UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON D_C _. 20460

DEC 0 S 2010

OFFICE Of

PREVE NTION. PESTICIDES AND

TOXIC SUBSTANCES

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:

FROM :

TO:

Usage Report Package in Support of Registration for the Fungicide.

Metirarn (01460 1), BEAN DP #: 384473 , Decision #: 303 189

Arthur H. Grube, Senior Economist

Economic & Analysis Branch

Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503 P)

Mary L Waller, Biologist

Fungici de Branch

Registration Division (7509P)

. Th is memorandum transmits the Usage report for Metiram. The data included in this

memorandum were reviewed by Jihad A. Alsadek, Economist. This report can be written in

various formats (MS Word. Exce l. Adobe Ac robat). It is advisable to open or save each repo rt to

view or print from the appropriate program.

For questions, comments and other usage or label use information requests, please contact

me at (703) 308-8095 . Other requests for information may be addressed to OPP Usage and

Label Use Team, our group e-mail address in Lotus Notes.

Note : If this report is more than two (2) years old, please check with the OPP Usage and

Label Use Team (also our e-mail address) to determine if there is more recent usage data

available.

The Usage report(s) electronically-transmitted through Lotus Notes links include:

Screening Level Usage Analys is (SLUA)

cc: Andrew Ertman
Metiram (014601)

Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)

Date: December 2, 2010

What is a Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)?

• Available estimates of pesticide usage data for a parti cu lar active ingredient that is used on

agricultural crops in the United States.

• Pesticide usage data obtained from various sources. The data are then merged, ave raged, and

rounded so that the presented information is not proprietary. business confidential, or trade secret.

What does it contain?

• Pesticide usage data for a single active ingred ient only.

• Agricultural use sites (crops) that the pesticide is reporled to be used on.

• Available pesticide usage inform ation from U.S. states that produce 80% or more ofa crop , in most

cases, or less than 80%, in rare cases, depending on the scope of the survey and available resources.

• Annual percent of crop treated (aver age & maximum) for each agricultural crop.

• Average annual pounds ofthe pesticid e applied for each agricultural crop (i.e ., for the states

surveyed, not for the entire United States).

What assumptions can I make about the reported data?

• Average pounds of active ingredient applied - Va lues are calculated by merging pesticide usage

data sources together; averaging across all observations, then rounding. Note: Ifthe estimated value

is less than 500. then that value is labeled <500. Estimated values between 500 & <1,000,000 are

rounded to 1 significant digit. Estimated values of1,000,000 or greater are rounded to 2 significant

digits.)

• Average percent of crop treated - Values are calc ulated by merging data sources together;

averaging by year, averaging acro ss all years, & rounding to the nearest multiple of 5. Note: Ifthe

estimated value is less than 2.5, then the value is labeled <2.5. lfthe estimated value is less than I,

then the value is labeled <1.

• Maximum percent of crop treated - Va lue is the single maximum va lue reported across all data

sources, across all years, & rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5. Note: lfthe estimated value is

less than 2.5, then the value is labeled <2.5.

W hat are the data sources used?

• USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture 's Natio nal Agricultural Statistics Service) -

pesticide usage data from 2001 to 2008.

• Private pesticide market research - pesticide usage data from 200 1 to 2008.

• NPUD 2002 (National Pesticide Use Database) pesticide usage data from the CropLife America

Foundation are used only if data are not available from the other sources.

• California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) Pesticide Us e Reporting (PUR) data for

2000 to 2008 .

What are the limitations to the data?

• Additional registered uses may exist but are not included because the availabl e surveys do not report

usage {e.g., small acreage crops).

• Lack ofreported usage data for the pesticide on a crop does not imply zero usage.

• Usage data on a particular site may be noted in data sources, but not quantified. In these instances,

the site would not be reported in the SLUA.

• Non-agricultural use sites (e.g., turf, post-harvest, mosquito control, etc.) are not reported in the

SLUA. A separate request must be made to receive these estimates.

• Some sites show some use, even though the y are not on the label. This usage could be due to

various factors, including , but not limited to Section 18 requests, existing stock s ofthe chemic al,

data collection errors, and experimental use permits (EUPs).
December 2, 2010

Screening Level Estimates of Agricultural Uses of Metira m (014601)

Sorted Alphahetically

Percent Cren Ttd.

Crop Lhs, A.I. Ave. MaL

1 Annles 400,000 10 25

2 A! paralrUs+ 2,000 <2.5 5

3 Potatoes 400 000 10 15

4 Squash-e <500 <1 <2.5

All numbers rounded.

<500 Less than 500 pounds of active ingredient

<2.5 Less than 2,5 percent of crop treated

<1 Less than 1 percent of crop treated

+ Crops not known to be listed on active end use product registrations or as Section 18 emergency

exemptions when this report was run

SLUA data sources include:

USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture's National Agricultural Statistics

Service) .

Private Pesticide Market Research

California DPR (Department ofPesticide Regulation)

These results reflect amalgamated data developed by the Agency and are releasable to the public.
Customer's Name: Mary L Waller, Biologist

Chemical Name: PC Code: 014601

Delivered Product: Sl UA

We appreciate your feedback. This helps us provide you with a better service. Feedback, in a

paragraph, is acceptable too.

1. Did you receive the reports in a timely manner?

Yes No

2. Were the data reports helpful in your preliminary review of this chemical (and its

associated registrations)?

Yes No

If your answer is No, how could the reports be improved to better help you in

your review of this chemical?

Please type your answer here :

3. Were the reports understandable?

Yes No

If No, please explain.

Please type your answer here:

4. How do you use the Usage Data Reports and the Label Use (LUIS) Reports?

Please type your answer here :

5. Do you have any additional comments or questions?

Please type your answer here :

6. What is your Division/Branch?

Please type your answer here:

Please respond to:

o pp Usage and Label Use Team

Last revised on l Oll8l200S.