Ecological Incidents........................................................................................................ 12

5. Exposure Pathways of Concern ............................................................................................. 14

6. Analysis Plan ........................................................................................................................... 15

6.1. Stressors of Concern ....................................................................................................... 15

6.2. Measures of Exposure.................................................................................................... 15

6.3. Measures of Effect .......................................................................................................... 16

6.4. Endangered Species Assessments................................................................................. 16

6.5. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program........................................................................ 17

7. Environmental Fate and Ecological Effects Data .................................................................. 17

7.1. Environmental Fate............................................................................................................ 17

7.2. Effects................................................................................................................................ 19

8. References................................................................................................................................ 26
Page 6 of 46

1. Introduction

EFED and AD evaluated the most recent ecological risk assessments for propiconazole in 

association with the updated toxicity, exposure, and usage information to determine if sufficient 

data are available and if further updates are needed to support registration review. EFED and AD 

will use application scenarios that result in upper bound exposure scenarios for the registered 

uses of propiconazole for the risk assessment. 

The active ingredient propiconazole is a triazole fungicide that has protective, curative, and 

systemic activity. Propiconazole is a racemic mixture of four stereoisomers. All of which appear 

to be active. The fate and toxicity of the isomers will be assumed to be equal if no data are 

available.

Some trade names for conventional products containing propiconazole include Banner®, Benit®, 

Desmel®, Orbit®, Radar®, Tilt®, Fidis®, Alamo®, Spire®, Practis®, Bumper®, Mantis®, Restore®, 

Banner Maxx®, Taspa®, Juno®, Novel® and Break®. End-use products are formulated as 

emulsifiable concentrates (EC) and wettable powders (WP). Some propiconazole end-use 

products are co-formulated with other pesticides. Depending on the crop being treated, products 

containing propiconazole as an active ingredient can be applied by aerial or ground broadcast 

spray, chemigation, sprinkler irrigation, hose-end and pump-up sprayer, backpack and mist 

blower, and dip tank. 

Some trade names for antimicrobial products containing propiconazole include Premier®, KopCoat®, Britewood®, Wocosen®, Preventol®, Wolman®, and Mycostat®. Some propiconazole enduse products are co-formulated with other pesticides.

To support the assessment of risks for propiconazole, this document is dealing with 

propiconazole parent compound only. The registration review risk assessment will focus on 

characterizing potential risks resulting from the registered uses, which have been identified in the 

Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA; dated 17 April 2015). The uses can be categorized as 

agricultural or non-agricultural uses. Agricultural uses include use on cereals (wheat, barley, 

rye, oats, and triticale), corn (sweet, field and popcorn), stone fruits (Apricot, peach, cherry, 

nectarine, prune and plum), seed crops, rice, wild rice, pecans, peanuts, dry beans and celery. 

Non-agricultural uses include use on turf, ornamentals, lawn, ground cover, golf courses, and sod 

farms. The maximum annual application rate ranges from a high of 7.2 pounds of active 

ingredient per acre (lb a.i./A) for turf use (based on 4 applications at 1.78 lb a.i./A) to a low of 

0.1125 lb a.i./A for barley, oats, rye, and triticale. 
Page 7 of 46

2. Conclusions from Previous Assessments

2.1. Ecological Risk Assessments

The Agency has conducted multiple ecological risk assessments on propiconazole that serve as a 

basis for this problem formulation. These assessments are briefly summarized below. 

The most recent risk assessments for propiconazole is the ‘Ecological Risk Assessment for 

Proposed New Uses on Dill, Radish, Leafy Brassica Subgroup 5B, Watercress, Ti palm; Crop 

Group Conversions for Stone Fruit Group 12 to 12-12 and Tree Nut Group 14 to 14-12 (Dated 

10/27/2015; D425282). A Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for propiconazole was 

conducted in 2006.

The major ecological conclusions presented in previous risk assessments for propiconazole uses

were as follows:

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

Taxa with 

Acute LOC 

Exceedances

Taxa with 

Chronic LOC 

Exceedances

Taxa with 

No LOC 

Exceedances

BCF Persistence Degradates of 

Concern

Terrestrial 

plants, 

freshwater fish, 

aquatic nonvascular plants

Freshwater 

invertebrates1, 

estuarine/marine 

fish1

, birds, and 

mammals

Terrestrial 

invertebrates2, 

and aquatic 

vascular 

plants

No Yes Not an ecological 

concern

1 Chronic risk presumed for these taxa due to lack of data.

2 Based on acute contact and oral toxicity with adult bees; were not assessed quantitatively.

Drinking Water Exposure Assessment

2.2. Previous Drinking Water Assessments

The most recent drinking water assessment (DWA) for propiconazole new use on Dill, Radish, 

Leafy Brassica Subgroup 5B, Watercress, Ti palm and Crop Group conversions for Stone Fruit 

Group 12-12 and Tree Nut Group 14-12, was conducted in 2015 (D 423648). 

The estimated groundwater concentrations of propiconazole were calculated using the Tier II

PRZM-GW model. The surface water EDWCs were lower than the groundwater EDWCs. The 

maximum concentrations of propiconazole in groundwater were estimated to be 37.9 μg/L.

The most recent EDWCs for 1,2,4-triazole, 1,2,4-triazole alanine, and 1,2,4-triazole acetic acid 

were calculated in support of the 2006 aggregate assessment for triazole-derivative fungicides 

(USEPA, 2006 a.; USEPA, 2006 b.). The highest 1,2,4-triazole, 1,2,4-triazole alanine, and 1,2,4-

triazole acetic acid EDWCs calculated in this assessment were for the turf use, which resulted in 

the surface water EDWCs peak of 55.8 μg/L (using PRZM-EXAMS). A groundwater EDWC of 

1.06 μg/L was calculated for 1,2,4-triazole using SCI-GROW.
Page 8 of 46

2.3. Clean Water Act Programs 

Propiconazole is not identified as a cause of impairment for any water bodies listed as impaired 

under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. No Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) criteria 

have been developed for propiconazole. Aquatic benchmarks have been established for 

propiconazole and are available at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/aquatic-life-benchmarks-pesticide-registration. Any data submitted or otherwise 

located as part of the registration review process may be used to update aquatic life benchmarks 

if applicable. 

3. Environmental Fate and Transport

Propiconazole appears to be persistent and moderately mobile to relative immobile in most soil 

and aqueous environments. Propiconazole degradation in the aquatic environment appears to be 

dependent solely on aqueous photolysis in the presence of photosensitizers. In soil environments, 

propiconazole dissipation appears to be dependent on incorporation or binding to soil organic 

matter content.

Laboratory and terrestrial field dissipation data indicate that propiconazole is stable in soil and 

aqueous environments. Propiconazole was stable to hydrolysis (t1⁄2 > 30 days), aqueous photolysis 

(< 10% of applied degraded in 30 days), soil photolysis (< 8% of applied degraded in 30 days), 

aerobic aquatic metabolism (t1⁄2 > 30 days), aerobic soil metabolism (t1⁄2 = 43 to 70 days), and 

anaerobic aquatic metabolism (t1⁄2 = 363 days). The terrestrial field dissipation data were 

consistent with reported half-lives of > 100 days for four soil textures. However, in supplemental 

aquatic dissipation data using basin-irrigation and flow through irrigation systems in rice fields, 

propiconazole was found to dissipate rapidly (t1⁄2 < 5 days). Aqueous photolysis studies using 

sensitizers indicated rapid degradation (t1⁄2 < 1 days) of propiconazole, which appears to be the 

case in rice fields. Furthermore, aquatic metabolism and dissipation studies indicate propiconazole 

dissipates by incorporation or binding to the organic matter content of soil/sediment.

Propiconazole mobility in soil appears to be dependent on the soil’s organic matter content. In 

general, propiconazole appears to be moderately mobile (KOC of 685, 436, 382, 604 and 1134

mL/goc) in soils with a low organic matter content (< 1%). Therefore, propiconazole may reach 

ground water in soils with low organic content. More importantly, propiconazole may 

contaminate surface water through off-site runoff and spray drift.

Bioaccumulation and biomagnification should not be a significant concern for propiconazole, 

because it has an octanol/water partition coefficient (log Kow) of 3.72 and bioconcentration factor 

(BCF) values of 24x, 138-516x, and 68-203x, respectively for edible, viscera, and whole body of 

bluegill. 
Page 9 of 46

A selection of propiconazole environmental fate and transport properties are summarized in 

Table 2 below.

Table 2. Physical Chemical and Environmental Fate Properties of Propiconazole.

Parameter Value Source

Selected Physical/Chemical Parameters

Chemical 

Structure

Empirical 

Formula

C15H17Cl2N3O2 http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4323

4

IUAPC Name 1-[[2-(2,4-dichlorophenyl)-4-propyl-1,3-

dioxolan-2-yl]methyl]-1,2,4-triazole

http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4323

4

CAS No. 60207-90-1 http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4323

4

PC Code No. 122101 http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4323

4

SMILES string: CCCC1COC(O1)(CN2C=NC=N2)C3=C

(C=C(C=C3)Cl)Cl

http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4323

4

Molecular 

Weight 

342.22 g/mol http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4323

4

Physical state Yellowish odorless liquid. Non corrosive http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4323

4

Vapor pressure 1.0 x 10-6 (torr) http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/4323

4

Aqueous 

solubility 

100 mg/L at 25 deg C Tomlin CDS, ed; The e-Pesticide Manual: a 

world compendium. Propiconazole. 13th ed. 

