# 1. Executive summary

The Environmen tal Fate and Effects Division (EFED) has completed the preliminary problem formulation for the ecological risk, environmental fate, endangered species, and drinking water assessments to be conducted as part of the registration review of the fungicide c yazo famid . The problem formulation describes the methods planned to be used during the completion of drinking water and ecological r isk assessments in support of registration review and provide s an ove rview of the environmental fate, ecological effects , and p otential risks associated with the use of c yazofamid as well as uncertain ties unique to risk assessment of c yazofamid . This document also identifies additional studies that would be beneficial to the conduct of an ecological risk assessment. Major findin gs include:

**Environmental Fate Data Gaps**

The fate database for cyazofamid is partially complete with the exception of the following studies:

• Environmental Chemistry Methods/Independent Laboratory Validations (OCSPP 850.6100): ECMs and ILVs in soil, wate r and sediment should be available.

**Ecological Effects Data Gaps**

The ecological database for cyazofamid is largely complete with the exception of the following studies:

• Estuarine/marine Fish acute toxicity (850.1075)

• Freshwater Invertebrate Life Cycle ( 850.1300)

• Estuarine/marine Invertebrate Life Cycle (850.1350)

• Estuarine/marine Fish ELS (850.1400)

• Freshwater Invertebrate Life Cycle using CTCA (850.1300)

• Freshwater Fish ELS using CTCA (850.1400)

• Whole sediment Chronic toxicity invertebrates

• Avian Acute Oral with degradate CCIM (850.2100)

• Toxicity to Cyanobacteria (850.4550)

• 

### Acute oral toxicity to larval honey bees (OECD TG237)

• Chronic oral toxicity to adult honey bees (Special)

• Chronic oral toxicity to larval honey bees (Special)

• Field Testing for Pollin ators (850.3040)

• Semi

- field testing for pollinators (tunnel or colony feeding studies) (Special

— Tier 2)

• Field Trial of residues in pollen and nectar (Special

— Tier 2)

2

### Uncertainties

The major uncertainties in the environmental fate database are related to the fact that the half

- lives were obtained from supplemental aerobic soil, and aerobic and anaerobic aquatic metabolism studies.

Regarding the application rates of cyazofamid on all registered crops , EFED will use application scenarios that result in m aximum exposure scenarios for a given use for the risk assessment. Any absence of information on the labels that specifies the maximum single application rate, the application interval, the annual maximum rate allowed (lbs a.i./year), or application metho d may result in conservative assumptions.

The major uncertainties in the environmental ecologi cal database are related to the degradates of c yazofamid wi th regard to terrestrial risk, specifically CCIM. A n a cute oral toxicity test indicates that CCIM is more toxic to mammals tha n cyazofamid ;

c yazofamid LD 50 

### >5000 ppm as compared to CCIM LD 50 

### = 324 ppm (MRID 45408910 and 45408916). Soil metabolism studies indicate the presence of CCIM and the potential for organisms to come into contact with CCIM in the f ield. Toxicity of CCIM to terrestrial species other than the rat is largely unknown and thus presents a major uncertainty. There is currently no data available to understand the toxicity of CCIM to avian species; there is uncertainty as to whether avian s pecies while exhibit the same enhanced toxicity to CCIM as compared to the parent that the mammals have exhibited in lab toxicity tests. There is additional uncertainty with regards to acute toxicity of cyazofamid to larval pollinators as well as oral chr onic toxicity to adult and larval pollinators. With regard to aquatic risk, there is no data available on the toxicity of cyazofamid to benthic organisms; risk to estuarine/marine organisms has been triggered in previous assessments and the K oc 

### shows the potential for the chemical to bind to sediments. The degradate toxicity database for aquatic species is largely complete and presents less of an uncertainty. In previous assessments, the LOC was exceeded for chronic risk to freshwater fish; the chronic t oxicity value for the parent was used i n place of the toxicity of CTCA. CTCA is expected to be the major terminal degradate in biologically active soils and water/sediment systems thus the potential chronic risk of CTCA to freshwater organisms is relevant to risk assessment

. 

# 2. Introduction

EFED evaluated the most recent ecological risk assessments for c yazofamid in association with the updated toxicity, exposure, and usage information to determine if sufficient data are available and if further updates ar e needed to support registration review. Recent risk assessments include a 2012 assessment for the proposed IR

- 4 new uses for cyazofamid in the product R anman ® 

### 400SC Fungicide (EPA Reg. No. 71512

- 3)

on s ucculent b eans, s helled b ean s , l eafy g reen s Subgroup 4A, basil (fresh and d r ied leaves), tuberous and corm v egeta bles Subgroup 1C, and fruiting v egetables Group 8

- 10 (DP Barcode D396387)

. The uses on turf and ornamentals were assessed in 2006 (DP Barcode D319107+ ), the use on carrots was assessed in 2008 ( DP Barcode D343415 ), the uses on fruitin g vegetables, okra and grapes (e ast of the Rocky Mountains) were assessed

3

### in 2009 (DP Barcode D356880+ ) , and in 2010 uses on b rassica (cole) leafy vegetables & turnip greens (Crop Group 5), spinach, and hops were ass essed

. In addition, EFED considered the latest Agency science policies and risk assessment methodologies. The structure of c yazofamid , as well as the chemical names and other identifiers can be found in the chemical identity table attached to this docume nt ( Appendix A )

. 

# 3. Use Characterization

Cyazofamid (CAS name: 4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- (4

- methylphenyl)

- 1H

imidazole

- 1

- sulfonamide; IUPAC name: 4

- chloro

- 2cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- p

tolylimidazole

- 1

- sulfonamide ; CAS No. 120116

- 88

- 3 ; PC code 085651 ; Case N o. 7056 ) is a selective fungicide. C yazofamid belongs the FRAC 1 

### Code 21 . Cyazofamid is the single chemical in the cyano

- imidazole chemical group under th is FRAC Code

. The pesticide’s mode of action is respiration inhibition by target ing the fungi comple x III cytochrome bc1 (ubiquinone reductase) at Q1 site (target site of action code is C4)

. According to the label, c yazofamid has limited systemic activity

, so it is used as a protectant fungicide applied by ground spray, foliar spray, aerial spray, drip irrigation, soil drench or soil surface spray, and sprinkler irrigation , before disease infection

. Cyazofamid controls a variety of pests such as downy mildew

, club root, cavity spot, root d ieback, phytophthora blight

, whit e rust , pyth i um damping off

, cot tony leak

, pink rot, pyth i um root, crown rot , taro leaf blight

, and late blight

. Cyazofamid is used on basil, brassica (cole) leafy vegetables crop group 5, cucurbit vegetable crop group 9

, grapes, hops, leafy greens crop subgroup 4A, and succulent podded and succulent shelled beans

, carrots , cucurbit vegetable crop group 9, tuberous and corn vegetables crop subgroup 1C

, fruiting vegetables crop group 8 and 10

, and tomato greenhouse transplants. Cyazofamid is also used on turf areas associated with golf c ourses (greens, tees and fairways), sod farms, seed farms, college and professional sports fields, residential and commercial lawns. It is formulated in two active Section 3 end

- use products as suspension
concentrates (Ranman 400SC, EPA Reg. No. 71512

- 3; and Cyazofamid 400SC Turf and Ornamental, EPA Reg. No. 71512

- 13; both products are suspension concentrates containing 34.5% A.I. and 3.33 lb A.I./gallon). The registrant for cyazofamid is ISK Biosciences Corp.

The chemical profile produced by BEAD

, dated February 2 , 201 5 ( USEPA 201 5 )

, located in the docket, lists the use patterns of maximum exposure s for the current uses of

c yazofamid

. EFED will use application scenarios that result in maximum exposure scenarios for a given use for the risk assessment

. Any absence of information on the labels that specifies the maximum single application rate, the application interval, the annual maximum rate allowed (lbs a.i./year), or application method may result in conservative assumptions

.

1 FRAC = Fungicid e Resistance Action Committee at http://www.frac.info/index.htm (accessed August 25, 2014).



### 4

# 4. Conclusions from Previou s Risk Assessments

a. Ecological Risk Assessment

The Agency has conducted multiple ecological risk assessments on c yazofamid that serve as a basis for this problem formulation

. EFED evaluated cyazofamid’s potential risks to

non

- target and endangered specie s for aquatic and terrestrial organisms (including plants) (DP Barcode s D319107+ and D356880+). In addition, in the 2012 assessment EFED evaluated chronic risk to birds and risk to terrestrial plants, based upon newly reviewed data (DP Barcode D396387)

.
The revised chronic RQ values for the uses on turf and ornamentals for birds ranged from 0.01

- 2.20 for single applications and from 0.03

- 3.87 for multiple applications (LOC ≥ 1). Since there was a possibility of risk to birds, reptiles could also be adver sely impacted. The same EECs calculated in the previous assessment were used to establish risk quotients in th e assessment (for the parent compound and the initial degradate CCIM and applications for the uses on turf and ornamentals). There was also a po ssibility of acute risk from the CCIM degradate to endangered and non

- endangered small mammals from the use on turf and ornamentals. However, according to the 2009 review (various crops), it appear ed that no acute or chronic LOCs were exceeded for mammals

. In the aquatic environment, endangered and threatened estuarine/marine invertebrates

we re considered at risk , specifically molluscs

. Freshwater fish may be at chronic risk from the degradate CTCA, assuming that chronic toxicity for CTCA is the same as the
p arent. However, this RQ value was considered very uncertain because no c hronic toxicity data was submitted for CTCA.

Based upon results of a newly submitted study, there were no statistically significant effects evident in the study on terrestrial p lants at the rate of 1.56 lb a.i./A, which is the highest rate allowed in the labels; thus risk to t errestrial plants at that rate w as considered unlikely. In addition, there we re no risks to aquatic plants.

At the time , EFED d id not assess risk to non

- t arget insects. Results of acceptable studies

we re used for recommending appropriate label precautions. As cyazofamid is practically

no n

- toxic to honeybees, low risk wa s assumed.

Table 1 . Summ ary of risk concerns i dentified for c y azofamid in previous a ssessments

Birds Mammals Terr. Plants Terr. Invert

s Fish BCF Aquatic Inverts Aquatic Plants Groundwater Contamination Persistence Degrad at es of Concern

Yes No No N o Yes A N A Yes No NA Yes A Yes B Yes = at least one LOC has been exceede d in previous assessments; No = LOCs have not been exceeded in previous assessments; NA = RQs have not been calculated previously. A For the degradate CTCA. B The degradates CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA were considered of concern.



### 5

## b. **Drinking Water Exposure Assess ments** 

A drinking water exposure assessment for the IR

- 4 petition for the use on succulent beans, s helled b ean s, leafy g reen s Subgroup 4A, basil (fresh and d r ied leaves), tuberous and corm vegetables Subgroup 1C, and fruiting v egetables Group 8

- 10 ( althoug h it is noted that at the time, some fruiting vegetables had been registered), was conducted in 2012 (DP Barcode D396052, dated February 10, 2012 )

. Based on a review of the use information, it was found that the proposed new crops had much lower seasonal application rates than turf and ornamentals

. The values reported i n the assessment of turf and ornamentals , conducted in 2006 (DP Barcode D 319466 , dated September 6, 2006 ) , were used to cover the new crop s. The Health Effects Division (HED) Metabolism As sessment Review Committee (MARC) concluded that cyazofamid and the metabolites CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA should be considered to be the major residues of concern in water

, and should be included in the drinking water assessments (Acierto et al. 2004, DP Barco de D298915). 2 

### Cyazofamid, CCIM and CCIM

- AM should be the chemicals present under acute exposure and CTCA under chronic exposure. Individual runs were performed for each of the chemicals in PRZM/EXAMS , using the residue summation approach (see below)

, and a summary of results is provided in Table 2

.

Table 2. M aximum surface and ground water EDWCs for cyazofamid and its relevant major degradates for the t urf and ornamentals use pattern (DP Barcode D319466 , dated 9/6/06)

Scenario Chemical Surface water E DWCs (ppb) Ground

water EDWC (ppb) Acute Chronic “Non

- Cancer” Chronic “Cancer” 1 st Scenario Cyazofamid 14.362 0.377 0.279 0.01180 2 nd Scenario CCIM 17.106 12.094 10.600 0.00061 CCIM

- AM 6.699 6.312 3.611 0.00270 3 rd Scenario CTCA 136.242 133.45 8 77.270 2.180

Recommended EDWCs : 38.2 133.5 77.3 2.18



### For turf and ornamentals, t he surface w ater acute EDWC was 38.2 ppb. The surface

w ater non

- cancer chronic value was 133.5 pp b and the cancer chronic EDWC was 77.3 ppb. The value for ground water i s 2.18 ppb, which was used for both acute and chronic
exposures. The reason why the chronic EDWCs are higher than the acute values is that CTCA (the chemical expected to be present chronically), demonstrated being more persistent than the other species mo deled.

Th e residue summation (RS) modeling strategy requires summation of individual residues of concern concentrations to represent the total toxic residues ( TTR s)

. Application rates for degradation products need to be adjusted to account for molecular

2 Acierto, A., et al. “ Cyazofamid

- Meeting Report of the Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC) ”

, Health Effe cts Division Memo dated 02/18/2004 ; DP Barcode D298915

.


### 6

### w eight ratios of degradate to parent and the normalized maximum percentage of degradation product formed.

A new drinking water assessment may be necessary following review of requested fate and transport data . Once the data are available they will be used in models available at that time. In this respect, it is noted that current models are the surface water concentration calculator (SWCC) for drinking water from surface water and PRZM ground water (PRZM

- GW) for ground water; these models are not the same t han those used in obtaining EDWCs in Table 2 above.



## c. **Clean Water Act Programs**

Cyazofamid 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) cri teria have been developed for c yazofamid ( http://iaspub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/attains_nation_cy.cause_detail_303d?p_cause_grou p_id=885 and http://iaspub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/attains_nation.tmdl_pollutant_detail?p_pollutant_gr oup_id=885&p_pollutant_group_n ame=PESTICIDES )

. Aquatic benchmarks have been established for cyazofamid and are available at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/ecorisk_ders/aquatic_life_benchmark.htm . Any da ta submitted or otherwise located as part of the registration review process may be used to update aquatic life benchmarks if applicable.


# 5. Environmental Fate and Transport

The main routes of dissipation for c yazofamid [ 4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- (4

- met hylphenyl)

- 1H

- imidazole

- 1

- sulfonamide ; CAS No. 120116

- 88

- 3 ; PC code 085651] in the environment (on soil and in surface water) are aerobic soil metabolism and aqueous photolysis

. A summary of physicochemical properties of cyazofamid is shown in Table 3 . T he chemical is a relatively insoluble compound in acidic, neutral and alkaline conditions. The low vapor pressure and Henry’s Law constant of cyazofamid suggest partitioning into the air from water and/or dry or wet soil surfaces will not be an important r oute of its dissipation in the environment. Cyazofamid has a K OW 

### = 1

, 585 suggesting that it will potentially be bioconcentrated by aquatic organisms such as fish.

Table 3

. P hysicoch emical properties of cyazofamid Parameter Value Ref or MRID Chemical Cl assification C yanoimidazole Molecular Formula C 13 H 13 ClN 4 O 2 S 45409038 Chemical Name (IUPAC) 4

- chloro

- 2cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- p

- tolylimidazole

- 1

- sulfonamide Cyazofamid data sheet Chemical Name (CAS) 4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- (4

- methylphenyl)

- 1H

imidaz ole

- 1

- sulfonamide CAS Number 120116

- 88

- 3 454090

- 38 Pesticide Classification Fungicide Molecular Weight 324.79



### 7

### Parameter Value Ref or MRID Physical State Crystalline solid Water Solubility (ppm) 0.121 @ pH 5, 0.107 @ pH 7, 0.109 @ pH 9 Solubility in Saltwater 0.0476 ppm @ 2 0°C 477163 06 Vapor pressure (25 o C) <9.9810

- 8 mmHg or < 1.33 x10

- 5 Pa or <1.32x10

- 10 atm. EPA Fact sheet Henry's Law Constant <4.0x10

- 7 atm. m 3 mole

- 1 Calculated Octanol/Water Partition, K OW 1,585 (log K OW 3.2 @ 25°C) 45409038



### Cyazofamid and degradates fate and transport properties are based on previously submitted studies and reports ( Agency r isk a ssessments dated 2004, 2006

, 2008 , and 2012 ). Cyazofamid’s environmental fate data are summarized in Table 4

.

