# Page 3 of 59 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 4

2.0 HAZARD CHARAC TERIZATION................................................................................... 6

2.1 A CUTE 

# T OXICOLOGY 

# C ATEGORIES 

# .................................................................................. 6

2.2 P OINTS OF 

# D EPARTURE 

# .................................................................................................... 7

3.0 PROPOSED US E PATTERNS .......................................................................................... 8

3.1 O CCUPATIONAL 

# -U SE 

# P RODUCTS 

# ...................................................................................... 8

3.2 T YPE OF 

# P ESTICIDE 

# /T ARGETED 

# P EST 

# ............................................................................... 8

3.3 F ORMULATION 

# T YPES AND 

# P ERCENT 

# A CTIVE 

# I NGREDIENT 

# .............................................. 9

3.4 R EGISTERED 

# U SE 

# S ITES 

# .................................................................................................... 9

4.0 OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSU RE/RISK PATHWAY....................................................... 12

4.1 O CCUPATIONAL 

# H ANDLER 

# E XPOSURES 

# ......................................................................... 12

4.1.1 Occupational Handler Assumptions ......................................................................... 12

4.1.2 Occupational Handler Equations .............................................................................. 16

4.1.3 Summary of Risk Concerns for Occupational Handlers........................................... 17

4.1.3.1 Occupational Dermal Risks .............................................................................. 17

4.1.3.2 Occupational Inhalation Risks.......................................................................... 18

4.1.3.3 Occupational Combined Risks.......................................................................... 18

4.2 O CCUPATIONAL 

# P OSTAPPLICATION 

# E XPOSURES 

# ............................................................ 23

4.2.1 Occupational Dermal Postapplication Expsoures..................................................... 23

4.2.1.1 Occupational Dermal Postapplication Assumptions and Calculations............. 23

4.2.1.2 Summary of Dermal Risk Concerns for Postapplication Workers ................... 28

4.2.1 Occupational Inhalation Postapplication Expsoures ................................................ 34

5.0 RESIDENTIAL (NON-OCCUPATIONAL) EXPOSURE/RISK PATHWAY ............... 34

5.1 R ESIDENTIAL 

# E XPOSURE 

# ................................................................................................ 34

5.2 S PRAY 

# D RIFT 

# ................................................................................................................. 34

5.3 R ESIDENTIAL 

# B YSTANDER 

# P OSTAPPLICATION 

# I NHALATION 

# E XPOSURE 

# ......................... 35

# Page 4 of 59 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This assessment was completed to incorporate a change to the dermal endpoint based on

an updated BMD analysis (D376936, TXR0055350). A previous ORE assessment was

completed in response to the Section 3 registration request for sugar beet use and as well as

several label amendments including one for expanding use for dry bulb onion, garlic and shallot

from regional to national use (A. Nielsen, D365459 5/27/09). The previous assessment also

included evaluation of all currently labeled oxamyl use patterns and indicated that some

revisions to labeled use patterns may be needed. Since the previous risk assessment was

completed, the registrant has withdrawn all new use requests. Therefore this updated ORE

assessment reflects the revised dermal endpoint as it applies to the current uses of oxamyl only

and does not include any proposed new or expanded uses.

Oxamyl, [Methyl N', N'-dimethyl-N-[(methyl carbamoyl)oxy]-1-thio-oxamimidate], is an

insecticide/nematicide that is formulated as a soluble concentrate liquid (24% and 42% active

ingredient) and as a solid/technical (42% active ingredient). Oxamyl is applied with the

following equipment: aerial equipment, chemigation, groundboom sprayer, airblast sprayer,

spotgun (low-pressure handwand) applicator, handgun sprayer, and shank soil injection.

Application rates for oxamyl range from 0.25 to 4 lb ai/acre. Oxamyl is a restricted use

pesticide. At this time, products containing oxamyl are intended for occupational use only.

HED has determined that there are potential exposures to mixers, loaders, applicators, and other

handlers during usual use-patterns associated with oxamyl. Based on the use patterns, several

major exposure scenarios were identified.

Since the toxicological effects are similar (cholinesterase inhibition in red blood cells) for

the dermal and inhalation PoDs, the dermal and inhalation risks to handlers are combined for an

aggregate occupational assessment. Since the level of concern is 100 for dermal risks and 30 for

inhalation risks, an aggregated risk index (ARI) is calculated. The level of concern for an ARI is

1 (i.e., ARIs greater than 1 are not a concern). No chronic scenarios were identified. The shortand intermediate-term dermal risks are identical since the same PoD was chosen for short- and

intermediate-term dermal assessments. The short- and intermediate-term inhalation risks are

also identical since the same PoD was chosen for short- and intermediate-term inhalation

assessments.

The short- and intermediate-term dermal risks did not exceed HED’s level of concern at

some level of risk mitigation for all handler scenarios, except :

• Mixing/loading liquid concentrates to support aerial applications to cotton in CA and AZ

at 1.0 lb ai/A;

• Mixing/loading liquid concentrates to support chemigation applications at 2.0 lb ai/A;

• Applying sprays by aircraft to cotton in CA and AZ at 1.0 lb ai/A.

The short- and intermediate-term inhalation risks did not exceed HED’s level of concern

at the baseline level (no respirator) for all handler scenarios, except mixing/loading to support

aerial applications to cotton in California and Arizona at the 1.0 lb ai/day application rate. Note

that only the only data available for applying sprays with aircraft is for engineering controls (i.e.,

an enclosed cockpit) – the risks did not exceed HED’s level of concern for aerial applicators at

# Page 5 of 59 baseline attire as long as enclosed cockpits are used.

The short- and intermediate-term combined dermal plus inhalation risks did not exceed

HED’s level of concern at some level of risk mitigation for all handler scenarios, except :

• Mixing/loading liquid concentrates to support aerial applications to cotton in CA and AZ

at 1.0 lb ai/A;

• Mixing/loading liquid concentrates to support chemigation applications at 2.0 lb ai/A;

• Applying sprays by aircraft to cotton in CA and AZ at 1.0 lb ai/A.

HED has determined that there are potential exposures to occupational postapplication

workers during usual use-patterns associated with oxamyl. Three dislodgeable foliar residue

(DFR) studies were submitted in support of the reregistration of oxamyl. The DFR studies were

done on three crops: cucumbers, tomatoes, and citrus fruits. To represent an arid and a non-arid

climate, two sites were chosen for each crop -- one in California and another one in Florida or

Georgia. A soil residue dissipation study also wa s conducted at the California site under tomato

plants. The results of the postapplication risk assessment indicate that for many crops, risks

remain a concern for several days following application.

This exposure/risk assessment relies in part on data from studies in which adult human

subjects were intentionally exposed to a pesticide to determine their dermal and inhalation

exposure. Many such studies, involving exposure to many different pesticides, comprise generic

pesticide exposure databases such as the Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database (PHED), the

Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force (ORETF) Database and the Agricultural Reentry Task

Force (ARTF) Database. EPA has reviewed all the studies in these multi-pesticide generic

exposure databases, and on the basis of available evidence has found them to have been neither

fundamentally unethical nor significantly deficient relative to standards of ethical research

conduct prevailing when they were conducted. There is no regulatory barrier to continued

reliance on these studies, and all applicable requirements of EPA’s Rule for the Protection of

Human Subjects of Research (40 CFR Part 26) have been satisfied.

# Page 6 of 59 2.0 HAZARD CHARACTERIZATION

2.1 Acute Toxicology Categories

Table 1 presents the acute toxicity categories as outlined in the Oxamyl - Report of the

Hazard Identification Assessment Review Committee , dated August 31, 1999.

Table 1: Acute Toxicity Categories of Oxamyl

Study Type Toxicity Category

(technical)

Acute Oral Toxicity I

Acute Dermal Toxicity IV

Acute Inhalation Toxicity II

Primary Eye Irritation III

Primary Dermal Irritation IV

Dermal Sensitization Not a skin sensitizer

# Page 7 of 59 2.2 Points of Departure

Dermal and inhalation points of departure (PoDs) have been identified for short-term (1

to 7 days) and intermediate-term (one week to several months) exposures (E. Reaves, D379814,

7/1/2010). These PoDs are listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Summary of Toxicological Dose and Points of Departure for Oxamyl

for Use in Human Health Risk Assessment

Exposure

Scenario Point of Departure

(mg/kg/day) Uncertainty/

FQPA Safety

Factors RfD, PAD, LOC

for Risk

Assessment Study and Toxicological

Effects

Acute Dietary

All populations 0.069 mg/kg UF A 

# =1x

UF H 

# =10x

FQPA SF=2.64x

(brain) aRfD=0.0069

aPAD= 0.0026

(1⁄2 -life 2.5 hours) Human Study (MRID

44912301)

BMD 10 

# = 0.083 mg/kg

BMDL 10 

# = 0.069 mg/kg, based

on RBC AChE inhibition

Chronic

Dietary Due to the rapid recovery of ChE activity, the acute exposure from oxamyl is the main duration of

concern and therefore a chronic assessm ent is not appropriate for oxamyl.

Incidental Oral

(All durations) Based on the current oxamyl uses, an incidental oral endpoint is not required.

Dermal 8.0 mg/kg

(RBC ChE) UF A 

# =10x

UF H 

# =10x

FQPA SF=1x MOE = 100

(adult) 21-day dermal rabbit study

(40827601)

RBC BMD 10 

# is 23.1 mg/kg

RBC BMDL 10 

# is 8.0 mg/kg

Dermal

Long-Term

(>6 mos) Due to the rapid recovery of ChE activity, the acute exposure from oxamyl is the main duration of

concern and therefore a long-term assessment is not appropriate for oxamyl.

Inhalation RBC Occupational:

HEC = 2.25 mg/m 3 

# or

0.39 mg/kg

RBC Non-Occupational:

HEC= 0.75 mg/m 3 

# or

0.13 mg/kg 

# UF A 

# =3x

UF H 

# =10x

FQPA SF= 1x MOE = 30 (adult,

occupational) Acute inhalation rat

(45155801)

RBC BMD 10 

# = 0.002 mg/L

RBC BMDL 10 

# = 0.0018 mg/L,

based on RBC AChE

inhibition in both sexes.

Inhalation

Long-Term

(>6 mos) Due to the rapid recovery of ChE activity, the acute exposure from oxamyl is the main duration of

concern and therefore a long-term assessment is not appropriate for oxamyl.

Cancer (oral,

dermal,

inhalation) Determined to be “not likely” a human carci nogen (Memorandum: HIARC report, Geruva Reddy,

8/31/1999)

1 

# Explanation of Abbreviations: UF = uncertainty factor. UF A 

# = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UF H 

# =

potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human popul ation (intraspecies). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor.

aPAD = population adjusted dose. RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern. N/A = not

applicable. HEC = Human Equivalent Concen tration. RDDR = regional deposited dose ratio.

# Page 8 of 59 Cancer Determination

Oxamyl was determined to be “not likely” a human carcinogen (Memorandum: HIARC

report, Geruva Reddy, 8/31/1999).

FQPA Safety Factor

Since the time of the 1999 RED, the comparative cholinesterase study in which the sensitivity of

the young to NMC’s is best evaluated has become available. Similar to results in comparative

cholinesterase studies with other N -methyl carbamates, this comparative cholinesterase study

revealed that PND11 pups are more sensitive to oxamyl than adult rats. The FQPA factor is

based on the ratio of the adult BMD 10 

# to PND11 BMD 10. 

# Cholinesterase data from this one

comparative cholinesterase study indicates that the PND11 pups were 2.64 fold more sensitive

than adult rats to brain cholinesterase inhibition. The FQPA factor is not appropriate for

pregnant females since the developmental studies did not indicate susceptibility. Therefore, for

the single chemical risk assessment for oxamyl, the FQPA factor may be applied to the oral,

dermal, and inhalation assessments for those scenarios involving children.

Levels of Concern

The levels of concern for occupational handlers and postapplication workers are 100 for

dermal risk and 30 for inhalation risk.