British Crop Protection Council, (2003)

Henry’s Law 

Constant

9.1X10-5 atm-m3/mole Foot Print Pesticides Properties Database @

http://sitem.herts.ac.uk/aeru/iupac/Reports/551.ht

m

log Kow 3.72 Foot Print Pesticides Properties Database @

http://sitem.herts.ac.uk/aeru/ppdb/en/Reports/551

.htm

Persistence

Hydrolysis halflife (pH 5, 7, 9)Stable MRID: 00067901 , 42238201

Aqueous 

photolysis halflife

Stable MRID: 41811901

Aerobic soil 

metabolism halflife (range in 

days)

43, 47, and 70 days MRID: 129912, 129914

Anaerobic 363 days MRID: 42347902
Page 10 of 46

Table 2. Physical Chemical and Environmental Fate Properties of Propiconazole.

Parameter Value Source

aquatic 

metabolism halflife 

Aerobic aquatic 

metabolism halflife (total 

system)

>30 days MRID: 42347901

Mobility

Adsorption/

desorption 

Kd (Avg): 5.34 (mL/g)

Koc (Avg): 648 (mL/g O.C.)

MRID 41727001; Kd values were 1.2, 2.81, 4.49, 

8.88 and 9.34. KOC values of 685, 436, 382, 604 

and 1134.

3.1. Transformation Products

The major degradates of propiconazole include CGA-91305, CGA-136735, CGA-118244, CGA118245, and CGA-71019. Structures are given in Appendix 5. 

4. Receptors

Tables 3 and 4 provide an update of the aquatic and terrestrial taxonomic groups, respectively, 

and most sensitive surrogate species tested to characterize the potential acute and chronic 

ecological effects of propiconazole. In addition, the tables provide a preliminary overview of the 

potential acute toxicity of propiconazole by providing the acute toxicity classifications. 

Additional details are included in the following tables.

4.1. Effects to Aquatic Organisms

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

Propiconazole

Taxonomic 

Group

Study 

Type

Surrogate 

Species

Toxicity Value

(μg a.i./L)

Acute Toxicity 

Classification or 

Adverse Effect 

Observed

Source

(Study 

classification)

Freshwater fish1

Acute Rainbow trout LC50 = 850 Highly toxic 0067923

(Acceptable)

Chronic Fathead 

minnow 

NOAEC = 95

Affected Endpoint: 

Hatchability, fry 

survival, total 

survival

133364

(Acceptable)

Freshwater 

invertebrates

Acute

Water flea 

EC50 = 1300 Moderately toxic 132932

(Acceptable)

Chronic NOAEC = 180 -- 49300501

(In review)
Page 11 of 46

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

Propiconazole

Taxonomic 

Group

Study 

Type

Surrogate 

Species

Toxicity Value

(μg a.i./L)

Acute Toxicity 

Classification or 

Adverse Effect 

Observed

Source

(Study 

classification)

Estuarine/marine 

fish

Acute Spot LC50 =2244 Moderately toxic 132921

(Supplemental)

Chronic No data -- No data2

Estuarine/marine 

invertebrates

Acute

Mysid shrimp

EC50 = 510 Highly toxic ACC: 260201

(Acceptable)

Chronic NOAEC = 205 -- 133365

(Acceptable)

Whole sediment; 

saltwater 

invertebrates

Chronic Saltwater 

amphipod No data N/A No data

Whole sediment; 

freshwater 

invertebrates

Chronic Freshwater 

amphipod No data N/A No data

Whole sediment; 

freshwater 

invertebrates

Chronic Freshwater 

midge No data N/A No data

Aquatic plants 

and algae

Vascular Duckweed EC50 = 3500

EC05 = 3803 -- 133363(Acceptable)

Nonvascular

Marine diatom 

(Skeletonema 

costatum)

EC50 = 21

EC05 = 153 -- 132939

(Acceptable)

1 Freshwater fish are surrogates for aquatic-phase amphibians. 2 The acute-to-chronic ratio (ACR) could not be employed since acceptable acute and chronic studies used 

different fish species that prevented the calculations. Freshwater fish data on the same species (e.g. fathead 

minnow) is needed to estimate the NOAEC for estuarine/marine fish.

3 Per EPA guidelines, the EC05 is used in lieu of the NOAEC since the NOAEC could not be determined as 

effects were observed in all levels.

4.2. Effects to Terrestrial Organisms

Table 4. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for 

Propiconazole

Taxonomic 

Group

Study 

Type

Surrogate 

Species

Toxicity Value Acute Toxicity 

Classification or 

Chronic Effects 

Observed

Source 

(Study 

classification)

Passerine Acute oral N/A No data N/A No data

Birds1

Acute oral

Bobwhite 

quail

LD50 =2,825 mg a.i./kgbw Practically non-toxic 79689

(Acceptable)

Subacute 

Dietary

LC50 >5,620 mg a.i./kgdiet Practically non-toxic 79690

(Acceptable)

Chronic NOAEC = 1000 mg 

a.i./kg-diet

Affected Endpoint: 

None.

133369

(Acceptable)
Page 12 of 46

Table 4. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for 

Propiconazole

Taxonomic 

Group

Study 

Type

Surrogate 

Species

Toxicity Value Acute Toxicity 

Classification or 

Chronic Effects 

Observed

Source 

(Study 

classification)

Mammals

Acute Oral

Laboratory 

rat

LD50 = 1344 mg a.i./kgbw Slightly toxic 58594

Chronic

NOAEL = 500 mg a.i./kgdiet (42 mg a.i./kg-bw [F0

males)

LOAEL = 2500 mg 

a.i./kg-diet (192 mg 

a.i./kg bw [F0 males])

Affected Endpoint: 

Reduced body weight 

gain in F0 and F1, liver 

changes in F0 generation, 

decreased offspring 

survival and body 

weight, hepatic lesions. 

00163164

Terrestrial 

Invertebrates

Acute 

Contact -

Adults

Honey bee 

LD50 > 25 μg a.i./bee Practically non-toxic 43420702

(Acceptable)

Acute Oral 

- Adults No data No data No data

Acute Oral 

- Larval No data N/A No data

Chronic 

Oral –

Adults

No data N/A No data

Chronic 

Oral -

Larval

No data N/A No data

Terrestrial 

plants

Seedling 

Emergence

Dicot 

(Cabbage)

EC25 = 0.178 lb a.i./A

NOAEC = 0.056 lb a.i./A -- 41673203

(In process of 

being updated) Monocot 

(Corn)

EC25 = 0.094 lb a.i./A

NOAEC = 0.18 lb a.i./A --

Vegetative 

Vigor

Dicot 

(Cabbage)

EC25 = 0.039 lb a.i./A

EC052 = Not reported -- 41673201

(In process of 

being updated) Monocot 

(Ryegrass)

EC25 = 0.315 lb a.i./A

NOAEC = 0.0185 lb 

a.i./A

--

1 Birds represent surrogates for terrestrial-phase amphibians and reptiles. 2 Per EPA guidelines, the EC05 is used in lieu of the NOAEC since the NOAEC is above the EC25.

4.3. Ecological Incidents

The ecological incident information system (EIIS) is an OPP database that houses ecological 

incidents that have been reported to the Agency. When available, EIIS includes date and 

location of an incident, type and magnitude of effects observed in various species, use(s) of 

pesticides known or suspected of contributing to the incident, and results of any chemical residue 

analysis or other analyses conducted during incident investigation. EIIS incidents are 

categorized according to the certainty that the incident resulted from pesticide exposure. The 

Avian Monitoring System (AIMS) is a database administered by the American Bird Conservancy 

that contains publicly available data on reported avian incidents involving pesticides. Many of 

the incidents listed in this database are also in the EIIS. 
Page 13 of 46

As of October 2015, there are 27 reported incidents for propiconazole in the EIIS database with 

20 incidents classified as ‘possible’, 1 incident ‘highly probable’, and 6 incidents ‘unlikely’(see 

Table 5 and Appendix I).

In the ‘highly probable’ incident (I022718-001) that occurred on February 6, 2010, in Somerset, 

UK by the Glastonbury Canal where hundreds of dead fish including roach, bream, rudd, chub, 

and perch were observed. Other dying fish were showing signs of distress and behaving 

erratically including jumping out of the water, swimming in circles and on their 

sides. Distressed fish were observed as far as Burtle--6 miles from the source of the 

spill. Analysis of dead fish revealed the presence of the pesticides permethrin, tebuconazole, and 

propiconazole, which are chemicals commonly used as wood preservatives. Tests from the 

Environment Agency's laboratories showed that the canal was contaminated with wood 

preservative chemicals, with extremely high levels of pesticides with some fish having more than 

seven times the lethal limit of chemicals in their gills.

The dates of the incident reports ranged from 1998 to 2014. Most involve damage by treating

directly or ingestion; however, one incident involves spray drift.

In addition to the incident reports available in EIIS, there were 24 aggregate ‘Other Non-Target’

incidents and no AIMs incidents reported to the Agency.

