UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY W ASHINGTON

. D

. C

. 20460



## S EP 1 6 2010

O FFICE O F C HEM !CA.L SAFETY A ND POlLUTIO N PREVENT ION MEMORA NDUM S UBJECT:

FROM:

T HRU :

TO: 

### P e rcent Cr o p Treated f or N ew U se s ( PC'Tn) of M ancozeb 

### o n Alm onds , Brocc oli , Ca bbage, Peppe r, Pwnp kin, and Winter Sq uash, PC Cnde : 01 4504; DP Barcnde : 360 397; Lettu ce , both Head and O ther ; PC Cnd e : 0 14504 ; DP Barcnde : 3 64745, NON PRIA , Parent D P : 6 35267; and Percent C rop T reated w i th Maneb f or 

### Coll ards. Mu stard Greens , Turn ip Green s, and K ale Jihad A lsadek , Ph
. D
. , Eco nomi s t

# T~**'W** A---

.

# .A-i~c;/ Scien ce l nfonnat i on & 

### Ana lysis Branch Biolog ical an d Economic Ana lysi s D ivision (7503P ) C ar l C he n, Ph
. D
. , P lant Pa thologi s t 

### B io lo gical Analys i s Bran ch Bio logical and Economic Analys i s Div i sio n (75 03P)

# .~ Dian n S ims, C hief 

# A'i Science In f orm ation 

### an d naly s is Br a

n

e 

### B iolog ical and Economic Analysis Divi sio n (750 3P) A rnet J on e s, C h ie f

# ::Jl~ B iologic al A nalys i s Branc h 

### Biological and E co nom ic Anal ys is D i visio n' 

### 503 P) L

isa J o n e s , Risk Man ager R eviewer 

### Fungicide Br anch Regi stration D ivision (7505P) C

hris tine O linger , Senior C hemi st Risk A ssess ment Bran ch V II Hea lth E ff ec ts Divi s ion (7509 P ) 

### Office o f Pe s ticide Program s
PRP 

### R eview: A ugust 4, 20 10



### 1

### I . S UMMARY H E D requested that B EAD prov ide refined percent c rop treated (P CT) v alue s for u se o f manc ozeb on almond s , bro ccoli , c abbage , p epper , pumpkin , winter s quash and lettu ce , b oth head 

### and other . A dditionally , H ED reque sted P CT va lues f or u se ofmaneb o n c ollard s, mu st ard and turnip g reen s, and kale
. HED a lso pro vided th e ED B CIET U T ask Force S tudy (Fe b ruary, 2 010 ) f or B E AD 's r eview
. T he EB D C Tas k Forc e (T F) s ubmitted a s tudy propo sal to devel op in formation on the maneb cancellati on, refinem ent s to th e R ED r isk a sse s sm ents , a nd the imp act 

### o f the s e refin em ents on th e EBDC s IETU c umulati ve and aggrega te ri sk a ssessm ent. Th eir prop osal al s o included data s o urces and meth od s t o refine PC Tn f or th e c rop s in the manco zeb petition s, and to c alculate the P CT for the lea fy g reen Bra ssi ca s B EAD re vi ewed th e mo st rece nt a v ailable u sage data and , throu gh thi s m em o, i s pro viding refinem ents o f the projected percent crop tr eat ed (PP C T) v a lue s ( new u se ) previou sly pr ovided for almond s , bro ccoli , cabba ge , p epper, pumpk in , and w inter s qu as h (A l s adek and C hen, 2 009a) and lettu ce, b oth h ead a nd oth er ( Al sadek a nd C hen , 200 9b )
. Th e term " PCT n " ha s b een re centl y u s ed f or perc ent c rop tre ated f or ne w u ses ( Doucoure and C he n, 2 0 10) , and i s u sed in thi s mem o ref erring to pr eviou s PP CTs . B EA D i s al s o pro vidin g P CT va lue s f or m aneb on c ollard s , mu st ard and turnip g reens , and kal e . A s ummary o f the pre vious, refined , a nd propo s ed ( EBD C Ta sk F orce ) manc o z eb P CTn value s ar e s hown in T able 

### l. T a bl e 2 pre sent s the refined P'C f n v alue s, both c hronic and a c ute for manc ozeb f or almond s , brocc oli, c abbage , pepper , pumpkin , wint er s qua s h, head lettu ce and o ther lettuce . P CT s f or co llard s, m u s tard a nd turnip g reen s, and kal e a re pre sented in T able 3 . B E AD ha s con sidered all a vailable relevant informatio n a nd beli eve s it i s unlik ely that th es e v alue s w ill be e xc eeded durin g th e nex t fi ve y e ar s for th e s e c rop s.