Table 4

. Summary of environmental fate data fo r c yazofamid Parameter Value 1 

### MRID Hydrolysis t 1⁄2 ~ 11.9 days @ 25 o C, pH 4
t 1⁄2 ~ 12.9 days @ 25 o C, pH 5
t 1⁄2 ~ 11.9 days @ 25 o C, pH 7
t 1⁄2 ~ 10.8 days @ 25 o C, pH 9
t 1⁄2 ~ 13.4, 12.4, 11.2, 9.3 hrs @ 50 o C, pH’s 4, 5, 7, 9, respectively Major degradates, of th e recovered : CCIM (74

- 83%) and CCIM

- AM (9

- 10% only at pH 9) 454090 39

, 465377 01

, 467027 01

Aqueous photolysis at pH 5 t 1⁄2 ~ 30 Minutes Major degradates: CCTS (37.9% at 0.13 day), CCIM (39.6% at 0.25 and 2 days), HTID (18.5% at 21 days), and CDTS (9.6% at 36 days). The degradate p

- t oluamide (12.1% at 36 days) was identified only in the [benzene

14 C] cyazofamid. 454091 02

, 465377 03

, 467027 03

Photo degradation on soil t 1⁄2 ~ 47 days Major degradates: None. Minor degradates: CCIM (6%), CCBA (2%), CTCA (1%), and CCIM

- AM (<1%). 454091 03

, 465377 04

, 467027 04 Aerobic soil metabolis m t 1⁄2 = 6.1

- 6.4 days in a loamy sand soil from Ohio, Soil 1 (pH 6.5, %OC 0.66) Major degradates: CCIM, CCIM

- AM, and CTCA 454091 06

, 465377 05

t 1⁄2 = 3.7

- 4.0 days in a s andy loam soil from England , Soil 2 (pH 7.6, %OC= 1.2)
t 1⁄2 = 4.3

- 4.4 days in a s andy loam soil from England, Soil 3 (pH 6.9, %OC= 3.0)
t 1⁄2 = 4.9

- 6.0 days in a s andy soil from Germany, Soil 5 (pH 5.9, %OC= 0.63) Major degradates: CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA 454091 08

, 465377 06 2

t 1⁄2 = 4.3 days in a s andy loam soil from CA (pH 5.7, %OM= 0.8)
t 1⁄2 = 3.0 days in a s andy clay loam from ND (pH~7.8, %OM= 5.8) Major degradates: CCIM, CCIM

- AM, CTCA

, CCBA and CCBA

- AC 477163 01

Aerobic aquatic metabolism t 1⁄2 = 14.7

- 18.0 days (total system): River wate r/Sandy loam (~3:1)
t 1⁄2 = 9.5

- 10.9 days (total system): Creek water/Sandy loam (~3:1) Major degradates: CCIM (up to 47%), CCIM

- AM (up to 11%) , and CTCA (up to 31%) 454091 10

, 46 5377 12

, 467027 07 2 Anaerobic aquatic metabolism 1 t 1⁄2 = 5.6

- 6.2 d ays (total s ystem): Milli

- Q water/Sandy loam (~2:1) Major degradates (of the applied): CCIM (25%), CCIM

- AM (17%); CTCA (22%) 454091 09

, 465377 11

, 467027 06
t 1⁄2 = 10.5 d ays (total system): Creek water/Sandy loam from OH (~2:1) Major degradates (of the applied): CCIM ( 40.0%), CCIM

- AM (19.8%); CTCA (62.8%) 477163 02

Adsorption/ Desorption (K d and K oc in L · Kg

- 1 ) [Imidazole

- 4

- 14 C]/[Benzene

- U

14 C]: Loamy sand (Ohio), Soil 1: K d = 9.99/ 6.96 and K oc = 1,524/1,062 Sandy loam (UK), Soil 2: K d = 43.31/87.00 and K oc = 1,444/2,900 Sandy loam (UK), Soil 3: K d = 14.11/13.49 and K oc = 1,176/1,124 Sand (Germany), Soil 5: K d = 5.14/ 4.14 and K oc = 815/ 657 454091 12

, 465377 13

Sandy loam (CA), K d = NA/ 7.01 and K oc = NA/ 1,491 Sandy clay loam (ND) K d = NA/ 39.5 and K oc = NA/ 1,171 477163 04 2



### 8

### Parameter Value 1 

### MRID Mobility in Soils: Column Un

- aged Leaching (4 soils) >98% of the applied radioactivity remained on the top 10 cm with very limited leaching.

• Observed rate and pa ttern of degradation were similar to aerobic soil (Major degradates: CCIM, CCIM

- AM).

• Leachate constituted <0.3% of the applied radioactivity. 454091 13

, 465377 16

Mobility in Soils: Aged Leaching (one soil) >95% of the radioactivity remained on the top 10 c m with very limited leaching.

• Observed rate and pattern of degradation were similar to aerobic soil , with ma jor degradates: CCIM, CC IM

- AM, and minor degradate CTCA

.

• Leachate constituted nearly 1% of the applied radioactivity and was domina ted by the degrad ate CTCA only.

• In comparison with unaged soils, radioactivity profile indicated aging may have caused increased mobility

. 454091 11

, 465377 15

Fish BCF Unacceptable study results are not reported. 45409138, 45409139, 465377 24 All BCFs are for whole fish a nd refer to total radioactivity : BCF: low dose sample 161x; high dose sample 170x. DT 50 = 1.0 days for whole fish. BCF K : low dose sample 123x; high dose sample 132x. DT 50 = 0.69 days for whole fish. Species rainbow trout at ~ 12 0 C, pH 8.1

- 8.3. 477163 05

NA=not available

1 Soil and aquatic systems range of half

- lives are values for the two labels. It is noted that longer half

- lives were observed for the aerobic/anaerobic aquatic systems in late intervals (a range of 19 to 30 days)

. 2 Only one radiolabel was used in this experiment.



### Available environmental fate studies suggest cyazofamid is not very mobile and degrades relatively rapidly into various products, according to the prevalent environmental conditions. Among the three ma jor degradates for cyazofamid, relevant to risk assessment (CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA), the two terminal degradates are CCIM

- AM and CTCA. Of them, CCIM

- AM is a major hydrolysate. It is expected to occur in itially in water. However , CTCA is expected to be t he major terminal degradate in biologically active soils and water/ sediment systems. Both CCIM

- AM and CTCA are stable to abiotic hydrolysis

, but only CCIM is highly susceptible to biodegradation. Given these fate characteristics, cyazofamid could potenti ally reach surface water via spray drift, or runoff under certain environmental conditions, but the potential for it to reach ground water is low. CCIM

- AM and/or CTCA could potentially be the terminal degradates in surface water bodies affected by spray d rift and/or runoff depending on the level of biol ogical activity. However, CTCA appears to have a high er potential to contaminate groundwater due to its high persistence ; however, its mobility is relatively low ( Table 5 )

.
Based on the referenced data, th e main process involved in cyzofamid fate in aqueous systems is direct photolysis followed by hydrolysis. Its fate in the soil system appears to be controlled by biotic degradation as well as its strong affinity for adsorption to the soil. Mobility of cyaz ofamid in natural environments is expected to be limited because of its relatively high affinity to adsorption.

Available fate and transport data on cyazofamid major de gradates CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA are presented in Table 5

.

9

### Table 5 . Environmental fat e data summary for the major and relevant degradates of cyazofamid

Parameter 1 Value (t 1⁄2 for [phenyl

- U

14 C]

- t 1⁄2 for [imidazole

- 4

- 14 C]
MRID CCIM CCIM

- AM CTCA Solubility in Saltwater @ 20°C (ppm) ≥ 115 0.200 98.7 All chemicals: 47716306 Hydrolysis All three were relatively stable @ 50oC for 5 days in pHs 4, 7, and 9. All chemicals: 454091 01

, 465377 02

, 467027 02 Aerobic soil metabolism 2 Soil 3 t 1⁄2 = 1.9

- 1.3 days t 1⁄2 = 6.3

- 6.6 days
t 1⁄2 >120 da ys (relatively stable) in all three soils CCIM : 454091 07

, 465377 07

, 465524 01 CCIM

- AM : 454091 04

, 465377 09

, 467027 05

CTCA : 454091 05

, 465377 10 Soil 4 t 1⁄2 = 1.3

- 0.9 days t 1⁄2 = 10.0

- 6.6 days

Soil 5 t 1⁄2 = 2.9

- 2.6 days t 1⁄2 = 20.2

- 12.3 days

Maj or degradates CCIM

- AM, CTCA, CCBA

- AM CTCA (max. 49.5

- 57.4% AR ) None identified

Adsorption/ Desorption

(K d and K oc in L Kg

- 1 )

Using: [Benzene

- U

- 14 C] Soil 1 K d = 3.91 K oc = 594 K d = 22.43 K oc = 3,398 K d = 8.96 K oc = 1,357 All chemicals: 454091 14

, 465377 14
S oil 2 K d = 5.70 K oc = 475 K d = 23.30 K oc = 1,941 K d = 9.80 K oc = 816

Soil 3 K d = 23.57 K oc = 786 K d = 62.47 K oc = 2,082 K d = 17.16 K oc = 572

Soil 5 K d = 7.3 K oc = 1,158 K d = 13.64 K oc = 2,165 K d = 3.77 K oc = 599

1 Soil 1 : Loamy Sand, Ohio (pH 6.5, %OC= 0.66); Soil 2 : Sandy loam, England (pH 7.6, %OC= 1.2); Soil 3 : Sandy loam, England (pH 6.9, %OC= 3.0); Soil 4: Loamy sand, England (pH 7.6, %OC= 1.1); and Soil 5: Sandy soil, Germany (pH 5.9, %OC= 0.63).
2 Range of half

- lives are values for the two labels. It was no ted that lon ger half

- lives were observed later in the experiments (a range of 2

- 7 days for CCIM and 14

- 28 days in the first two soils and >112 days for the third soil for CCIM

- AM.


### Data on hydrolysis suggest that the three degradates are stable to this abi otic process. Various conclusions are derived from the data on aerobic soil metabolism and mobility. The first major degradate, CCIM

, appears to be susceptible to leaching ; however, it is short

- lived. CCIM

- AM is similar to it s parent in its low persiste nce/ mobility. Finally, the degradate CTCA shows high persistence , but moderate mobility

. The major terminal

degradate in biologically active soil and aquatic environments is expected to be CTCA because of the apparent transformation of CCIM to CCIM

- AM and finally into the persistent CTCA. Cyazofamid reaching surface water is expected to be highly affected by hydrolysis, which transforms it into CCIM, which is stable to abiotic hydrolysis. The degradates CCBA, CCBA

- AM and CCBA

- AC may also be observed afte r further metabolism in some studies. The registrant

- proposed degradation pathway is presented in Figure 1

. Further information about all the degradates observed in all the environmental fate studies (nomenclature, structures, maximum observed in each st udy,
etc. ) is provided in Appendix A

.

10

### Figure 1. Cyazofamid Registrant’s Proposed Degradation Pathway (Source: MRID# 47716303)

A summary of previously submitted field studies is shown in Table 6

.

Table 6 . Summary of the terrestrial field diss ipation st udy on cyazofamid
Location (MRID) Half

- life 1 Soil Dissipation of Cyazofamid and its Degradation Products Grant County, WA 454091 16, 465377 17

, 465524 02 t 1⁄2 = 1.5 days Loamy sand pH: 6.5 OM: 0.60% Cyazofamid: was not detected below 0

- 15 cm. Degradation Pro ducts: CCIM

- AM and CTCA (detected through 540 days).

CTCA was detected 8 times in the 15

- 30 cm soil layer throughout the 540

- day experiment.



### 11Location (MRID) Half

- life 1 Soil Dissipation of Cyazofamid and its Degradation Products Wayne County, NY 454091 17, 465377 20, 465524 03 t 1⁄2 = 8.5 days Sandy loam pH: 6.1 OM: 3.33% Cyazofamid: was not dete cted below 0

- 15 cm. Degradation Products: CCIM

- AM (detected through 28 days), and CCBA (detected sporadically at 0.03

- 0.01 ppm); CCIM and CTCA detected at 0.01

- 0.02 ppm through the 540

- day study.

Degradates were not generally detected below 0

- 15 cm with t he exception of CTCA which was sporadically detected in the 15

- 30 cm layer. Montezuma, GA 456385 12, 465377 23, 467842 01 t 1⁄2 = 2.0 days Loam pH: 6.2 OM: 0.55% Cyazofamid: was not detected below 15 cm. Degradation Products: CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA (detected
t hrough 540 days).

Only CCIM

- AM was sporadically detected in the 15

- 30 cm layer. Watsonville, CA 456385 13, 465377 22, 467842 02 t 1⁄2 = 15 days L oam pH: 6.5 OM: 2.38% Cyazofamid: was detected only once below 15 cm. Degradation Products: CCIM

- AM and CTCA were detected through 582 days with maximum concentrations reaching >10%, CCBA (detected through 582 days), and CTCA detected at the end of the study period.

Degradates were not detected below 0

- 15 cm, except of CCIM

- AM which was sporadically detected. Pikevi lle, NC 465871 01 t 1⁄2 ( days ) : Grass: 7 Thatch: 29

- 32 Soil: 15

- 120 Sandy loam pH: 5.7 OM: 2.2% Cyazofamid: was detected only once in the 7.5

- 15 cm soil layer. Degradation Products: CCIM, CTCA, CCIM

- AM, and CCBA were all detected in mino r amo unts (<10%) in the three layers.

O nly CCIM

- AM was detected at >10% of the total applied parent in the thatch layer only. Ashland, VA 465711 02 t 1⁄2 ( days ) : Grass: 3 Thatch: 9

- 26 Soil: 10

- 25 Sandy loam pH: 6.8 OM: 1.1% Cyazofami d: was detected only once in the 7.5

- 15 cm soil layer. Degradation Products: CCIM, CTCA, CCIM

- AM, and CCBA were all detected in minor amounts in grass and thatch layers.

O nly CTCA was detected in minor amounts in the soil layer.

1 t 1⁄2 = first order half

- l ife; DT 50 = Dissipation time of 50% of the compound.


### The major uncertainties in the environmental fate database are related to the fact that the half

- lives were obtained from supplemental aerobic soil, and aerobic and anaerobic aquatic metabolism studies.


# 6. Receptors

Based on the available toxicity information, cyazofamid is particularly toxic to freshwater and estuarine/marine fish and invertebrate s. H owever , limited solubility of the substance resulted in a number of studies with non

- definitive endpoints for both aquatic and terrestrial species to which toxicity cannot be determined

.



## a. **Effects to Aquatic Organisms**

In early submissions (45409129, 45409130, 45409132) of freshwater acute fish studies classifie d as supplemental, reliable LC 50 

### values were no t measurable due to the solubility of the compound and poor recoveries. However, there were no mortalities due to toxicity up to the limit of solubility. More rec ent studies conducted using a formulated

12

### product plus adjuvant (46258206) indicate that the fo rmulation would be classified as highly toxic based on the LC50 value.

Two freshwater fish early life cycle studies were submitted. The study conducted using TGAI on the fathead minnow (45409137) fulfills the guideline and is considered acceptable. Th e statistically significant treatment related effects were reduction in growth parameters (total length) and impaired coordination. The study conducted using
t he rainbow trout (46258211) using the formulation does not meet the guideline requirements and i s considered supplemental.

There are two studies available for the acute toxicity to Daphnia magna conducted using the TGAI and the formulated product (46702708) . In the bioassay on the TGAI, the test substance was observed undissolved as a surface fil m in the 0.45 ppm test solutions and undissolved as surface film and bottom deposit in the 0.79 and 1.3 ppm test solutions. The test study author reported that the concentrations tested in this experiment exceeded the water solubility by a factor of 10 an d that the solubility of the test substance in this experiment was greatly limite d despite attempts at centrifugation and filtration. After 48 hours, no mortalities or sub

- lethal effects were observed. The limit of solubility was reported as being betwee n 0.14 and 0.45 ppm. When tested as the formulation the toxicity of cyazofamid is much greater.

There is one freshwater aquatic invertebrate life cycle study available using the TGAI (46702708). The functional limit of water solubility for technical c yazofamid was reported as 0.14 ppm. Growth parameters (dry weight) were affected at 0.087 ppm and above with a NOAEC of < 0.0087 ppm. A new study should be submitted with a valid NOAEC.

There is one estuarine/marine acute fish study available conducted using TGAI on the sheepshead minnow (45409131). Since the LC 50 

### is >0.167 ppm, the toxicity of technical cyazofamid can be categorized as highly toxic to estuarine/marine fish on acute basis. There was a 15% morta lity rate observed on day 4 of exposure i n the 0.167 group with a NOAEC of 0.108 ppm. The study was deemed supplemental.