Table 5. Incident Reports from EIIS 

INCIDENT 

NUMBER YEAR CERTAINTY INDEX STATE LEGALITY USE SITE

SPECIES 

AFFECTED

EXPOSURE / 

MAGNITUDE

I022718-001 2010 Highly 

probable NR Misuse Wood Fish

Spill / hundreds of 

bream, perch, and 

unknown fish

I004697-061 NR Possible NR Unknown NR Shrimp Unknown

I007644-016 1998 Possible CA Unknown Orchard Nectarines Treated directly / 12 

acres

I012786-002 2001 Possible NR Unknown Ornamen

tal Ornamental Treated directly / 19 acres

I014029-006 2003 Possible VA Registered Use Wheat Wheat Treated directly / 51 

acres

I014538-013 2003 Possible IN Misuse 

(accident)

Golf 

course

Fish Runoff / ~1,500 fish

I015291-045 NR Possible ND Registered Use Wheat Wheat Treated directly/ 

120 acres

I019130-070 2007 Possible IL Unknown Corn Corn Carryover / 400 

acres

I021500-074 2009 Possible OH Unknown Corn Corn, field Treated directly / 

112 acres

I021500-075 2009 Possible IL Unknown Corn Corn, field Treated directly / 35 

acres

I021947-001 2010 Possible OR Misuse NR Apple NR

I022082-030 2010 Possible ND Unknown Wheat Wheat Treated directly / 

320 acres

I023082-042 2011 Possible ND Unknown Wheat Wheat Treated directly / 

404 acres
Page 14 of 46

Table 5. Incident Reports from EIIS 

INCIDENT 

NUMBER YEAR CERTAINTY INDEX STATE LEGALITY USE SITE

SPECIES 

AFFECTED

EXPOSURE / 

MAGNITUDE

I023390-020 2011 Possible WI Registered Use Wheat Wheat Treated directly / 

900 acres

I023390-021 2011 Possible WI Registered use Wheat Wheat Treated directly / 

1900 acres

I023444-039 2010 Possible NY Unknown Corn Corn Treated directly / 50 

acres

I024295-031 2012 Possible IA Registered use Corn Corn Treated directly / 80 

acres

I026232-001 NR Possible CA Registered use NR Bees NR / 100-170 hives

I026233-001 NR Possible CA Unknown Ag area Bees 87 hives

I026241-001 2014 Possible CA Unknown NR Bees 244 of 460 hives

I026297-001 NR Possible FL Unknown NR Bees ~6000 hives

I020459-023 NR Unlikely WA Unknown Wheat Onion Spray drift / Not 

reported

I023225-006 2011 Unlikely NR Unknown NR Bees Ingestion / 10% area 

(thousands)

I024875-001 2013 Unlikely UT Unknown Ag area Bees NR / 3,972 hives

I025162-001 2013 Unlikely CA Unknown Almond Bees Treated directly / 

12,000 colonies

I026789-001 2014 Unlikely IL Registered Use Corn Bees and fish NR / 600 dead

I027851-001 NR Unlikely NC Unknown NR Bees Ingestion / 1 hive

NR – Not reported

5. Exposure Pathways of Concern

The environmental fate and toxicity profile for propiconazole suggests that direct spray, spray 

drift, leaching and runoff represent the likely exposure pathways for terrestrial and aquatic nontarget organisms. Surface water and inhalation exposure pathways for ecological risk will be

also screened using the SIP (Screening Imbibition Program) and STIR (Screening Tool for 

Inhalation Risk) screening methods to determine if they are potential pathways of concern or 

support requesting data. As a result of the screening, both exposure pathways are of low concern 

for propiconazole, and additional data specific to these exposure pathways are not needed. SIP 

and STIR are described in detail at: http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessingpesticide-risks/models-pesticide-risk-assessment#terrestrial and the modeling can be found in the 

Appendices 2 and 3.
Page 15 of 46

6. Analysis Plan

6.1. Stressors of Concern

Ecological Risk Assessment

Based on available toxicity data, it appears that the stressor of ecological concern for terrestrial 

and aquatic organisms is propiconazole, the parent compound only as the degradates are low in 

toxicity compared to the parent compound.

Drinking Water Assessment

The assessment of the common triazole degradate, 1,2,4-triazole, will be conducted in a separate

assessment. For the parent, propiconazole, surface water EECs (eco) and EDWCs (human) will 

be reassessed with SWCC model, ground water EDWCs will be reassessed with PRZM-GW 

model; following updated model input guidance.

6.2. Measures of Exposure 

Conventional Uses

EFED will use standard available models to evaluate potential exposures to aquatic and 

terrestrial organisms and/or exposure routes as described at http://www2.epa.gov/pesticidescience-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/models-pesticide-risk-assessment.

Antimicrobial Uses

There are 56 active propiconazole labels in OPPIN for two antimicrobial major use patterns: 

wood preservatives (dip, spray, and pressurized applications) and material preservatives.

Specifically, propiconazole may be used in adhesives; coatings; plastics; inks; metalworking 

fluids; and wood preservatives (above-ground and ground-contact) including for use on/in 

lumber, log buildings, roof shingles, wood siding, and fencing), and textile uses including 

“canvas” (i.e., awnings, boat covers, carpet backing, cordage, tents, tarpaulins, and wall coverings). 

On March 8, 2006, the Agency published a Federal Register Notice announcing receipt of a 

request to cancel apparel, furnishings (except shower curtains), and carpet fiber applications of 

propiconazole and EPA issued cancellation orders for these uses on May 26, 2006. However, the 

Agency has identified some product labels that still have these uses. EPA is working with 

registrants to remove these uses; therefore, the apparel, furnishings (except shower curtains), and 

carpet fiber uses will not be considered in registration review.

Based on the registered antimicrobial uses and the physical/chemical and environmental fate 

properties in Table 2 for parent propiconazole, the Agency has developed conceptual model 

diagrams for exposure of ecological organisms to propiconazole. Propiconazole is stable to 

degradation and moderately mobile (Table 2) and therefore environmental exposure to parent 

propiconazole is expected. Chemicals that are released down-the-drain can typically take from a 
Page 16 of 46

few to several hours to reach wastewater treatment plant intakes following their discharge and 

from several hours to roughly a day following their discharge down-the-drain to subsequently be 

discharged from wastewater treatment plants to surface water. Data on WWTP dissipation have 

not been submitted for propiconazole, however, the primary routes of dissipation are expected to 

be partitioning to water with minimal degradation and subsequent outflow in effluent. 

The Agency has created conceptual models for potential routes of environmental exposure which 

are included in “Conceptual Models for Environmental Exposure Pathways of Antimicrobial 

Pesticides,” (EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0638-0002), found in the docket at www.regulations.gov, 

EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0638. The Agency does not consider the interior latex paints or coatings to 

lead to exposure because the treated materials are not anticipated to come into contact with 

water. The conceptual model for adhesives may be seen in slide 17, and for exterior latex paints 

and coatings may be seen in slides 24 and 25. The conceptual model for wood preservation, is in 

slide 29. In MRID 46074205, the leaching rates of propiconazole from treated wood 

(μg/cm2/day) using simulated rainfall were 0.49 (maximum). 0.0026 (minimum), and 0.095 

(average). The cumulative leach rate was 9.9 μg/cm2

.

6.3. Measures of Effect 

Toxicity data presented in Section 4 of this problem formulation will be used to calculate risk 

quotients. Any additional information submitted by the registrant or found in the open literature 

prior to conduct of the risk assessment also will be considered. The open literature studies are 

identified using EPA’s ECOTOXicology database (ECOTOX) (USEPA, 2007c), which employs 

a literature search engine for locating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, 

and wildlife. The publically available database is available at http://www2.epa.gov/chemicalresearch/ecotoxicology-database. The evaluation of both sources of data can also provide insight 

into the direct and indirect effects of pesticides on biotic communities from loss of species that 

are sensitive to the chemicals and from changes in structure and functional characteristics of the 

affected communities.

6.4. Endangered Species Assessments

Consistent with EPA’s responsibility under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Agency will 

evaluate risks to federally listed threatened and endangered (listed) species from registered uses 

of pesticides in accordance with the Joint Interim Approaches developed to implement the 

recommendations of the April 2013 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report, Assessing 

Risks to Endangered and Threatened Species from Pesticides. The NAS report outlines 

recommendations on specific scientific and technical issues related to the development of 

pesticide risk assessments that EPA and the Services must conduct in connection with their 

obligations under the ESA and FIFRA. EPA will address concerns specific to propiconazole in 

connection with the development of its final registration review decision for propiconazole. 

In November 2013, EPA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries (the 

Services), and USDA released a white paper containing a summary of their joint Interim 

Approaches for assessing risks to listed species from pesticides. These Interim Approaches were 
Page 17 of 46

developed jointly by the agencies in response to the NAS recommendations, and reflect a 

common approach to risk assessment shared by the agencies as a way of addressing scientific 

differences between the EPA and the Services. Details of the joint Interim Approaches are 

contained in the November 1, 2013 white paper4, Interim Approaches for National-Level 

Pesticide Endangered Species Act Assessments Based on the Recommendations of the National 

Academy of Sciences April 2013 Report.