### II . FE D ERA L REGIST ER L A N G UAG E For the market lead er approach, E P A e s timates the p erc ent c rop tr eated f or new u s e s ( PC T n) o f a c h e mica l repre sent the upper b ound o f u se e xp e cted durin g the pe sticid e 's initi al fi ve y ears o f re gi stration ; that is , P C Tn for thi s chemical i s a thr e shold o f u se that E PA i s r ea so nably cert ain w ill n ot be exce ed ed f or ea ch registered u s e s ite
. The PC Tn re commended f or u s e in the c hronic d ietar y as sess ment i s ca lculated as th e a v erage perc ent crop treated ( P CT) of the mark et l eader o r l eaders , ( i .e., th e on e( s) wi th th e g reate s t P CT, ) on that s ite o ve r the three mo st recent y ears of a v ailable s u rvey dat a . Th e P CTn re commended f or u s e in the a c ute dietary a ssess ment i s the ma ximum o bserved PC T o ver th e s ame p eriod . C o mp ar is o ns ar e o nl y made am ong pe sticides o f th e s am e p e sticid e t ype s ( e.g ., the mark et l eader f or fun gicide s o n the u se s ite i s s e l ect e d fo r co mpari s on w ith a ne w fun g icide)
. The mark et lead er includ ed in th e e s timation ma y n ot be the s ame for each y ear s i nc e differ ent pe sticid e s m ay domin a te at di fferent time s. Ty pically , E PA u s e s U S D AINASS as th e s o ur ce dat a b ecau s e i t i s publicl y a vai lable and dir ectly report s va lue s f or P CT. When a s pecific u s e s ite i s not rep orted b y U S DAIN AS S, E P A u ses propri etary data and c alculate s the P CT g i v en rep orted data on a cre s treated and a cre s g rown . If no data ar e availabl e , E P A ma y ex trap olate PCTn from oth er c rop s, if the produ ction



### 2

### area and pe st s pectrum are substantially s imilar. EPA refines P CTn e stimate s ba sed on approache s other than the market leader approach if the previou s P CTn estimate s b ased on the market leader indicate that th e chemical expo sure potenti ally p o se a ri sk of co ncern. E PA con siders th e p est o r pe st spectrum targeted b y the c hemical f or the ne w u ses and identifi es other p esticides alread y registered on that crop that target the s ame pe st or pe st s pectrum. Th e P CTn i s calculated ba sed on the data f rom the thr ee mo st recentl y available pe sticide u sage s urveys. If multiple c hemicals ar e identified that target th e s ame p e s t s pectrum , then the o ne with the highe st P CT i s se lected from ea ch year / crop combination
. C onsideration i s al so gi ven to th e potential f or the de velopment of r e si stance for ea ch chemical u sin g data avail able from the Re si stan ce A ction Co mmittees. EPA ha s considered all a vailable relevant inf ormation and conclude s that it is unlikel y that the PCT n v alues w ill be e xceeded durin g th e next fi ve ye ars.


### II I. R efi nemen t o f M ancoze b's PCT n V alues for Alm ond s, B roccoli, Ca bbage, Pepper, Pum p kin, W inte r Squa sh, He ad Lettuc e, a nd O ther L ett uce. Previ ou s Pc 'Fn 