Combined Risks

Since the toxicological effects are similar (cholinesterase inhibition in red blood cells) for

the dermal and inhalation PoDs, the dermal and inhalation risks to handlers are combined for an

aggregate occupational assessment. Since the level of concern is 100 for dermal risks and 30 for

inhalation risks, an aggregated risk index (ARI) is calculated. The level of concern for an ARI is

1 (i.e., ARIs greater than 1 do not exceed HED’s level of concern).

3.0 REGISTERED USE PATTERNS

3.1 Occupational-Use Products

Oxamyl [Methyl N', N'-dimethyl-N-[(methyl carbamoyl)oxy]-1-thio-oxamimidate] is an

insecticide/nematicide/plant regulator that is registered for use on terrestrial food crops and

terrestrial food and feed crops.

3.2 Type of Pesticide/Targeted Pest

Oxamyl is an insecticide, nematicide, and plant regulator.

# Page 9 of 59 3.3 Formulation Types and Percent Active Ingredient

Oxamyl is formulated as a soluble concentrate/liquid (24% and 42% active ingredient)

and as a solid/technical (42% active ingredient).

3.4 Registered Use Sites

Table 3 lists the occupational use sites, the maximum application rates, and the

application equipment for each of the registered uses of oxamyl. Current oxamyl labels state that

oxamyl can only be used on commercial and farm plantings. Oxamyl is applied with the

following equipment: aerial equipment, chemigation, groundboom sprayer, airblast sprayer,

spotgun (low-pressure handwand) applicator, handgun sprayer, and shank soil injection.

Application rates for oxamyl range from 0.25 to 4 lb ai/acre. Oxamyl can be applied anywhere

from 1 to 12 times a year depending on the crop. Most crops have a maximum seasonal

application rate of 6 times or less. Current end-use product labels limit aerial applications to a

maximum of 1 pound active ingredient per acre and ground applications to foliage are limited to

2 pounds active ingredient per acre. Soil-directed applications are a maximum of 4 pounds

active ingredient per acre. Maximum application rates vary by crop, by method of application,

by target of application (soil versus foliage) and by state or region.

There are no registered uses of oxamyl at residential sites. Oxamyl is a restricted use

pesticide. At this time, products containing oxamyl are intended for occupational use only.

Current oxamyl labels state that oxamyl can only be used in commercial and farm plantings.

Oxamyl is not for use in home plantings, nor on any commercial crop that is turned into a “upick” or “pick your own” or similar operation.

Table 3: Occupational Uses of Oxamyl

Crop Geographic Location Target Application Equipment Maximum Application

Rate (lb ai/A)

Entire U.S. Foliage airblast, handgun, chemigation 2

WA Foliage aerial 1 Apples Thinning - NJ, PA, VA,

WV Foliage airblast, handgun, chemigation 1

Foliage low pressure handwand Bananas, Plantains Puerto Rico Soil low pressure handwand 0.005 lb ai/plant

Foliage groundboom, chemigation 1

groundboom 4 Carrot U.S., except CA Soil chemigation 2

Foliage aerial 0.5 AZ, CA Foliage groundboom, chemigation 0.5

Foliage aerial 0.5

Foliage groundboom, chemigation 2 FL

Soil groundboom 4

Foliage groundboom, chemigation 2 Celery

PA, OH, MI, TX Soil groundboom 4

Foliage aerial, airblast, handgun 1

Foliage Citrus Entire U.S.

Soil chemigation 2

# Page 10 of 59 Table 3: Occupational Uses of Oxamyl

Crop Geographic Location Target Application Equipment Maximum Application

Rate (lb ai/A)

Clover Grown for

Seed CA SLN

(CA060028) Foliage Aerial, groundboom 1

AZ and CA Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation, 1

Cotton

U.S., except AZ and CA Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation, 0.5

West of Rockies Foliage groundboom, chemigation 1

Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 1 Cucurbits:

Cucumber,

Cantaloupe,

Honeydew Melon,

Watermelon,

Squash, Pumpkin East of Rockies

Soil groundboom 4

Entire U.S. Foliage groundboom, chemigation 1 Eggplant U.S., except CA Soil groundboom, chemigation 2

Foliage groundboom, chemigation 2

Foliage aerial 1 OR,

& NY SLN

(NY990002) Soil groundboom 4

CA (Modoc & Siskiyou

counties) Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 1

WA SLN

(WA000018) Foliage &

Soil groundboom, chemigation 1

Foliage Garlic

CA Soil groundboom, chemigation 2

Foliage groundboom 1 Ginger Root HI Soil groundboom 4

Foliage aerial, groundboom, airblast,

handgun, chemigation 1 Nonbearing Fruit

(apple, cherry,

citrus, peach, pear) Entire U.S.

Soil groundboom, airblast,

handgun 4

Foliage aerial 1

Foliage groundboom, chemigation 2 OR, ID, WA,

& NY SLN

(NY990002) Soil groundboom 4

Soil groundboom 2 CA Foliage groundboom, chemigation 2

CA (Modoc & Siskiyou

counties)

& CO SLN

(CO010005)

& NV SLN

(NY990002)

& UT SLN

(UT990004) Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 1

Foliage aerial 0.5

Foliage groundboom, chemigation 2 MI, TX

Soil groundboom 4

Foliage aerial, groundboom 0.5 WI SLN

(WI070005) Soil Groundboom 4 Onions

(dry bulb only)

NM Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 0.5

Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 0.5

Peanuts U.S., except CA

Soil aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 0.5

Pears U.S., except CA Foliage airblast, handgun, chemigation 2

# Page 11 of 59 Table 3: Occupational Uses of Oxamyl

Crop Geographic Location Target Application Equipment Maximum Application

Rate (lb ai/A)

groundboom, chemigation 2 Peppermint and

Spearmint ID, MI, MT, OR, WA,

WI Foliage aerial 1

Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 1 Peppers

(Bell and

Non-Bell) Entire U.S.

Soil groundboom, chemigation 1

Foliage groundboom, chemigation 2 Pineapple U.S., except CA Soil groundboom, chemigation 2

Entire U.S. Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 1

MD SLN

(MD080003)

& NY SLN

(NY080001) Foliage &

Soil groundboom, chemigation 2

Foliage groundboom, chemigation 1 PA SLN

(PA070002) Soil groundboom 2 Potatoes

U.S., except Northeast,

Mid-Atlantic States Soil groundboom 4

Sweet Potatoes U.S., except CA Soil groundboom 4

Tobacco Entire U.S. Soil groundboom, chemigation 2

Foliage aerial, groundboom,

chemigation 1 Entire U.S.

Soil chemigation 2 Tomatoes

CA only Soil groundboom 1.25

Yams Puerto Rico Soil groundboom, chemigation 0.5

# Page 12 of 59 4.0 OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE/RISK PATHWAY

4.1 Occupational Handler Exposures

HED has determined that there are potential exposures to mixers, loaders, applicators,

and other handlers during usual use patterns associated with oxamyl. Based on the use patterns

of oxamyl, several major exposure scenarios were identified for oxamyl:

• mixing/loading liquids for aerial application;

• mixing/loading liquids for chemigation application;

• mixing/loading liquids for groundboom application;

• mixing/loading liquids for airblast application;

• applying liquids with aerial equipment;

• applying liquids with a groundboom sprayer;

• applying liquids with an airblast sprayer;

• flagging for liquid aerial applications;

• mixing/loading/applying with spotgun (low-pressure handwand) equipment; and

• mixing/loading/applying with handgun equipment.

4.1.1 Occupational Handler Assumptions

Chemical-specific data for assessing human exposures during pesticide handling

activities were not submitted to the Agency in support of the reregistration of oxamyl. It is the

policy of the HED to use data from the Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database (PHED) Version

1.1 and data from the Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force (ORETF) to assess handler

exposures for regulatory actions when chemical-specific monitoring data are not available.

PHED: The PHED Task Force is comprised of representatives from the U.S. EPA, Health

Canada, the California Department of Pesticide regulation, and member companies of the

American Crop Protection Association. PHED is a software system consisting of two parts: a

database of measured exposure values for workers involved in the handling of pesticides under

actual field conditions and a set of computer algorithms used to subset and statistically

summarize the selected data. Currently, the database contains values for over 1,700 monitored

individuals (i.e., replicates).

Users select criteria to subset the PHED database to reflect the exposure scenario being

evaluated. The subsetting algorithms in PHED are based on the central assumption that the

magnitude of handler exposures to pesticides are primarily a function of activity (e.g.,

mixing/loading, applying), formulation type (e .g., wettable powders, granulars), application

method (e.g., aerial, groundboom), and clothing s cenarios (e.g., gloves, double layer clothing).

Once the data for a given exposure scenario have been selected, the data are normalized

(i.e., divided by) by the amount of pesticide handled resulting in standard unit exposures

(milligrams of exposure per pound of active ingredient handled). Following normalization, the

data are statistically summarized. The distribution of exposure values for each body part (e.g.,

chest upper arm) is categorized as normal, lognormal, or “other” (i.e., neither normal nor

# Page 13 of 59 lognormal). A central tendency value is then se lected from the distribution of the exposure

values for each body part. These values are the arithmetic mean for normal distributions, the

geometric mean for lognormal distributions, and the median for all “other” distributions. Once

selected, the central tendency values for each body part are composited into a “best fit” exposure

value representing the entire body.

The unit exposure values calculated by PHED generally range from the geometric mean

to the median of the selected data set. While data from PHED provide the best available

information on handler exposures, it should be noted that some aspects of the included studies

(e.g., duration, acres treated, pounds of active ingredient handled) may not accurately represent

labeled uses in all cases. HED has developed a series of tables of standard unit exposure values

for many occupational scenarios that can be utilized to ensure consistency in exposure

assessments (PHED Surrogate Exposure Guide, August 1998).

ORETF Handler Studies (MRID 44972201) : A report was submitted by the ORETF

(Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force) that presented data in which the application of

various products used on turf by homeowners and lawncare operators (LCOs) was monitored.

All of the data submitted in this report were completed in a series of studies.

OMA002: LCO Liquid Applications with a Low Pressure Handgun (MRID 44972201):

A mixer/loader/applicator study was performed by the Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force

(ORETF) using Dacthal as a surrogate compound to determine “generic” exposures to

individuals applying a pesticide to turf with a low-pressure “nozzle gun” or “handgun” sprayer.

Dermal and inhalation exposures were estimated using whole-body passive dosimeters and

breathing-zone air samples on OVS tubes. Inhala tion exposure was calculated using an assumed

respiratory rate of 17 liters per minute for light work (NAFTA, 1999), the actual sampling time

for each individual, and the pump flow rate. All results were normalized for pounds active

ingredient handled.

A total of 90 replicates were monitored us ing 17 different subjects. Four different

formulations of dacthal [75% wettable powder (packaged in 4 and 24 pound bags), 75% wettable

powder in water soluble bags (3 pound bag), 75% water dispersible granules (2 pound bag) and

55% liquid flowable (2.5 gallon container)] were applied by five different LCOs to actual

residential lawns at each site in three different locations (Ohio, Maryland, and Georgia) for a

total of fifteen replicates per formulation. An additional ten replicates at each site were

monitored while they performed spray application only using the 75 percent wettable powder

formulation. A target application rate of 2 pounds active ingredient was used for all replicates

(actual rate achieved was about 2.2 pounds active ingredient per acre). Each replicate treated a

varying number of actual client lawns to attain a representative target of 2.5 acres (1 hectare) of

turf. The exposure periods averaged five hours twenty-one minutes, five hours thirty-nine

minutes, and six hours twenty-four minutes, in Ohio, Maryland and Georgia, respectively.

Average time spent spraying at all sites was about two hours. All mixing, loading, application,

adjusting, calibrating, and spill clean up procedures were monitored, except for typical end-ofday clean-up activities, e.g. rinsing of spray tank, etc. Dermal exposure was measured using

inner and outer whole body dosimeters, hand washes, face/neck washes, and personal air

monitoring devices. All test subjects wore one-piece, 100 percent cotton inner dosimeters

# Page 14 of 59 beneath 100 percent cotton long-sleeved shirt and long pants, rubber boots and nitrile gloves.

Gloves are typically worn by most LCOs, and required by many pesticide labels for mixing and

loading.