Given that the agencies are continuing to develop and work toward implementation of the 

Interim Approaches to assess the potential risks of pesticides to listed species and their 

designated critical habitat, this ecological problem formulation supporting the Preliminary Work 

Plan for propiconazole does not describe the specific ESA analysis, including effects 

determinations for specific listed species or designated critical habitat, to be conducted during 

registration review. While the agencies continue to develop a common method for ESA analysis, 

the planned risk assessment for the registration review of propiconazole will describe the level of 

ESA analysis completed for this particular registration review case. This assessment will allow 

EPA to focus its future evaluations on the types of species where the potential for effects exists, 

once the scientific methods being developed by the agencies have been fully vetted. Once the 

agencies have fully developed and implemented the scientific methods necessary to complete 

risk assessments for listed species and their designated critical habitats, these methods will be 

applied to subsequent analyses of propiconazole as part of completing this registration review.

6.5. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

Propiconazole was included in the first group of chemicals issued an order to conduct Tier 1 

EDSP testing for which EPA has received all of the required Tier 1 assay data. The Agency has 

reviewed all of the assay data received for the appropriate List 1 chemicals, and the conclusions 

of those reviews are available in the chemical-specific public dockets (EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-

0634-0248). For additional information the EDSP program, visit

http://www2.epa.gov/endocrine-disruption/endocrine-disruptor-screening-program-edspoverview.

7. Environmental Fate and Ecological Effects Data

7.1. Environmental Fate

Table 6 identifies environmental fate studies by MRID that offer data for each guideline 

requirement, as well as study classifications and whether or not further data are needed in order 

to support risk assessment.

 4 http://www2.epa.gov/endangered-species/interim-approaches-pesticide-endangered-species-act-assessments-basednas-report
Page 18 of 46

Table 6. Submitted Environmental Fate Data for Propiconazole

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data 

Requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Are data 

needed to 

conduct risk 

assessment?

Justification 

and 

Assumptions 

EPA will Make 

in Absence of 

Data

835.2120 Hydrolysis 00067901 

42238201 Acceptable No

835.2240 Aqueous photolysis 41811901 Acceptable No

835.2410 Soil photolysis 41811902 Acceptable No

835.1110

Activated Sludge 

Sorption Isotherm 

(ASSI)5 

No data N/A

Yes 

(antimicrobial 

uses)

835.31106 Ready 

Biodegradability

No data N/A Yes 

(antimicrobial 

uses)

835.32209 Porous Pot Test

No data N/A Yes 

(antimicrobial 

uses)

835.32409

Simulation Test—

Aerobic Sewage 

Treatment: A. 

Activated Sludge

Unit

No data N/A

Yes 

(antimicrobial 

uses)

835.32809

Simulation Tests to 

Assess the Primary 

and Ultimate

Biodegradability of 

Chemicals 

Discharged to 

Wastewater

No data N/A

Yes 

(antimicrobial 

uses)

 5 The log Kow is greater than 3 (3.72), and ASSI data are required.

6 The results of the Activated Sludge Respiration Inhibition Test (ASRI) will determine which of these four 

biodegradation tests is/are anticipated to be required.

• If the ASRI test EC50 is less than or equal to 20 mg/L, then either the (i) Biodegradation in Activated Sludge 

Study or (ii) Simulation Test - Aerobic Sewage Treatment: A. Activated Sludge Units or (iii) the Porous Pot 

Test is required. If the ASRI test EC50 is greater than 20 mg/L, then the registrant must conduct either: (i) 

Ready Biodegradability or (ii) a) Biodegradation in Activated Sludge or b) Simulation Test - Aerobic Sewage 

Treatment: A. Activated Sludge Units or c) the Porous Pot Test. 

• If the Ready Biodegradability study is conducted and passes, then no further testing is required. If, however, the 

antimicrobial fails the Ready Biodegradability study, then the a) Biodegradation in Activated Sludge or b) 

Simulation Test - Aerobic Sewage Treatment: A. Activated Sludge Units, or c) the Porous Pot study is required.
Page 19 of 46

Table 6. Submitted Environmental Fate Data for Propiconazole

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data 

Requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Are data 

needed to 

conduct risk 

assessment?

Justification 

and 

Assumptions 

EPA will Make 

in Absence of 

Data

835.4100 Aerobic soil 

metabolism

129912

129914

133375

Acceptable No

835.4300 Aerobic aquatic 

metabolism 42347901 Acceptable No

835.4400 Anaerobic aquatic 

metabolism 42347902 Acceptable No

835.1230

835.1240

Adsorption/ 

desorption and 

leaching

41727001

44701801 Supplemental No

835.6100 Terrestrial field 

dissipation

155642

159691

45528702

45528703

Acceptable No

835.6200 Aquatic field 

dissipation

164823

42560501

42560502

Acceptable No

850.1730 Fish bioconcentration 40963502 Acceptable No

850.3300

Activated Sludge 

Respiration Inhibition 

Test (ASRI)

No data N/A

Yes 

(antimicrobial 

uses)

Environmental

Chemistry

Method: Water 

& its ILV

850.6100

Analytical method in 

water

48697002

48713801 Acceptable No

Environmental

Chemistry

Method: Soil & 

its ILV

850.6100

Analytical method in 

soil

48697002

48713801 Acceptable No

7.2. Effects

Tables 7 and 8 identify ecological effects studies by MRID that offer data for each guideline 

requirement, as well as study classifications and whether or not further data are needed in order 

to support risk assessment. Only technical grade active ingredient (TGAI) propiconazole data 

needs are discussed; studies with propiconazole formulated products and/or propiconazole 

transformation products are not being requested at this time. Rationales for the additional data 

requested are presented below.
Page 20 of 46

Conventional Uses

• Propiconazole may cause exposure of pollinators visiting off-site plants that are 

contaminated by spray drift. Acceptable toxicity data to honey bee adults and larvae have not 

been submitted for propiconazole and these data are needed to fulfill EPA’s recent policy on 

pollinator protection. A Tier I study on the toxicity of residues on foliage (OCSPP 850.3030) 

is not needed since results of the honey bee acute contact LD50 is >25 μg a.i./bee, above the 

11 μg a.i./bee trigger criterion. To be consistent with the honey bee risk assessment 

framework, the following seven Tier I, II and III honey bee studies, yet to be submitted for 

propiconazole, are required: 

o Honeybee larval acute oral toxicity study (following OECD 237, Tier I)

o Honey bee adult oral toxicity test (OECD 213, Tier I)

o Honeybee adult 10-day chronic oral (special study; Tier I)

o Honeybee larval repeated dose study (special study renamed as honeybee larval 

chronic oral toxicity study, Tier I) 

o Semi-field testing for pollinators (special study, Tier II). 

o Field testing for pollinators (OCSPP 850.3040, Tier III)

o Field trial of residues in pollen and nectar (special study, Tier III)

Note that it is possible to conduct the larval chronic oral study in such a way as to derive both 

an LD50 (acute endpoint of interest) and a NOAEC (chronic endpoint of interest) from a 

single study. If the chronic larval toxicity study is conducted in such a way that it derives 

both an LD50 and NOAEC, then a separate acute larval toxicity study is not needed. For 

pollinator studies without finalized OECD guidelines, protocols should be submitted for EPA 

review and comment prior to study initiation.

The need for higher Tier semi-field and full field pollinator studies for propiconazole will be 

determined after review of these Tier I studies.

• Acceptable avian acute oral toxicity data were not submitted for a passerine species exposed 

to propiconazole, which is now required under the 40 CFR Part 158 data requirements

(Guideline 850.2100). Though the available bobwhite quail study indicates propiconazole has 

low toxicity to upland game bird species, it is uncertain whether passerines may be more or 

less sensitive to this chemical as a result of their higher metabolic rate and differing 

metabolic pathways. An avian oral toxicity study is needed for a passerine species. 

• Currently, an acute to chronic ratio (ACR) for estuarine/marine fish from the freshwater data 

is not appropriate because the acceptable acute and chronic studies used different freshwater 

species that prevented the calculations. EFED is in need of a fathead minnow acute toxicity

study to obtain an acute toxicity value in order to calculate an ACR using freshwater data on 

the same species (e.g., fathead minnow) to estimate the NOAEC for estuarine/marine fish. 

Without an acute toxicity study with the fathead minnow, chronic risk to estuarine/marine 

fish will be presumed. However, EFED has no reservations if a Fish Early Life-Stage chronic 

toxicity study (OCSPP 850.1400) with an estuarine/marine fish is submitted instead of the 

fathead minnow acute toxicity study to get the NOAEC directly for estuarine/marine fish.
Page 21 of 46

• Acceptable avian reproduction toxicity data were not submitted for a waterfowl species 

exposed to propiconazole. A new avian reproduction toxicity study for mallard ducks is 

necessary to satisfy standard data requirements as the previous mallard reproduction study 

submitted was classified as invalid.

Antimicrobial Uses

• The chemical and physical properties of propiconazole indicate that it may pose risk to 

sediment-dwelling invertebrates when used as an antimicrobial pesticide. To assess the 

toxicity and bioaccumulation potential of propiconazole in sediment fauna, the Agency 

anticipates the need to require three whole sediment chronic invertebrate studies: two in 

freshwater and one in saltwater.
Page 22 of 46

Table 7. Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for Propiconazole

OCSPP

Guideline

Data 

Requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Are data 

needed for 

assessment?