### value s were deriv ed b y u sing th e market leader approach. Th e mark et leader approa ch i s s upported by an anal ysis that the new pesti cide or ne w u s e o f a regi ster ed pe sticide i s not likel y to ov ertake the market lead er for the pe sticide typ e , fun gicide in thi s ca se . The se v alues were derived by averaging the three m ost recent years o f available data for the pe sticide typ e market l eader and crop to o btain the c hronic P CTn v alue for manco zeb and b y s e lecting the high est ob served from the three y ears o f data f or the acute P CTn va lue
. BE AD refine s e stimates b ased o n approache s other than the market leader appro ach where PCTn e stimate s pro vided ba sed on the market leader indicate that the chemical ex posure po ses a ri sk o f c oncern and reli able inf ormation s hows that th e market lead er e s timate s would ov erstate future c hemical u se . Thi s approach relie s he avily on either a detail ed c hemical-specific anal ysis o r a general anal y sis ba sed o n hi storical data
. Be cause the pr evious P e Tn es timates based o n the mark et leader indi cate th at th e ch emical expo sure p otentiall y po se a ri sk o f c oncern, B EA D attempt ed to further refine the se P f'Tn v alue s be yond th e mark et leader a pproach. Man cozeb i s a broad s pectrum f ungicide w ith a low pot ential for the dev elopment o f re sistance. O ther c hemical s that targ et th e s ame ge neral pe st s pectrum, al so with lo w potential for the de v el opment of re si stance, include c opper c ompounds , chlorothalonil , s ulfur , and o ther EBDC s. 

### B EAD fir st con sidered th e p est o r p e st s pectrum target ed by the ch emical for the new u se s . N ext, B EAD identified o ther pe sticide s alread y regi stered on that crop th at targ et th e s ame pe st or pe st s pectrum . B EAD then calculated a 

### P Cfn ba sed on the data from th e thre e m ost re cently available s u rve ys. Th e dat a s o urce s us ed in the refinement included U SDA NA SS ( 2002, 2004, 2006), Ca l DPR ( 2006 , 2007 , 2008) , and pr oprietary data ( GtK Kynetec)
. If multipl e c hemical s w ere identified th at tar g et th e s ame pe st s pectrum, th en th e one with the highe st p eT was s elected from e ach year/c rop c ombination
. C onsideration wa s a lso g iven to th e

3p otential fo r th e d e velopm ent o f res istanc e f or e ach c hemical u sin g dat a a va ilable fr o m the Re si stance A cti on C o m m itt ees. S hould additional reli able i nformation b ecom e ava ilable , B EAD m ay b e a bl e to furth er r efi ne th e P CTn es timate. Tab le 1 i s a s ummar y o f the pre viously ca lcu la ted P CTn va lues u sing the m arket l eader a pproach , th e refined P CTn va lue s and th e T ask Fo rce prop o s ed man cozeb PCTn v alu es f or a lmonds , broccoli, ca b bage, p epper , pumpkin , w inter s quash , head lettu ce , oth er lettu ce. Tab le 2 pr e s ents th e r efin ed P CTn V alue s , b oth chronic an d a cute f or mancozeb f or a lm ond s , b rocco li , ca bbage , peppe r , pumpkin , w inter s quas h, head lettuc e an d o ther l ettuc e T a ble 1. Summary o f P reviously Ca lc ula ted PCT n Va lues U s i ng t he M arket L e ader App r oa ch, t he Re fined PCT n Va lues, a nd the Tas k Forc e's P r opos ed Ma ncoze b PC Tn Va lues for Al mo nds , Brocc oli, C ab bage , Pepp er, P umpk in, W inter Sq uash, He ad Lettuce , an d Oth er L ettuce. C rop BEAD Mar ket BEAD R efin ed T ask Force Le ade r Approac h C hro nic PC T n+ P ro pos ed PCTs *** C hronic PCTn*/** A lmond s 3 1 

### 18 

### 10 B roccoli 8 

### 5 10 Ca bbage 

### 42 4 2 15 Pepper 

### 4 6 4 4 30 Pumpkin 

### 45 4 5 6 W inter S qua s h 

### 47 47 25 H ead l ettuce 

### 67 67 67 O ther lettuce 

### 6 2 62 62 +. See T ab le 2 for m ore deta il s on how th e refine d P C Tn w ere c alc ulated S ou rces: *M ancozeb PP CT M emo b y J . A lsadek, an d C
. C hen , 

### 4/ 2/2009. ** Man cozeb PP C T Me mo b y 

### J
. A lsadek, and C
. C hen, 

### 6 /

21/2009
. * **EBDCIE TU T ask F orce R espon s e to EP A' s Jun e 14 ,2 007 Me morandum , February 5, 2 010