Overall, residues were highest on the upper and lower leg portions of the dosimeters. In

general, concurrent lab spikes produced mean recoveries in the range of 78-120 percent, with the

exception of OVS sorbent tube sections which produced mean recoveries as low as 65.8 percent.

Adjustment for recoveries from field fortifica tions were performed on each dosimeter section or

sample matrix for each study participant, using the mean recovery for the closest field spike level

for each matrix and correcting the value to 100 percent. The unit exposure values are presented

below in Table 4. [Note the data were found to be lognormally distributed. As a result, all

exposure values are geometric means.]

Table 4: Unit Exposure Values Obtained for LCO Liquid Applications with a Low Pressure

Handgun from ORETF Handgun Studies (MRID 44972201)

Total Dermal Unit Exposure 1 

# (mg/lb ai)

Application Method 4 

# Single Layer,

No Gloves Single Layer,

Gloves Double Layer 3



# , Gloves Inhalation Unit

Exposure 1,2 

# ( μ g/lb ai)

LCO Handgun Spray Mixer/Loader/Applicator

Liquid Flowable No Data 0.45 0.245 1.8

1 

# Unit exposure values repor ted are geometric means.

2 

# Air concentration (mg/m 3 

# /lb ai) calculated using NAFTA ‘99 standard breathing rate of 17 lpm (1 m 3 

# /hr).

3 

# Exposure calculated using OPP/HED 50% protection factor (PF) for cotton coveralls on torso, arms, and legs.

4 

# All commercial handlers wore long pants, l ong-sleeved shirt, nitrile gloves and shoes.



# ORETF Handler Studies (MRID 44459801) : A report was submitted by the ORETF

(Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force) that presented data in which the application of

various products used on vegetable gardens by homeowners was monitored. All of the data

submitted in this report were completed in a series of studies.

OMA006: Homeowner Liquid Application to Garden with a Low Pressure Handwand

(MRID 44459801): The study was designed to quantify dermal and inhalation exposure of

homeowners as they mixed, loaded and applied liquid formulations of a carbaryl end-use product

to home garden vegetables. A low pressure handw and) was used to apply Sevin Liquid® Brand

Carbaryl Insecticide. Twenty replicates were conducted with gloves and 20 replicates were

conducted without gloves. Inhalation exposure was monitored using personal air samplers

(average flow rate of 1.5 liter/minute) and dermal exposure was monitored by using inner and

outer dosimeters, facial/neck wipes, and hand washes. The overall mean field fortification

recovery of each matrix ranged from 77.6 ± 13.6% (outer dosimeters) to 98.4 ± 3.8% (OVS

tubes). Laboratory fortified recovery samples were analyzed with each set of samples analyzed

on a particular day; however, the results of the laboratory recoveries were not provided in the

Study Report. Unit exposures were calculated fo r short pants/short sleeves, long pants/short

sleeves, and long pants/long sleeves scenarios. The results for the low pressure handwand are

summarized in Table 5 below.

# Page 15 of 59 Table 5. Unit Exposure Values for Homeow ner Liquid Application to Garden with a

Low Pressure Handwand Obtained From ORETF Study (MRID 44459801)

Total Dermal Unit Exposure 1



# (mg/lb ai) Inhalation Unit

Exposure 1



# ( μ g/lb ai) Scenario Monitored

Gloves No Gloves No Respirator

Homeowner Liquid Applications with a

Low Pressure Handwand Sprayer 0.33 15 2.7

1 

# Unit exposure values repor ted are geometric means.



# The following general assumptions are made:

• Average body weight of an adult handler is 70 kg.

• Average work day interval is 8 hours which represents a typical day.

• Calculations of handler scenarios are completed using the maximum application rates on

the oxamyl labels.

• PHED Version 1.1 or ORETF surrogate data were used for to estimate exposures for all

scenarios. NOTE: According to information provided by DuPont, the Vydate L spotgun

applicator appears to have a similar application technique as a low pressure handwand

and therefore exposure from the spotgun is assumed to be similar to the low pressure

handwand. Thus, PHED and ORETF unit exposure data from the use of a low pressure

handwand was used as surrogate data for the spotgun applicator.

• Due to a lack of scenario-specific data, HED calculated unit exposure values using

generic data from the Pesticide Handler Exposure Database (PHED) and the Outdoor

Residential Exposure Task Force database (O RETF). When necessary, protection factors

are applied to represent various risk mitigation options (i.e., the use of respirator and

double-layer body protection).

• Exposures were estimated for handlers using:

3⁄4 1200 acres per day for aerial applications to cotton,

3⁄4 350 acres per day for aerial applications to all other crops,

3⁄4 350 acres per day for chemigation applications,

3⁄4 200 acres per day for groundboom applications to cotton,

3⁄4 80 acres per day for groundboom applications to all other crops,

3⁄4 40 acres per day for airblast applications to tree crops,

3⁄4 5 acres per day for handgun applications to tree crops, and

3⁄4 2 acres per day for a spotgun (low-pressure handwand applications to bananas and

plantains

. 

# Note: According to information provided by DuPont, there are

approximately 715 banana plants per acre and a person can apply oxamyl with a

# Page 16 of 59 spotgun to approximately 2 acres per day. Since 10 mL of concentrate is applied

per plant, then 3.6 pounds active ingredient is applied per acre.

• There are no data to assess handler exposure during a shank injection application.

However, exposure to handlers during groundboom application is considered to be a

reasonable surrogate.

4.1.2 Occupational Handler Equations

Potential daily dermal exposure is calculated using the following formula:

Potential daily inhalation exposure is calculated using the following formula:

The daily dermal and inhalation dose is calculated using a 70 kg body weight for both short-term

and intermediate-term exposure as follows:

⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛

⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛

⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛

(kg) Weight Body 1

x day ai mg Exposure Inhalation Daily

= kg/day ai mg Dose Inhalation Daily

The short-term and intermediate-term risks for dermal exposure were calculated using a NOAEL

of 8 mg/kg/day. The short-term and intermediate-term risks for inhalation exposure were

calculated using a NOAEL of 0.39 mg/kg/day. The inhalation and dermal MOEs were

calculated using the following formulas: ⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛ ⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛

day A Treated Acres Daily x A

ai lb Rate Use x ai lb ai mg Exposure Unit

= day ai mg Exposure Dermal Daily

⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛ ⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛ ⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛

day A Treated Acres Daily x A

ai lb Rate Use x

g 1,000 1mg Factor Conversion x ai lb ai

g Exposure Unit = day ai mg Exposure Inhalation Daily

μ μ



# ⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛

⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛

⎟ ⎟

⎠ ⎞

⎜ ⎜

⎝ ⎛

(Kg) Weight Body 1

x Day ai mg Exposure Dermal Daily

= Kg/Day ai mg Dose Dermal Daily

# Page 17 of 59 ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛

kg/day mg Dose Daily Dermal kg/day mg NOAEL

= MOE Dermal

⎟ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛ ⎟

⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛

kg/day mg Dose Daily Inhalation kg/day mg NOAEL

= MOE Inhalation

Since the toxicological effects are similar (cholinesterase inhibition in red blood cells) for the

dermal and inhalation PoDs, the dermal and inhalation risks to handlers are combined. Since the

level of concern is 100 for dermal risks and 30 for inhalation risks, an aggregated risk index

(ARI) is calculated. The level of concern for an ARI is 1 (i.e., ARIs greater than 1 are not a

concern). ARIs are calculated using the following formula:

Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) = 1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /100) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 30 )).

4.1.3 Summary of Risk Concerns for Occupational Handlers

The short- and intermediate-term dermal risks are identical since the same PoD was

chosen for short- and intermediate-term dermal assessments. The short- and intermediate-term

inhalation risks are also identical since the same PoD was chosen for short- and intermediateterm inhalation assessments. A summary of the short-term and intermediate-term risks are

presented in Table 6 (see Appendices A-C for more detail regarding risk calculations). Since the

toxicological effects are similar (cholinesterase inhibition in red blood cells) for the dermal and

inhalation PoDs, the dermal and inhalation risks to handlers are combined for an aggregate

occupational assessment. Since the level of concern is 100 for dermal risks and 30 for inhalation

risks, an aggregated risk index (ARI) is calculated. The level of concern for an ARI is 1 (i.e.,

ARIs greater than 1 are not a concern).

4.1.3.1 Occupational Dermal Risks

The short- and intermediate-term dermal risks did not exceed HED’s level of concern at

some level of risk mitigation for all handler scenarios, except :

• Mixing/loading liquid concentrates to support aerial applications to cotton in CA and AZ

at 1.0 lb ai/A;

• Mixing/loading liquid concentrates to support chemigation applications at 2.0 lb ai/A;

• Applying sprays by aircraft to cotton in CA and AZ at 1.0 lb ai/A.

# Page 18 of 59 4.1.3.2 Occupational Inhalation Risks

The short- and intermediate-term inhalation risks did not exceed HED’s level of concern

at the baseline level (no respirator) for all handler scenarios, except mixing/loading to support

aerial applications to cotton in California and Arizona at the 1.0 lb ai/day application rate. Note

that only the only data available for applying sprays with aircraft is for engineering controls (i.e.,

an enclosed cockpit) – the risks did not exceed HED’s level of concern for aerial applicators at

baseline attire as long as enclosed cockpits are used.

4.1.3.3 Occupational Combined Risks

The short- and intermediate-term combined dermal plus inhalation risks did not exceed

HED’s level of concern at some level of risk mitigation for all handler scenarios, except :

• Mixing/loading liquid concentrates to support aerial applications to cotton in CA and AZ

at 1.0 lb ai/A;

• Mixing/loading liquid concentrates to support chemigation applications at 2.0 lb ai/A;