Justification and 

Assumptions EPA 

will Make in 

Absence of Data

850.1010

Freshwater 

invertebrate 

acute toxicity

67925

132932

132935

ACC:072209

Acceptable

Acceptable

Supplemental

Acceptable

No --

850.1025

850.1035

Estuarine/Marine 

invertebrate 

acute toxicity 

132933

132934

ACC:260201

ACC:260201

ACC:260201

Acceptable

Acceptable

Acceptable

Acceptable

Acceptable

No --

850.1075 Freshwater fish 

acute toxicity 

67922

67923

67924

132922

132923

132925

132927

132928

132930

133380

ACC:072209

Acceptable

Acceptable

Supplemental

Acceptable

Supplemental

Acceptable

Supplemental

Acceptable

Acceptable

Acceptable

Supplemental

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

A fathead minnow 

acute toxicity test (to 

generate an ACR to 

apply to the spot fish 

acute toxicity value 

to estimate an 

estuarine/marine fish 

NOAEC) or an 

estuarine/marine fish 

chronic toxicity test 

is necessary to satisfy 

standard data

requirement.

850.1075

Estuarine/Marine 

fish acute 

toxicity 

132921

132924

Supplemental

Acceptable No --

850.1300

Freshwater 

invertebrate life 

cycle 

49300501 In Review -- --

850.1350

Estuarine/Marine 

invertebrates life 

cycle 

133365 Acceptable No

850.1400

Estuarine/Marine 

fish early-life 

stage 

No data N/A

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

An estuarine/marine 

fish chronic toxicity 

test or a fathead

minnow acute 

toxicity test (to make 

a conservative 

assumption) is 

necessary to satisfy 

standard data 

requirement.

Without data, risk 

would be presumed 

for estuarine/marine 

fish, including listed 

species.
Page 23 of 46

Table 7. Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for Propiconazole

OCSPP

Guideline

Data 

Requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Are data 

needed for 

assessment?

Justification and 

Assumptions EPA 

will Make in 

Absence of Data

850.1400 Freshwater fish 

early-life stage 133364 Acceptable No --

850.1500 Fish life cycle (None) (N/A) No

Not triggered per 40 

CFR Part 158 based 

on results of 850.1400 

studies

NonGuidelineWhole sediment; 

chronic 

invertebrate: 

freshwater and 

marine

No data (N/A)

Yes

(antimicrobial 

uses)

Triggered per 40 

CFR Part 158W 

based on chemical 

properties and 

metabolism studies.

850.1735 Whole sediment; 

acute 

invertebrate: 

freshwater

(None) (N/A) No

Not triggered per 40 

CFR Part 158 based 

on chemical 

characteristics

850.1740 Whole sediment; 

acute 

invertebrate: 

marine 

(None) (N/A) No

850.4400

Aquatic plant 

growth: Vascular 

plants

133363 Acceptable No --

850.4500 Aquatic Plant 

Growth: Algal

132937

132938

132939

Acceptable No --

850.4550

Aquatic Plant 

Growth: 

Cyanobacteria

133362 Acceptable No --
Page 24 of 46

Table 8. Submitted Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data for Propiconazole

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data 

Requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Are data 

needed for 

assessment?

Current Additional 

Data Need

850.2100 Avian oral 

toxicity

67926

79689

Acceptable

Acceptable

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

A passerine bird 

study is necessary to 

satisfy standard data 

requirement. Without 

data, risk would be 

presumed for smallsized birds, including 

listed species.

850.2200 Avian dietary 

toxicity

67927

79690

133366

133367

138267

138268

Acceptable

Acceptable

Supplemental

Supplemental

Acceptable

Acceptable

No --

850.2300 Avian 

reproduction 133369 Acceptable

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

A mallard duck study 

is necessary to satisfy 

standard data 

requirement. Without 

data, risk would be 

presumed for 

waterfowls, including 

listed species.

NonguidelineAvian 

inhalation (None) (N/A) No

The STIR model 

indicates exposure 

through inhalation is 

not a concern for birds. 

850.3020

Adult honey 

bee acute 

contact 

toxicity

43420702 Acceptable No --

850.3030

Honey bee 

residue on 

foliage

No data No data No

No data is available; 

however, EFED is not 

asking for the toxicity 

of residue on foliage 

since the bee contact 

LD50 was >25 μg 

a.i./bee, which is above 

the 11 μg a.i./bee 

criterion that triggers 

the study. AD will not 

require toxicity of 

residue data because 

propiconazole is not 

expected to be applied 

to wood used to 

construct honey bee 

enclosures.
Page 25 of 46

Table 8. Submitted Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data for Propiconazole

OCSPP 

Guideline

Data 

Requirement

Submitted 

Studies 

(MRID)

Study 

Classifications

Are data 

needed for 

assessment?

Current Additional 

Data Need

850.3040 Field testing 

for pollinators No data No data

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

Pollinator Tier I, II 

and III studies with 

the honeybees are 

necessary to satisfy 

standard data 

requirement. Without 

data, risk would be 

presumed for 

pollinators, including 

listed species.

SS

Larval honey 

bee chronic 

oral toxicity

No data No data

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

SS

Adult honey 

bee chronic 

oral toxicity

No data No data

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

SS

Larval honey 

bee acute 

toxicity

No data No data

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

SS

Adult honey 

bee acute oral 

toxicity

No data No data

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

SS

Field testing of 

residues in 

pollen and 

nectar

No data No data

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

SS

Semi-field 

testing for 

pollinators

No data No data

Yes

(conventional 

uses)

850.4100

Tier I or II 

seedling 

emergence

41673203

47675201

Acceptable

Acceptable No

--

850.4150

Tier I or II 

vegetative 

vigor

41673201

47675201

Acceptable

Acceptable No
Page 26 of 46

8. References 

MRID 46074205. Maier, M. (2003) Leaching Behaviour of Wolsin FL-35 Treated Timber. 

Project Number: 08/2003. Unpublished study prepared by Dr. Wolman GMBH. 10 p.

United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. Assessing soil contamination: A reference 

manual. http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x2570e/x2570e06.htm

USEPA 2006. Environmental Fate and Effects Division Revised RED for the Reregistration of

Propiconazole. Dated June 30 2006.

USEPA. 2006 a. 1,2,4-Triazole, Triazole Alanine, Triazole Acetic Acid: Drinking Water 

Assessment in Support of Reregistration and Registration Actions for Triazole-derivative 

Fungicide Compounds. D320682. Office of Pesticide Programs Environmental Fate and Effects 

Division, Environmental Risk Branch 1. February 28, 2006.

USEPA. 2006 b. 1,2,4-Triazole, Triazole Alanine, Triazole Acetic Acid: Human Health 

Aggregate Risk Assessment in Support of Reregistration and Registration Actions for Triazolederivative Fungicide Compounds. DP Number 322215. Office of Pesticide Programs Health 

Effects Division and Environmental Fate and Effects Division. February 7, 2006.

U.S. EPA, Office of Pesticide Programs, Antimicrobial Division, Risk Assessment and Science 

Support Branch. August 4, 2014. Conceptual Models for Environmental Exposure Pathways of 

Antimicrobial Pesticides. EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-

0638. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0638-0002

Ecological Effects Bibliography (Acceptable or Supplemental studies 

only)

850.2100 Avian Single Dose Oral Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

67926 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.B.; Joiner, G.; et al. (1980) Final Report: Acute 

Oral LD50--Mallard Duck: Project No. 108-194. (Unpublished study 

received Jan 28, 1981 under 100-618; prepared by Wildlife 

International, Ltd. and Washington College, submitted by Ciba-Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, N.C.; CDL:244273-G) 

79689 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.B.; Joiner, G.; et al. (1980) Final Report: Acute 

Oral LD50--Bobwhite Quail: Project No. 108-193. (Unpublished study 

received Jan 28, 1981 under 100-618; prepared by Wildlife 

International, Ltd. and Washington College, submitted by Ciba-Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, N.C.; CDL:244273-F) 
Page 27 of 46

850.2200 Avian Dietary Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

67927 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.B.; Joiner, G.; et al. (1980) Final Report: Eight-day 

Dietary LC50--Mallard Duck: Project No. 108-192. (Un- published 

study received Jan 28, 1981 under 100-618; prepared by Wildlife 

International, Ltd. and Washington College, submitted by Ciba-Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, N.C.; CDL:244273-I) 

79690 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.B.; Joiner, G.; et al. (1980) Final Report: Eight-day 

Dietary LC50--Bobwhite Quail: Project No. 108-191. (Unpublished 

study received Jan 28, 1981 under 100-618; prepared by Wildlife 

International, Ltd. and Washington College, submit- ted by Ciba-Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, N.C.; CDL:244273-H) 

133366 Ullmann, L. (1978) Report on 8-day-feeding Toxicity in the Adult 

Japanese Quail of Technical CGA 64250: Project No. 785254. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by 

Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Switz., submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greens- boro, 

NC; CDL:072210-I) 

133367 Ullmann, L. (1978) Report on 8-day-feeding Toxicity in the 3-day Old 

Peking Duck of Technical CGA 64250: Project # 785255. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by 

Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Switz., submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greens- boro, 

NC; CDL:072210-J) 

138267 Beavers, J.; Jaber, M.; Joiner, G.; et al. (1983) A Dietary LC50 in the 

Bobwhite with CGA-131013: Project No. 108-221. Final rept. 