4

### Ta ble 2
. Re fi nement of P C Tn Val ues, Bo th C hro nic and Acute , for Mancozeh b a s ed on P CTs from Ma rk et Le aders f or A lmo n ds , B ro cco li , C a b b a ge , Pe ppe r, Pumpk in, W int er S quash , H e ad Le ttuce , and Othe r L e tt u c e . C rop ' Ma rk e t L eader Years A nn u al Avg
. PCT of Max
. P C T of (ML ) P C To f ML ( Chronic) M L(Acut e) M L A lmonds C opper Hy dro x ide 

### 2006 2 5 18 25 C opp e r H ydroxid e 

### 2007 14 C o ppe r Hy droxide 

### 2008 16 Brocco li Man c b 

### 20 02 5 5 6 C h lorotha l o ni l 

### 2004 6 C h lo ro tha lo nill 

### 2006 3 Maneb 

### C abb age C hl o rothal o ni l 

### 20 02 33 42 47 C h lo rotha lo ni l 

### 20 04 47 C hloro tha lo ni l 

### 2006 47 P eppe r s C o pper Hyd ro x ide 

### 20 02 48 44 48 S u lf ur 

### 2 004 40 M aneb 

### 20 06 45 P umpk in C hlo roth a lo n i l 

### 2002 31 45 57 C hlo rothalo nil 

### 20 04 5 7 C hlor othaloni I 

### 20 06 48 Wi nter C hlorothalonil 

### 200 2 42 47 54 S qua sh C h lo rothalonil 

### 2 00 4 54 C hlo ro th a lon i l 

### 2 006 45 Head M ane b 

### 200 2 66 67 75 Lettuce M aneb 

### 2004 59 M aneb 

### 2006 75 O ther M aneb 

### 2002 61 62 66 Lettuce M ane b 

### 2004 5 9 Ma ne b 

### 2006 66 S ou rces: G fK K yne te c . (1 998 -2 008) Propr ietary da ta. Agr icu ltura l C he mica l Usage (2 002 , 2004, a nd 20 06) Ve ge ta b le s Su mmary, N ASS, US DA. C alifo rnia DPR ( 2006 · 2008)

1 C A da ta are use d for a lmonds and broccol i. A lmonds and brocc oli acreage t reated with t he market le ader(s ) d ivided by total CA acreage f or the yea rs 2 006 , 2007,and 20 08 fo r a lm on ds
. and f o r the ye ars 20 02 , 2004 , and 2 00 6 fo r broc co l i and m ultipl ying by 10 0 to g et a pe rcentage f or each year a nd then ave rag ing th e thre e p erce nta ge s to get a m anc oze b refined PC T valu e. A verage PCT v alue s ar e u s ed fo r c h ro nic and ma ximum va l u es a re us e d f or acu te ri sk a ssessment . 2 2 00 2 , 2 0 04 , and 2 0 06 N ASS d a t a are av eraged for ea ch m a rke t le ader to g e t r e fin ed ma nc o zeb pe T va lues f or p eppers , pu mpkins , a nd w inte r s quash
. Ave rage p eT val ues a re u sed f or c hro nic ri s k a ssessment an d ma xi mum v alues are us e d for ac u te r isk a ssessmen t. 