Additionally, there are two acute studies available using estuarine/marine invertebrates using the TGAI: one using the eastern oyster (45409134) and one using the mysid (4540 9135). Since the EC 50 

### and LC 50 

### are 0.0147 and 0.089, the toxicity of technical cyazofamid are categorized as very highly toxic to estuarine/marine invertebrates on an acute basis.

There is one aquatic vascular plant study available using duckweed (4540 9142) where no endpoints were affected; the resulting endpoint was EC 50 

### > 1220 ppb. There was also one aquatic nonvascular plant study available using Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata (46258213); the most sensitive endpoint was biomass resulting in an

. There was no data submitted on chronic toxicity of cyazofamid to estuarine/marine fish or invertebrates.

13

### Table 2 . Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for Cyazofamid Taxonomic

Group Study Type S urrogate Species Toxicity Value (all units in

terms of measured active ingredient) Acute Toxicity Classification Source

Freshwater fish 1 Acute Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) LC 50 >0.14 ppm Not toxic at solubility limit Supplemental 45409129

Rai nbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) LC 50 > 0.10 ppm Not toxic at solubility limit No mortalities Supplemental 46258206

Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) 2 LC 50 =0.56 ppm Highly toxic Supplemental 46258206 Bluegill Sunfish (Leopmis macrochirus) LC 50 >0 .14 ppm Not toxic at solubility limit Supplemental 45409130

Chronic (Early Life

Stage) Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) NOAEC = 0.0901 ppm LOAEC = 0.179
ppm

Reduction in total length -- Acceptable 45409137

Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) 2 NO AEC = 0.57
ppm LOAEC = 1.92
ppm
Swimming behavior and body color -- Supplemental 46258211

Freshwater invertebrates Acute Water Flea ( Daphnia
magna ) EC 50 > 1.3 ppm Not toxic at solubility limit Acceptable 45409133

Water Flea ( Daphnia
magna ) 2 EC 50 = 0. 158
ppm Highly toxic Acceptable 46258201

Chronic Water Flea (Daphnia magna) NOAEC <0.0087 ppm LOAEC= 0.087
ppm
Dry weight -- Supplemental 46702708

Estuarine/marine fish Acute Sheepshead Minnow ( Cyprinodon variegatus ) LC 50 >0.167
ppm Highly toxic Supp lemental 45409131



### 14Taxonomic Group Study Type S urrogate Species Toxicity Value (all units in

terms of measured active ingredient) Acute Toxicity Classification Source

Estuarine/marine invertebrates Acute Eastern Oyster ( Crassostrea virginica ) EC 50 = 0.0147
ppm Very Highly Toxic Acceptable 45409134

Mysid (Americamysis bahia) LC 50 = 0.089
ppm Very Highly toxic Acceptable 45409135

Aquatic plants and algae Vascular Duckweed ( Lemna gibba ) EC 50 >1220 ppb No endpoint affected -- Acceptable 45409142

Non

vascular Green Algae ( Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata ) 2 EC 50 = 100 ppb Biomass -- Acceptable 46258213

1 Freshwater fish may be surrogates for aquatic

- phase amphibians.

2 Conducted using formulation; 35.9% ai 

### The toxicity database for c yazofamid degradates for acute studies is significant, however there are no chronic studies available for CTCA. Submitted studies for freshwater fish indicate that degra dates are less toxic on an acute basis compared to the parent. The degradates are somewhat less toxic to the daphnid than the parent. While the CCIM

- AM metabolite is classified as highly toxic it should be noted that the test concentration recovered were 0.4 to 5.5% due to the limited solubility of the compound. The concentration of 0.4 mg/L reflects the solubility of the compound.

Table 3 . Summary of Available Aquatic Studies Using Degradates of Cyazofamid Species Degradate Name Toxicity Value ( LD 50 ) Affected Endpoint Source

Acute Freshwater Fish

Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss 98.7 % CCIM

- AM >7.88 ppm Moderately Toxic Supplemental 46258208

99.3 % CTCA >92.2 ppm Slightly toxic Supplemental 46258209

Acute Freshwater Invertebrate

Daphnia magn a 98.1% CCIM 0.413 ppm Highly toxic Acceptable 46258202

98.7% CCIM

- AM >0.4 ppm Highly toxic Supplemental 46258203

99.3% CTCA >99.2 ppm Slightly toxic Acceptable 46258204 Green Algae

Selenastrum

costatum 98.1% CCIM 680 ppb Biomass -- Supplemental 462 58214

98.7% CCIM

- AM >400 ppb None -- Supplemental 46258215

99.3% CTCA >102,000 ppb Cell density, growth rate, biomass -- Supplemental 46258216



### 15

## b. **Effects to Terrestrial Organisms**

Two acceptable avian acute oral studies are available for risk characteri zation: one conducted using TGAI on the bobwhite quail (45409121) and one conducted using formulated product on the mallard (4658212). Both studies resulted in LD 50 

### of >2000 mg/kg bw thus cyazofamid is considered practically non

- toxic to waterfowl and upl and gamebird species on an acute oral basis.

Additionally, there are two avian subacute dietary studies available for risk characterization: both were conducing using TGAI on the bobwhite (45409123) and mallard (45409124). With both studies demonstrati ng an LC 50 

### > 4740 mg/kg

.

Two a vian reproduction studies were submitted using TGAI

. There were no effects seen in the study using the mallard (45638514). The highest concentration did no t product effects and a LOAEC was no t established. In the study usi ng the bobwhite (45638515), no parental mortality was observed. However, reproductive parameters were adversely affected in the lowest treatment group, 168 ppm. Endpoints t hat were significantly affected at this level were reductions in number of 14

- day survivors per hen. Other effects at higher levels included eggshell thickness, survivor weight and female weight. An additional study was conducted using the Japanese quail (45409125) and was deemed supplemental because the test species is not a preferre d test subject. Furthermore, the lowest level (27 ppm) elicited an adverse effect (number of hatchlings per pen and reduction in mean food consumption) thus a NOAEC was no t established. Upland gamebird species seem to be reproductively more sensitive to cyazofamid exposure than the waterfowl. A new study was conducted using the Bobwhite quail and submitted in 2009 to present a valid NOAEC (47716308). There were no treatment related effects observed on any adult parameter. Egg production was the only re productive parameter evaluated and this endpoint and this endpoint was reduced in a dose

- dependent manner and was statistically significant at the highest treatment level. The NOAEC was determined to be 170 mg /kg diet.

An analysis of mammalian toxicity studies conducted using the rat indicated that technical cyazofamid is categorized as practically non

- toxic to small mammals on a n acute oral basis (45408910)

. Cyazofamid produced no effects in the reproduction study (45408935) with a NOAEL > 20,000 ppm.

There was one seedling emergence study and one vegetative vigor study available for cyazofamid (47716309 and 47716310). Both studies were unable to determine a most sensitive endpoint and resulted in an EC 50 

### > 1.56 lb ai/A.

Submitted studies indicate t hat cyazofamid is practically non

- toxic to honeybees on an acute contact and acute oral basis (45409144).

16

### Table 3 . Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for Cyazofamid Taxonomic

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

Birds 1 Acute Bobwhite quail ( Colinus virginianus ) LD 50 = >2000 mg/kg

- bw Practically

non

- toxic Acceptable 454091

- 21

Mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ) LD 50 > 2000 mg/kg

- bw 2 Practically

non

- toxic Acceptable 46258212

Sub

- acute dietary Bobwhite quail ( Colinus virginianus ) LC 50 >4989 ppm No more than

s lightly toxic Acceptable 45409123

Mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos) LC 50 >4740 ppm No mo re than

s lightly toxic Acceptable 45409124

Chronic Bobwhite quail ( Colinus virginianus ) NOAEC = 170 mg/kg diet LOAEC

– 1020 mg/kg diet

Endpoint affected: eggs laid per hen -- Acceptable 47716308

Mammals Acute Oral Laboratory rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) LD 50 >5000 Practically

non

- toxic Acceptable 45408910

Chronic Laboratory rat ( Rattus norvegicus ) NOAEL = 20,000
ppm LOAEL> 20,000
ppm No effects -- Acceptable 45408935

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

no n

- toxic Acceptable 45409144

Acute oral Honey bee ( Apis mellifera L. ) LC 50 > 151.7 μg/bee Practically

non

- toxic Supplement al 45409144

Terrestrial plants Seedling Emergence Most sensitive species could not be determined EC 50 /IC 50 > 1.56 lbs/A -- Acceptable 47716309

Vegetative Vigor Most sensitive species could not be determin ed EC 50 /IC 50 > 1.56 lbs/A -- Acceptable 47716310

1 Birds represent surrogates for terrestrial

- phase amphibians and reptiles.

2 Conducted using formulated product with 35.9% ai



### 17

### Degradates were moderately toxic to practically non

- toxic (LD50 values ranging from 324 to >3000 mg/kg). Parent cyazofamid exhibited a toxicity value of >5000 mg/kg; all three degradates exhibited higher toxicity than the parent to mammals. Studies are tabulated in Table 5. The increased toxicity of CCIM as compared to the parent is of concern to organisms on an acute basis.

Table 5. Acute Oral Toxicity of Major Degradates to Mammal Rattus norvegicus Degradate Name Toxicity Value ( LD 50 ) Affected Endpoint Source

99.0% CCIM 324 mg/kg

- bw (M) 443 mg/kg

- bw (F) Death 45408916

99.6 % CCIM

- AM >3000 mg/kg

- bw None 45408918

99.7 % CTCA 2947 mg/kg

- bw (M) 1863 mg/kg

- bw (F) Death 45408919



## c. **Ecological Incidents**

The ecological incident information system (EIIS) is an OPP database that houses ecological incidents that have been reported to t he 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 Conse rvancy that contains publicly available data on reported avian incidents involving pesticides. Many of the incidents listed in this database are also in the EIIS.

EIIS , AIMS and Aggregate Incident Database were run on November 12, 2014 and did
not retu rn any incidents.



# 7. Exposure Pathways of Concern

The environmental fate properties and use patterns of c yazofamid indicate that direct spray, spray drift, leaching to ground water, and runoff represent potential transport mechanisms of c yazofamid to aquat ic and terrestrial organisms. Drinking water and inhalation exposure pathways were screened using the SIP (Screening Imbibition Program) and STIR (Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk) screening methods and were found to be exposure pathways of low concern (no LOC exceedances are expected). SIP and STIR are described in detail at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/terrestrial/index.htm

.

Results of SIP and STIR can be found in Appen dix C and D. SIP results indicate tha t drinking water exposure alone is not a potential concern for avian species or mammals on

18

### an acute or chronic basis. STIR results also indicate that inhalation exposure is not likely significant for both aerial and s oil applications.


# 8. Analysis Plan

**a. Stressors of Concern** 

i. Ecological Risk Assessment

The stressors of ecological concern for terrestrial organisms are c yazofamid a nd its degradates CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA . Submitted studies on mammals indicate that CCIM tox icity to mammals is more toxic than c yazofamid ; this increased toxicity triggers concern on an acute basis. CCIM

- AM and CTCA have similar toxicity to the parent.

For aquatic exposure, t he ecological risk assessment will inco r po rate model estimates of

c y azofamid residues of concern, which at the present time appear to be parent compound, CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA . This is also consistent with the human health residues of concern (see reference in the next section)

. Each of the species will be modeled
separ ately, using the residue summation (RS) method or formation/decline (F/D) method

. In the RS method, the parent application rate is proportionately distributed across the species. This modeling strategy requires summation of individual residues of concern concentrations to represent the total toxic residues ( TTR s) . Application rates for degradation products need to be adjusted to account for molecular weight ratios of degradate to parent and the normalized maximum percentage of degradation product formed. This method requires environmental fate data for individual residues. It also requires manual post

- processing of data for estimating 1

- in

- 10 year exposure concentrations. [ Note that t he RS method is different than the total residue method, in which the half

- life of the decay of the sum of the residues is calculated.] The RS method will be utilized since sufficient environmental fate data is available for each of the chemicals. Should sufficient data be available to run the formation/decline of the resi dues of concern, EFED may use such approach. In the F/D method, both parent and degradates are run simultaneously in the SWCC. Currently, EFED is actively working in finalizing the F/D strategy and may use the method in the assessment. It should be note d that a maximum of three species can be modeled at the same time in the SWCC (in this case, it would be the parent compound and two degradates). EFED may take the approach to combine two degradates (such as CCIM and CCIM

- AM) in order to model them.

Addi tionally, two degradates identified as major in a more recent fate study: CCBA and CCBA

- AC may be evaluated for possible inclusion as residues of ecological concern. Cyazofamid residues of concern and the approach to be taken for aquatic modeling may be r eevaluated pending receipt and review of additional environmental fate and ecological toxicity data for c yazofamid and its degradates.

19

### ii. Drinking Water

The drinking water assessments conducted to support the registration review human health risk assessm ents of c yazofamid will incorporate model estimates of c yazofamid residues of concern, which at the present time appear to be parent compound, CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA in surface and ground waters (Acierto et al. 2004, DP Barcode D298915). 3 

### Each of the spec ies will be modeled separately, using the RS or F/D method s (see previous section)

. Additionally, two degradates identified as major in a recent fate study: CCBA and CCBA

- AC may be evaluated for possible inclusion as residues of human health toxicological concern. Cyazofamid residues of concern may be reevaluated pending receipt and review of additional environmental fate and human health toxicity data for c yazofamid and its degradates.



## b. **Measures of Exposure**

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

.

i. Available Monitori ng Data

The Agency is not aware of monitoring conducted by federal and state agencies ; however, this route of exposure will be considered in the assessment to the extent that data on c yazofamid are available.



## c. **Measures of Effect**

Toxicity data presented in Section 3 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 will also be considered. The open literature studies are identified using EPA’s ECOTOXicology database ( ECOTOX) (USEPA, 2007 c ), which employs a literature search engine for locating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife. The ev aluation 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.



## 9. **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 pesticid es in accordance with the Joint Interim Approaches developed to implement the recommendations of the April 2013 National Academy of

3 Acierto, A., et al. Cyazofamid

- Meeting Report of the Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC), Health Effects Division Memo dated 02/18/2004 ; DP Barcode D298915

. 

### 20

### 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 cyazofamid in connection with the development of its final registration review decision for cyazofamid

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

, 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 dev elop 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 cyazofamid 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 p lanned risk assessment for the registration review of cyazofamid 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 th e 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 cyazofamid as part of completing this registration review.



## 10. **Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program**

Cyazofamid was not included in the first group of 67 chemicals iss ued an order to conduct Tier 1 EDSP testing. For additional information the EDSP program, visit http://www.epa.gov/endo/

.

21

## 11. **Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps**

a. Environmental Fate

Table 4 and Tab le 5 identify 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 sup port risk assessment.

Table 4 . Submitted Environmental Fate Data for Cyazofamid

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

835.2120 Hydrolys is 454090 39 465377 01 467027 01 Acceptable No

-- -

835.2240 Aqueous photolysis 454091 02 465377 03 467027 03 Acceptable No

-- -

835.2410 Soil photolysis 454091 03 465377 04 Unacceptable No Up to 37.0% of the applied residues were not extracted from the soil, and it was not certain that wavelengths <290 nm were filtered out prior to the light reaching the samples. In the portion of the study conducted with [imidazole

- 14 C]cyazofamid, the material balance of the irradiated sample was only 82.3% of the applied at th e final sampling interval. 467027 04 Supplemental The 6 and 12 day samples were treated two days after the initial samples, there was no time 0, and there were no overlapping sampling intervals to demonstrate that conditions in the two sets of samples w ere equivalent. Also, the study was terminated after only 12 days of continuous irradiation, at which time 51

- 68% of the applied cyazofamid remained undegraded. 835.4100 Aerobic soil metabolism 454091 06 465377 05 Supplemental N o Unextracted residues were >10% of the applied and the soil moisture content was >100% of the water holding capacity at 1⁄3 bar . One soil system was tested. 454091 08 465377 06 Supplemental Unextracted residues were >10% of the applied

. Three soil systems were tested. 477163 01 Supplemental For the North Dakota sandy clay loam soil only, recovery of total [ 14 C]residues decreased by ca. 20% by study termination. Two soil systems were tested. 835.4300 Aerobic aquatic metabolism 454091 10 465377 12 467027 07 Supplemental No Unextracted residues were >10% of the applied

. Two sediment systems were tested.

835.4400 Anaerobic aquatic metabolism 454091 09 465377 11 467027 06 Supplemental No Unextracted residues were > > 10% of the applied

. Two sediment systems were tested.