(Unpublished study received Apr 4, 1984 under 100-617; prepared by 

Wildlife International Ltd., submitted by Ciba- Geigy Corp., 

Greensboro, NC; CDL:253013-B) 1H-1,2,4-Triazole-1-propanoic acid, 

.alpha.-amino138268 Beavers, J.; Jaber, M.; Joiner, G.; et al. (1983) A Dietary LC50 in the 

Mallard with CGA-131013: Project No. 108-222. Final rept. 

(Unpublished study received Apr 4, 1984 under 100-617; prepared by 

Wildlife International Ltd., submitted by Ciba- Geigy Corp., 

Greensboro, NC; CDL:253013-C) 1H-1,2,4-Triazole-1-propanoic acid, 

.alpha.-amino850.2300 Avian Reproduction

MRID Citation Reference

133368 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.; Joiner, G.; et al. (1981) Subacute Feeding: 

Reproduction Screening Bioassay--Bobwhite Quail: CGA-64250 

Technical: Project No. 108-201. Final rept. (Unpublished study 

received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by Wildlife Inter-
Page 28 of 46

national Ltd., submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; 

CDL:072210-K) 

133369 Fink, R.; Beavers, J.; Joiner, G.; et al. (1982) One-generation Reproduction--Bobwhite Quail: CGA 64250 Technical: Project No. 108-

202. Final rept. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-

617; prepared by Wildlife International Ltd., submitted by Ciba-Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072210-M) 

72-1 850.1075 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Fish

MRID Citation Reference

67922 Thompson, C.M.; Griffen, J.; Cranor, W. (1980) Acute Toxicity of CGA64250 to Bluegill Sunfish (~Lepomis macrochirus~): Static Acute 

Bioassay Report # 26037. (Unpublished study received Jan 28, 1981 

under 100-618; prepared by Analytical Bio Chemistry Laboratories, Inc., 

submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, N.C.; CDL:244273-B) 

67923 Thompson, C.M.; Griffen, J.; Cranor, W. (1980) Acute Toxicity of CGA64250 to Rainbow Trout (~Salmo gairdneri~): Static Acute Bioassay 

Report # 26038. (Unpublished study received Jan 28, 1981 under 100-

618; prepared by Analytical Bio Chemistry Laboratories, Inc., submitted 

by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, N.C.; CDL:244273-C) 

67924 Thompson, C.M.; Griffen, J.; Cranor, W. (1980) Acute Toxicity of CGA64250 to Channel Catfish (~Ictalurus punctatus~): Static Acute Bioassay 

Report # 26039. (Unpublished study received Jan 28, 1981 under 100-

618; prepared by Analytical Bio Chemistry Laboratories, Inc., submitted 

by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, N.C.; CDL:244273-D) 

132922 Hitz, H.; Kurmann, F.; Mendezu, C.; et al. (1981) Report on the Acute 

Toxicity of CGA 64250 to Bluegill ...: Test No. 81 03 03. (Unpublished 

study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by Ciba-Geigy 

Ltd., Switz., submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; 

CDL:072209-D) 

132923 Bathe, R. (1979) Report on Acute Toxicity to Brown Trout and Blue- gill 

of CGA 64250 EC 250 (A-6097 A): Project No. 785822. (Un- published 

study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by Ciba-Geigy 

Ltd., Switz., submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; 

CDL:072209-E) 

132925 LeBlanc, G.; Sousa, J. (1983) Acute Toxicity of Tilt 3.6E to Blue- gill ...: 

Report #BW-83-2-1364. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 

under 100-617; prepared by EG & G, Bionomics, sub- mitted by CibaGeigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072209-G) 

132927 Buchanan, J.; Pell, I. (1980) The Acute Toxicity of 2 Formulations of 

CGA 64,250 to the Carp and the Rainbow Trout: CBG 276/80961. 

(Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by 

Huntingdon Research Centre, Eng., submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., 

Greensboro, NC; CDL:072209-I) 
Page 29 of 46

132928 LeBlanc, G.; Sousa, J. (1983) Acute Toxicity of Tilt 3.6E to Rain- bow 

Trout ...: Report #BW-83-2-1362. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 

1983 under 100-617; prepared by EG & G, Bionomics, submitted by 

Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL: 072209-J) 

132929 De Morsier, A.; Kurmann, F.; Mendezu, C.; et al. (1982) Report on the 

Test for Acute Toxicity of CGA 64250 to Carp: Project No. 81 03 02. 

(Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by 

Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Switz., submitted by Ciba- Geigy Corp., Greensboro, 

NC; CDL:072209-K) 

132930 De Morsier, A.; Kurmann, F.; Mendezu, C.; et al. (1982) Report on the 

Test for Acute Toxicity of CGA 64 250 to Cat Fish: Project No. 81 03 04. 

(Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by 

Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Switz., submitted by Ciba- Geigy Corp., Greensboro, 

NC; CDL:072209-L) 

46074203 Hertl, D. (2003) Acute Toxicity of Wolsin FL-35 to Rainbow Trout 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a 96 hour Semi Static Test: (Final Report). 

Project Number: 14643230. Unpublished study prepared by Institut fuer

Biologische Analytik und. 78 p.

Fenpropimorph/Propiconazole/Boric acid

48860604 Gonsior, G. (2010) Chlorothalonil/Propiconazole SE (A13817A) - Acute 

Toxicity Testing in Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (Teleostei, 

Salmonidae): Final Report. Project Number: S10/01128/OCR 

TK0022210. Unpublished study prepared by Eurofins - GAB GmbH. 

44p.

49268903 Gonsior, G. (2011) Fludioxonil/Chlorothalonil/Propiconazole: 

Fludioxonil/Chlorothalonil/Propiconazole SE (A14036B)- Acute Toxicity 

Testing in Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): Final Report. Project 

Number: S09/03026. Unpublished study prepared by Eurofins - GAB 

GmbH. 45p.

Accession 

No.

072209

Hitz, H.R. (1982) Acute Toxicity of CGA-64250 to Rainbow Trout. 

Prepared by Ciba-Geigy Ltd. Data Acct. No. 072209. Reference 7

Accession 

No. 072211

MRID 

133380

Rufli, H. (1983) Report on the Test for Acute Toxicity of CGA-98032 to 

Rainbow Trout. Project No. 02-14-18. Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Basle, 

Switzerland. Accession No. 072211.

850.1010 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Invertebrates

MRID Citation Reference

67925 Forbis, A.D.; Boudreau, P.; Cranor, W. (1980) Acute Toxicity of CGA64250 to Daphnia magna: Static Acute Bioassay Report # 26040. 

(Unpublished study received Jan 28, 1981 under 100-618; prepared by 

Analytical Bio Chemistry Laboratories, Inc., submit- ted by Ciba-Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, N.C.; CDL:244273-E) 
Page 30 of 46

132931 Hitz, H.; Haas, A. (1981) Report on the Acute Toxicity of CGA 64 250 

to Daphnia magna Straus: Test No. 80 19 28. (Unpublished study 

received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by Ciba- Geigy Ltd., 

Switz., submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072209-

M) 

132932 LeBlanc, G.; Surprenant, D. (1983) Acute Toxicity of Tilt 3.6E to the 

Water Flea ...: Report #BW-83-2-1367. (Unpublished study received 

Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by EG & G, Bionomics, 

submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL: 072209-N)

132935 LeBlanc, G.; Mastone, J.; Elwood, D.; et al. (1981) Acute Toxicity of 

CGA-64250 to Crayfish ...: Report #BW-81-10-1035. (Unpublished 

study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by EG & G, 

Bionomics, submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; 

CDL:072209-Q) 

133381 Rufli, H.; Kurmann, F.; Kurtz, S. (1983) Report on the Test for A- cute 

Toxicity of CGA 98032 to Daphnia magna: Project No. 82 14 16. 

(Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared 

by Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Switz., submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., 

Greensboro, NC; CDL:072211-U) 

163165 LeBlanc, G.; Mastone, J. (1981) The Chronic Toxicity of CGA-64250 to 

the Water Flea (Daphnia magna): Report No. BW-81-11-1043. 

Unpublished study prepared by EG&G Bionomics. 29 p. 

46074204 Hertl, D. (2003) Acute Toxicity of Wolsin FL-35 to Daphnia magna in a 

48 hour Immobilization Test. Project Number: 14642220. Unpublished 

study prepared by Institut fuer Biologische Analytik und. 69 p.

Fenpropimorph/Propiconazole/Boric acid

48860605 Borrmann, K. (2010) Chlorothalonil/Propiconazole SE (A13817A) -

Assessment of Toxic Effects on Daphnia magna Using the 48 Hour 

Acute Immobilisation Test: Final Report. Project Number: 

S10/01085/OCR, TK0022212. Unpublished study prepared by Eurofins 

- GAB GmbH. 44p.

492668906 Borrmann, K. (2011) Fludioxonil/Chlorothalonil/Propiconazole SE 

(A14036B)-Assessment of Toxic Effects on Daphnia magna Using the 

48 h Acute Immobilisation Test: Final Report. Project Number: 

S09/03027. Unpublished study prepared by Eurofins - GAB GmbH. 

43p.

Accession No. 

072209 

Suprenant, Donald C. (1983) Acute Toxicity of Tilt 3.6E to the Water 

Flea (Daphnia magna). Prepared by EG&G Bionomics, Aquatic 

Toxicology Laboratory, Wareham, Mass. Data Accession No. 072209. 

Reference 13.

