UNITED STATES ENVIRONMEN T AL PROTECTION · AGENCY WASHINGTON , D

. C

. 20460 

## AUG l8 2015

MEMORANDUM OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY ANO POLLUTION PREVENTION

SUBJECT: BEAD Chemical Profile (BCP) for Registration Review: Ziram (034805) 

### FROM: Carl Chen , Biologist

### ~**~** Biological Analysis Branch

THRU: Rafael A. Prieto, Environmental Protection

# Sp~J.i**stl,** I 

# J 0., 

# f**~** Science Information and Analysis Branch

### fl~ (A/\/ l ' Stephen Smearman , Economist

# ~~ Economic Anal ys is Branch Biological and Economic Analysis Di vis ion (7503P) Arnet Jones, Chief Biological Analysis BrancH Diann Sims , Chief

# ~ Science Information and Analysis Branch Timothy Kiely , Chief
. (;\_

## vv..._~ Eco nomic Analysis Branch'-' 

# J Biological and Eco nomic Analysis Di vi s ion ( 3 P) TO: Khue Nguyen , Chemical Review Manager Ri sk Management and Impl ementation Branch 1 Pestici de Re-e valuation Division (7508P)


### Peer Review Panel date: July 15, 2015 SUMMARY Ziram is a fungicide that was first registered in 1948. According to the ziram SLUA generated in 2014 (w ith a reporting time frame of2004-2012), the crops with th e highest pound s of active ingredient (a.i.) applied are almonds with 900,000 pounds a.i. and apples with 400 , 000 pound sa.i. applied annually. In terms of the average percent crop treated (PCT) , the top crops are apricots , blueberries and peaches with 35%, 30% and 30% average percent crop treated (PCT) respectively. Additional crops included in the SLUA are: cherries, grapes , nectarines, pears , pecans , pumpkins , strawberries , and tomatoes. 

### INTRODUCTION The Biological and Economic Analysis Division (BEAD) Chemical Profile (BCP) provides an overview of the pest management roles and quantitative usage information for ziram. The BCP includes summaries ofprevious BEAD products and available public and/or private use and usage data for ziram to describe the role ofthis chemical in pest management. Additional information on use is available in the Label Data Reports for ziram. Information provided in this BEAD Chemical Profile (BCP) may be used by stakeholders (e.g. , users and registrants) , OPP risk assessors , and OPP ri sk managers, and the general public during the Registration Review process ofthis pesticide. 

### USE SITES Registered agricultural use sites for ziram include: almond , apple, apricot , blackberry, blueberry , cherry, grapes , nectarine , peach, pear, pecan , and tomato. Registered non-agricultural use s ite s for ziram include: Christmas tree plantations , conifers, and ornamentals.


### FORMULATIONS AND APPLICATION METHODS Ziram is formulated as a dry flowable and applied as a ground foliar spray , or by aircraft.


### HISTORY OF ZIRAM BEAD PRODUCTS A search of the BEAD database for previous products for ziram indicates that there are no records of prior benefits assessments or Section 18 Emergency Exemption Requests. Recent Section 18 Emergency Exemption Requests might suggest that a chemical is important for the uses granted in the request ; however, a lack of Section 18 Emergency Exemption Requests is not an indication of the relative importance ofthe chemical.

2USAGE Agricu l tu ral For the 2009-20 1 3 timeframe , zi ram annual usage averaged 1.5 million pounds of a.i. treating an a nnual average of 380 , 000 ac res, with an overa ll average application rate of 4 pounds a . i. per acre . As s hown in Figures I and 2 , use , both in terms of a. i. and in term s of tota l area treated , has remained relatively constant. (Proprietary Data, 2009-20 1 3) Usage Trend s 

### FIGURE 1. Ziram Pounds A. I
. A lied 2005-2013

___ __:__:c.



### ct 

### "' "O c ::J 0 Q. 3,000,000

11'1 0 0 N l.O 0 0 N 

## " 0 0 N 00 0 0 N en 0 0 N Year 0 rl 0 N
So urce: Proprietary Data , 2005-2013 rl rl 0 N N rl 0 N m rl 0 N



### FIGURE 2. Ziram Tota l Area Treated in Acres Q OOS-2013 )

_ _, "' Ill 

## ... u ct £ 

# [

"O Ill 

# ... "' Ill 

## ...**~** 

## "' Ill 

## ... ct c;; 

# ... 0**~** 650,000

0 11'1 0 0 N l.O 0 0 N
So urce: Proprietary Data, 2005-2013 

## " 0 0 N 00 0 0 N en 0 0 N Year 0 rl 0 N rl rl 0 N N rl 0 N m rl 0 N

3As seen in Fi gure 3 below , the highest usage ofziram in terms of pounds applied is almonds. FIGUR E 3. Pounds Ziram for Top Crops , 2009-2013 1,400,000

VI c. 0

.... u c.**~** .... .$2 <( VI "O c: :J 0 0..