477163 02 Supplemental The study was not conducted for a sufficient length of time to adequately address th e patterns of formation and decline of cyazofamid transformation products CCIM

- AM and CTCA. Not all transformation products detected at ≥10% of applied were identified. One sediment system was tested.



### 22OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk assessment? Comments

835.1230 835.1240 Adsorption/ desorption and leachin g 454091 13 465377 15 Supplemental No This is an unaged leaching study. Soils were leached with an insufficient amount of water (20 cm) rather than the required 50.8 cm. 454091 12 465377 13 Supplemental This is an adsorption/desorption study. The concent ration of residues absorbed to the soil was calculated and not confirmed by analysis of the soil. 454091 11 465377 16 Supplemental This is an aged leaching study. Test soil were leached with an insufficient amount of water (20 cm), rather than the requi red 50.8 cm; the test soil was foreign and not compared to U.S. soils; and degradates were not identified after aging and prior to leaching. 477163 04 Acceptable The test soils were sterilized using gamma irradiation prior to

use. Only two soils were t ested. 835.1410 Volatility

– laboratory Not available Not applicable No Cyazofamid has a relatively low vapor pressure and Henry’s Law Constant. 835.6100 Terrestrial field dissipation 454091 16 465377 17 465524 02 Acceptable No Study was conducted on a bare ground plot in WA.

454091 17 465377 20 465524 03 Acceptable Study was conducted on a bareground plot in NY.

456385 12 465377 23 467842 01 Acceptable Study was conducted on a bareground plot in GA.

456385 13 465377 22 467842 02 Acceptable Study was condu cted on a bareground plot in CA.

465711 02 Acceptable Study was conducted on turfed plot in VA. 465871 01 Acceptable Study was conducted on turfed plot in NC. 835.6200 Aquatic field dissipation No ne Not applicable No Cyazofamid has no aquatic uses.

850.1730 Fish bioconcentration 45409138 45409139 465377 24 Unacceptable No Cyazofamid crystals formed on the input line during exposure due to low solubility, and were ingested by the fish; Also, cyazofamid degrades quickly ( ca . 30 minutes) under normal i llumination. These issues resulted in variable concentrations in the water during exposure (less than half nominal application rate), and unreliable data for the concentration in the fish tissues.



### 23OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk assessment? Comments

477163 05 Supplemental The aquaria water was not analyz ed for specific residues at several sampling intervals to demonstrate that residues in the water consisted primarily of undegraded parent material. The study indicates that flu orescent l ight similar to natural sunlight was used. Since c yazofamid is susce ptible to aqueous photolysis, with a half

- life on only 30 minutes and initial photoproducts are CCTS and CCIM , it is possible that cyazofamid degraded in the study and actual exposure was to cyazofamid photoproducts . In the study, the concentration of

14 C

- cyazofamid was consistently referred to as based on the total radioactivity. Residues in edible tissues and non

- edible tissues were not characterized at the interval when the fish contained the highest level of residues. Total organic carbon (TOC) range d from 49.13

- 49.53 mg carbon/L during the exposure period and 0.77

- 0.89 mg carbon/L during the depuration period. OCSPP guidelines recommend to limit the TOC to 2 mg/L for the dilution w ater.

A run was conducted using the model KABAM v.1.0, using
very co nservative inputs, and it resulted in no LOC exceedances. At the present time, a new study is not required (refer to Appendix B )

.



### 24OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed to conduct risk assessment? Comments

850.6100 Analytical method in soil 45409037 In review Yes The ECM and ILV should be submitted in separate reports. Submitte d study is in review; however, the issues indicated below were noted. Clarification on these issues is required. This study is a combined ECM/ILV for the analysis of cyazofamid and CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA; however, the reported LOQ was higher than the one reported in the field studies

. Furthermore, CCBA was included among the analytes in two terrestrial field dissipation studies conducted in turfed plots in NC and VA, but that for these studies no ECM or ILV

we re available. The ILV report should indicate that the independent validation was conducted in a separate lab oratory with staff, equipment, and study director that are all separate from those of the initial validation. LOQs should be less than both, the human health and ecological effects levels of

concern. Analytical method in water 45409021 In review Yes The ECM and ILV should be submitted in separate reports. Submitted study is in review; however, the issues indicated below were noted. Clarification on these issues is required. This study is a combined ECM /ILV study. The ILV i ncludes only parent cyazofamid while the ECM includes cyazofamid, CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA . No dataset associated with the ECM was provided

. The ILV report should indicate that the independent validation was conducted in a separate lab oratory with staff, equipment, and study director that are all separate from those of the initial validation. The LOQ for the method (s) should be less than both, the human health and ecological effects levels of concern. Analytical method in sediment Not available Not applicable Yes The ECM and ILV should be submitted in separate reports. Since cyazofamid exhibits a moderately high K OC , method(s) and independent validation(s) for the analysis of cyazofamid, CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA in sedim ent are required. The LOQ for the method (s) should be less than both, the human health and ecological effects levels of concern.
Non

guideline Solubility in saltwater 47716306 Supplemental No A definitive solubility of CCIM in saltwater was not determine d and the study methods were not completely described. T he solubilities of cyazofamid and CCIM

- AM were significantly below the limit recommended for the shake flask method.
Non

guideline Freezer storage stability (soil) 46537719 Acceptable No

---



### 25

### Tab le 5

. Submitted Environmental Fate Data for the Cyazofamid ’s Degradates

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

835.2120 Hydrolysis 454091 01 465377 02 467027 02 Acceptable No This study was conducted on CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA.

835.4100 Aerobic soil metabolism 454091 07 465377 07 465524 01 Supplemental No Study was conducted on CCIM. Unextracted residues were >10% of the applied

.

454091 04 465 377 09 467027 05 Supplemental No Study was conducted on CCIM

- AM. Unextracted residues were >10% of the applied

.

454091 05 465377 10 Supplemental No Study was conducted on CTCA. Unextracted residues were >10% of the applied

. 835.123 0 Adsorption/ desorptio n 454091 14 46537714 Supplemental No This study was conducted on CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA. The concentration of residues absorbed to the soil was calculated and not confirmed by analysis of the soil.



## b. Effects

Table 6 and Table 7 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 assessme nt. Rationale for the additional data requested is presented below the tables.

For the major degradates CCIM, CCIM

- AM, and CTCA, acute data are available for freshwater fish, freshwater invertebrates and algae. Table 8 identifies ecological effects studies that are needed for the effects assessment and rationale for these requests is presented below the table.

Table 6 . Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for Cyazofamid

OCSPP Guide line Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classification

s Are data neede

d to condu ct risk

assess ment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data

850.1010 Freshwater invertebrate acute toxicity 45409133 Acceptable No

-- 46258201 Acceptable

850.1025 850.1035 850.1045 850.1055 Estuarine/marine invertebrate acute toxicity 45409134 Acceptable No

--

45409135 Acceptable

850.1075 45409129 Supplemental No

--



### 26OCSPP Guide line Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classification

s Are data neede

d to condu ct risk

assess ment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data

Freshwater fish acute toxicity 45409130 Supplemental

45409132 Supplemental

46258206 Supplemental

850.1075 E stuarine/marine fish acute toxicity 45409131 Supplemental Yes A guideline compliant saltwater fish acute toxicity test is needed. Without submission, EPA will make conservative assumptions and use tools such as QSAR estimates, open literature data, or data from similar chemicals to estimate the toxicity.

850.1300 Freshwater invertebrate life cycle 45409136 Invalid Yes A new study needs to be submitted to demonstrate a valid NOAEC. 4 6702708 Supplemental

850.1350 Saltwater invertebrates life cycle (None) (N/A) Yes A guideline compliant saltwater invertebrate life cycle test is needed . Without submission of an acceptable saltwater invertebrate chronic study, EPA will make

conserv ative assumptions to define a conservative NOAEC in saltwater invertebrates using data such as QSAR estimates, open literature data, or data from other similar chemicals. Such estimates are likely to

over

- estimate toxicity based on NOAECs.

850.1400 Fr eshwater fish early

- life stage 45409137 Acceptable No

--

46258211 Supplemental



### 27OCSPP Guide line Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classification

s Are data neede

d to condu ct risk

assess ment? Justification and Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data

850.1400 Saltwater fish early

- life stage (None) (N/A) Yes A saltwater fish Early

- life stage toxicity test is needed to understand the baseline chronic toxicity of the parent.
850.1500 Fish life cycle (None) (N/A) No

-- Special Study Whole Sediment Chronic toxicity invertebrates (Chironomid, Leptochirus, and Hyalella) (None) (N/A) Yes Risk to sediment dwelling organisms has been triggered in previous assessments. T he K oc shows the potential for the chemical to bind to sediments. A guideline compliant toxicity test should be submitted to demonstrate the toxicity of cyazofamid to whole sediment dwelling organisms. The study is requested to be conducted as a chronic study because the collective half lives exceed 10 days. It should monitor the parent plus all degradates to fully understand the scope of
exposure.
850.4400 Aquatic plant Toxicity Test using Lemna
spp. 45409142 Acceptable No

--

850.4500 Algal toxicity 4 5409143 Invalid No

-- 46258213 Acceptable

46209403 Invalid

46209404 Invalid

850.4550 Cyanobacteria 46209402

Invalid Yes A guideline compliant toxicity test is needed utilizing cyanobacteria. Without submission, EPA will make conservative a ssumptions and use tools such as QSAR estimates, open literature data, or data from similar chemicals to estimate the toxicity.



### 28

### Table 7 . Submitted Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data for Cyazofamid

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

850.2100 Avian oral toxicity 45409121 Acceptable Yes An avian acute oral toxicity test should be submitted using CCIM. Because cyazofamid degrades rapidly to CCIM in the environment, organisms could be exposed to both the parent and the degradate. CCIM demonstrates an increased toxicity as compared to the parent in mammals thus there is uncertainty of the toxicity of the degradate to avian species on an acute basis. 46258212 Acceptable

45409122 Invalid

850.2200 Avian dietary toxicity 45409123 Acceptable No

-- 45409124 Acceptable

850.2300 Avian reproduction 45638515 Supplemental No

-- 45638514 Supplemental

4540912 5 Supplemental

47716308 Acceptable

850.3020 Honey bee
acute contact toxicity 45409144 Acceptable No

--

OECD TG237 Acute oral toxicity to larval honeybees (None) (N/A) Yes Study requested on the basis of assessing risk to larval stage of bees whic h are expected to be exposed via nectar and/or pollen which may be brought back to bee colonies from foraging bees. Special Chronic oral toxicity to adult honeybees (None) (N/A) Yes A study should be submitted to assess the risk to all bee life stages as the result of exposure of a foraging bee to residues that are in turn brought back to the colonies where in hive bees including young adult and developing brood may be exposed. Therefore, exposure at all be life stages would be expected.



### 29OCSPP Guideline Data Requireme nt Submitted Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed for risk assessment? Current Additional Data Need

Special Chroni c oral toxicity to larval honeybees (None) (N/A) Yes A study should be submitted to assess the risk to all bee life stages as the result of exposure of a foraging bee to residues that are in turn brought back to the colonies where in hive bees including
yo ung adult and developing brood may be exposed. Therefore, exposure at all be life stages would be expected.

850.3040 Field Testing for Pollinators (None) (N/A) Yes A study should be submitted to fully assess and understand the risks of exposure to poll inators across all life stages on the field.

Non

Guideline (Tier 2) Semi

- field testing for pollinators (tunnel or colony feeding studies) (None) (N/A) Yes A semi

- field study should be submitted to fully understand exposure to pollinators across all life s tages.

Non

Guideline (Tier 2) Field trial of residues in pollen and
nectar (None) (N/A) Yes A field trial of residues in pollen and nectar should be submitted to understand alternate routes of exposure for pollinators.

850.4100 Seedling Emergence and Seedling Growth 47716309 Acceptable No

--

850.4150 Vegetative Vigor 47716310 Acceptable No

--

Table 8

. 

### Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for the Cyazofamid Degradat es CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA

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

850.1075 46258207 Invalid No

-- 46258208 Supplemental



### 30OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitt ed Studies (MRID) Study Classifications Are data needed for risk assessment? Current Additional Data Need

Freshwater fish acute toxicity 46258209 Supplemental

46258210 Supplemental

45409128 Invalid

850.1010 Freshwater invertebrate acute toxicity 46258202 Acceptable No

-- 46258203 Supplemental

46258204 Acceptable

46258205 Acceptable

850.1300 Freshwater Invertebrate Chronic Study (None) (N/A) Yes The terminal long te rm degradate of cyazofamid is CTCA. In order to properly understand chronic toxicity of cyazofamid to inver tebrates, a chronic freshwater invertebrate s tudy needs to be submitted using CTCA. In the absence of data, EPA will make conservative assumptions to estimate the toxicity of the degradate, including QSAR estimates, open literature data, and data from other similar chemicals.

850.1400 Freshwater Fish Early Life Stage (None) (N/A) Yes The terminal long term degradate of cyazofamid is CTCA. In order to properly understand chronic toxicity of cyazofamid to fish, a chronic freshwater fish ELS study needs to be submitted using CTCA. In the absence of data, EPA will make conservative assumptions to estimate the toxicity of the degradate, including QSAR

e stimates, open literature data, and data from other similar chemicals.

850.4500 Nonvascular Plants 46258214 Supplemental No

-- 46258215 Supplemental

46258216 Supplemental

46209403 Supplemental



### 31

### Guideline Number: Special Study Study Title: Adult Honey Bee Chronic Oral Toxicity Rationale for Requiring the Data This study is needed for the assessment to evaluate risks to honey bees if the registered uses of cyazofamid will result in adverse effects to honey bees or other insect pollinators

. Residues can in turn be brought back to bee colonies where in

- hive bees including young adult and developing brood ( i.e. , eggs, larvae and pupae) may be exposed. Therefore, exposure at all bee life stages would be expected and may extend for chronic ex posures.

T he Agency finalized its framework to assess risk to pollinators in 2014 (USEPA, 2014). EPA now requires this study for all use sites where potential exposure to pollinators may

occur. Registrants may request a waiver of the study if use prac tices significantly restrict exposure of the pesticide to bees.

Although EPA has not developed a guideline for this study and OECD has yet to finalize test guidance for chronic studies, efforts are currently underway to develop standardized guidelines for assessing effects from chronic (10

- day) exposures to adult bees in the laboratory. At this time, EFED is asking that a protocol for the study be submitted beforehand to increase the likelihood of an acceptable study submission. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used and how could the data impact the Agency’s future decision

making?

The 10

- day toxicity study with young adult bees provides no

- observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) and lowest

- observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) for asse ssing potential chronic effects. Data obtained from this study will be used in estimating chronic risk to individual adult bees. Risk estimates based on these data will be considered along with other lines of evidence to determine whether higher

- tier stud ies are needed at the whole colony level.

These data are needed for the registration review risk assessment and for future endangered species
assessments. The data would allow the Agency better characterize the potential for risk to insects (including be neficial pollinators) from the use of cyazofamid . These data will help the Agency determine whether any mitigations are needed. If the registration review and any future endangered species risk assessments are performed without these data, the Agency woul d have to assume that cyazofamid "may affect" insects, including bees and beneficial pollinators, directly (and endangered species from other taxa indirectly), and uses of cyazofamid might need to be restricted in areas where pollinators could be exposed.

Guideline Number: Non

- Guideline Study Title: Larval Honey Bee Acute and Chronic Oral Toxicity Rationale for Requiring the Data This study is needed for the assessment to evaluate risks to honey bees if the registered uses of cyazofamid will result i n adverse effects to honey bees or other insect pollinators. Therefore, cyazofamid residues may result in exposure to foraging bees. Residues can in turn be brought

32

### Guideline Number: Non

- Guideline Study Title: Larval Honey Bee Acute and Chronic Oral Toxicity Rationale for Requiring the Data
back to bee colonies where in

- hive bees including young adult and developing brood ( i.e.
, eggs, larvae and pupae) may be exposed. Therefore, exposure at all bee life stages would be expected and may extend for chronic exposures.

T he Agency finalized its framework to assess risk to pollinators in 2014 (USEPA, 2014). EPA now requires this st udy for all use sites where potential exposure to pollinators may

occur. Registrants may request a waiver of the study if use practices significantly restrict exposure of the pesticide to bees.

Although EPA has not developed a guideline for this study, t he 21

- day larval toxicity study currently under development by OECD provides both acute and chronic oral toxicity data on developing bee brood and (when this guidance is finalized) may be used to satisfy the requirement for both acute and chronic oral toxi city to honey bee larvae. Registrant may submit a separate acute (single dose) larval toxicity study following OECD TG237 as well as the 21

- day repeat dose chronic toxicity study. Practical Utility of the Data
How will the data be used and how could t he data impact the Agency’s future decision

making?