850.1025/850.1035 Acute Toxicity to Estuarine/Marine 

Invertebrates

MRID Citation Reference
Page 31 of 46

132933 Ward, G. (1983) Acute Toxicity of Tilt 3.6E to Eastern Oysters ...: 

Report No. BP-83-3-42. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 

under 100-617; prepared by EG & G Bionomics, submitted by CibaGeigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072209-O) 

132934 Ward, G. (1983) Acute Toxicity of Tilt 3.6E to Mysid Shrimp ...: Report 

No. BP-83-4-50. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-

617; prepared by EG & G Bionomics, submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., 

Greensboro, NC; CDL:072209-P) 

132921 Ward, G. (1981) Acute Toxicity of CGA-64250 to Spot ...: Report No. 

BP-81-7-123R. Rev. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 

100-617; prepared by EG & G Bionomics, submitted by Ciba-Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072209-C) 

132924 Ward, G. (1983) Acute Toxicity of Tilt 3.6E to Spot ...: Report No. BP83-4-48. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; 

prepared by EG & G Bionomics, submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., 

Greensboro, NC; CDL:072209-F) 

Accession No. 

260201

Dionne, E. and D.C. Suprenant (1985) Acute Toxicity of CGA-64250 to 

Embryolarvae of Eastern Oysters (Crassostrea virginica). Prepared by 

Springborn Bionomics, Inc., Wareham, Mass., Submitted by CibaGeigy Corp., Greensboro, NC. Bionomics Report No. BW-85-8-1815. 

Bionomics Study No. 1781.0585.6119.514. Accession No. 260201.

Accession No. 

260201

Ward, G.S. (1982) Acute Toxicity of CGA-64250 to Eastern Oysters 

(Crassostrea virginica). Prepared by EG&G Bionomics, Pensacola, FL. 

Submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corporation, Greensboro, NC. Project No. 

BP-82-2-12. Accession No. 260201.

Accession No. 

260201

Hollister, T.A. (1981) Acute Toxicity of CGA-64250 to Mysid Shrimp 

(Mysidopsis bahia) in a 96-hr. Flow-through Test. Prepared by EG&G 

Bionomics, Pensacola, Florida, Submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., 

Greensboro, NC. Project No. R26, EG&G Report No. BP-81-8-138-R. 

Accession No. 260201.

850.1300 Aquatic Invertebrate Life Cycle 

MRID Citation Reference

49300501 Fournier, A. (2014) Propiconazole - Full Life-Cycle Toxicity Test with 

Water Fleas, Daphnia, magna, Under Static Renewal Conditions: Final 

Report. Project Number: 1781/6953. Unpublished study prepared by 

Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC. 55p.

850.1350 Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate Life Cycle 

MRID Citation Reference
Page 32 of 46

133365 Hollister, T. (1981) Chronic Toxicity of CGA-64250 to Mysid Shrimp: 

Project No. R26; Report No. BP-81-9-146. (Unpublished study 

received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by EG&G Bionomics, 

submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072210-E) 

850.1400 Fish Early Life Stage 

MRID Citation Reference

133364 Iley, E.; Naplin, N.; Nimmo, D. (1981) Flow-through Fathead Minnow 

Early Life Stage Toxicity Test with CGA-64250: PA909. (Unpublished 

study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by 

Environmental Research & Technology, Inc., submitted by Ciba- Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072210-D) 

41720302 Surprenant, D. (1987) The Toxicity of CGA-64250 (Propiconazole) to 

Fathead Minnow (Pimephales Promelas) Embryo and Larvae: Lab 

Project Number: 87-8-2476. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 235 p. 

850.4100 Seedling emergence 

MRID Citation Reference

41673202 Maggio, R. (1990) Tier 2 Seed Germination Nontarget Phytotoxicity 

Study Using Propiconazole: Lab Project Number: LR90-419. 

Unpublished study prepared by Ciba-Geigy Corp. 58 p. 

41673203 Maggio, R. (1990) Tier 2 Seedling Emergence Nontarget Phytotoxicity 

Study Using Propiconazole: Lab Project Number: LR90-420. 

Unpublished study prepared by Ciba-Geigy Corp. 149 p. 

47675201 Gray, J. (2008) Wolsin FL-35: Seedling Emergence, Tier I and 

Vegetative Vigour, Tier II. Project Number: DWM/0002, DWM/0003. 

Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Life Sciences, Ltd. 80 p.

Fenpropimorph/Propiconazole/Boric acid

850.4150 Vegetative vigor

MRID Citation Reference

41673201 Maggio, R. (1990) Tier 2 Vegetative Vigor Nontarget Phytotoxicity 

Study Using Propiconazole: Lab Project Number: LR90-418. 

Unpublished study prepared by Ciba-Geigy Corp. 141 p. 
Page 33 of 46

47675201 Gray, J. (2008) Wolsin FL-35: Seedling Emergence, Tier I and 

Vegetative Vigour, Tier II. Project Number: DWM/0002, DWM/0003. 

Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Life Sciences, Ltd. 80 p.

Fenpropimorph/Propiconazole/Boric acid

850.5400 Aquatic plant growth

MRID Citation Reference

132936 Hitz, H.; Haas, A. (1981) Report on the Growth-inhibition Test to Algae 

(Scenedesmus suspicatus) of CGA 64 250 (AFNOR T 90- 304): Test 

No. 80 19 29. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-

617; prepared by Ciba-Geigy Ltd., Switz., sub- mitted by Ciba-Geigy 

Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072209-R) 

132937 Hollister, T. (1981) The Effect of CGA-64250 to the Freshwater Alga 

Selenastrum capricornutum: Report No. BP-81-7-129-R. Rev. (Unpublished study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by 

EG & G Bionomics, submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; 

CDL:072209-S) 

132938 Hollister, T. (1981) The Effect of CGA-64250 to the Freshwater Diatom 

Navicula seminulum: Report No. BP-81-8-134R. Rev. (Un- published 

study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by EG & G 

Bionomics, submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; 

CDL:072209-T) 

132939 Hollister, T. (1981) The Effect of CGA-64250 to the Marine Alga 

Skeletonema costatum: Report No. BP-81-8-136-R. Rev. (Unpublished 

study received Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by EG & G 

Bionomics, submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; 

CDL:072209-U) 

133362 Hollister, T. (1981) The Effect of CGA-64250 to the Blue-green Alga: 

Project No. R26; Report No. BP-81-8-137- R. Rev. (Unpublished study 

received Dec 12, 1983 under 100- 617; prepared by EG&G Bionomics, 

submitted by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL:072210-A) 

133363 Hollister, T. (1981) The Effect of CGA-64250 to Duckweed: Project No. 

R26; Report No. BP-81-8-139-R. Rev. (Unpublished study received 

Dec 12, 1983 under 100-617; prepared by EG&G Bionomics submitted 

by Ciba-Geigy Corp., Greensboro, NC; CDL: 072210-B) 

47675202 Biester, M. (2008) Wolsin FL-35: Phytotoxicity Test with the 

Freshwater Duckweed (Lemna gibba), Under Static Conditions. Project 

Number: 1111/001/410. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn 

Smithers Laboratories (Europe). 64 p.

Fenpropimorph/Propiconazole/Boric acid

47675203 Hudson, B. (2008) Assessment of the Algal Toxicity, Tiers I and II 

(96th EC 50) of Wolsin FL-35 to the Marine Alga Skeletonema 

costatum, the Freshwater Algae Selenastrum capricornutum and 

Anabaena flos aquae. Project Number: 1051/27. Unpublished study 

prepared by Opus Plus Limited. 69 p.
Page 34 of 46

Fenpropimorph/Propiconazole/Boric acid

47675204 Biester, M. (2008) Wolsin FL-35: Alga, Growth Inhibition Test with 

Navicula pelliculosa. Project Number: 1111/001/440. Unpublished 

study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories (Europe). 68 p.

Fenpropimorph/Propiconazole/Boric acid

48860602 Dengler, D. (2010) Chlorothalonil/Propiconazole SE (A13817A) -

Testing of Effects on the Single Cell Green Alga Pseudokirchneriella 

subcapitata: Final Report. Project Number: S10/01086/OCR, 

TK0022211. Unpublished study prepared by Eurofins - GAB GmbH. 

63p.