• Applying sprays by aircraft to cotton in CA and AZ at 1.0 lb ai/A.Page 19 of 59Table 6: Summary of Risk Mitigation for Handlers Exposed to OxamylExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)Area TreatedDailyb(acres)Handler Risk MitigationMixer/LoaderApples (WA only); Citrus; CloverGrown for Seed (SLN CA),Cucurbits (East of Rockies), Garlic (OR & CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, SLN NY); Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA - Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR, ID,WA, SLN CO, SLN NV, SLN NY,SLN UT); Peppermint andSpearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Peppers; Potatoes (alsoSLN PA); Tomatoes1 350Engineering Controls(ARI = 1.8)Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 1200Risks of concern with maximum risk mitigation –closed system mixing/loading(ARI = 0.51)Cotton (not AZ and CA) 0.5 1200Engineering Controls(ARI = 1.0)Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates for AerialApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX, SLN WI);Peanuts (not CA)0.5 350Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.1)Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates for ChemigationApplications (PHED)Apples; Carrot (not CA); Celery(FL, PA, OH, MI, TX); Citrus;Eggplant (not CA); Garlic (CA, OR); Dry Bulb Onions (CA, OR,ID, WA. MI, TX); Pears (not CA); Peppermint and Spearmint (ID,MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Pineapple (not CA); Potatoes (SLN MD,SLN NY, SLN PA); Tobacco; Tomatoes2 350Risks of concern with maximum risk mitigation –closed mixing/loading system(ARI = 0.88)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Cotton (CA and AZ);Cucurbits; Dry Bulb Onions (SLN CO, SLN NV, SLN UT );Eggplant (CA); Garlic (SLNWA);Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear); Peppers; Potatoes1 350Engineering Controls(ARI = 1.8)Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates for ChemigationApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA); Cotton (not CA and AZ); Dry Bulb Onions(NM); Peanuts (not CA); Yams (Puerto Rico only)0.5 350Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.1)Page 20 of 59Table 6: Summary of Risk Mitigation for Handlers Exposed to OxamylExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)Area TreatedDailyb(acres)Handler Risk MitigationNonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach, pear; soil); Carrots(not CA); Celery (FL, PA, OH,MI, TX); Cucurbits (East ofRockies); Garlic (OR, SLN NY); Ginger Roots (HI); Dry BulbOnions (MI, TX, OR, ID, WA, SLN NY, SLN WI); Sweet Potatoes(not in CA); Potatoes (U.S. except Northeast, Mid-Atlantic States)4(all soildirected)80Engineering Controls(ARI = 1.9)Pineapples (not CA); Eggplants (not CA); Garlic (CA); Dry BulbOnions (CA); Peppermint and Spearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR, WA,WI); Potatoes (SLN MD, SLN NY, SLN PA); Tobacco2 80Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.2)Tomatoes (CA) 1.25 80Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.8)Mixing/Loading LiquidsConcentrates for GroundboomApplications (PHED)Clover Grown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (West of Rockies);Dry Bulb Onions (SLN CO, SLN NV, SLN UT); Eggplants (CA);Garlic (SLNWA); Peppers; Potatoes (Northeast and Mid-AtlanticStates); Tomatoes (entire US)1 80Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 2.3)Cotton (AZ and CA) 1 200Double layers plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.1)Cotton (U.S. except CA and AZ) 0.5 200Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.8)Mixing/Loading LiquidsConcentrates for GroundboomApplications (PHED) contCelery (AZ, CA); Dry Bulb Onions (NM); Yams (Puerto RicoOnly); Peanuts (not in CA)0.5 80Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 4.6)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 40Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 2.3)Mixing/Loading LiquidsConcentrates for AirblastApplications (PHED)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA, VA,WV); Citrus; Nonbearing Fruit(apple, cherry, citrus, peach, pear)1 40Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 4.6)ApplicatorApples (WA only); Citrus; CloverGrown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (East of Rockies), Garlic (OR & CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, SLN NY); Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA - Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR, ID,WA, SLN CO, SLN NV, SLN NY,SLN UT); Peppermint andSpearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Peppers; Potatoes (alsoSLN PA); Tomatoes1 350Enclosed cockpits(ARI = 3.0)Applying Sprays via AerialEquipment (PHED)Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 1,200Risks of concern with maximum risk mitigation –enclosed cockpits(ARI = 0.86)Page 21 of 59Table 6: Summary of Risk Mitigation for Handlers Exposed to OxamylExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)Area TreatedDailyb(acres)Handler Risk MitigationCotton (not AZ and CA) 0.5 1,200Enclosed cockpits(ARI =1.7)Applying Sprays via AerialEquipment (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX, SLN WI);Peanuts (not CA)0.5 350Enclosed cockpits(ARI = 5.9)Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach, pear); Carrot (notCA); Celery (FL, PA, OH, MI, TX); Cucurbits (East of Rockies);Garlic (OR, SLN NY); Ginger Root(HI); Dry Bulb Onions (MI,TX, OR, ID, WA, SLN NY, SLN WI); Sweet Potatoes (not in CA);Potatoes (U.S. except Northeast, Mid-Atlantic States)4(all soildirected)80Double layers plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.1)Pineapple (not CA); Eggplant (not CA); Garlic (CA); Dry BulbOnions (CA); Peppermint and Spearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR, WA,WI); Potatoes (SLN MD, SLN NY, SLN PA); Tobacco2 80Baseline attire(ARI = 1.9)Tomatoes (CA) 1.25 80Baseline attire(ARI = 3.0)Clover Grown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (West of Rockies);Dry Bulb Onions (SLN CO, SLN NV, SLN UT): Eggplant (CA);Garlic (SLNWA); Peppers; Potatoes (Northeast and Mid-AtlanticStates); Tomatoes (entire US)1 80Baseline attire(ARI = 3.8)Cotton (AZ and CA) 1 200Baseline attire(ARI = 1.5)Cotton (U.S. except CA and AZ) 0.5 200Baseline attire(ARI = 3.0)Applying Sprays viaGroundboom Equipment(PHED)Celery (AZ, CA); Dry Bulb Onions (NM); Yams (Puerto RicoOnly); Peanuts (not in CA)0.5 80Baseline attire(ARI = 7.5)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 40Engineering control dermal (enclosed cab) plusbaseline inhalation (no respirator)(ARI = 1.5)Applying Sprays via AirblastEquipment PHED)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA, VA,WV); Citrus; Nonbearing Fruit(apple, cherry, citrus, peach, pear)1 40Engineering control dermal (enclosed cab) plusbaseline inhalation (no respirator)(ARI = 3.0)Page 22 of 59Table 6: Summary of Risk Mitigation for Handlers Exposed to OxamylExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)Area TreatedDailyb(acres)Handler Risk MitigationFlaggerApples (WA only); Citrus; Clover Grown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (East of Rockies), Garlic (OR & CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, SLN NY); Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA - Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR, ID,WA, SLN CO, SLN NV, SLN NY,SLN UT); Peppermint andSpearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Peppers; Potatoes (alsoSLN PA); Tomatoes1 350Baseline(ARI = 1.2)Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 350Baseline(ARI = 1.2)Cotton (U.S. except AZ and CA) 0.5 350Baseline(ARI = 2.4)Flagging for Aerial SpraysApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX, SLN WI);Peanuts (not CA)0.5 350Baseline(ARI = 2.4)Mixer/Loader/ApplicatorMixing/Loading/ApplyingLiquid Concentrates with LowPressure Handwand (PHED)Bananas, Plantains (PR) 3.6 2Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.3)Mixing/Loading/ApplyingLiquid Concentrates with LowPressure Handwand (ORETF,ground directed)Bananas, Plantains (PR) 3.6 2Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 2.3)Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach, pear) 4 5Double layers plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.1)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 5Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 1.2)Mixing/Loading/ApplyingLiquid Concentrates with aHandgun Sprayer (LCOORETF data)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA, VA, WV); Citrus 1 5Baseline plus C-R gloves(ARI = 2.4)Footnotesa. Application rates are maximum application rates from the labels.b. Science Advisory Council Policy # 9.1c. Risk Mitigation: Baseline = long-sleevedshirt, long pants, shoes, and socks; C-R gloves = chemical-resistant gloves; Doublelayers = coveralls over long-sleeved shirt, longpants; Engineering control for mixing/loading = closed system;Engineering control for aerial applicators = enclosed cockpit; and Engineering control for airblast applicator =enclosed cab.

# Page 23 of 59 4.2 Occupational Postapplication Exposures

4.2.1 Occupational Dermal Postapplication Expsoures

4.2.1.1 Occupational Dermal Postapplicat ion Assumptions and Calculations

The registrant has submitted three dislodgeable foliar residue (DFR) studies in support of the

reregistration of oxamyl:

• “Dissipation of Dislodgeable Foliar and Soil Residues of Oxamyl Following Application

of Vydate ® 

# L Insecticide to Tomatoes in the USA- Season 1997 and 1998;” MRID

44704801.

• “Dissipation of Dislodgeable Foliar Resi dues of Oxamyl from Citrus Following

Application of Vydate ® 

# L Insecticide in the U.S.A - Season 1997;” MRID 44686901.

• “Dissipation of Dislodgeable Foliar Residue s of Oxamyl from Cucumbers Following

Application of Vydate ® 

# L Insecticide in the U.S.A. - Season 1997;” MRID 44686902.

The dissipation data obtained from these studies has been used to determine the days

after treatment when the calculated MOE did not exceed HED’s level of concern (MOE ≥ 100)

for oxamyl crops following foliar applications of oxamyl. The raw data from the studies are

corrected for recoveries as appropriate. The data is then natural log transformed. A semi-log

regression analysis is run on the log transformed data. From the regression analysis, a

dissipation rate (slope) and predicted dislodgeable foliar residue data for each site and crop is

determined. If the day 0 actual DFR data are significantly higher than the predicted DFR, then

the actual data are used for day 0 calculations. The following calculations are used to calculate

the dose and risk. The Restricted Entry Interval (REI) typically is established on the day that the

calculated MOE is 100 or above.

Daily dose is calculated as follows:

Where:

DFR = Dislodgeable Foliar Residue initial or daily (μg/cm 2 

# ) at time (t).

Tc = Transfer coefficient (cm 2 

# /hr)

CF = Conversion factor (1 mg/1,000 μg)

ED = Exposure duration (hours per day)

BW = Body weight (kg) 

# (kg) BW (hrs) ED x

g 1,000 mg 1 CF x /hr) cm ( Tc x ) cm g/ ( (DFR

= (mg/kg/d) Dose 2 2 

# ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ ⎞ ⎜ ⎜ ⎝ ⎛

μ μ

# Page 24 of 59 The daily MOE is calculated as follows:

Where:

NOAEL = 8 mg/kg/day

Dose = Calculated dose



# The following general assumptions are made:

• Only crops where oxamyl is applied to the foliage are included in this assessment.

There are no soil transfer values or other data available to evaluate

postapplication exposure and risk following oxamyl applications to the soil.

However, the exposure is likely to be minimal and the default REI for oxamyl

should be sufficiently protective for postapplication workers exposed to oxamyl

in the soil.

• The transfer coefficients used in this assessment are from the Agricultural Reentry

Task Force (ARTF) database. An interim transfer coefficient policy was

developed by HED’s Science Advisory Council for Exposure using the ARTF

database (policy # 3.1). It is the intention of HED’s Science Advisory Council for

Exposure that this policy will be periodically updated to incorporate additional

information about agricultural practices in crops and new data on transfer

coefficients.

• A route-specific dermal study was used to select a dermal PoD, so a dermal

absorption value is not necessary.

• The exposure duration is assumed to be 8 hour work day.

• Adult body weight is 70 kg. ) (mg/kg/day Dose ) (mg/kg/day NOAEL

= MOE

# Page 25 of 59 Table 7 is a summary of the DFR studies’ parameters. A detailed summary of each DFR

is below.

Table 7. Comparison of Dislodgeable Foliar Residue Study Parameters

Crop Tomatoes Citrus Cucumbers

Site Florida California Florida California Georgia California

Slope -0.43 -0.12 -0.235 -0.078 -0.51 -0.282

Initial Residues (μg/cm 2 

# ) 1.85 3.83

(actual) 2.14

(actual) 2.05

(actual) 4.1

(actual) 3.9

(actual)

Study Application Rate (lb ai/A) 1 1 1

Half Life (days) 1.6 5.8 3.0 8.9 1.4 2.5

R 2 

# Values 0.99 0.67 0.86 0.76 0.81 0.94



# Cucumber DFR Study - MRID 44686902: The study: “Dissipation of Dislodgeable Foliar

Residues of Oxamyl from Cucumbers Following Application of Vydate® L Insecticide in the

U.S.A. - Season 1997;" (MRID 44686902), was submitted by the registrant and reviewed by

HED. The study was conducted at two sites, one in California and one in Georgia, during the

summer of 1997. The treated plot at each site received two applications of Vydate® L

insecticide/ nematicide using a tractor-mounted boom sprayer. There was a fourteen-day

interval between the applications. The application rate for each treatment was 1 pound of active

ingredient (ai) per acre applied at a rate of 50 ga llons per acre of finished spray at both sites.

The data from leaf punches after the second treatment were used to characterize concentration of

oxamyl on the treated crop and the rate of dissipation.

The subplots at the California site were furrow /flood irrigated, while the subplots at the

Georgia site did not require irrigation. The rainfall for the month of July was 10.64 inches at the

Georgia site. This exceeded the 10-year average for July at the Georgia site of 6.58 inches.

However, the total average rainfall during the course of the study at the Georgia site was 12.55

inches. This was lower than the 10-year total average for the same stretch of time, which was

14.97 inches. The first rainfall after the last application at the Georgia site occurred on Day 4.

At the California site, there was no rain during the course of the study and the irrigation water

did not wet the sampled foliage.

Foliage leaf punch samples were collected randomly from dry viable leaves from each

subplot and control plot using a one inch diam eter Birkestrand® leaf punch sampler. One

control sample from the control plot and three replicate samples from the treated plot were

collected at both study sites at the following sampling intervals: prior to each application,

immediately after each application after the spray dried (day 0), and 1, 2, 3, 7, 14 ,21, 28, and 35

days after the second (final) application. The California site experienced an insect infestation

after the 28th day, leaving no viable leaves to be sampled on the 35th day.

For the Georgia and California sites, on day 0 the actual DFR data are higher than the

predicted DFR data. Since using the predicted values for day 0 would underestimate exposure,

# Page 26 of 59 the actual values are also reported for day 0 for this site. Results from the regression analysis are

presented in Table 8 of this report.