The 21

- day larval toxicity study under development by OECD provides both acute and chronic toxicity data on developing bee brood and will yield a median lethal dose (LD 50 

### ) for assessing acute toxicity d uring the early part of the study as well as a 21

- day no

- observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) and lowest

- observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) for assessing chronic effects. Effects on survival and development (adult bee emergence) from repeat exposures to the active ingredient will be used in estimating chronic risk to individual brood. Risk estimates based on these data will be considered along with other lines of evidence to determine whether higher

tier studies are needed at the whole colony level.

These data are needed for the registration review risk assessment and for future endangered species
assessments. The data would allow the Agency better characterize the potential for risk to insects (including beneficial pollinators) from the use of cyazo famid . These data will help the Agency determine whether any mitigations are needed. If the registration review and any future endangered species risk assessments are performed without these data, the A gency would have to assume that cyazofamid "may affec t" insects, including bees and beneficial pollinators, directly (and endangered species from other taxa indirectly), and uses of cyazofamid might need to be restricted in areas where pollinators could be exposed.

33

# 12. References

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

- overview.pdf

.

USEPA. 201 5

. BEAD’s Chemical Profile (BCP) for Registration Review: Cyazofamid (085651)

. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Biological and Econ omic Analysis Division. Office of Pesticide Programs . Memorandum dated February 2, 2015.

34

## 085651 Cyazofamid Fa te Chemistry Bibliography

835.2120 Hydrolysis

MRID Citation Reference

45409039 Hendrix, I.; Neal, T. (1997) A Hydrolysis Study of I KF

- 916: Lab Project Number: 6578

- 95

- 0181

- EF

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca LLC. 87 p.

45409101 Repko, T. (1999) A Hydrolysis study of the IKF

- 916 Metabolites CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA: Lab Project Number: 98

- 0045: 7495

- 98

- 0045

- EF

- 001. Unpublishe d study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 50 p.

46537701 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Hydrolysis of Cyazofamid. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/001/01, 6578/95/0181/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 10 p.

46537702 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes From the Data Evaluation Report on the Hydrolysis of the Cyazofamid Degradates CCIM, CCIM

- AM, CTCA. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/002/01, 7495/98/0045/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Rice rca, Inc. 11 p.

46702701 Lentz, N. (2005) Report Amendment Number One: A Hydrolysis Study of IKF

- 916 (MRID# 45409039). Project Number: 6578/95/0181/EF/001/001, 6578/95/0181/EF/000/003. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 33 p.

4670270 2 Lentz, N. (2005) Report Amendment Number One: A Hydrolysis Study of the IKF

- 916 Metabolites CCIM, CCIM

- AM, and CTCA (MRID#45409101). Project Number: 7495/98/0045/EF/001/001, 7495/98/0045/EF/000/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 19 p.



## 835.2240 Photodegradation in water

MRID Citation Reference

45409102 Hendrix, I. (1999) Aqueous Photolysis of (Carbon 14)IKF

- 916 at pH 5: Lab Project Number: 6794

- 96

- 0063

- EF

- 001

- 001: 6794

- 96

- 0063

- EF

- 001: 96

- 0063. Unpublished study prepar ed by Ricerca, Inc. 130 p.

46537703 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes From the Data Evaluation Report on the Phototransformation of Cyazofamid in Water. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/003/01, 6794/96/0063/EF/001/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 21 p.

46537725 Leyes, G. (2005) Waiver Request for Hydrolysis/Soil Metabolism Studies on CCTS and Other Cyazofamid Aqueous Photolysis Products (161 and 162 Series). Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/016/01, 010433/1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 14 p.

46702703 Lentz, N. (2005) Report Amendment Number Two: Aqueous Photolysis of (Carbon 14)IKF

- 916 at pH 5 (Including Report Amendment Number One) (MRID#45409102). Project Number: 6794/96/0063/EF/001/001, 6794/96/0063/EF/000/004. Unpublis hed study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 28 p.



### 35

## 835.2410 Photodegradation on soil

MRID Citation Reference

45409103 Shelby, D. (1999) Photochemical Degradation of (Carbon 14) IKF

- 916 in Soil: Lab Project Number: 6830

- 96

- 0247

- EF

- 001. Unpub lished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 87 p.

46537704 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Phototransformation of Cyzofamid on Soil. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/004/01, 6830/96/0247/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 12 p.

46702704 Hiler, T. (2005) Photodegradation of (Carbon 14)Cyazofamid in/on Soil by Artificial Light. Project Number: 1382W/1. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL West, Inc. 134 p.



## 835.4100 Aerobic soil metabolism

MRID C itation Reference

45409104 Lentz, N.; Korsch, B. (1998) Rate of Degradation in Aerobic Soils of CCIM

- AM (A Metabolite of IKF

- 916): Lab Project Number: 7173

- 97

- 0089

- EF

- 001

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 154 p.

45409105 Landphair, C . (1999) Rate of Degradation in Aerobic Soils of CTCA (A Metabolite of IKF

916): Lab Project Number: 7173

- 97

- 0090

- EF

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 132 p.

45409106 Hartman, D. (1997) An Aerobic Soil Metabolism Study with (Carbon 14) IKF

- 916: Lab Project Number: 6613

- 95

- 0215

- EF

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 124 p.

45409107 Hatman, D.; Korsch, B. (1999) Rate of Degradation in Aerobic Soils of CCIM (A Metabolite of IKF

- 916): Lab Project Number: 7173

- 97

- 0064

- EF

- 001. Unpu blished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 168 p.

45409108 Hatman, D.; Korsch, B.; Lentz, N. (1999) Rate of Degradation of IKF

- 916 in Aerobic Soil: Lab Project Number: 6861

- 96

- 0111

- EF

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 147 p.

46537705 Leyes, G. (2005) Response To Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Aerobic Biotransformation of Cyazofamid in Soil and Request for Waiver from Conducting Additional Soil Metabolism Studies. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/005/01, 6613/95/0215/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 32 p.

46537706 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Aerobic Biotransformation of Cyazofamid in Soil. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/006/01, 6861/96/0111/EF/001. Unpubl ished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 65 p.

46537707 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Aerobic Biotransformation of Cyazofamid Metabolite CCIM in Soil. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/007/01, 7173/97/0064/EF/00 1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 14 p.



### 36MRID C itation Reference

46537709 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Aerobic Biotransformation of Cyazofamid Metabolite CCIM

- AM in Soil. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/008/01, 7173/9 7/0089/EF/001/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 46 p.

46537710 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Aerobic BioTransformation of Cyazofamid Metabolite CTCA in Soil. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/0 09/01, 7173/97/0090/EF/001/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 12 p.

46552401 DiFrancesco, D. (2004) Report Amendment Number One: Rate of Degradation in Aerobic Soils of CCIM (A Metabolite of IKF

- 916): (MRID# 45409107). Project Number: 3/97/0 064/EF/001/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. and Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 11 p.

46702705 Lentz, N. (2005) Report Amendment Number Two: Rate of Degradation in Aerobic Soils of CCIM

- AM (A Metabolite of IKF

- 916)

- Amended Report (MRID#3430910 4). Project Number: 7173/97/0089/EF/001/002. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 45 p.

47716301 Shepler, K. (2009) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of (Carbon 14) Cyazofamid in Two Soils. Project Number: 1680W, 1680W/1. Unpublished study prepar ed by PTRL West, Inc. 182 p.



## 835.4400 Anaerobic aquatic metab olism

MRID Citation Reference

45409109 McCall, B.; Waller, R. (1998) An Anaerobic Aquatic Soil Metabolism Study with (Carbon 14) IKF

- 916: Lab Project Number: 6834

- 96

- 0093

- EF

- 001. Unpu blished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 366 p.

46537711 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Anaerobic Biotransformation of Cyazofamid in Water

- Soil and Request for Waiver from Conducting Additional Water/Sed iment Testing. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/010/01, 6834/96/0093/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 17 p.

46702706 Lentz, N. (2005) Report Amendment Number One: An Anaerobic Aquatic Soil Metabolism with (Carbon 14) IKF

- 916 (MRID#45409109). Project Number: 6834/96/0093/EF/001/001, 6834/96/0093/EF/000/004. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 41 p.

47716302 DiFrancesco, D. (2009) Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism of (Carbon 14) Cyazofamid. Project Number: 021402/1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 155 p.



### 37

## 835.4300 Aerobic aquatic metab olism

MRID Citation Reference

45409110 Hartman, D.; Korsch, B.; Repko, T. (1999) IKF

- 916 Degradation and Fate in a Water/Sediment System: Lab Project Number: 67 95

- 96

- 0065

- EF

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 178 p.

46537712 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Aerobic Biotransformation of Cyazofamid in Water

- Soil System and Request for Waiver from Con ducting Additional Water/Sediment Testing. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/011/01, 6795/96/0065/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 17 p.

46702707 Lentz, N. (2005) Report Amendment Number One: IKF

- 916 Degradation and Fate in a Water/Sediment S ystem (MRID#45409110). Project Number: 6795/96/0065/EF/001/001, 6795/96/0065/EF/000/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 20 p.

47716303 Halarnkar, P. (2009) Request for Waiver Conducting Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Study on Cyazofam id. Project Number: IB/2009/PH/001/01. Unpublished study prepared by ISK Biosciences Corporation. 9 p.



## 835.1230 Leach ing /adsorp tion /desorption

MRID Citation Reference

45409111 Shelby, D. (1998) Aged Residue Leaching Study of (Carbon 14) IKF

- 916 : Lab Project Number: 6577

- 96

- 0189

- EF

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 64 p.

45409112 Landphair, C. (1998) Adsorption and Desorption of IKF

- 916 in Soils: Lab Project Number: 6575

- 95

- 0216

- EF

- 001

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 206 p.

45409113 Shelby, D. (1998) Parent Column Leaching Study of (Carbon 14) IKF

- 916: Lab Project Number: 7136

- 97

- 0060

- EF

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 63 p.

45409114 Murray, M. (1999) Adsorption and Desorption of IKF

- 916 Metab olites CCIM, CCIM

AM, and CTCA: Lab Project Number: 7496

- 98

- 0048

- EF

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 139 p.

46537713 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Adsorption

- Desorption of Cyazofamid in Soil. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/012/01, 6575/95/0216/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 62 p.

46537714 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Adsorption

- Desorption of Cyazofamid Metabolites C CIM, CCIM

- AM, and CTCA in Soil. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/013/01, 7496/98/0048/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 62 p.



### 38MRID Citation Reference

46537715 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Leaching of Cyazofamid i n Soil Columns. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/014/01, 7136/97/0060/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 11 p.

46537716 Leyes, G. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Leaching of Cyazofamid in Aged Soil Colu mns. Project Number: IB/2005/GAL/015/01, 6577/96/0189/EF/001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 42 p.

47716304 Schick, M. (2008) Soil Adsorption/Desorption of (Carbon 14) Cyazofamid by the Batch Equilibrium Method. Project Number: 1681W, 1681W/1 . Unpublished study prepared by PTRL West, Inc. 123 p.



## 835.6100 Terrestrial field dissipation

MRID Citation Reference

45409037 Parker, A. (2001) Independent Laboratory Validation of the Analytical Procedure for Determination of Residues of IKF

- 916 and its Metabolites (CCIM, CCIM

- AM, CTCA and CCCB) in Soil (Ricerca Method 011141

- 2): Lab Project Number: 010232

- 0: 011141

- 2: 1375. Unpublished study prepared by Pyxant Labs., Inc. 177 p. {OPPTS 850.7100}

45409115 Jablonski, J. (2001) Stability of I KF

- 916 and Metabolites (CCIM, CCBA, CTCA and CCIM

- AM) in Soil During Freezer Storage Through 250 Days: Lab Project Number: 010231

- 1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 187 p.

45409116 Crawford, C. (2001) Dissipation of Residues of IKF

- 916 and it s Metabolites (CCIM, CCBA, CTCA, and CCIM

- AM) from Soil in Washington: Lab Project Number: 010227

- 1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 303 p.

45409117 Jablonski, J. (2001) Terrestrial Field Dissipation of IKF

- 916 Applied to Bareground in New Yo rk: Lab Project Number: 010229

- 1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca LLC. 268 p.

45638511 McFadden, J.; Lucas, F. (2002) Cyazofamid (1KF

- 916): Revised Summary of Environmental Fate, Effects and Risk Assessment: Lab Project Number: 014182

- 1. Unpublishe d study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 45 p.

45638512 Crawford, C. (2001) Dissipation of Residues of IKF

- 916 and Its Metabolites (CCIM, CCBA, CTCA, and CCIM

- AM) From Soil in Georgia: Lab Project Number: 010230

- 1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 30 2 p.

45638513 Crawford, C.; Cassidy, P. (2002) Dissipation of Residues of IKF

- 916 and Its Metabolites (CCIM, CCBA, CTCA, and CCIM

- AM) From Soil in California: Lab Project Number: 010228

- 1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 209 p.

46537717 Wie dmann, J. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report for Terrestrial Field Dissipation of Cyazofamid. Project Number: IB/2005/JLW/001/01, 010227/1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 8 p.

46537719 Cassidy, P. (2002) Stabili ty of IKF

- 916 and Metabolites (CCIM, CCBA, CTCA and CCIM

- AM) in Soil During Freezer Storage: Final Report. Project Number: 010231/2. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 202 p.



### 39MRID Citation Reference

46537720 Wiedmann, J. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data E valuation Report for Terrestrial Field Dissipation of Cyazofamid. Project Number: IB/2005/JLW/003/01, 010229/1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 8 p.

46537722 Wiedmann, J. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report for Te rrestrial Field Dissipation of Cyazofamid. Project Number: IB/2005/JLW/002/01, 010228/1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 8 p.

46537723 Wiedmann, J. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report for Terrestrial Field Dissipa tion of Cyazofamid. Project Number: IB/2005/JLW/004/01, 010230/1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 8 p.

46552402 Cassidy, P. (2005) Report Amendment: Dissipation of Residues of IKF

- 916 and its Metabolites (CCIM, CCBA, CTCA and CCIM

- AM) From Soi l in Washington: (MRID# 45409116). Project Number: 010227/1/1, 010227. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. and Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 50 p.

46552403 Cassidy, P. (2005) Report Amendment: Dissipation of Residues of IKF

- 916 and its Metabolites (CC IM, CCBA, CTCA and CCIM

- AM) from Soil in New York: (MRID# 45409117). Project Number: 010229/1/1, 010229. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. and Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 42 p.

46571102 Weidmann, J. (2005) Amended Report: Field Soil Dissipation of Ranman 400SC Applied to Turf in Ashland, VA

- USA 2003. Project Number: IB/2003/JLW/004/01/02, ISK/BIOSCIENCES/CORP/1489. Unpublished study prepared by Pyxant Labs Inc. 753 p.

46587101 Wiedmann, J. (2004) Field Soil Dissipation of Ranman 400SC Applied to Turf in Goldsboro, NC

- USA 2003. Project Number: B/2003/JLW/002/01/01. Unpublished study prepared by Pyxant Labs Inc. 792 p.

46784201 Cassidy, P. (2006) Dissipation of Residues of IKF

- 916 and its Metabolites (CCIM, CCBA, CTCA AND CCIM

- AM) from Soil in G eorg ia. Project Number: 010230

- 1 010230. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 49 p.

46784202 Cassidy, P. (2005) Dissipation of Residues of IKF

- 916 and its Metabolites (CCIM, CCBA, CTCA and CCIM

- AM) from Soil in California. Project Number : 010228/1/1, 010228. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca Biosciences, LLC. 50 p.



## 850.1730 Fish BCF

MRID Citation Reference

45409138 Caunter, J.; Latham, M.; Morris, D. (1998) IKF

- 916: Determination of the Accumulation and Elimination of (C arbon 14) IKF

- 916 in Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss): Lab Project Number: AF0381/C. Unpublished study prepared by ZENECA Limited. 54 p. {OPPTS 850.1730}

45409139 Lanphair, C. (1999) (Carbon 14) IKF

- 916 Laboratory Studies of Pesticide Accumulation in Fish: Identification of Residues: Lab Project Number: 010433

- 1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 57 p. {OPPTS 850.1730}



### 40MRID Citation Reference

46537724 Wiedmann, J. (2005) Response to Reviewer Notes from the Data Evaluation Report on the Bioaccumulation of Cyazofami d in Fish and Request for Waiver from Conducting a Replacement Study. Project Number: IB/2005/JLW/004/01, 010230/1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 8 p.