850.3020 Honey bee acute contact

MRID Citation Reference

43420702 Palmers, S.; Beavers, J. (1994) Propiconazole Technical: An Acute 

Contact Toxicity Study with the Honey Bee: Lab Project Number: 108-

373. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 16 p. 
Page 35 of 46

Appendix 1. Incidents 

EIIS Pesticide Summary Report: General Information

Propiconazole (122101)

Incident # Date County State Certainty Legal. Formul. Appl. Method Total Magnitude

AQUATIC

Golf course

I014538-013 8/1/2003 Hamilton IN 2 MA Spill Approx. 1500 fish

N/R

I004697-061 2 UN N/R UNKNOWN UNKNOWN

Wood

I022718-001 2/6/2010 4 M N/A Hundreds

PLANTS

Corn

I019130-070 9/10/2007 La Salle IL 2 UN Broadcast 400 acres

I021500-074 7/21/2009 Clark OH 2 UN Broadcast 112 acres

I021500-075 8/29/2009 Greene IL 2 UN Broadcast 35 acres

I023444-039 10/8/2010 Cayuga NY 2 UN N/R N/R 100% of 50 acres

Corn, field

I024295-031 6/9/2012 Clinton IA 2 RU Post-broadcast 100% of 80 acres

N/R

I021947-001 5/24/2010 Linn OR 2 M 1

Wednesday, October 07, 2015 Certainty Code: 0=Unrelated, 1=Unlikely, 2=Possible, 3=Probable, 4=Highly Probable. Page 1 of 3

Legality Code: RU=Registered Use, M=Misuse, MA=Misuse (Accidental), MI=Misuse (Intentional), U=Unknown.
Page 36 of 46

Incident # Date County State Certainty Legal. Formul. Appl. Method Total Magnitude

ORCHARD

I007644-016 7/1/1998 TULARE CA 2 UN N/R 12 ACRES OUT 

OF 16

Ornamental

I012786-002 5/15/2001 2 UN 19

Wheat

I023082-042 6/7/2011 Sargent ND 2 UN Post-broadcast 100% of 404 acres

Wheat, spring

I015291-045 Cass ND 2 RU EC Broadcast 120 acres

I022082-030 6/7/2010 Hettinger ND 2 UN Broadcast 100% of 320 Acres

I023390-021 7/6/2011 Clark WI 2 RU Post-broadcast 100% of 1900 acres

I023390-020 9/1/2011 Clark WI 2 RU Post-broadcast 100% of 900 acres

Wheat, winter

I020459-023 Walla Walla WA 1 UN Spray

I014029-006 4/5/2003 King William VA 2 RU Broadcast 51 acres

TERRESTRIAL

No Data

I026297-001 FL 2 UN ~6000 hives

I027851-001 Haywood NC 1 UN 1 hive

I026232-001 Kern CA 2 RU 70% loss

Wednesday, October 07, 2015 Certainty Code: 0=Unrelated, 1=Unlikely, 2=Possible, 3=Probable, 4=Highly Probable. Page 2 of 3

Legality Code: RU=Registered Use, M=Misuse, MA=Misuse (Accidental), MI=Misuse (Intentional), U=Unknown.
Page 37 of 46

Incident # Date County State Certainty Legal. Formul. Appl. Method Total Magnitude

I023225-006 4/17/2011 1 UN Thousands

I026241-001 3/3/2014 Kern CA 2 UN 244 of 460 affected

I028065-001 7/22/2014 Washington ME 2 UN

Agricultural area

I026233-001 San Joaquin CA 2 UN 87 hives damged

I024875-001 7/1/2013 UT 1 UN N/R 3,972 hives

Almond

I025162-001 5/3/2013 Madera CA 1 UN

Corn

I026789-001 8/1/2014 Woodford IL 1 RU SC 600

Wednesday, October 07, 2015 Certainty Code: 0=Unrelated, 1=Unlikely, 2=Possible, 3=Probable, 4=Highly Probable. Page 3 of 3

Legality Code: RU=Registered Use, M=Misuse, MA=Misuse (Accidental), MI=Misuse (Intentional), U=Unknown.
Page 38 of 46

EIIS Pesticide Summary Report: Species Information

Propiconazole (122101)

Incident # Species Scientific Name Magnitude Response Rt. Exposure

AQUATIC

Golf course

I014538-013

unknown fish 1500 mortality Runoff

N/R

I004697-061

shrimp Decapoda unknown mortality UNKNOWN

Wood

I022718-001

bream Notemigonus crysoleucas hundreds mortality Treated directly

perch Percidae hundreds mortality Treated directly

unknown fish hundreds mortality Treated directly

PLANTS

Corn

I019130-070

corn Zea mays 400 acres plant damage Carryover

I021500-074

corn, field Zea mays 112 acres plant damage Treated directly

I021500-075

Wednesday, October 07, 2015 Page 1 of 4
Page 39 of 46

Incident # Species Scientific Name Magnitude Response Rt. Exposure

corn, field Zea mays 35 acres plant damage Treated directly

I023444-039

corn Zea mays 100% of 50 acres plant damage Treated directly

Corn, field

I024295-031

corn Zea mays 100% of 80 plant damage Treated directly

N/R

I021947-001

apple Melus domestica 1 plant damage N/R

ORCHARD

I007644-016

nectarines 12 acres out of 16 plant damage Treated directly

Ornamental

I012786-002

ornamental 19 plant damage

Wheat

I023082-042

wheat 100% of 404 acres plant damage Treated directly

Wheat, spring

I015291-045

wheat, spring 120 acres plant damage Treated directly

I022082-030

wheat, spring 100% of 320 acres plant damage Treated directly

I023302-026

Wednesday, October 07, 2015 Page 2 of 4
Page 40 of 46

Incident # Species Scientific Name Magnitude Response Rt. Exposure

wheat, spring 51.3% plant damage Treated directly

I023390-020

wheat, spring 100% of 900 acres plant damage Treated directly

I023390-021

wheat, winter 100% of 1,900 acres plant damage Treated directly

Wheat, winter

I014029-006

wheat, winter 51 acres plant damage Treated directly

I020459-023

onion plant damage Drift, spray

TERRESTRIAL

No Data

I023225-006

honey bee Apis millifera 10% area beekeepers mortality Ingestion

I026232-001

honey bee Apis millifera 100-170 hives affect mortality

I026241-001

honey bee Apis millifera 244 of 460 mortality N/R

I026297-001

honey bee Apis millifera 6000 colonies + mortality

I027851-001

honey bee Apis millifera 1 hive mortality Ingestion

I028065-001

honey bee Apis millifera 3,500 colonies mortality

Wednesday, October 07, 2015 Page 3 of 4
Page 41 of 46

Incident # Species Scientific Name Magnitude Response Rt. Exposure

Agricultural area

I024875-001

honey bee Apis millifera 3,972 hives mortality N/R

I026233-001

honey bee Apis millifera 75% of 87 hives mortality

Almond

I025162-001

honey bee Apis millifera 12,000 colonies mortality Treated directly

Almonds

I026333-008

honey bee Apis millifera mortality

Corn

I026789-001

brook trout Salyelinus fontinalis mortality

honey bee Apis millifera 600 mortality

rainbow trout Onchorhynchus mykiss 600 mortality

Wednesday, October 07, 2015 Page 4 of 4
Page 42 of 46

Appendix 2. STIR

Input

Application and Chemical Information

Enter Chemical Name Propiconazole

Enter Chemical Use All

Is the Application a Spray? (enter y or n) y

If Spray What Type (enter ground or air) air

Enter Chemical Molecular Weight (g/mole) 342.33

Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 1.00E-06

Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 1.8

Toxicity Properties

Bird

Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD50 (mg/kg bw) 2825

Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15

Enter Tested Bird Weight (kg) 0.178

Mammal

Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD50 (mg/kg bw) 729

Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC50 (mg/L) 5.84

Duration of Rat Inhalation Study (hrs) 4

Enter Rat Weight (kg) 0.35

Output

Results Avian (0.020 kg )

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m3) 1.84E-02

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.32E-03

Adjusted Inhalation LD50 1.26E+02

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD50 1.84E-05 Exposure not Likely Significant

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.73E-01

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation 

LD50 1.37E-03 Exposure not Likely Significant

Results Mammalian (0.015 kg )

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m3) 1.84E-02

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.91E-03

Adjusted Inhalation LD50 3.48E+02

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD50 8.37E-06 Exposure not Likely Significant

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.17E-01

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation 

LD50 6.25E-04 Exposure not Likely Significant
Page 43 of 46

Appendix 3. SIP

Table 1. Inputs

Parameter Value

Chemical name Propiconazole

Solubility (in water at 25oC; mg/L) 100

Mammalian LD50 (mg/kg-bw) 729

Mammalian test species laboratory rat

Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Mammalian NOAEL (mg/kg-bw) 43

Mammalian test species laboratory rat

Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Avian LD50 (mg/kg-bw) 2825

Avian test species northern bobwhite quail

Body weight (g) of "other" avian species

Mineau scaling factor 1.15

Mallard NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) no data

Bobwhite quail NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 1000

NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) for other bird species

Body weight (g) of other avian species

NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) for 2nd other bird species

Body weight (g) of 2nd other avian species

Table 2. Mammalian Results

Parameter Acute Chronic

Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 17.2000 17.2000

Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 560.7181 33.0739

Ratio of exposure to toxicity 0.0307 0.5200

Conclusion*

Surface water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for mammals

Surface water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for mammals

Table 3. Avian Results

Parameter Acute Chronic

Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 81.0000 81.0000

Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 2035.2134 106.2983

Ratio of exposure to acute toxicity 0.0398 0.7620

Conclusion*

Surface water exposure 

alone is NOT a potential 

concern for birds

Exposure through Surface 

water alone is a potential 

concern for birds

*Conclusion is for Surface water exposure alone. This does not combine all routes of exposure. Therefore, 

when aggregated with other routes (i.e., diet, inhalation, dermal), pesticide exposure through Surface water

may contribute to a total exposure that has potential for effects to non-target animals.
Page 44 of 46

Appendix 4. Degradate Structures

Photopropiconazole (photoproduct I) CAS Reg. No. 71769-74-9

Photoproduct II (phenylurea) CAS Reg. No. 64-10-8
Page 45 of 46

Appendix 5. Parent Propiconazole and Degradate 

Structures
Page 46 of 46