Table 8. Cucumber Foliar Dissipation for Oxamyl (MRID 44686902)

DFR (μg/cm 2 

# ) Predicted Values–Based on Log Transformed Data (Values in Parentheses are Actual Field

Measured Averages)

Site

0 DAT 1 DAT 2 DAT 3 DAT 4 DAT 5 DAT 6

DAT 7 DAT R 2 

# Slope

(t 1⁄2 

# days) a



# Georgia 1

(4.1) 0.6

(0.87) 0.36 0.22 0.13 0.079 0.048 0.029 0.81 -0.508

(1.36)

California 3.2

(3.9) 2.4

(3.4) 1.8

(2.8) 1.4 1.03 0.78 0.59 0.44 0.94 -0.282

(2.46)

a t 1⁄2 

# is the calculated half-life of oxamyl at the Georgia site are from 0 DAT to 14 DAT and the half-life of oxamyl at

the California site are from 0 DAT to 28 DAT.



# Tomato DFR Study - MRID 44704801: The study: “Dissipation of Dislodgeable Foliar

and Soil Residues of Oxamyl Following Application of Vydate ® 

# L Insecticide to Tomatoes in the

USA- Season 1997 and 1998

. " (MRID 44704801) was submitted by the registrant and reviewed

by HED. There were two sites in the study, one in California and one in Florida. Two

applications of Vydate ® 

# L were applied 5 days apart to test fields. For the California site, the

applications were made beginning in mid July 1997 and for the Florida site, the applications

were made in mid November 1997. Vydate ® 

# L was applied twice at each site using a broadcast

boom sprayer at an application rate of 1.0 lb ai per acre in 50 gallons per acre of final volume.

The data from leaf punches after the second treatment were used to characterize concentration of

oxamyl on the treated crop and the rate of dissipation. Numerous rainfall events occurred during

the study at the Florida site. During the study from Nov. 13, 1997 - Dec. 23, 1997, 14.40 inches

of precipitation fell at the Florida site, while the 10-year average precipitation amounts were 2.36

inches in Nov. and 2.82 inches in December. The first rainfall after the last application at the

Florida site occurred on Day 16. Only one rain event occurred at the California site - 0.05 inches

on Day 2 after the last application.

The average foliar residues immediately after the second (last) application were 2.03

μg/cm 2 

# at the Florida site and 3.83 μg/cm 2 

# at the California site. After 14 days, the residues

declined to 0.005 μg/cm 2 

# at the Florida site and 0.065 μg/cm 2 

# at the California site. At the

Florida site, the DFR residues were less than the limit of quantitation (LOQ) of 0.001 μ g/cm 2



# after Day 14; therefore, data on Day 21, 28, and 35 were removed from regression analysis for

this site. Results from the regression analysis are presented in Table 9 of this report.

# Page 27 of 59 Table 9. Tomato Foliar Dissipation for Oxamyl (MRID 44704801)

DFR (μg/cm 2 

# ) Predicted Values – Based on Log Transformed Data (Values in Parentheses are Actual Field

Measured Averages)

Site

0 DAT 1 DAT 2 DAT 3 DAT 4 DAT 5 DAT 6 DAT 7 DAT R 2 

# Slope

(t 1⁄2 

# days) a



# Florida 1.85 1.21 0.79 0. 51 0.34 0.22 0.14 0.094 0.99 -0.425

(1.62)

California

(foliar) 0.61

(3.83) 0.54

(1.29) 0.48 0.43 0.38 0.34 0.30 0.27 0.24 -0.119

(5.84)

a t 1⁄2 

# is the calculated half-life of oxamyl at the Florida site are from 0 DAT to 14 DAT and the half-life of Oxamyl at

the California site are from 0 DAT to 35 DAT.



# Citrus DFR Study - MRID 44686901: The study: “Dissipation of Dislodgeable Foliar

Residues of Oxamyl from Citrus Following Application of Vydate® L Insecticide in the U.S.A -

Season 1997" (MRID 44686901) was submitted by the registrant and review by HED. The study

was done at two sites, one in Florida and one in California. The treated plots at each site

received two applications of Vydate® L insecticide using airblast sprayer applications of the test

substance. At the California site, each application was 1.0 pounds of active ingredient per acre

in 100 gallons of finished spray per acre. The data from leaf punches after the second treatment

were used to characterize concentration of oxamyl on the treated crop and the rate of dissipation.

A protocol deviation occurred when for the firs t application in Florida; Vydate®L was sprayed

1.25 lb ai/acre due to an increase in spray pressure from 60 to 100 PSI in 147 gallons per acre.

Insertion of a pressure regulator for the second application brought the application rate down to

1.0 lb ai/acre in 101 gallons of finished spray per acre. The sprayers were calibrated prior to all

applications by the volume/time method. In California, irrigation occurred four times with a

microsprinkler irrigation that did not wet the fo liage sampled. The California site had 1.3 inches

of rainfall during the course of the study – the ten year average is 1.46 inches. In Florida, the

rainfall per day ranged from 0.2 to 2.6 inches. The total rainfall during the sampling period was

13.7 inches – the ten year average is 20 inches.

For the Florida and California sites, on day 0 the actual DFR data are higher than the

predicted DFR data. Since using the predicted values for day 0 would underestimate exposure,

the actual values are also reported for day 0 for this site. Results from the regression analysis are

presented in Table 10 of this report.

# Page 28 of 59 Table 10. Citrus Foliar Dissipation for Oxamyl (MRID 44686901)

DFR (μg/cm 2 

# ) Predicted Values – Based on Log Transforme d Data (Values in Parentheses are Actual

Field Measured Averages)

Site

0 DAT 1 DAT 2 DAT 3

DAT 4 DAT 5 DAT 6

DAT 7 DAT R 2 

# Slope

(t 1⁄2 

# days) a



# Florida 0.639

(2.14) 0.505

(1.46) 0.40

(0.477) 0.316 0.250 0.198 0.156 0.124 0.858 -0.235

(2.95)

Californi

a 0.738

(2.05) 0.683 0.632 0.585 0.541 0.501 0.463 0.429 0.76 0.078

(8.92)

a t 1⁄2 

# is the calculated half-life of oxamyl at the Flor ida and California site are from 0 DAT to 35 DAT.



# Use of the Oxamyl DFR Study Data

The citrus DFR study data was used to assess exposure to oxamyl-treated foliage for

citrus and also was used to assess exposure to foliage from the other tree crops (pears, apples,

bananas, plantains, and non-bearing trees). The cucumber DFR study data was used to assess

exposure to oxamyl-treated foliage for the cucurbit crops. And the tomato DFR study data were

used to assess exposure to oxamyl-treated foliage for tomatoes and other fruiting vegetables

(peppers and eggplant). For all the remaining crops, both the tomato residue data (MRID

44704801) and the cucumber residue data (MRID 44686902) were used to assess exposure to

oxamyl-treated foliage. For all crops where both tomato and cucumber residue data are

presented, the results for the California sites were averaged and the results from the Florida and

Georgia sites were averaged. The DFR values from the three submitted studies were adjusted

proportionately to reflect remaining crops applica tion rates. The new DFR values are calculated

as follows:

4.2.1.2 Summary of Dermal Risk Concerns for Postapplication Workers

See Tables 11 and 12 for a summary of the postapplication results. The resulting

postapplication assessments indicate that the MOEs equal or exceed 100 on the day specified for

the following crops, according to the DFR study site and tasks that represent the highest transfer

coefficient. The postapplication risk assessment indicates that for many crops, risks remain a

concern for several days following application. (lbsai/A) rate n applicatio study (lbsai/A) rate n applicatio crop x ) cm g/ ( DFR Study

= ) cm g/ ( DFR Adjusted 2

2 

# μ μ

# Page 29 of 59 Table 11: Oxamyl Postapplication Risks for Tree Crops

Crop Appl.

Rate a



# (lbs. ai/

acre) Transfer Coefficient b



# (cm 2 

# /hr)

and

Activity DFR Data

Source c 

# Dose at Day 0 d



# (mg/kg/day) MOE at

Day 0 e 

# Day After

Treatment When

MOE ≥ 100 f



# Florida 1.8 5 9

Banana/

Plantain 3.6 2000

Training, Hand Pruning,

Thinning, Topping, Hand

Weeding California 1.7 5 27

Florida 1.5 6 8

Apples 2 3000

Hand Harvesting, Thinning,

Propping, Training, Hand

Pruning California 1.4 6 24

Florida 1.5 6 8

Citrus 2 3000

Hand Harvesting, Hand

Pruning, Thinning California 1.4 6 24

Florida 1.5 6 8 Pears

(U.S., except

CA) 2 3000

Hand Harvesting, Thinning,

Tying, Hand Pruning,

Training California 1.4 6 24

Florida 0.098 82 1 Nonbearing

Fruit Trees 1 400

All Tasks California 0.094 85 1

a. Application rates are the maximum application rate s determined from EPA regist ered labels for oxamyl.

b. Transfer Coefficients are from Science Advisory Council on Exposure Policy 3.1. Risks were only assessed for the highest

transfer coefficient available for a crop.

c. The results from the analysis using actual DFR values for Day 0. The actual DFR values were used instead of the predicted

DFRs when the actual DFR values were higher than the predicte d DFR values (Day 0, 1, and 2 for Citrus FL and Day 0 for

Citrus CA).

DFR Data sources:

Citrus CA: MRID 44686901: Slope = -0.078, Day 0 (actual) = 2.05, Study Application Rate = 1

Citrus FL: MRID 44686901: Slope = -0.235, Day 0 (actual) = 2.14, Study Application Rate = 1

d. Daily Dose = [DFR (μg/cm 2 

# ) x Transfer Coefficient (cm 2 

# /hr) x 0.001 mg/μg x 8 hrs/day] ÷ body weight (70 kg adult)

e. MOE = NOAEL/Daily Dose (Adult Derm al NOAEL = 8 mg/kg/day). Target MOE = 100

f. Day After Treatment When MOE ≥ 100. Values in bold indicate that the calculated REI is greater than 48 hrs.

# Page 30 of 59 Table 12: Oxamyl Postapplication Risk s for Vegetable and Non-Tree Fruit Crops

Crop Appl.

Rate a



# (lbs. ai/

acre) Transfer

Coefficient b



# (cm 2 

# /hr)

And Activity DFR Data Source c 

# Dose at Day 0 d



# (mg/kg/day) MOE at

Day 0 e 

# Day After

Treatment

When

MOE ≥ 100 f 

# Average

Day after

Treatment

when MOE

≥ 100

Cucumber

GA 2.3 3 4

Tomato

FL 1.1 8 9 7

Cucumber

CA 2.2 4 12 Celery

(FL, PA, OH,

MI, TX) 2 2500

Hand harvesting

Tomato

CA 2.2 4 13 13

Cucumber

GA 0.59 14 2

Tomato

FL 0.26 30 3 3

Cucumber

CA 0.55 15 7 Celery

(AZ, CA) 0.5 2500

Hand harvesting

Tomato

CA 0.55 15 2 5

Cucumber

GA 1.4 6 3

Tomato

FL 0.63 13 5 4

Cucumber

CA 1.3 6 10 Peppermint

and

Spearmint

(ID, MI, MT,

OR, WA, WI) 2 1500

Irrigation;

scouting; hand

weeding

Tomato

CA 1.3 6 9 10

Cucumber

GA 0.94 9 3

Tomato

FL 0.21 38 3 3

Cucumber

CA 0.88 9 8 Pineapples 2 1000

Hand harvesting;

hand pruning

Tomato

CA 0.88 9 5 7

Cucumber

GA 0.28 28 1

Tomato

FL 0.13 63 2 2

Cucumber

CA 0.26 30 4 Garlic

(OR, CA) 2 300

Irrigation;

scouting;

thinning; hand

weeding

Tomato

CA 0.26 30 2 3

# Page 31 of 59 Table 12: Oxamyl Postapplication Risk s for Vegetable and Non-Tree Fruit Crops

Crop Appl.