### 5

### I V
. Percen t Cr op Tre ated w ith M aneb f or the H rassi ca Crops ( collar ds, mu stard g reens, t urnip green s, a nd k ale) Maneb i s labeled for c ollards, mu stard gr eens , and t urnip green s, o nly i n G eorgia and T enne s see , whil e it i s labeled f or u se on kale in all state s e xcept Ca lifornia. P CT va lue s f or these cro ps arc s ummarized in T able 3
. B EAD c alculated th e P'C 'T s for c ollards , mu stard greens , and turnip g reens u sing th e mo st re cent agricultural c ensus data (2 007). B EAD id e ntified th e available crop acreage harv ested i n Georgia and T ennessee for e ach c rop a nd di vided the rel evant ac reage b y the total U .S area harv ested f or tha t c rop , a nd then multiplied b y 100
. Thi s method a ssumes 100 percent maneb treatment f or the three crop s in Ge orgia and Te nnessee . Wh ere ther e were no avail abl e harve sted ac res data for T ennessee, B EAD u sed the ratio o f TN farm s to US farm s multiplied by th e national harvested acreage as a s urrogate for TN harv ested acres. G A and TN har ve sted acreage i s di vided b y total U S harv ested acre s a nd th en multipli ed by 100
. The res ult i s u sed a s a s urrogate f or perc ent c rop tre ated f or collard s, mu stard gr eens , and turnip gr eens. T hese percent ages f or c ollards , mu stard gr eens, and turnip greens ar e u sed b y I l ED t o refine their ri sk a ssessment. Thi s a ssume s 100 percent maneb treatment o n collard s , mu stard green s, and turnip gr eens in G eorgia and T ennessee. To c alculate th e PCT va lue for maneb 's u se on kale , B EAD s ubtracted th e CA harv ested acreage fr om the nation al har vested acr eage. The re sult is divid ed by the national harvested acreage and multiplied by 100
. Thi s method a s sumes 100 perc ent man eb tre atment on kal e in all s tates but C alifornia
. Th e T F approach di ffers from B EAD's in the following a reas : 1) BE AD u sed mo st re cent data , 2007 a gricultural c ensus data , w hile T F u sed relatively o ld data , 2 003 N ASS dat a, and 2) o bserved maneb lab eled crop s in ce rtain s tates differ from th e TF s tudy , e specially kale whi ch i s l abeled nationw ide exce pt f or C alifornia.

6

### Table 3. P CTs for Brassica C rops ( Collard s, M ustard Green s, T urnip G reens, and Kale), T reated wit h Mancb. C rop Year Stat es A creage H arvested Tota l U S B EAD T ask Fo rce Acre s Calc ulated Pro posed H arve sted PCT s P CTs Collar d s 2007 GA&TN 3 , 451(3 ,320 + 131 ' ) 11 ,223 3 1 % 5 3 % Mus tard 2007 GA&TN 1 ,786 (1, 585 +2 01' ) 8,323 22 % 23 % Gree n s Turnip 2007 GA&TN 3 ,371 (2 ,777 +59 4 ' ) 9,365 3 6 % 48 % G reens K ale 2007 All Excep t CA 2 ,917" 3,99 4 73 % 10 % So urce . hnp :Nwww .agcensus .usda.gov/Publications l2007IFull Report /us v I
. pdf

• • Acc ordi n g to the so urce , ac re s harve st ed in T enness ee ( TN) were w ithheld to a void d isclosing data fo r ind ividua l fann s . B EAD u sed the rat io of TN farm s to nati onal number of farm s , multip lied by t he nati onal ac re s harv e sted to be the acreage for TN
. Th is acreage wa s adde d t o the G A acreage and div ided by the to ta l na t ional ac r eage to g et the percent of ac reage in GA and TN harv e sted
. Th is pe rcentag e is u sed as a s urroga t e for pe r cent crop treated f or ea ch o f the se three cro p s , assumi ng 100 percen t m aneb trea tment.

• • • Ca lifo rnia harve s ted acreage was s ubtracte d f orm the tota l U S harve ste d ac reage . B EAD d i vided th is r e sult b y the total US harve sted acre age , and mu ltiplied b y 100 to g e t th e perce nt of ka le tr eate d with maneb
V , A DDI TIONA L BIOLOGICAL FA C TORS T here ar e three main biol ogical factor s B EAD co n si der s i n e valuating the likeliho od that u se of a n ew ly reg ist ered c hemical or a new u se w ill ex ceed the p eT f or ne w u ses o r new chemic als : (1 ) th e extent o f pe st pressure o n the c rop s in qu e stion ; ( 2) the pe st s pectrum o f the ne w pe sticide in co mparison with the market leader s as well a s whether the market leaders are well

-establis hed for thi s use ; and ( 3) re si stanc e c on cern s with th e n ew p e sticide and the market leaders . Hi gh pe st pre ssure with the lack o f re gist ered c ontrol s could indicat e s ignificant demand f or a new ch emic al. E mergency exemption s under s ection 18 o f FIFRA a re a g ood indicator in regard to th ese s itu a tio n s. On th e o ther hand , it w ould he rel atively diffi cult f or a new active ingredient to g ain a lar ge p ortion o f the m arket i f a ) 