47716305 Blankinship, A.; Kendall, T.; Krueger, H. (2008) (Carbon 14)

- Cyazofamid: A Biocon centration Test with the Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): Final Report. Project Number: 272A/110, 272/092807/RBT/B10/14C/SUB272. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 92 p.



## Non

- Guideline Stud ies

MRID Citation Reference

47716 306 Kendall, T.Z., and W.B. Nixon. 2009. Determination of the water solubility of IKF916 and metabolites CCIM, CCIM

- AM and CTCA in saltwater using the shake flask method.

45638511 McFadden, J.; Lucas, F. (2002) Cyazofamid (1KF

- 916): Revised Summary of Env ironmental Fate, Effects and Risk Assessment: Lab Project Number: 014182

- 1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 45 p.



## 085651 Cyazofamid Eco

- Effects Bibliography

71

- 1 850.2100 Avian Single Dose Oral Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

45409121 van Dreumel, I.; Frieling, W. (1999) Acute Oral Toxicity Study with IKF

- 916 Technical in the Bobwhite Quail: Lab Project Number: NOTOX # 182789. Unpublished study prepared by NOTOX B.V. 60 p. {OPPTS 850.2100}

45409122 Ullmann, L. (2001) IKF

- 916 Technical: Acute Oral Toxicity Study in Mallard Duck (Includes Report Amendment NO. 1): Lab Project Number: RCC # 728886. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Ltd. 35 p. {OPPTS 850.2100}

46258212 Heijink, E.; Dreumel, I. (1999) Acute Oral Toxicity Stud y In The Bobwhite Quail With IKF

- 916 400SC Plus Organosilicone Adjuvant. Project Number: 218442, 74538, 7360/97/0194/TX/001. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 76 p.



## 71

- 2 Avian Dietary Toxicity

41MRID Citation Reference

45409123 Standens

- P eek, W.; Frieling, W. (1999) 5

- Day Dietary Toxicity Study in Bobwhite Quail with IKF

- 916 Technical: Lab Project Number: NOTOX # 182813. Unpublished study prepared by NOTOX B.V. 68 p. {OPPTS 850.2200}

45409124 Stadens

- Peek, W.; Frieling, W. (1999) 5

- Day D ietary Toxicity Study in Mallard Duck with IKF

- 916 Technical: Lab Project Number: NOTOX #218521. Unpublished study prepared by NOTOX B.V. 76 p. {OPPTS 850.2200}



## 71

- 4 Avian Reproduction

MRID Citation Reference

45409125 Burri, R. (1999) IKF

- 916 Technical: Avian Reproduction Test in Japanese Quail: Lab Project Number: RCC #729314. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Ltd. 110 p. {850.2300}

45409126 Frey, L.; Martin, K.; Beavers, J. (2001) IKF

- 916 Technical: A Pilot Reproduction Study with the Mall ard: Lab Project Number: 272

- 120. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 66 p. {OPPTS 850.2300}

45409127 Frey, L.; Martin, K.; Beavers, J. et al. (2001) IKF

- 916 Technical: A Reproduction Study with the Mallard: Interim Report: Lab Pro ject Number: 272

- 121. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 80 p. {OPPTs 850.2300}

45638514 Frey, L.; Martin, K.; Beavers, J.; et al. (2001) IKF

- 916 Technical: A Reproduction Study with the Mallard: Final Report: Lab Project Number: WI 272

- 121: RIC 012760. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 159 p. {OPPTS 850.2300}

45638515 Frey, L.; Martin, K.; Beavers, J.; et al. (2002) IKF

- 916 Technical: A Reproduction Study with the Northern Bobwhite Quail (Colinus virgini anus): Lab Project Number: WI 272

- 127. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 162 p. {OPPTS 850.2300}

46317901 Frey, L.; Martin, K.; Beavers, J.; et al. (2004) IKF

- 916 Technical: A Reproduction Study with the Northern Bobwhite Quail ( Colinus virginianus). Project Number: WI/272/127 . Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 22 p.

46329501 Burri, R. (2004) Response to EPA Review and Submission of Supplemental Data: Addendum to Report: IKF

- 916 Technical: Avian Reproduct ion Test in Japanese Quail. Project Number: 729314. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Umweltchemie Ag. 88 p.

47716308 Frey, L.; Martin, K.; Beavers, J.; et al. (2009) Cyazofamid: A Reproduction Study with the Northern Bobwhite: Final Report. Project Numbe r: 272/140. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 89 p.



## 72

- 1 850.1075 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Fish

MRID Citation Reference



### 4245409128 Bogers, M. (1999) 96

- Hour Acute Toxicity Study in Carp with IKF

- 916 Technical ( Flow

- Through): Lab Project Number: NOTOX #182881. Unpublished study prepared by NOTOX B.V. 29 p. {OPPTS 850.1075}

45409129 Bogers, M. (1999) 96

- Hour Acute Toxicity Study in Bluegill with IKF

- 916 Technical (Flow

- Through): Lab Project Number: 182846. Unpub lished study prepared by NOTOX B.V. 25 p. {OPPTS 850.1075}

45409130 Bogers, M. (1999) 96

- Hour Acute Toxicity Study in Rainbow Trout with IKF

- 916 Technical (Flow

- Through): Lab Project Number: 182857. Unpublished study prepared by NOTOX B.V. 29 p. {OPPTS 8 50.1075}

45409132 Latham, M.; Morris, D. (1998) IKF

- 916: Determination of Acute Toxicity to Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss)

- Preliminary to Fish Accumulation Study: Lab Project Number: AF0381/B. Unpublished study prepared by ZENECA Limited. 21 p. {OPP TS 850.1075}

46258207 Bogers, M. (1999) 96

- Hour Acute Toxicity Study in Rainbow Trout With CCIM (Static). Project Number: 247861, 79965, 7724. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 21 p.

46258208 Bogers, M. (1999) 96

- Hour Acute Toxicity in Rainbow Tr out With CCIM

- AM (Static). Project Number: 247872. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 19 p.

46258209 Bogers, M. (1999) 96

- Hour Acute Toxicity Study In Rainbow Trout With CTCA (Static). Project Number: 247883, 79983, 7724. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 19 p.

46258210 Seyfried, B. (1999) Acute Toxicity of DMSA (Metabolite of IKF

- 916) To Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) In A 96

- Hour Static Test. Project Number: RCC/734883, 734894. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 33 p.

46258206 B ogers, M. (1999) 96

- Hour Acute Toxicity Study in Rainbow Trout With IKF

- 916 400SC Plus Organosilicone Adjuvant (Flow

- Through). Project Number: 218633. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 28 p.



## 72

- 2 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Invertebrates

MRI D Citation Reference

45409133 Bogers, M. (1999) Acute Toxicity Study in Daphnia Magna with IKF

- 916 Technical (Flow

- Through): Lab Project Number: NOTOX #182868. Unpublished study prepared by NOTOX B.V. 32 p. {OPPTS 850.1010}

46258201 Migchielsen, I. (1999) Acute Toxicity Study in Daphnia magna with IKF

- 916 400SC Plus Organosilicone Adjuvant (Flow

- Through). Project Number: 218644, 74538, 7362/97/0196/TX/001. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 29 p.

46258202 Migchielsen, I. (1999) Acute Toxicity Study in Daphnia magna With CCIM (Static). Project Number: 247894, 79965, 7723. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 25 p.

46258203 Migchielsen, I. (1999) Acute Toxicity In Daphnia magna with CCIM

- AM (Static). Project Number: 247905, 79974, 7723. Unp ublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 22 p.



### 4346258204 Migchielsen, I. (1999) Acute Toxicity Study in Daphnia magna With CTCA (Static). Project Number: 247916, 79983, 7723. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 19 p.

46258205 Seyfried, B. (1999) Acute T oxicity of DMSA (Metabolite of IKF

- 916) to Daphnia magna in a 48

- Hour Immobilization Test. Project Number: RCC/734905, 734916. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Umweltchemie Ag. 32 p.



## 72

- 3 Acute Toxicity to Estuarine/Marine Organisms

MRID Citation R eference

45409131 Boeri, R.; Ward, T. (2001) IKF

- 916 Technical: Acute Toxicity to the Sheepshead Minnow, Cyprinodon variegatus: Lab Project Number: 2008

- SK. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 29 p. {OPPTS 850.1075}

454091 34 Boeri, R.; Ward, T. (2001) IKF

- 916 Technical: Flow

- Through Mollusc Shell Deposition Test: Lab Project Number: 2009

- SK: Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 30 p. {OPPTS 850.1025}

45409135 Boeri, R.; Ward, T. (2001) IKF

- 916 Te chnical: Acute Toxicity to the Mysid, Americamysis Bahia: Lab Project Number: 2007

- SK. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 29 p. {OPPTS 850.1035}



## 72

- 4 850.1400 Fish Early Life Stage

MRID Citation Reference

4540 9137 Boeri, R.; Ward, T. (2001) IKF

- 916 Technical: Early Life Stage Toxicity to the Fathead Minnow, Pimephales Promelas: Lab Project Number: 2006

- SK. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 59 p. {OPPTS 850.1400}

46258211 Peither, A. (1999) Sublethal Toxic Effects of IKF

- 916 400SC Formulation Plus Organo

- Silicone Adjuvant on Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in a Fish Juvenile Growth Test Over 28 Days. Project Number: RCC/733500, 733511. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 49 p.



## 72

- 4 850.1300 Daphnid chronic toxicity test

MRID Citation Reference

46258211 Peither, A. (1999) Sublethal Toxic Effects of IKF

- 916 400SC Formulation Plus Organo

- Silicone Adjuvant on Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss) in a Fish Juvenile Growth Test Over 28 Days. Project Number: RCC/733500, 733511. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 49 p.



### 4446702708 Hoberg, J. (2005) Technical Cyazofamid (IKF

- 916)

- Full Life

- Cycle Toxicity Test with Water Fleas, Daphnia magna, Under Flow

- Through Cond itions. Project Number: 13562/6138. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories. 81 p.

47716307 Hoberg, J. (2008) Response to EPA Review of MRID No. 467027

- 08: Technical Cyazofamid (IKF

- 916)

- Full Life

- Cycle Toxicity Test with Water Fl eas, Daphnia Magna, Under Flow

- Through Conditions. Project Number: 13562/6138A. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories. 5 p.

45409136 Peither, A. (1999) Influence of IKf

- 916 on Survival and Reproduction of Daphnia Magna in a Sesist atic Test Over Three Weeks: Lab Project Number: RCC # 741251. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Ltd. 41 p. {OPPTS 850.1300}

45409137 Boeri, R.; Ward, T. (2001) IKF

- 916 Technical: Early Life Stage Toxicity to the Fathead Minnow, Pimephales Promelas: Lab P roject Number: 2006

- SK. Unpublished study prepared by T. R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 59 p. {OPPTS 850.1400}



## 122

- 1 Seed Germination/Seedline Emergence and Vegetable Vigor

MRID Citation Reference

45409140 Stewart, E. (2001) Tier 1 Seedling Eme rgence Study Assessing IKF

- 916 400SC Formulation: Lab Project Number: IB

- 2000

- SARS

- 002

- 01. Unpublished study prepared by Stewart Agricultural Research Services, Inc. 62 p. {OPPTS 850.4100}

45409141 Stewart, E. (2001) Tier 1 Vegetative Vigor Study Assessi ng IKF

- 916 400SC Formulation: Lab Project Number: IB

- 2000

- SARS

- 002

- 01. Unpublished study prepared by Stewart Agricultural Research Services, Inc. 57 p. {OPPTS 840.4150}



## 141

- 1 Honey bee acute contact

MRID Citation Reference

45409144 Schmitze r, S. (1999) Laboratory Testing for Toxicity (Acute Contact and Oral LD50) of IKF

- 916 Technical on Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.)(Hymenoptera, Apidae): Lab Project Number: IBACON #2915036. Unpublished study prepared by Institut fur Biologische Analytik Und Consulting IBACON GmbH. 31 p. {OPPTS 850.3020



## 8 50.4100 Terrestrial plant toxicity, Tier 1 (seeding emergence)

MRID Citation Reference

47716309 Greenland, R. (2008) Tier I Seedling Emergence Study Assessing IKF

- 916 400SC Formulation. Project Number: IB/2007/MG/001/00/00. Unpublished study prepared by Stewart Agricultural Research Services. 58 p.



### 45

## 850.4150 Terrestrial plant toxicity, Tier 1 (vegetative vigor)

MRID Citation Reference

47716310 Greenland, R. (2008) Tier I Vegetative Vi gor Study Assessing IKF

- 916 400SC Formulation. Project Number: IB/2007/MG/002/00/00. Unpublished study prepared by Stewart Agricultural Research Services. 58 p.



## 122

- 2 Aquatic plant growth

MRID Citation Reference

45409142 Boeri, R.; Ward, T. (2 001) IKF

- 916: Toxicity to the Duckweed, Lemna gibba: Lab Project Number: 2131

- SK. Unpublished study prepared by T.R. Wilbury Laboratories, Inc. 33 p. {OPPTS 850.4400}

45409143 Bogers, M. (1999) 96

- Hour Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhibition Test with IKF

- 91 6 Technical: Lab Project Number: NOTOX #218767. Unpublished study prepared by NOTOX B.V. 41 p. {OPPTS 850.5400}

46258213 Bogers, M. (1999) Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhibition Test With IKF

- 916 400SC Plus Organosilicone Adjuvant. Project Number: 218655. U npublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 43 p.

46258214 Bogers, M. (1999) Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhibition Test With CCIM. Project Number: 247927, 79965, 7595. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 35 p.

46258215 Bogers, M. (1999) Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhibition Test With CCIM

- AM. Project Number: 247938. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 23 p.

46258216 Bogers, M. (1999) Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhibition Test With CTCA. Project Number: 247949, 79983, 7595. Unpublished study prepared by N otox B.V. 32 p.



## 850.5400 Algal toxicity, Tiers 1 and II

MRID Citation Reference

46209402 Hoberg, J. (2003) Technical Cyazofamid (IKF

- 916)

- Acute Toxicity to the Marine Diatom, Skeletonema costatum. Project Number: 13562/6132, 060603/OPPTS/SA/ SKELETONEMA. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories. 64 p.

46209403 Hoberg, J. (2003) Technical Cyazofamid (IKF

- 916)

- 96

- Hour Toxicity Test with the Freshwater Blue

- Green Alga, Anabaena flos

- aquae . Project Number: 13562/6131, 012 103/OECD/EC/OPPTS/SA/ANABAENA. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories. 64 p.

46209404 Hoberg, J. (2003) Technical Cyazofamid (IKF

- 916)

- Acute Toxicity to the Freshwater Diatom, Navicula pelliculosa. Project Number: 13562/6130,



### 46060 603/OECD/EC/OPPTS/SA/NAVICULA. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Smithers Laboratories. 64 p.

46258213 Bogers, M. (1999) Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhibition Test With IKF

- 916 400SC Plus Organosilicone Adjuvant. Project Number: 218655. Unpublished s tudy prepared by Notox B.V. 43 p.

46258214 Bogers, M. (1999) Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhibition Test With CCIM. Project Number: 247927, 79965, 7595. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 35 p.

46258215 Bogers, M. (1999) Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhib ition Test With CCIM

- AM. Project Number: 247938. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 23 p.

46258216 Bogers, M. (1999) Fresh Water Algal Growth Inhibition Test With CTCA. Project Number: 247949, 79983, 7595. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 32 p.

46258217 Seyfried, B. (1999) Toxicity of DMSA (Metabolite of IKF

- 916) To Scenedesmus subspicatus in A 72

- Hour Algal Growth Inhibition Test. Project Number: RCC/734927. Unpublished study prepared by Notox B.V. 38 p.



# Non

- Guideline Studies

45408901 Lu cas, F. (2001) FQPA Supplemental Information Document (PR Notice 97

- 1)

- Petition for Tolerance for Cyazofamid in or on Cucurbits, Potatoes, Tomatoes and Wine Grapes: Lab Project Number: FQPA

- 01

- 001

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 9 p.

454 08902 Tucker, K. (2001) Tier 1 Chronic and Acute Dietary Exposure Analyses for Potential Residues of Cyazofamid in or on Cucurbits, Potatoes, Tomatoes and Wine Grapes: Lab Project Number: CYAZOFAMID 01

- 01. Unpublished study prepared by Novigen Sciences, In c. 87 p.

