2 Comment s on Ecological Effects :

Valent provided comments on ecological effects data gaps identified in the problem formul ation regarding their intent to submit studies ( OCSPP 850. 4500 for freshwater and marine/estuarine

diatoms and OCSPP 850.4150 for ry egrass ) to address data gaps

. Submitted studies should adhere to the applicable OCSPP/OPPTS test guidelines.

EPA Response:

EFED will review studies ass ociated with the data call in.

Specific comment on 850. 1350 :

“Because of fluopicolide’s low solubility in test solutions and low toxicity of TGAI to Daphnia magna , Valent proposes to use the EC 50 of 5.3 mg a.i./L, (calculated from EC 50 of 11 mg formulation/L of the study with TEP) as a definitive acute endpoint for Daphnia

magna to calculate an Acute to Chronic Ratio for freshwater invertebrate to predict chronic toxicity to estuarine/marine invertebrate.”

TEP data should not be used to calculate an acute

- to

- chronic ratio ( ACR ) for freshwater

invertebrates as it would result in additional u ncertainty because the formulation may have reduced or enhanced the toxicity of fluopicolide . A n ACR based on TEP to TGAI may differ

from that of the TGAI to TGAI

. An ACR may be calculated in lieu of conducting 850.1350 if a definitive acute toxicity end point is available from an acceptable study testing the TGAI on Daphnia magna

. Otherwise, a study on chronic toxicity to marine/estuarine invertebrates (850.1350) is needed to address risk.

Specific comment on 850. 4100 and 850.4150 :

Valent proposes to submit a waiver request for the seedling emergence study and conduct Tier 2 vegetative vigor testing on species where a NOAEC was not achieved in the available Tier 1 study. EFED reiterates that risk to terrestrial plants cannot be prec luded because the available Tier 1 studies tested at applications rates well below currently labeled rates for some uses (e.g.

turf )

. Therefore, additional testing (seedling emergence and vegetative vigor) is needed on all ten plant species. Tier 1 test ing could be conducted at the maximum labeled application rate in

lieu of Tier 2 testing ; however, Tier 2 would be required for any species showing effects in a Tier 1 study (conducted a t the maximum labeled application rate) . As an alternative, the

avail able Tier 1 studies could be used for risk assessment if all labeled application rates are lowered to the tested rate ( 0.121 lb ai/A). In that case

, Tier II testing would be needed only for the species that showed effects in the currently available Tier I studies ( buckwheat

– seedling

emergence * and ryegrass

– vegetative vigor)

.

* Valent commented in error that the DER concluded that the NO A EC = 0.121 lb ai/A for all test species. The DER concluded that the NO A EC < 0.121 lb ai/A for buckwheat.3 Comment s on Environmental Fate:

Valent intends to submit an a erobic a quatic m etabolism study

.

EPA Response:

EFED will review the submitted study. Submitted studies should adhere to the applicable

OCSPP/OPPTS test guidelines.

Comment s on Use and Usage Information:

Valent will provide information regarding agricultural use patterns, label inconsistencies

, and

label ambiguities

. Valent will work with RD to clarify intended application rates and restrictions regarding container grown ornamental plants.

EPA Response:

EFED appreciates assistance regarding label information. EFED notes that soil drench applications at the reported 27.133 lb ai/A rate are also labeled for uses such as Christmas tree plantations

, which are more realistically extrapolated t o a whole acre of land.

Comments (Other) :

The correct MRID is 467085

- 09 (Tier II green algae study) not 467086

- 09 as reported in the problem formulation

.

EPA Response:

EFED appreciates the response and will correct the error.