### i t co mpetes wi th th e mark et leader( s) or o thers th at h ave b een e xtensivel y u sed for p est c ontrol in cluding th e sa me tar get pe st(s) , b) it s ne w u se i s limi ted, f or example, regist ered o nly for a s in g le pe s t, and/o r c) it i s labeled for pe st( s ) o f min or eco no mic co ncern . Fin ally, if the targe t pe s ts are deve loping re sistance t o th e marke t le ader ( s ) , 

### it co uld i ndicate an a d vanta ge f or th e new ac tive in gredient i n th e mar ket
. B ot h man eb an d man cozeb are E BDCs and are co n sidered to be broad s pe ctru m fu ngicid e s wi th low ri sk f or r e sis tance. Whi le the Task Fo rce as s ume s th at man cozeb would replace maneb on a o ne-to-one b asi s , B EAD doe s n ot h ave data that would indicate that thi s w ould occur, or wh ether anothe r b road-spec trum fu ngicide wo uld be s el ec ted b y the g ro wers . The refore BEAD h as se lected th e broad

- spectrum fungici de with the gre atest P CT to estimate the P CTn , and concl ude s that it i s un l ikely that the use of manc ozeb will exceed the re fmed



### 7

### PCTn es timates o n any c rop ident ified in Table 2
. It 

### is mainly bec ause 1 ) f or manc ozeb to co mpete w ith the l eading f ungicide( s) th at h ave been use d ex ten s ively f or s imilar fun ctions s uch as broa d s p ec trum and l ow ri s k i n re s i stan ce, i t wi ll take tim e to build mark et s hare, w hich w ill unlikel y happen i n th e tim e f rame of thi s as s essment; and/ or 2 ) e xi sting man eb s tocks are lik ely to reduce the u s age o f man cozeb
. If mor e th an o n e EB DC product i s u s ed o n the s ame cro p d uring the s ame growing seas on, the m aximum s easo na l po undage m ay not exce e d t hat allowed f or a si ngle p roduct. In addition, N ASS P C T data are not available f or th e four leafy green B rassi cas. Man eb PCTs in Te nnessee w ere e s timated, w hen c ompared to oth er leafy green fun gicide u s e s in the s tate, as 45% f or c ollard s, 4 5% for k ale , 7 0% fo r mu stard g ree n s, an d 6 0% f or turnip gree n s (Ten ne ssee G reens Profile, 2 008)
. Mane b i s labeled for u se o n ka le in a ll U. S. exce p t C a lif o rni a, and o ther thr ee green s in Geo rgia and T enne ssee o nly
. Th i s mem o as s umes 1 00% m aneb u sage o n co llard s, m u stard greens , or turnip greens in Ge orgia an d Tenn essee and kal e i n a ll s tate s exce pt Ca l if ornia. It 

### i s a co n serva tive es timate and n o analysis o n addition al f actor s is n eeded. B ecau s e th ese g reen s are al so grown in oth er s tates that are n ot lab el ed f or maneb u s e , TF prop o sed th at " [fJor the purpo s e s of ri sk as sess ment , it can b e a ss umed t hat c on serva tively 1 00% o f th e Geo rgia c ollard c rop was tr eated with m aneb
. Therefore , the propo sed % CT f o r maneb o n c ollard s i s 5 3%." ( Task Force S tudy. 20 10) Fo r an other e xample

- mu stard green s, TF ca lculated th at " 10 0% of th e G eorgia c rop , repre s enting 2 3% of the US ac reage , i s a fai r e stimat e o f th e total US % C T , resulting in 2 3% CT f or m aneb
. " Be s ide th e agreement o n th e approach u s ed fo r these greens , th ere are d if ference s bet ween thi s memo and the T F p ropo sal (Table 3 ). First , 20 07 C e ns us of Ag riculture dat a are u sed . Se cond , T e nn ess e e i s included, whi ch i s a lso l abeled f or man eb u se , i n s p i te o f relatively s mall acreage . A nd t hird , t he s ame ass umption and ca lculation i s ap plied to a ll fo ur g reen s in t hi s me mo , but was n ot applied to kale in T F ' s propo s al.