Rate a



# (lbs. ai/

acre) Transfer

Coefficient b



# (cm 2 

# /hr)

And Activity DFR Data Source c 

# Dose at Day 0 d



# (mg/kg/day) MOE at

Day 0 e 

# Day After

Treatment

When

MOE ≥ 100 f 

# Average

Day after

Treatment

when MOE

≥ 100

Cucumber

GA 0.14 57 1

Tomato

FL 0.06 130 0 (12 hours) 1

Cucumber

CA 0.13 60 3 Garlic

(SLN NY,

SLN WA) 1 300

Irrigation;

scouting;

thinning; hand

weeding

Tomato

CA 0.13 61 1 2

Cucumber

GA 0.28 28 1

Tomato

FL 0.13 63 2 2

Cucumber

CA 0.26 30 4 Onions, Dry

Bulb

(OR, ID, WA,

CA, MI, TX 2 300

Irrigation;

scouting;

thinning; hand

weeding

Tomato

CA 0.26 30 2 3

Cucumber

GA 0.14 57 1

Tomato

FL 0.06 130 0 (12 hours) 1

Cucumber

CA 0.13 60 3 Onions, Dry

Bulb

(SLN CO,

SLN NV,

SLN NY,

SLN UT) 1 300

Irrigation;

scouting;

thinning; hand

weeding

Tomato

CA 0.13 61 1 2

Cucumber

GA 0.07 110 0 (12 hours)

Tomato

FL 0.03 250 0 (12 hours) 0 (12

hours)

Cucumber

CA 0.07 120 0 (12 hours) Onions, Dry

Bulb

(NM, SLN

WI) 0.5 300

Irrigation;

scouting;

thinning; hand

weeding

Tomato

CA 0.07 120 0 (12 hours) 0 (12

hours)

Cucumber

GA 0.7 11 2

Tomato

FL 0.32 25 4 3

Cucumber

CA 0.66 12 7 Clover Grown

for Seed

(SLN CA) 1.0 1500

Irrigation;

scouting;

Tomato

CA 0.66 12 3 5

# Page 32 of 59 Table 12: Oxamyl Postapplication Risk s for Vegetable and Non-Tree Fruit Crops

Crop Appl.

Rate a



# (lbs. ai/

acre) Transfer

Coefficient b



# (cm 2 

# /hr)

And Activity DFR Data Source c 

# Dose at Day 0 d



# (mg/kg/day) MOE at

Day 0 e 

# Day After

Treatment

When

MOE ≥ 100 f 

# Average

Day after

Treatment

when MOE

≥ 100

Cucumber

GA 1.2 7 3

Tomato

FL 0.53 15 5 4

Cucumber

CA 1.1 7 9 Carrot 1 2500

Hand harvesting;

Tomato

CA 1.1 7 7 8

Cucumber

GA 1.2 7 3 3

Cucurbits 1 2500

Hand harvesting;

hand pruning,

thinning Cucumber

CA 1.1 7 9 9

Cucumber

GA 1.2 7 3

Tomato

FL 0.53 15 5 4

Cucumber

CA 1.1 7 9 Cotton

(AZ and CA) 1 2500

Hand harvesting;

Tomato

CA 1.1 7 7 8

Cucumber

GA 0.59 14 2

Tomato

FL 0.26 30 3 3

Cucumber

CA 0.55 15 7 Cotton

(U.S. except

AZ and CA); 0.5 2500

Hand harvesting

Tomato

CA 0.55 15 2 5

Cucumber

GA 1.4 6 3

Tomato

FL 0.63 13 5 4

Cucumber

CA 1.3 6 10 Potatoes

(SLN MD,

SLN NY) 2 1500

Irrigation;

scouting

Tomato

CA 1.3 6 9 10

Cucumber

GA 0.7 11 2

Tomato

FL 0.32 25 4 3

Cucumber

CA 0.66 12 7 Potatoes

(also SLN

PA) 1 1500

Irrigation;

scouting

Tomato

CA 0.66 12 3 5

# Page 33 of 59 Table 12: Oxamyl Postapplication Risk s for Vegetable and Non-Tree Fruit Crops

Crop Appl.

Rate a



# (lbs. ai/

acre) Transfer

Coefficient b



# (cm 2 

# /hr)

And Activity DFR Data Source c 

# Dose at Day 0 d



# (mg/kg/day) MOE at

Day 0 e 

# Day After

Treatment

When

MOE ≥ 100 f 

# Average

Day after

Treatment

when MOE

≥ 100

Tomato

FL 0.21 38 3 3 Eggplant;

Tomatoes;

Peppers 1 1000

Hand harvesting;

hand pruning

(eggplant and

tomato); staking;

tying, thinning

(tomato); training

(tomato) Tomato

CA 0.44 18 2 2

Cucumber

GA 0.14 57 1

Tomato

FL 0.06 130 0 (12 hours) 1

Cucumber

CA 0.13 60 3 Ginger Root

(HI) 1 300

Irrigation;

scouting;

thinning; hand

weeding

Tomato

CA 0.13 61 1 2

Cucumber

GA 0.35 23 1

Tomato

FL 0.16 50 2 2

Cucumber

CA 0.33 24 5 Peanuts (U.S.

except CA) 0.5 1500

Irrigation;

scouting

Tomato

CA 0.33 24 2 4

a. Application rates are the maximum application rate s determined from EPA regist ered labels for oxamyl.

b. Transfer Coefficients are from Science Advisory Council on Exposure Policy 3.1. Risks were only assessed for the highest

transfer coefficient available for a crop.

c. The results from the analysis using actual DFR values for Da y 0 for cucumber GA, cucumber CA, and tomato CA. The actual

DFR values were used instead of the predicted DFRs when th e actual DFR values were significantly higher than the predicted

DFR values. An analysis using act ual DFR values was not necessary for the tomato data from Florida.

DFR Data sources:

3⁄4 Cucumber CA: MRID 44686902: Study Application Rate = 1, Slope = -0.282, Day 0 (predicted) = 3.2 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 0

(actual) = 3.86 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 1 (actual) = 3.42 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 2 (actual) = 2.83 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 3 (predicted) = 1.37 μg/cm 2



# , Day 4 (predicted) = 1.03 μg/cm 2 

# ), Day 5 (predicted) = 0.778 μg/cm 2



# . 3⁄4 Tomato CA: MRID 44704801: Study Application Rate = 1, Slope = -0.119, Day 0 (predicted) = 0.61 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 0

(actual) = 3.83 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 1 (actual) = 1.29 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 2 (predicted) = 0.48 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 3 (predicted) = 0.43

μg/cm 2 

# , Day 4 (predicted) = 0.38 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 5 (predicted) = 0.34 μg/cm 2 

# ,Day 6 (predicted) = 0.30 μg/cm 2



# 3⁄4 Cucumber GA: MRID 44686902: Study Application Rate = 1 lb ai/A, Slope (predicted) = -0.508, Day 0 (predicted) =

1, Day 0 (actual) = 4.11 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 1 (actual) = 0.869 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 2 (predicted) = 0.36 μg/cm 2 

# , Day 3 (predicted) =

0.21 μg/cm 2



# . 3⁄4 Tomato FL: MRID 44704801: Study Application Rate = 1, Slope = -0.425, Day 0 (predicted) = 1.85

d. Daily Dose = [DFR (μg/cm 2 

# ) x Transfer Coefficient (cm 2 

# /hr) x 0.001 mg/μg x 8 hrs/day] ÷ body weight (70 kg adult)

e. MOE = NOAEL/Daily Dose (Adult Derm al NOAEL = 8 mg/kg/day). Target MOE = 100

f. Day After Treatment When MOE ≥ 100. Values in bold indicate that the calculated REI is greater than 48 hrs.

# Page 34 of 59 4.2.2 Occupational Inhalation Postapplication Expsoures

Based on the Agency's current practices, a quantitative occupational postapplication

inhalation exposure assessment was not performed for oxamyl at this time. However, there are

multiple potential sources of postapplication inhalation exposure to individuals performing

postapplication activities in previously treated fields. These potential sources include

volatilization of pesticides and resuspension of dusts and/or particulates that contain pesticides 

# . The

Agency sought expert advice and input on issues related to volatilization of pesticides from its

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticid e Act Scientific Advisory Panel (SAP) in

December 2009. The Agency received the SAP’s final report on March 2, 2010

( http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/SA P/meetings/2009/120109meeting.html ). The Agency is in the

process of evaluating the SAP report as well as available postapplication inhalation exposure

data generated by the Agricultural Reentry Task Force and may, as appropriate, develop policies

and procedures, to identify the need for and, subsequently, the way to incorporate occupational

postapplication inhalation exposure into the Agency's risk assessments. If new policies or

procedures are put into place, the Agency may revisit the need for a quantitative occupational

postapplication inhalation exposure assessment for oxamyl. [Note: Oxamyl could potentially be

used on crops in greenhouses. The Worker Protection Standard for Agricultural Pesticides

contains requirements for protecting workers from inhalation exposures during and after

greenhouse applications through the use of ventilation requirements.]

5.0 RESIDENTIAL (NON-OCCUPATIONAL) EXPOSURE/RISK PATHWAY

5.1 Residential Exposure

This document presents the assessment of agricultural uses of oxamyl. No residential

uses and no occupational uses at residential sites are registered for oxamyl; therefore, no

residential risk assessment has been conducted.

5.2 Spray Drift

Spray drift is always a potential source of exposure to residents nearby to spraying

operations. This is particularly the case with aerial application, but, to a lesser extent, could also

be a potential source of exposure from the ground application method employed for oxamyl.

The Agency has been working with the Spray Drift Task Force, EPA Regional Offices and State

Lead Agencies for pesticide regulation and other parties to develop the best spray drift

management practices (see the Agency’s Spray Drift website for more information at

http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/factsheets/spraydrift.htm ). On a chemical by chemical basis, the

Agency is now requiring interim mitigation measures for aerial applications that must be placed

on product labels/labeling. The Agency has completed its evaluation of the new database

submitted by the Spray Drift Task Force, a membership of U.S. pesticide registrants, and is

developing a policy on how to appropriately apply the data and the AgDRIFT computer model to

its risk assessments for pesticides applied by air, orchard airblast and ground hydraulic methods.

After the policy is in place, the Agency may impose further refinements in spray drift

management practices to reduce off-target drift with specific products with significant risks

# Page 35 of 59 associated with drift.

5.3 Residential Bystander Postapplication Inhalation Exposure

Based on the Agency's current practices, a quantitative residential bystander

postapplication inhalation exposure assessment was not performed for oxamyl at this time.

However, volatilization of pesticides may be a potential source of postapplication inhalation

exposure to individuals nearby to pesticide app lications. The Agency sought expert advice and

input on issues related to volatilization of pesticides from its Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and

Rodenticide Act Scientific Advisory Panel (S AP) in December 2009. The Agency received the

SAP’s final report on March 2, 2010

( http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/SA P/meetings/2009/120109meeting.html ). The Agency is in the

process of evaluating the SAP report and may, as appropriate, develop policies and procedures,

to identify the need for and, subsequently, the way to incorporate postapplication inhalation

exposure into the Agency's risk assessments. If new policies or procedures are put into place, the