2009 2010

So u rce: Proprietary Data , 2009-2013 2011 Year 2012 20 13 ....,._ Almonds -e- Apples

....,._ Peaches

- • -O ther

As s hown in Table s 1 , 2 , and 3 below , from 2009

- 20 1 3, almonds , ap ples, and peac hes had the hi ghest usage , wi th almonds acco untin g for 45% of the u sage in terms of total pounds applied. 

### TABLE 1. 

### Crops with H. h U f 

## z· 1 2 est se o 1ram - p 

### ercent ofT I Lb Applied (2009-2013) 

### ota s. Crop %Lbs Almonds 45

A pple s 21 Pe ache s 16

Other 18 

### Sou rce: Proprietary Data, 2009-2013 

### TABLE 2. States with 

## u· h U f 

## z· 121 est se o 1ram- p 

### er cent o f 

### T t I Lb Applied (2 009-2013) 

### oa s. State %Lbs C alifornia 

### 69 Michigan 

### 9 Washington 4 Other
. 18 

### Sou rce: Propr ietary Data, 2009

- 2013

4Application Rates 

### TABLE3 

# z· . 1 ram 

# use on 

### T C op rops: A 

### verage A I R t 2009 2013 

# .. a e, 

# - Crop Average An nu al Average Annual Total Avg. Al Rate Tota l Po un ds Area T r eated* (lbs a.i./ac r es) Almonds 690 , 000 130 ,0 00 5.1

App les 310,000 100 , 000 3.1 Peaches 240 , 000 53 , 000 4.6 *Total Area Treated sums all acres treated for a crop , including tho se acres that receive multiple treatments. 

### Sou rce: Proprietary Data, 2009

- 2013 Non-agricultural Usage B EAD has no available non-agricultural z iram usage d ata on a national level. Geographic Distribution ofZi ram Use According to the following map (Figure 4) , New Jersey is the state with the highest usage (more than 120 lbs) in terms ofpound s per 1 , 000 crop acres grown. This is followed by California with 22 to 120 lbs in terms ofpound s per 1 , 000 crop acres grown.

5Figure 4. Annual average ag ricultural u s e intensity of ziram (2008-2012)
.

Pounds Active Ingredient per 1 ,000 Crop Acres Grown 

### CJ •4 0 4

- 1 3

- 14

- 21

- 22

- 120

- > 120 LJ NOD a ta Source: Proprietary Data , 2008-2012 

### CHEMICAL AND USE CHARACTERISTIC S Ziram belongs to the chemical group of dithiocarbamate s and relatives classified by the Fungicide Resi stance Action Committee (FRAC) as a FRAC Group M3 fungicide. In general, M3 fungicides are considered as a l ow risk group without any signs ofresistance de vel oping to th em (FRAC , 2014). Ziram has a multi- site contact activity against plant pathogens. It can also be used with systemic fungicides for broad-spectrum disease control and for resistance management. A Section 2(ee) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide , and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) recommendation has been issued for Ziram®760F , a single active ingredient product of z iram , for use in tank mixe s for resistance management to contro l almond di seases in Ca l ifornia (CDMS, 2015). Ziram was a l so used with additional use d irections that are not registered under FIFRA Section 3. A FIFRA Section 24(c) re gis tration has been issued for Ziram® 76DF for a Special Local Need (SLN) u se to contro l b lu eberry diseases in Michigan and New Jersey. Compared to the federall y registere d l abel, a higher application rate is a ll owed in the SLN use , and aerial app li cations are a ll owed in Michigan (CDMS , 20 1 5).