### VI. C ON CLU S IO NSIRECOMMENDA TI ONS B EAD recommend s th at th e total refined EBDCs PC Tn va lues f or almond s, bro ccoli, c abbage , p epper , pumpk in , w inter s quash, and head/other le ttuce , and the man eb P CTs f or c ollards , kale , mu stard greens , and turnip g reen s be u sed i n th e c hronic and / or acute d i etar y ri sk as sess ment. BE AD ha s co n s idered a ll ava ilable rele v ant inf ormation an d beli eve s it i s unl ikely tha t the ab ove P CTn and P CT va lues w ill be e xcee ded durin g th e n e xt fiv e yea rs f or t hese cr ops .



### 8VII. REF ERENCES A gricultural C hemical U sage ( 2002 , 2 004 , an d 20 06) V eg etabl es S u mm ary . A lsadek J , C hen C. 2 009a. Proj e cted Per c ent C rop T reated ( PPCT) f or th e F ung icide Man co zeb o n S ix Ne w C rops: A lmonds, B ell Pepper , Br occoli, C abbage , Pumpkin , W inter S quash, and Pe rcent Impo rt S hare f or M andarin! O ranges . P C C ode : 0 14504; D P B arcode: 3 6 0397; D ecis ion #: 2 994 14. A lsadek 

### J , C hen C. 2 009b. Proj ected P ercent Cro p Tre ated ( P l'C 'I') f or th e Fungicide Ma n coze b on Le ttuce (Head , and O ther). P C C ode : 0 14504 ; DP B arcode : 36 0397; NON PRI A , Pare nt D P:635267; Dec ision #: 3 02667. BEA D Me m o. 12/14/ 2006. BEAD's A pproach t o Pr ovid ing Proj ected P ercent C rop Tre ated ( Pl'C'I} E stimates f or Us e i n Die tary Ri sk Ass essment in O P? Ce nsus o f Ag riculture
. 20 07. U nited S tates Departm ent of Ag riculture Na tional A gricultura l S tati s tic s S ervice
. http: //'WV.'W.agcenslls. llsda.gov/Publications /2007 /Fu ll Reportlusv I.pdf
. Co mments t o M aneb C ancellat ion. 2 010
. S um mary o f Co mment s t o Prop osed Rul e o f May 2 6, 2 0 I 0 : Maneb To lerance R evocati on s. C ucurbits F a c t S heet. 1 987
. A nthrac nose o f C ucurbits. Co rnell U nive rsity D ep artm ent of Plant Pa th o logy Vegetable MD O nline Fac t s heets
. A ccesse d o n Jul y 2 8, 2 010. http :// veg etabl e mdonline
. ppath .co rnel l. e dul factsheets /C ucurbit

_ Lis t . htrn D ouc oure C , Che n C. 2 010. P erc ent C rop Tr eated f or New Us es ( PCTn) w ith th e Ne w C hemical, Fl uopyrarn , PC # 080302 , D P # 37037 1. G tK Kynetec. 1 998-2008
. Prop ri etary Da ta. Ta sk Fo rce S tud y. 2 010
. E BDCIE TC Task Fo rce R esponse t o E PA 's J une 14 ,20 07 M em or andum "E thy lenethiourea (ET U) fr om E B DCs: He alth E ff ect s D ivi si on ( HED) Human H ealth Ri sk Ass ess ment of th e Co mmon Metabolite /D egradate ETU " an d E PA's Ap ril 1 7 ,2 007 Me morandum " PP #9#6 006 PP #4F4 324 a d 4F4 333 Agg regate D ietary A ssess ment o f th e Co mmon Me tabolit elDeg radate E thylene Thi ourea (ET U) t o Su pport New To le ranc es o n Imp orted G ra pes an d Banan as for Me tiram a nd for New T ol eran ces fo r M anco ze b on A lmonds, Bo rcco li, Ca b bage , L ettuce, an d Pe pper s". J anet O llinger. Fe bru ary 5, 201 0
. Te nness ee Gr eens Profil e. 20 08. C rop Pr ofil e f or Le afy G reen s in T en nessee. Unive rsity of T enn essee E x tensi o n Serv ice. http ://www .iprncenters.orgicropprofiles /docsrrN leaf ygreens. pdf

c c: M
. W aller; C
. O linger

9