45408909 Lucas, F.; O'Meara, H. (2001) Cyazofamid (IKF

- 916): Summary of the Toxicology: Lab Project Number: 012641

- 3. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, Inc. 129 p



### 47

## Appendix A. Cyazofamid and Environmental Degradates

Table A1. Nomenclat ure for Cyazofamid and Its Major Environmental Degradates

Applicant's Code IUPAC Chemical Names/CAS Name (if reported)
C yazofamid 4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- p

- tolylimidazole

- 1

- sulfonamide (IUPAC) Or 4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- (4

- methylphenyl)

- 1 H

- imidazole

- 1

- sulfonamide (CAS) (01) CCIM 4

- Chloro

- 5

- p

- tolylimidazole

- 2

- carbonitrile (02) CCIM

- AM 4

- Chloro

- 5

- p

- tolylimidazole

- 2

- carboxamide (03) CTCA 4

- Chloro

- 5

- p

- tolylimidazole

- 2

- carboxylic acid (04) CCTS 6

- (4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyanoimidazol

- 5

- yl)

- N,N

- dimethyl m

- toluenesulfonamide (05) CDTS 2

- Cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- p

- tolyimidazole

- 4

- sulfonamide (06) HTID 5

- Hydroxy

- 5

- p

- tolyl

- 2,4

- imidazolidinedione (07) p

- Toluamide 4

- Methylbenzamide (08) CCBA

- AM 4

- (4

- Chloro

- 2

- amidoimidazol

- 5

- yl)benzoic acid (09) CTI 4

- Chloro

- 5

- p

- tolylimidazole (10) CHCN 4

- Chloro

- 5

- (4

- hydroxymethylphenyl)imidazole

- 2

- carbonitrile (11) CCBA 4

- (4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyanoimidazol

- 5

- yl)benzoic acid (IUPAC) Or 4

- (4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyano

- 1H

- imidazol

- 5

- yl)benzoic acid (CAS) (12) CCBA

- AC

, CCBA hydrolysis compound #1

, or M

- 1 4

- (4

- chloro

- 2

- carboxyimidazol

- 5

- yl)benzoic acid 1

1 Registrant

- suggested chemical name.



### 48

### Table A 2

. Cyazofamid and Its Major Environmental Degradates
Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type Ref. (MRID) Maximum %AR (day) A 

### Final %AR (study length)

PARENT 

### Cyazofamid
IKF

- 916 4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyano

- N,N

dimethyl

- 5

- p

tolylimidazole

- 1

- sulfonamide

CAS No.: 120116

- 88

- 3

Formula: C 13 H 13 ClN 4 O 2 S MW: 324.78 g/mol

Cc2ccc(c1c(Cl)nc(C#N)n1 S(=O)(=O)N(C)C)cc2 Parent compound

TRANSFORMATIO N PRODUCTS 

### N N
C H

3



### S O 2 

### N ( C H 3 

### ) 2 

### Cl

C N



### 49

### Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type Ref. (MRID) Maximum %AR (day) A 

### Final %AR (study length)
CCIM 4

- Chloro

- 5

- p

tolylimidazole

- 2

- carbonitrile

Formula: C 11 H 8 ClN 3 MW: 217.66 g/mol

Cc2ccc( c1[nH]c(C#N)nc1 Cl)cc2 Hydrolysis 45409039, 46537701, 46702701 82.5% of the recovered* @ pH 7 @ 30 days 82.5% of the recovered* @ pH 7 @ 30 days A q photolysis 45409102, 46537703

, 46702703 39.6 @ 2 days 25.3% @ 30 days

Soil photolysis 46702704 6.2% @ 4 days 2.5% @ 12 days

Aerobic soil 45409106, 46537705 16.3% @ 5 days 3.9% @ 59 days

Aerobic soil 45409108, 46537706 31.3% @ 10 days 6.9% @ 4 5 days

Aerobic soil 47716301 29.0% @ 3 days 0.3% @ 3 days Aerobic aquatic 45409110 46537712 46702707 47.4% @ 21 days 14.4% @ 100 days

Anaerobic aquatic 45409109 46537711 46702706 24.6% @ 7 days 0.5% @ 360 days

Anaerobic aquatic 47716302 35. 8% @ 7 days 3.9% @ 180 days Terr dissipation C 454091

- 16 465377

- 17 465524

- 02 22% @ 1 day <3% @ 498

Terr dissipation C 454091

- 17 465377

- 20 465524

- 03 39% @ 6 th app ND @ 498 days

Terr dissipation C 456385

- 12 465377

- 23 467842

- 01 28% @ 1 day 10% @ 540 days

Terr dissipation C 456385

- 13 465377

- 22 467842

- 02 65% @ 7 days <4% @ 582 days

Terr dissipation C 465711

- 02 Thatch 6.0% @ 2 days Soil <LOQ or ND @ all intervals Thatch 3.5% @ 120 days Soil ND @ 120 days 

### N H N
C H

3 

### Cl

C N



### 50

### Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type Ref. (MRID) Maximum %AR (day) A 

### Final %AR (study length)
Terr dissipation C 465871

- 01 Thatch 5.6% @ 4 days Soil 12% @ 4 days Thatch 0.6% @ 120 days Soil <LOQ @ 120 days 

### CCIM

- AM 4

- Chloro

- 5

- p

tolylimidazole

- 2

- carboxamide

Formula: C 11 H 10 N 3 OCl MW: 235.67 g/mol

Cc2ccc(c1[nH]c(CON)nc1 Cl)cc2 Soil photolysis 46702704 0.9% @ 4 days 0.5% @ 12 days Aer obic soil 45409106, 46537705 13.2% @ 15 days 5.9% @ 59 days

Aerobic soil 45409108, 46537706 13.7% @ 7 days 3.6% @ 45 days

Aerobic soil 47716301 11.7% @ 7 days 3.0% @ 366 days Aerobic aquatic 45409110 46537712 46702707 10.7% @ 60 days 5.3% @ 100 days

Anaerobic aquatic 45409109 46537711 46702706 14.1% @ 10 days 2.0% @ 360 days

Anaerobic aquatic 47716302 18.4% @ 56 days 12.7% @ 180 days Terr dissipation C 454091

- 16 465377

- 17 465524

- 02 17% @ 1 day 5% @ 498 days

Terr dissipation C 45409 1

- 17 465377

- 20 465524

- 03 57% @ 1 day ND @ 498 days

Terr dissipation C 456385

- 12 465377

- 23 467842

- 01 96% @ 1 day 28% @ 540 days

Terr dissipation C 456385

- 13 465377

- 22 467842

- 02 67% @ 4 days 27% @ 582 days

Terr dissipation C 465711

- 02 Thatch 9.5% @ 3 days Soil <LOQ or ND @ all intervals Thatch 0.1% @ 120 days Soil ND @ 120 days 

### N H N
C H

3 

### Cl

C O N H 2



### 51

### Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type Ref. (MRID) Maximum %AR (day) A 

### Final %AR (study length)
Terr dissipation C 465871

- 01 Thatch 0.6% @ 4 days Soil <LOQ or ND @ all intervals Thatch 0.2% @ 120 days Soil ND @ 120 days



### CTCA 4

- Chloro

- 5

- p

tolylimidazole

- 2

- carboxylic a cid

Formula: C 11 H 9 ClN 2 O 2 MW: 236.65 g/mol

Cc2ccc(c1[nH]c(C(=O)O) nc1Cl)cc2 Soil photolysis 46702704 1.2% @ 4 days 0.0% @ 12 days Aerobic soil 45409106, 46537705 9.8% @ 44 days 8.4% @ 59 days

Aerobic soil 45409108, 46537706 21.3% @ 18 days 14.2% @ 45 days

Aerobic soil 47716301 38.9% @ 245 day s 35.2% @ 366 days Aerobic aquatic 45409110 46537712 46702707 26.2% @ 100 days 26.2% @ 100 days

Anaerobic aquatic 45409109 46537711 46702706 21.3% @ 56 days 10.8% @ 360 days

Anaerobic aquatic 4 7716302 47.9% @ 180 days 47.9% @ 180 days Terr dissipation C 454091

- 16 465377

- 17 465524

- 02 39% @ 14 days <3% @ 498 days

Terr dissipation C 454091

- 17 465377

- 20 465524

- 03 42% @ 90 days ND @ 498 days

Terr dissipation C 456385

- 12 465377

- 23 467842

- 01 5 8% @ 28 days 15% @ 540 days

Terr dissipation C 456385

- 13 465377

- 22 467842

- 02 43% @ 371 & 582 days 43% @ 582 days

Terr dissipation C 465711

- 02 Thatch 1.2% @ 2 days Soil 37% @ 14 days Thatch 0.1% @ 120 days Soil <LOQ @ 120 days 

### N H N
C H

3 

### Cl

C O O H



### 52

### Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type Ref. (MRID) Maximum %AR (day) A 

### Final %AR (study length)
Terr dissipation C 46 5871

- 01 Thatch 1.1% @ 7 days Soil 20% @ 4 days Thatch 0.3% @ 120 days Soil <LOQ @ 120 days 

### CCBA 4

- (4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyanoimidazol

- 5

- yl)benzoic acid

Formula: C 11 H 6 ClN 3 O 2 MW: 247.64 g/mol Soil photolysis 46702704 2.7% @ 4 days 0. 7% @ 12 days Aerobic soil 47716301 13.9% @ 7 days 4.8% @ 366 days Terr dissipation C 454091

- 16 465377

- 17 465524

- 02 8% @ 90 days 5% @ 498 days

Terr dissipation C 454091

- 17 465377

- 20 465524

- 03 29% @ 1 day post

- 7 th app ND @ 498 days

Terr dissipation C 456385

- 12 465377

- 23 4678 42

- 01 38% @ 2 nd app 12% @ 540 days

Terr dissipation C 456385

- 13 465377

- 22 467842

- 02 41% @ 6 days post

- 4 th app 33% @ 582 days

Terr dissipation C 465711

- 02 Thatch 6.7% @ 2 days Soil <LOQ or ND @ all intervals Thatch 0.2% @ 120 days Soil ND @ 120 days

Terr dissipation C 465871

- 01 Thatch 5.4% @ 7 days Soil 17% @ 4 days Thatch 0.3% @ 120 days Soil <LOQ @ 120 days 

### CCBA

- AC , CCBA hydrolysis compound #1

, or M

- 1 4

- (4

- chloro

- 2

- carboxyimidazol

- 5

- yl)benzoic acid

C2(=C(C1=CC=C(C=C1) C(=O)O[H])[N](C(=N2)C( =O)O[H ])[H])Cl Aerobic soil 47716301 17.4% @ 245 day 15.7% @ 366 days 

### N H N Cl

C N H O O C

Cl C O O H

N H N

C O O H



### 53

### Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type Ref. (MRID) Maximum %AR (day) A 

### Final %AR (study length)
CCBA

- AM 4

- (4

- chloro

- 2

- amidoimidazol

- 5

- yl) benzoic acid

Formula: C 11 H 8 N 3 O 3 Cl MW: 265.66 g/mol Aerobic soil 47716301 M inor component M inor component



### CCTS 6

- (4

- Chloro

- 2

- cyanoimidazol

- 5

- yl)

- N,N

dimethyl m

toluenesulfonamide Aq photolysis 45409102, 46537703

, 46702703 37.9% @ 180 min 0% @ 30 days



### CDTS 2

- Cyano

- N,N

- dimethyl

- 5

- p

- tolyimidazole

- 4

- sulfonamide Aq photolysis 45409102, 46537703

, 46702703 9.6% @ 36 days 9.6% @ 36 days



### HTID 5

- Hydro xy

- 5

- p

- tolyl

- 2,4

- imidazolidinedione Aq photolysis 45409102, 46537703

, 46702703 18.5% @ 26 days 17.0% @ 36 days



### p - Toluamide 4

- Methylbenzamide Aq photolysis 45409102, 46537703

, 46702703 12.1% @ 36 days 12.1% @ 36 days



### CHCN 4

- Chloro

- 5

- (4

- hydroxymethylph enyl)imid azole

- 2

- carbonitrile Anaerobic aquatic 45409109 46537711 46702706 ≤1.2% @ 7 days 0.0% @ 360 days N H N Cl

H O O C C O N H 2



### N H N
C H

3 

### Cl

C N

S O 2 

### N ( C H 3 

### ) 2



### N H N
C H

3 

### ( H 3 

### C ) 2 

### N O 2 

### S

C N

N H N H
C H

3 

### O

O
O H



### C H

3 

### C O N H 2



### N H N
H O C H 2 

### Cl

C N



### 54

### Code Name/ Synonym Chemical Name Chemical Structure Study Type Ref. (MRID) Maximum %AR (day) A 

### Final %AR (study length)
Carbon Dioxide Carbon dioxide

CAS Number: 124

- 38

- 9

Formula: CO 2 MW: 44. 01 g/mol Soil photolysis 46702704 Not measured Not measured Aerobic soil 45409106, 46537705 Not applicable 14.1% @ 59 days

Aerobic soil 45409108, 46537706 Not applicable 14.4% @ 45 days

Aerobic soil 47716301 Not applicable 15.9% @ 366 days Aerobic aquatic 45409110 46537712 46702707 Not applicable 3.2% @ 100 day s

Anaerobic aquatic 45409109 46537711 46702706 Not applicable 3.4% @ 360 days

Anaerobic aquatic 47716302 Not applicable 0.5% @ 180 days
A Bolded values indicate a major degradate was formed or that a degradate is of toxicological significance

B In a later submission, the recoveries ranged from 91.4

- 105.3% AR (both labels).

C Terrestrial field study percentages represent the ratio of degradate concentration to the maximum parent concentration, both in the top layer of soil (and/or thatch)

. C O O



### 55

## Appendi x B. KABAM v.1.0 Output File

Table 1. Chemical characteristics of Cyazofamid.
Characteristic Value Comments/Guidance

Pesticide Name Cyazofamid Required input

Log K OW 3.2 Required input Enter value from acceptable or supplemental study submitted by reg istrant or available in scientific literature.

K OW 1585 No input necessary. This value is calculated automatically from the Log K OW value entered above.

K OC (L/kg OC) 1338 Required input Input value used in PRZM/EXAMS to derive EECs. Follow input paramet er guidance for deriving this parameter value (USEPA 2002).
Time to steady state (T S ; days) 3 No input necessary. This value is calculated automatically from the Log K OW value entered above.

Pore water EEC (μg/L) 0.096 Required input Enter value generat ed by PRZM/EXAMS benthic file. PRZM/EXAMS EEC represents the freely dissolved concentration of the pesticide in the pore water of the sediment. The appropriate averaging period of the EEC is dependent on the specific pesticide being modeled and is based o n the time it takes for the chemical to reach steady state. Select the EEC generated by PRZM/EXAMS which has an averaging period closest to the time to steady state calculated above. In cases where the time to steady state exceeds 365 days, the user shoul d select the EEC representing the average of yearly averages. The peak EEC should not be used.

Water Column EEC (μg/L) 0.096 Required input Enter value generated by PRZM/EXAMS water column file. PRZM/EXAMS EEC represents the freely dissolved concentrat ion of the pesticide in the water column. The appropriate averaging period of the EEC is dependent on the specific pesticide being modeled and is based on the time it takes for the chemical to reach steady state. The averaging period used for the water col umn EEC should be the same as the one selected for the pore water EEC (discussed above).

Table 2. Input parameters for rate constants. "calculated" indicates that model will calculate rate constant.

Trophic level k 1 (L/kg*d) k 2 (d - 1 ) k D (kg

- food/kg

org/d) k E (d - 1 ) k M * (d - 1 ) phytoplankton calculated calculated 0* 0* 0



### 56zooplankton c alculated calculated calculated calculated 0 benthic invertebrates calculated calculated calculated calculated 0 filter feeders calculated calculated calculated calculated 0 small fish calculated calculated calculated calculated 0 medium fish calculate d calculated calculated calculated 0 large fish calculated calculated calculated calculated 0

* Default value is 0. k 1 and k 2 represent the uptake and elimination constants respectively, through respiration. k D and k E represent the uptake and elimination constants, respectively, through diet.

k M represents the metabolism rate constant.

Table 3. Mammalian and avian toxicity data for Cyazofamid. These are required inputs.

Animal Measure of effect (units) Value Species If selected species is "other," enter body weight (in kg) here.

Avian LD 50 (mg/kg

bw) 2000 mallard duck LC 50 (mg/kg

diet) 4740 mallard duck
NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) 170 Northern bobwhite quail

Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15 Default value for all spe cies is 1.15 (for chemical specific values, see Mineau et al. 1996).