6ROLE OF ZIRAM IN PEST MANAGEMENT Ziram is registered for control of some important di seases including sca b on nut crops, pome fruits, and stone fruits; shot hole on nut crops and sto ne fruits; bro wn rot on stone fruits; ripe rot o n sma ll fruits; and early blight on tomatoes. It is also reg istered for ornamental uses to contro l diseases such as rust, leaf spo t , and powdery mildew. T he major agricultural use of zi ram is on fruit and nut crops. On apricots, z iram ranks first in order of usefulne ss in an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) pro gram for control of shot hol e during the main growi ng season, considering efficacy , gener al fungicide properties , and information relating to environmental imp act (Adaskaveg et al., 2009). On pe ac hes , ziram was reported to have excellent or effe ctive control for leaf curl, shot hol e, and scab diseases in California (CDPR , 20 11- 2012). Approximately 90% ofthe peach acreage was treated with ziram in New Jersey (Proprietary Data , 2009-2013) , which partially exp lains th e relatively high use intensity in the state dep icted in Figure 4. Ziram also pla ye d an important role on severa l other commodities that are high in value to the growe r, treating approximately 20 to 30 percent ofthe almond, blueberry, nectarine, and/o r pear acreage on average during the period of 2004 to 2012 (EPA , 2 014 ).
DATA NEEDS The Agency currently doe s not have compl ete informatio n on z iram
. Information on regi s t e red crops/ sites such as ornamentals that have no usage data available , including total pounds active ingredient applie d per year on a national or regional bas is, percent crop/site treated , app li cation rates (typical and maximum) , frequency and intervals of application , and target or niche pest species , may improve future assessments related to the use and importance of z iram
. B EAD also need s non-agricultural usage information for uses including ornamentals , foliar rep e llent use, and as an additive in indu stria l adhesi ves, sealants , caulking and latex paints. Info rmation neede d for the se s ites and products include s the quantities sold in th ese products , es timated areas of u se or application and frequency o r interval of application as well as the target pe s ts.
REFERENCES Ada s kaveg J E, Gubler WD , Coates WW , Stap l eton JJ , Capril e JL, Holt z BA. 2009. UC IPM Pest M a nagement Guidel in es: Apricot. UC ANR Publication 3 4 33. Unive rs ity of Ca li fornia. A vailable at http: // www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG /r5100311.html. CD M S. 2 015. Crop Data Man agement Systems. Available at http ://premier
. cdms .net/webap ls . CDPR. 2 012. Su mm ary of pe s ticide u se data

- inde xe d by C hemicals. California Department of Pe s ticide

. Reg i s tration (CD PR). Avai la bl e at http ://www .cdp r.ca.gov/ docs/ pur / pur I 2rep/ l 2s um.htm
.



## .. 7EPA. 2014. Screening Level Estimates of Agricu ltural Use of Ziram (034805). Reporting Time: 2004- 2012. June 20 , 2014. EPA Office of Pesticide Pro grams Biological and Eco nomic A nal ys is Division. FRAC. 20 14
. Fungicide Resistance Action Co mmitte e (FRAC)

- 2014 FRAC Co de List0

. Availabl e at http ://www .frac.i n fo/ fra c/ p ub lic ati o n/a nh an g/20 14%2 0 FRAC%2 0C o de%2 0Li st. pd f

. Proprietary Data. 2005-2013.
APPENDIX A The map included herein is primarily for the use of the risk assessors in the Environmental Fate and Effects Division. The map provides a very broad geographical view of the average annual amount (in pounds) ofthe activ e ingredient applied per 1,000 acres of crop acres grown. These data are included in the maps because risk assessors are intere sted in the amount of a pesticide used across agricultural land. The calculated values presented in the map are not equivalent to an application rate (lbs. a.i/A). The data used to make these maps have severa l limitations. Any interpretation of the maps should consi der the underlying data and the associated limitations carefully. The numerator (annual average pounds app li ed) is based on private market surveys ofpesticide u se in agriculture averaged over the last five years (Proprietary Data , 2008-2012). These surveys cover abo ut 60 crops and are targeted in states that produce the majority of the crop. Although the surveys capture most ofthe use of a particular active ingredient in agriculture, there are several limitations to the se surveys.
• States with minor production of a surveyed crop are not samp led • Not all types ofpesticides are surveyed in every crop in every year • Many specialty crops with very smal l acreages are not included in the survey The result of these limitation s is that states that show no u sage m ay actually have a s mall amount of the active ingredient being used. In some cases the displayed use intensity may. be distorted because the surveyed crops and the reported pesticide usage may not accurately represent the actual pesticide usage on the crops produced in the state. The denominator (1 , 000 crop acres grown) was also obtained from the same private market survey database. The "Crop Acres Grown " variable represents the total acres grown in a given state of all of the surveyed crops. This value is independent of pesticide usage and pesticide registration. It is important to note that the surveyed crops (about 60) are sampled from states that are major producers of each crop. Therefore, there are cases where the actu a l crop acreage in

8a state is higher than that reported by crop acres grown in the survey because either that state and/or crop was not included in the survey. The reader should pay particular attention to the figure legends and realize that a map prepared for a particular chemical is not directly comparable to a map prepared for a different chemical as the legend bins will likely be different.



### 9