Agency may revisit the need for a quantitative postapplication inhalation exposure assessment

for oxamyl.Page 36 of 59APPENDIX A Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Risks at Baseline.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)Dermal(mg/lbai)Inhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermale(mg/kg/day)Inhalationf(mg/kg/day)Dermalg(LOC=100)Inhalationh(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Index(LOC = 1)Mixer/LoaderApples (WA only); Citrus; CloverGrown for Seed (SLN CA),Cucurbits (East of Rockies),Garlic (OR & CA - Modoc &Siskiyou counties, SLN NY);Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear); Dry BulbOnions (CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, OR, ID, WA, SLN CO,SLN NV, SLN NY, SLN UT);Peppermint and Spearmint (ID,MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Peppers;Potatoes (also SLN PA);Tomatoes1 350 2.9 1.2150.0060.55650.0055Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 1200 2.9 1.2500.0210.16190.0016Cotton (not AZ and CA) 0.5 1200 2.9 1.2250.010.32380.0032Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates for AerialApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX, SLN WI);Peanuts (not CA)0.5 350 2.9 1.27.30.0031.101300.011Page 37 of 59APPENDIX A Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Risks at Baseline.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)Dermal(mg/lbai)Inhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermale(mg/kg/day)Inhalationf(mg/kg/day)Dermalg(LOC=100)Inhalationh(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Index(LOC = 1)Apples; Carrot (not CA); Celery(FL, PA, OH, MI, TX); Citrus;Eggplant (not CA); Garlic (CA,OR); Dry Bulb Onions (CA, OR,ID, WA. MI, TX); Pears (notCA); Peppermint and Spearmint(ID, MI, MT, OR, WA, WI);Pineapple (not CA); Potatoes(SLN MD, SLN NY, SLN PA);Tobacco; Tomatoes2 350 2.9 1.2290.0120.28330.0028Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Cotton (CA and AZ);Cucurbits; Dry Bulb Onions(SLN CO, SLN NV, SLN UT );Eggplant (CA); Garlic (SLNWA);Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear); Peppers;Potatoes1 350 2.9 1.2 15 0.0060.55650.0055Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates forChemigation Applications(PHED)Celery (AZ, CA); Cotton (not CAand AZ); Dry Bulb Onions (NM);Peanuts (not CA); Yams (PuertoRico only)0.5 350 2.9 1.2 7.3 0.0031.101300.011Page 38 of 59APPENDIX A Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Risks at Baseline.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)Dermal(mg/lbai)Inhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermale(mg/kg/day)Inhalationf(mg/kg/day)Dermalg(LOC=100)Inhalationh(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Index(LOC = 1)Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear; soil); Carrots(not CA); Celery (FL, PA, OH,MI, TX); Cucurbits (East ofRockies); Garlic (OR, SLN NY);Ginger Roots (HI); Dry BulbOnions (MI, TX, OR, ID, WA,SLN NY, SLN WI); SweetPotatoes (not in CA); Potatoes(U.S. except Northeast, MidAtlantic States)4(all soildirected)80 2.9 1.2 13 0.00550.60710.006Pineapples (not CA); Eggplants(not CA); Garlic (CA); Dry BulbOnions (CA); Peppermint andSpearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR,WA, WI); Potatoes (SLN MD,SLN NY, SLN PA); Tobacco2 80 2.9 1.2 6.6 0.00271.201400.012Tomatoes (CA) 1.25 80 2.9 1.2 4.1 0.00171.902300.019Clover Grown for Seed (SLNCA); Cucurbits (West ofRockies); Dry Bulb Onions (SLNCO, SLN NV, SLN UT);Eggplants (CA); Garlic(SLNWA); Peppers; Potatoes(Northeast and Mid-AtlanticStates); Tomatoes (entire US)1 80 2.9 1.2 3.3 0.00142.402800.024Cotton (AZ and CA) 1 200 2.9 1.2 8.3 0.00340.971100.0096Cotton (U.S. except CA and AZ) 0.5 200 2.9 1.2 4.1 0.00171.902300.019Mixing/Loading LiquidsConcentrates forGroundboomApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA); Dry BulbOnions (NM); Yams (Puerto RicoOnly); Peanuts (not in CA)0.5 80 2.9 1.2 1.7 0.000694.805700.048Page 39 of 59APPENDIX A Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Risks at Baseline.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)Dermal(mg/lbai)Inhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermale(mg/kg/day)Inhalationf(mg/kg/day)Dermalg(LOC=100)Inhalationh(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Index(LOC = 1)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 40 2.9 1.2 3.3 0.00142.402800.024Mixing/Loading LiquidsConcentrates for AirblastApplications (PHED)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Citrus; NonbearingFruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear)1 40 2.9 1.2 1.7 0.000694.805700.048ApplicatorApples (WA only); Citrus; CloverGrown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (East of Rockies),Garlic (OR & CA - Modoc &Siskiyou counties, SLN NY);Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear); Dry BulbOnions (CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, OR, ID, WA, SLN CO,SLN NV, SLN NY, SLN UT);Peppermint and Spearmint (ID,MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Peppers;Potatoes (also SLN PA);Tomatoes1 350 No Data No Data No Data No DataNo DataNo DataNo DataCotton (CA and AZ) 1 1,200 No DataNo Data No Data No DataNo DataNo DataNo DataCotton (not AZ and CA) 0.5 1,200 NoData No Data No Data No DataNo DataNo DataNo DataApplying Sprays viaAerial Equipment(PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX, SLN WI);Peanuts (not CA)0.5 350 No Data No Data No Data No DataNo DataNo DataNo DataPage 40 of 59APPENDIX A Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Risks at Baseline.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)Dermal(mg/lbai)Inhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermale(mg/kg/day)Inhalationf(mg/kg/day)Dermalg(LOC=100)Inhalationh(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Index(LOC = 1)Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear); Carrot (notCA); Celery (FL, PA, OH, MI,TX); Cucurbits (East of Rockies);Garlic (OR, SLN NY); GingerRoot (HI); Dry Bulb Onions (MI,TX, OR, ID, WA, SLN NY, SLNWI); Sweet Potatoes (not in CA);Potatoes (U.S. except Northeast,Mid-Atlantic States)4(all soildirected)80 0.014 0.74 0.064 0.00341301200.94Pineapple (not CA); Eggplant(not CA); Garlic (CA); Dry BulbOnions (CA); Peppermint andSpearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR,WA, WI); Potatoes (SLN MD,SLN NY, SLN PA); Tobacco2 80 0.014 0.74 0.032 0.00172502301.9Tomatoes (CA) 1.25 80 0.014 0.74 0.02 0.00114003703Clover Grown for Seed (SLNCA); Cucurbits (West ofRockies); Dry Bulb Onions (SLNCO, SLN NV, SLN UT):Eggplant (CA); Garlic (SLNWA);Peppers; Potatoes (Northeast andMid-Atlantic States); Tomatoes(entire US)1 80 0.014 0.74 0.016 0.000855004603.8Cotton (AZ and CA) 1 200 0.014 0.74 0.04 0.00212001801.5Cotton (U.S. except CA and AZ) 0.5 200 0.014 0.74 0.02 0.00114003703Applying Sprays viaGroundboom Equipment(PHED)Celery (AZ, CA); Dry BulbOnions (NM); Yams (Puerto RicoOnly); Peanuts (not in CA)0.5 80 0.014 0.74 0.008 0.0004210009207.5Page 41 of 59APPENDIX A Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Risks at Baseline.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)Dermal(mg/lbai)Inhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermale(mg/kg/day)Inhalationf(mg/kg/day)Dermalg(LOC=100)Inhalationh(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Index(LOC = 1)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 40 0.36 4.5 0.41 0.005119760.18Applying Sprays viaAirblast EquipmentPHED)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Citrus; NonbearingFruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear)1 40 0.36 4.5 0.21 0.0026391500.4FlaggerApples (WA only); Citrus;Clover Grown for Seed (SLNCA); Cucurbits (East of Rockies),Garlic (OR & CA - Modoc &Siskiyou counties, SLN NY);Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear); Dry BulbOnions (CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, OR, ID, WA, SLN CO,SLN NV, SLN NY, SLN UT);Peppermint and Spearmint (ID,MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Peppers;Potatoes (also SLN PA);Tomatoes1 350 0.0110.350.055 0.00181502201.2Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 350 0.011 0.35 0.055 0.00181502201.2Cotton (U.S. except AZ and CA) 0.5 350 0.011 0.35 0.028 0.000882904502.4Flagging for AerialSprays Applications(PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX, SLN WI);Peanuts (not CA)0.5 350 0.011 0.35 0.028 0.000882904502.4Page 42 of 59APPENDIX A Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Risks at Baseline.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)Dermal(mg/lbai)Inhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermale(mg/kg/day)Inhalationf(mg/kg/day)Dermalg(LOC=100)Inhalationh(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Index(LOC = 1)Mixer/Loader/ApplicatorMixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrateswith Low PressureHandwand (PHED)Bananas, Plantains (PR) 3.6 2 100 30 10 0.00310.781300.0078Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrateswith Low PressureHandwand (ORETF,ground directed)Bananas, Plantains (PR)3.6 2 15 2.7 1.5 0.000285.201,4000.052Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear)4 5 No Data 1.8 No Data 0.00051No Data760No DataApples; Pears (not CA) 2 5 No Data 1.8 No Data 0.00026No Data1,500No DataMixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrateswith a Handgun Sprayer(LCO ORETF data)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Citrus1 5 No Data 1.8 No Data 0.00013No Data3,000No DataFootnotesa. Application rates are maximum application rates from the labels.b. Science Advisory Council Policy # 9.1c. Unit Exposures based on PHED Version 1.1 and ORETF. Baselinedermal unit exposure represents long pants, long sleeved shirt, no gloves, openmixing/loading, open cab tractor. Baseline inhalation exposure represents no respirator.d. Only engineering control (enclosed cockpit) data are available to assess dermal and inhalation risks to handlers operating aircraft. Only baseline attire (singlelayer of clothing) plus chemical-resistantglove data are available to assess dermalrisks to handlers mixing/loading/applyingliquid concentrates with a handgunsprayer.e. Dermal Dose (mg/kg/day) = daily unit exposure (mg/lb ai)x application rate (lb ai/acre) x acres treated / body weight (70 kg).f. Inhalation Dose (mg/kg/day) = daily unit exposure (μg/lb ai) x conversion factor (1 mg/1,000μg) x application rate (lb ai/acre) x acres treated / body weight(70 kg).g. Dermal MOE = NOAEL (8 mg/kg/day) / dermal daily dose (mg/kg/day). Level of concern = 100.Page 43 of 59h. Inhalation MOE = NOAEL (0.39 mg/kg/day) / inhalation daily dose (mg/kg/day). Level of concern = 30.i Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) -- combined dermal and inhalation risks = 1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 100)). Level of concern = 1.Page 44 of 59APPENDIX B Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Personal Protective Equipment.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalPPE-G(mg/lb ai)BaselineInhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermal PPE-Gd(mg/kg/day)BaselineInhalatione(mg/kg/day)DermalPPE-Gf(LOC =100)BaselineInhalationg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– PPE-G +BaselineInhalation(LOC = 1)Mixer/LoaderApples (WA only); Citrus;Clover Grown for Seed (SLNCA); Cucurbits (East ofRockies), Garlic (OR & CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties,SLN NY); Nonbearing Fruit(apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR,ID, WA, SLN CO, SLN NV,SLN NY, SLN UT); Peppermintand Spearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR,WA, WI); Peppers; Potatoes(also SLN-PA); Tomatoes1 350 0.023 1.2 0.12 0.00670650.53Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 1200 0.023 1.2 0.39 0.02120 19 0.15Cotton (not AZ and CA) 0.5 1200 0.023 1.2 0.2 0.0141380.31Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates for AerialApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX, SLN WI);Peanuts (not CA)0.5 350 0.023 1.2 0.058 0.003140 130 1.1Page 45 of 59APPENDIX B Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Personal Protective Equipment.