Mammalian LD 50 (mg/kg

bw) 324 laboratory rat LC 50 (mg/kg

diet) N/A other Chronic Endpoint 20000 laboratory rat

units of chronic endpoint* ppm

*ppm = mg/kg

- diet



### 57Characteristic Value Concentration of Particulate Organic Carbon (X

POC ; kg OC/ L) 0.00E+00

Concentration of Dissolved Organic Carbon (X

DOC ; kg OC/L) 0.00E+00

Concentration of Dissolved Oxygen (C OX ; mg O 2 /L) 5.0

Water Temperature (T; o C) 15

Concentration of Suspended Solids (C SS ; kg/L) 3.00E-05

Sediment Organic Carbon (OC; %) 4.0% Guidance* Table 4. Abiotic characteristics of the model aquatic ecosystem.

Default value is 4.0% when using EECs generated by PRZM/EXAMS. Default value is 3.00x10 -5 kg/L when using EECs generated by PRZM/EXAMS. Value is defined by the average water temperature of the EXAMS pond when using EECs generated by PRZM/EXAMS. Model user should consult output file of EXAMS to define this value. Default value is 5.0 mg O 2 /L when using EECs generated by PRZM/EXAMS. When using EECs generated by PRZM/EXAMS, use a value of “0” for both POC and DOC.

*When using pesticide concentrations from monitoring data or mesocosm studies, consult Appendix B of the User’s Guide for specific guidance on selecting values for these parameters.

Trophic Level Wet Weight (kg) % lipids % NLOM % Water Do organisms in trophic level respire some pore

water? sediment* N/A 0.0% 4.0% 96.0% N/A phytoplankton N/A 2.0% 8.0% 90.0% no zooplankton 1.0E-07 3.0% 12.0% 85.0% no benthic invertebrates 1.0E-04 3.0% 21.0% 76.0% yes filter feeders 1.0E-03 2.0% 13.0% 85.0% yes small fish 1.0E-02 4.0% 23.0% 73.0% yes medium fish 1.0E-01 4.0% 23.0% 73.0% yes large fish 1.0E+00 4.0% 23.0% 73.0% no

N/A = not applicable Table 5. Characteristics of aquatic biota of the model ecosystem.

*Note that sediment is not a trophic level. It is included in this table because it is consumed by aquatic organisms of the KABAM foodweb.



### 58Trophic level in diet Zoo plankton Benthic Invertebrates Filter Feeder Small Fish Medium Fish Large Fish sediment* 0.0% 34.0% 34.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% phytoplankton 100.0% 33.0% 33.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% zooplankton 33.0% 33.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% benthic invertebrates 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% filter feeders 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% small fish 50.0% 0.0% medium fish 100.0% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% *Note that sediment is not a trophic level. It is included in this table because it is consumed by aquatic organisms of the KABAM foodweb. Diet for: Table 6. Diets of aquatic biota of the model ecosystem.



### 59Parameter Phyto plankton Zoo plankton Benthic Invertebrates Filter Feeders Small Fish Medium Fish Large Fish

C B 0.000007 0.00000529 0.000006 0.000004 0.000007 0.000007 0.00001 C BD 0.000000 0.00000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 C BR 0.00000719 0.00000528 0.00000575 0.00000382 0.00000738 0.00000737 0.00000736
C S C WDP C WTO k 1 283.265 40514.831 3610.888 1612.924 720.467 321.821 143.752
k 2 3.679965 735.919482 60.225874 40.567401 9.370816 4.185790 1.869724
k D 0.000000 0.303497 0.107685 0.047114 0.053970 0.038208 0.027049
k E 0.000000 0.059499 0.014942 0.009858 0.005664 0.004909 0.003772
k G 0.100000 0.012559 0.003155 0.001991 0.001256 0.000792 0.000500
k M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

m o 1 1 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1

m p 0 0 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0 Σ (P i * C Di ) 0 7.19409E-06 5.86584E-06 5.8658E-06 5.526E-06 6.5859E-06 7.4309E-06 Ф

X

POC X

DOC K OW Ф

C S C SOC C WDP K OC OC

C ox N/A
E W N/A
G V N/A 0.007891472 0.703328201 3.14165167 14.0332425 62.6841919 280
k 1 283.2648224 40514.83077 3610.888093 1612.92446 720.466894 321.82074 143.752044
K OW W B N/A 0.0000001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1

k 1 283.2648224 40514.83077 3610.888093 1612.92446 720.466894 321.82074 143.752044

k 2 3.679964779 735.9194825 60.22587402 40.5674005 9.37081563 4.18578959 1.86972353
K BW 76.97487324 55.05334718 59.95576074 39.7591279 76.8841179 76.8841179 76.8841179
K OW V LB 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04
V NB 0.08 0.12 0.21 0.13 0.23 0.23 0.23
V WB 0.9 0.85 0.76 0.85 0.73 0.73 0.73 β 0.35 Table 10. Input parameters and calculations relevant to derivation of C B .

Equation A1

Equation A2
0.0000000 0.000005

0.00000010

0.00000010

1.00000000

0.0000000

1585 1585 5 0.0001 1.00000000 Equation A4

Equation A6 0.0000

0.035 1585

Equation A5 0.00000

1338

0.513400158 4%



### 60k G 0.1 0.012559432 0.003154787 0.00199054 0.00125594 0.00079245 0.0005
T
W B N/A 0.0000001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1

C ox N/A N/A N/A 5 N/A N/A N/A
C SS N/A N/A N/A 3.00E-05 N/A N/A N/A
E D N/A
G D N/A 6.07E-08 2.15E-05 9.42E-05 1.08E-03 7.64E-03 5.41E-02
G V N/A N/A N/A 3.14 N/A N/A N/A
k D 0 3.03E-01 1.08E-01 4.71E-02 5.40E-02 3.82E-02 2.70E-02
K OW T N/A
W B N/A 0.0000001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1

C ox N/A N/A N/A 5 N/A N/A N/A
C SS N/A N/A N/A 3.00E-05 N/A N/A N/A

E D N/A
G D N/A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000942 0.0011 0.0076 0.0541
G F N/A 0.000000 0.000015 0.000066 0.000726 0.004965 0.034777
G V N/A N/A N/A 3.1417 N/A N/A N/A
k E 0 0.0595 0.0149 0.0099 0.0057 0.0049 0.0038
K GB N/A 0.2789 0.1977 0.2981 0.1561 0.1978 0.2170
K OW N/A
T N/A
V LB N/A 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.04
V LD N/A 0.02 0.01650 0.0165 0.03 0.035 0.04
V LG N/A 0.007966 0.005876 0.005876 0.003571 0.004311 0.004979
V NB N/A 0.12 0.21 0.13 0.23 0.23 0.23
V ND N/A 0.08 0.0796 0.0796 0.165 0.22 0.23
V NG N/A 0.03186 0.02835 0.02835 0.09819 0.13548 0.14315
V WB N/A 0.85 0.76 0.85 0.73 0.73 0.73
V WD N/A 0.9 0.9039 0.9039 0.805 0.745 0.73
V WG N/A 0.9602 0.9658 0.9658 0.8982 0.8602 0.8519
W B N/A 0.0000001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 β N/A 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035

ε L N/A 0.72 0.75 0.75 0.92 0.92 0.92

ε N N/A 0.72 0.75 0.75 0.6 0.6 0.6

ε W N/A 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25

C BCF 7.38959E-06 5.28512E-06 5.75575E-06 3.8169E-06 7.3809E-06 7.3809E-06 7.3809E-06 Equation A8

Equation A9 0.499881161

Calculation of BCF values 15 0.4999

1585 1585
15

15 Equation A7



### 61Total concentration

(μg/kg-ww) Lipid normalized concentration

(μg/kg-lipid) Contribution due to diet (μg/kg-ww) Contribution due to respiration (μg/kg-ww) 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A 5 N/A N/A N/A 7 360 N/A 7.19 5 176 0.00 5.28 6 192 0.01 5.75 4 191 0.01 3.82 7 185 0.03 7.38 7 186 0.06 7.37 7 187 0.11 7.36 Phytoplankton

Medium Fish Small Fish

Large Fish Zooplankton Benthic Invertebrates Ecosystem Component Water (total)*

Filter Feeders Sediment (pore water)* Sediment (in solid)** Water (freely dissolved)* Table 11. Estimated concentrations of Cyazofamid in ecosystem components.

* Units: μg/L; **Units: μ g/kg-dw

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Zooplankton Benthic Invertebrates Filter Feeders Small Fish Medium Fish Large FishConcentration (μg/kg)

Trophic Level

Figure 1. Total pesticide concentration per trophic level Contribution due to respiration (μg/kg-ww)
Contribution due to diet (μg/kg-ww)



### 62Total BCF ( μ g/kgww)/( μ g/L) Total BAF ( μ g/kgww)/( μ g/L) 77 75 55 55 60 60 40 40 77 77 77 77 77 78 Medium Fish Large Fish Benthic Invertebrates Trophic Level Phytoplankton Zooplankton Table 12. Total BCFand BAF values of Cyazofamid in aquatic trophic levels.

Filter Feeders Small Fish

BCF ( μ g/kglipid)/( μ g/L) BAF ( μ g/kglipid)/( μ g/L) BMF ( μ g/kglipid)/( μ g/kglipid) BSAF ( μ g/kglipid)/( μ g/kgOC) 3849 3747 N/A 3 1835 1836 0.49 1 1999 2002 1.09 1 1988 1991 1.08 1 1922 1929 1.01 1 1922 1935 0.98 1 1922 1946 1.01 1 Medium Fish Large Fish Trophic Level Phytoplankton Zooplankton Benthic Invertebrates Filter Feeders Small Fish Table 13. Lipid-normalized BCF, BAF, BMF and BSAF values of Cyazofamid in aquatic trophic levels.



### 63fog/water shrew 0.02 0.140 0.585 0.003 0.003 0.01

rice rat/star-nosed mole 0.1 0.107 0.484 0.011 0.003 0.01

small mink 0.5 0.079 0.293 0.048 0.002 0.01

large mink 1.8 0.062 0.229 0.168 0.002 0.01

small river otter 5.0 0.052 0.191 0.421 0.001 0.01

large river otter 15.0 0.042 0.157 1.133 0.001 0.01

sandpipers 0.0 0.228 1.034 0.004 0.0059 0.01

cranes 6.7 0.030 0.136 0.211 0.0008 0.01

rails 0.1 0.147 0.577 0.010 0.0038 0.01

herons 2.9 0.040 0.157 0.120 0.0010 0.01
small osprey 1.3 0.054 0.199 0.069 0.0015 0.01
white pelican 7.5 0.029 0.107 0.228 0.0008 0.01 Table 14. Calculation of EECs for mammals and birds consuming fish contaminated by Cyazofamid.

Avian Body Weight

(kg) Drinking Water Intake (L/d) Wet Food Ingestion Rate (kg-wet

food/kgbw/day) Dry Food Ingestion Rate (kg-dry

food/kgbw/day) Dose Based(mg/kgbw/d) Wildlife Species EECs (pesticide intake) Biological Parameters Dietary Based (ppm)

Mammalian



### 64Dose Based (mg/kg-bw) Dietary Based (mg/kg-diet) Dose Based (mg/kg-bw) Dietary Based (mg/kg-diet)

fog/water shrew 680.37 N/A 2099.90 20000

rice rat/star-nosed mole 461.54 N/A 1424.50 20000

small mink 304.27 N/A 939.10 20000
large mink 215.15 N/A 664.05 20000

small river otter 166.66 N/A 514.37 20000
large river otter 126.63 N/A 390.84 20000

sandpipers 1038.45 4740.00 N/A 170

cranes 2483.95 4740.00 N/A 170

rails 1253.13 4740.00 N/A 170

herons 2190.74 4740.00 N/A 170
small osprey 1930.94 4740.00 N/A 170
white pelican 2526.33 4740.00 N/A 170 Wildlife Species Mammalian

Avian Acute Table 15. Calculation of toxicity values for mammals and birds consuming fish contaminated by Cyazofamid.

Chronic Toxicity Values



### 65Dose Based Dietary Based Dose Based Dietary Based

fog/water shrew 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000

rice rat/star-nosed mole 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000

small mink 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000
large mink 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000

small river otter 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000
large river otter 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000

sandpipers 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000

cranes 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000

rails 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000

herons 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000
small osprey 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000
white pelican 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 Avian Acute Chronic Table 16. Calculation of RQ values for mammals and birds consuming fish contaminated by Cyazofamid.

Wildlife Species Mammalian



### 66

## Appendix C

— SIP Results

Table 1. Inputs Parameter Value Chemical name Cyazofamid Solubility (in water at 25 o C; mg/L) 0.121

Mammalian LD 50 (mg/kg

- bw) 5000 Mammalian tes t species laboratory rat Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Mammalian NOAEL (mg/kg

- bw) 20000 Mammalian test species laboratory rat Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Avian LD 50 (mg/kg

- bw) 2 000 Avian test species northern bobwhite quail Body weight (g) of "other" avian species Mineau scaling factor 1.15

Mallard NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) 5100 Bobwhite quail NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) 168 NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) for other b ird species 27 Body weight (g) of other avian species 120 NOAEC (mg/kg

- diet) for 2nd other bird species Body weight (g) of 2nd other avian species

Table 2. Mammalian Results Parame ter Acute Chronic Upper bound exposure (mg/kg

- bw) 0.0208 0.0208 Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg

- bw) 3845.8028 15383.2113 Ratio of exposure to toxicity 0.0000 0.0000

Conclusion* Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential

concern for mammals Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential

concern for mammals

Table 3. Avian Results Parameter Acute Chronic Upper bound exposure (mg/kg

- bw) 0.0980 0.0980 Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg

- bw) 1440.8590 3.2935 Ratio of expo sure to acute toxicity 0.0001 0.0298



### 67Conclusion* Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential concern for birds Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential concern for birds

*Conclusion is for drinking water exposure alone. This doe s not combine all routes of exposure. Therefore, when aggregated with other routes ( i.e ., diet, inhalation, dermal), pesticide exposure through drinking water may contribute to a total exposure that has potential for effects to non

- target animals.



### 68

## App endix D

— STIR Results 

# Welcome to the EFED Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk This tool is designed to provide the risk assessor with a rapid method for determining the potentia significance of the inhalation exposure route to birds and mammals in a risk assessment.


# Input

Application and Chemical Information
Enter Chemical Name Cyazofamid Enter Chemical Use Turf Is the Application a Spray? (enter y or n) n If Spray What Type (enter ground or air) air Enter Chemical Mol ecular Weight (g/mole) 324.79 Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 1.00E

- 07 Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 1.56

Toxicity Properties
**Bird** Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 2000 Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15 Ent er Tested Bird Weight (kg) 0.178 **Mammal** Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 5000 Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC 50 (mg/L) 5.5 Duration of Rat Inhalation Study (hrs) 4 Enter Rat Weight (kg) 0.35


# Output Results Avian (0.020 k g ) Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.75E

- 03 Maximum 1

- hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.20E

- 04 Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.23E+01 Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.79E

- 05 Exposure not Likely Signi ficant Maximum Post

- treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) not applicable Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 not applicable not applicable



### Results Mammalian (0.015 kg ) Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Satu ration (mg/m 3 ) 1.75E

- 03 Maximum 1

- hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.76E

- 04



### 69Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 3.27E+02 Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 8.44E

- 07 Exposure not Likely Significant Maximum Post

- treatment Spray Inhalation Dos e (mg/kg) not applicable Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 not applicable not applicable



# Welcome to the EFED Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk This tool is designed to provide the risk assessor with a rapid method for determining the potentia significance of the inhalation exposure route to birds and mammals in a risk assessment.


# Input

Application and Chemical Information
Enter Chemical Name Cyazofamid Enter Chemical Use Ornamental 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) 324.79 Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 1.00E

- 07 Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 1.02

Toxicity Prope rties
**Bird** Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 2000 Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15 Enter Tested Bird Weight (kg) 0.178 **Mammal** Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 5000 Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC 50 (mg/L) 5.5 Duration of Rat Inhalation Study (hrs) 4 Enter Rat Weight (kg) 0.35


# Output Results Avian (0.020 kg ) Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.75E

- 03 Maximum 1

- hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.20E

- 04 Adjusted Inhal ation LD 50 1.23E+01 Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.79E

- 05 Exposure not Likely Significant Maximum Post

- treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 9.80E

- 02 Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 7.99E

- 03 Expos ure not Likely Significant



### 70

### Results Mammalian (0.015 kg ) Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.75E

- 03 Maximum 1

- hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.76E

- 04 Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 3.27E+02 Ratio of Vapor Dose t o Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 8.44E

- 07 Exposure not Likely Significant Maximum Post

- treatment Spray Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 1.23E

- 01 Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 3.76E

- 04 Exposure not Likely Significant



### 71