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalPPE-G(mg/lb ai)BaselineInhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermal PPE-Gd(mg/kg/day)BaselineInhalatione(mg/kg/day)DermalPPE-Gf(LOC =100)BaselineInhalationg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– PPE-G +BaselineInhalation(LOC = 1)Apples; Carrot (not CA); Celery(FL, PA, OH, MI, TX); Citrus;Eggplant (not CA); Garlic (CA,OR); Dry Bulb Onions (CA, OR,ID, WA. MI, TX); Pears (notCA); Peppermint and Spearmint(ID, MI, MT, OR, WA, WI);Pineapple (not CA); Potatoes(SLN MD, SLN NY, SLN PA);Tobacco; Tomatoes2 350 0.023 1.2 0.23 0.01235330.26Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Cotton (CA and AZ);Cucurbits; Eggplant (CA); Garlic(SLNWA); Nonbearing Fruit(apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Peppers; Potatoes1 350 0.023 1.2 0.12 0.00670650.53Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates forChemigation Applications(PHED).Celery (AZ, CA); Cotton (notCA and AZ); Dry Bulb Onions(NM); Peanuts (not CA); Yams(Puerto Rico only)0.5 350 0.023 1.2 0.058 0.003140 130 1.1Page 46 of 59APPENDIX B Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Personal Protective Equipment.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalPPE-G(mg/lb ai)BaselineInhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermal PPE-Gd(mg/kg/day)BaselineInhalatione(mg/kg/day)DermalPPE-Gf(LOC =100)BaselineInhalationg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– PPE-G +BaselineInhalation(LOC = 1)Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear; soil); Carrots(not CA); Celery (FL, PA, OH,MI, TX); Cucurbits (East ofRockies); Garlic (OR, SLN NY);Ginger Roots (HI); Dry BulbOnions (MI, TX, OR, ID, WA,SLN NY, SLN WI); SweetPotatoes (not in CA); Potatoes(U.S. except Northeast, MidAtlantic States)4(all soildirected)80 0.023 1.2 0.11 0.005576710.58Pineapples (not CA); Eggplants(not CA); Garlic (CA); Dry BulbOnions (CA); Peppermint andSpearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR,WA, WI); Potatoes (SLN MD,SLN NY, SLN PA); Tobacco2 80 0.023 1.2 0.053 0.0027150 140 1.2Tomatoes (CA) 1.25 80 0.023 1.2 0.033 0.0017240 230 1.8Clover Grown for Seed (SLNCA); Cucurbits (West ofRockies); Dry Bulb Onions (,SLN CO, SLN NV, SLN UT);Eggplants (CA); Garlic(SLNWA); Peppers; Potatoes(Northeast and Mid-AtlanticStates); Tomatoes1 80 0.023 1.2 0.026 0.0014300 280 2.3Cotton (AZ and CA) 1 200 0.023 1.2 0.066 0.0034120 1100.92Cotton (U.S. except CA and AZ) 0.5 200 0.023 1.2 0.033 0.0017240 230 1.8Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates forGroundboom Applications(PHED)Celery (AZ, CA); Dry BulbOnions (NM); Yams (PuertoRico Only); Peanuts (not in CA)0.5 80 0.023 1.2 0.013 0.00069610 570 4.6Page 47 of 59APPENDIX B Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Personal Protective Equipment.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalPPE-G(mg/lb ai)BaselineInhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermal PPE-Gd(mg/kg/day)BaselineInhalatione(mg/kg/day)DermalPPE-Gf(LOC =100)BaselineInhalationg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– PPE-G +BaselineInhalation(LOC = 1)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 40 0.023 1.2 0.026 0.0014300 280 2.3Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates for AirblastApplications (PHED)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Citrus; NonbearingFruit (apple, cherry, citrus,peach, pear)1 40 0.023 1.2 0.013 0.00069610 570 4.6ApplicatorApples (WA only); Citrus;Clover Grown for Seed (SLNCA); Cucurbits (East ofRockies), Garlic (OR & CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties,SLN NY); Nonbearing Fruit(apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR,ID, WA, SLN CO, SLN NV,SLN NY, SLN UT, SLN WI);Peppermint and Spearmint (ID,MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Peppers;Potatoes (also SLN PA);Tomatoes1 350 No Data No Data No Data No DataNo Data No DataNo DataCotton (CA and AZ) 1 1200 No DataNo Data No Data No DataNo Data No Data No DataCotton (not AZ and CA) 0.5 1200 No Data No Data No Data No DataNo Data No Data No DataApplying Sprays viaAerial Equipment(PHED)dCelery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX); Peanuts(not CA)0.5 350 No Data No Data No Data No DataNo Data No Data No DataPage 48 of 59APPENDIX B Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Personal Protective Equipment.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalPPE-G(mg/lb ai)BaselineInhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermal PPE-Gd(mg/kg/day)BaselineInhalatione(mg/kg/day)DermalPPE-Gf(LOC =100)BaselineInhalationg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– PPE-G +BaselineInhalation(LOC = 1)Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear); Carrot (notCA); Celery (FL, PA, OH, MI,TX); Cucurbits (East ofRockies); Garlic (OR, SLN NY);Ginger Root (HI); Dry BulbOnions (MI, TX, OR, ID, WA,SLN NY, SLN WI); SweetPotatoes (not in CA); Potatoes(U.S. except Northeast, MidAtlantic States)4(all soildirected)80 0.014 0.74 0.064 0.0034130 1200.94Pineapple (not CA); Eggplant(not CA); Garlic (CA); Dry BulbOnions (CA); Peppermint andSpearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR,WA, WI); Potatoes (SLN MD,SLN NY, SLN PA); Tobacco2 80 0.014 0.74 0.032 0.0017250 230 1.9Tomatoes (CA) 1.25 80 0.014 0.74 0.02 0.0011400 370 3Clover Grown for Seed (SLNCA); Cucurbits (West ofRockies); Dry Bulb Onions (SLNCO, SLN NV, SLN U T);Eggplant (CA); Garlic(SLNWA); Peppers; Potatoes(Northeast and Mid-AtlanticStates); Tomatoes1 80 0.014 0.74 0.016 0.00085500 460 3.8Cotton (AZ and CA) 1 200 0.014 0.74 0.04 0.0021200 180 1.5Cotton (U.S. except CA and AZ) 0.5 200 0.014 0.74 0.02 0.0011400 370 3Applying Sprays viaGroundboom Equipment(PHED)Celery (AZ, CA); Dry BulbOnions (NM); Yams (PuertoRico Only); Peanuts (not in CA)0.5 80 0.014 0.74 0.008 0.000421000 920 7.5Page 49 of 59APPENDIX B Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Personal Protective Equipment.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalPPE-G(mg/lb ai)BaselineInhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermal PPE-Gd(mg/kg/day)BaselineInhalatione(mg/kg/day)DermalPPE-Gf(LOC =100)BaselineInhalationg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– PPE-G +BaselineInhalation(LOC = 1)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 40 0.24 4.5 0.27 0.005129760.26Applying Sprays viaAirblast Equipment(PHED)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Citrus; NonbearingFruit (apple, cherry, citrus,peach, pear)1 40 0.24 4.5 0.14 0.0026581500.52FlaggerApples (WA only); Citrus;Clover Grown for Seed (SLNCA); Cucurbits (East ofRockies), Garlic (OR & CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties,SLN NY); Nonbearing Fruit(apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR,ID, WA, SLN CO, SLN NV,SLN NY, SLN UT, SLN WI);Peppermint and Spearmint (ID,MI, MT, OR, WA, WI); Peppers;Potatoes (also SLN PA);Tomatoes1 350Notapplicable0.35 Not applicable 0.0018Notapplicable220NotapplicableCotton (CA and AZ) 1 350Notapplicable0.35 Not applicable 0.0018Notapplicable220NotapplicableCotton (U.S. except AZ and CA) 0.5 350Notapplicable0.35 Not applicable 0.00088Notapplicable450NotapplicableFlagging for Aerial SpraysApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX); Peanuts(not CA)0.5 350Notapplicable0.35 Not applicable 0.00088Notapplicable450NotapplicablePage 50 of 59APPENDIX B Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Personal Protective Equipment.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplicationRatea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalPPE-G(mg/lb ai)BaselineInhalation(μg/lb ai)Dermal PPE-Gd(mg/kg/day)BaselineInhalatione(mg/kg/day)DermalPPE-Gf(LOC =100)BaselineInhalationg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– PPE-G +BaselineInhalation(LOC = 1)Mixer/Loader/ApplicatorMixing/Loading/ApplyingLiquid Concentrates withLow Pressure Handwand(PHED)Bananas, Plantains (PR)3.6 2 0.43 30 0.044 0.0031180 130 1.3Mixing/Loading/ApplyingLiquid Concentrates withLow Pressure Handwand(ORETF, ground directed)Bananas, Plantains (PR)3.6 2 0.33 2.7 0.034 0.00028240 1400 2.3Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear)4 5 0.45 1.8 0.13 0.00051627600.61Mixing/Loading/ApplyingLiquid Concentrates witha Handgun Sprayer (LCOORETF data)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 5 0.45 1.8 0.064 0.00026120 1500 1.2Mixing/Loading/ApplyingLiquid Concentrates witha Handgun Sprayer (LCOORETF data) contApples for Thinning (NJ, PA,VA, WV); Citrus1 5 0.45 1.8 0.032 0.00013250 3000 2.4Footnotesa. Application rates are maximum application rates from the labels.b. Science Advisory Council Policy # 9.1c. Unit Exposures based on PHED Version 1.1 and ORETF.Baseline dermal unit exposure represents long pants, long sleeved shirt, no gloves, open mixing/loading, open cab tractor.Baseline inhalation exposure represents no respirator.PPE – G = Baseline attire (single layer ofclothing) plus chemical-resistant gloves.EC = Engineering Control = closed systems for mixing/loading liquids, enclosed cockpits for aerial application, and enclosed cabs for airblast application.d. Only engineering control (enclosed cockpit) data are available to assess dermal and inhalation risks to handlers operating aircraft.e. Dermal Dose (mg/kg/day) = daily unit exposure (mg/lb ai)x application rate (lb ai/acre) x acres treated / body weight (70 kg).f. Inhalation Dose (mg/kg/day) = daily unit exposure (μg/lb ai)x conversion factor (1 mg/1,000 μg) x application rate (lb ai/acre) x acres treated / body weight(70 kg).g. Dermal MOE = NOAEL (8 mg/kg/day) / dermal daily dose (mg/kg/day). Level of concern = 100.h. Inhalation MOE = NOAEL (0.39 mg/kg/day) / inhalation daily dose (mg/kg/day). Level of concern = 30.i Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) -- combined dermal and inhalation risks = 1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 100)). Level of concern = 1.Page 51 of 59APPENDIX C Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Engineering Controls.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplication Ratea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalEng Cntl(mg/lbai)InhalationEng Cntl(μg/lb ai)DermalEng Cntld(mg/kg/day)InhalationEng Cntle(mg/kg/day)DermalEng Cntlf(LOC =100)InhalationEng Cntlg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– Eng CntlDermal +Eng CntlInhalation(LOC = 1)Mixer/LoaderApples (WA only); Citrus; CloverGrown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (East of Rockies), Garlic(OR & CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, SLN NY); NonbearingFruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR,ID, WA, SLN CO, SLN NV, SLNNY, SLN UT); Peppermint andSpearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR, WA,WI); Peppers; Potatoes (also SLNPA); Tomatoes1 3500.0086 0.083 0.043 0.00042190 940 1.8Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 12000.0086 0.083 0.15 0.0014 542700.51Cotton (not AZ and CA) 0.5 12000.0086 0.083 0.074 0.00071110 550 1.0Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates for AerialApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX, SLN WI);Peanuts (not CA)0.5 3500.0086 0.083 0.022 0.00021370 1900 3.5Page 52 of 59APPENDIX C Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Engineering Controls.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplication Ratea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalEng Cntl(mg/lbai)InhalationEng Cntl(μg/lb ai)DermalEng Cntld(mg/kg/day)InhalationEng Cntle(mg/kg/day)DermalEng Cntlf(LOC =100)InhalationEng Cntlg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– Eng CntlDermal +Eng CntlInhalation(LOC = 1)Apples; Carrot (not CA); Celery(FL, PA, OH, MI, TX); Citrus;Eggplant (not CA); Garlic (CA,OR); Dry Bulb Onions (CA, OR, ID,WA. MI, TX); Pears (not CA);Peppermint and Spearmint (ID, MI,MT, OR, WA, WI); Pineapple (notCA); Potatoes (SLN MD, SLN NY,SLN PA); Tobacco; Tomatoes2 3500.0086 0.083 0.086 0.00083 934700.88Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA, VA,WV); Cotton (CA and AZ);Cucurbits; Eggplant (CA); Garlic(SLNWA); Nonbearing Fruit (apple,cherry, citrus, peach, pear); Peppers;Potatoes1 3500.0086 0.083 0.043 0.00042190 940 1.8Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates forChemigation Applications(PHED).Celery (AZ, CA); Cotton (not CAand AZ); Dry Bulb Onions (NM);Peanuts (not CA); Yams (PuertoRico only)0.5 3500.0086 0.083 0.022 0.00021370 1900 3.5Page 53 of 59APPENDIX C Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Engineering Controls.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplication Ratea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalEng Cntl(mg/lbai)InhalationEng Cntl(μg/lb ai)DermalEng Cntld(mg/kg/day)InhalationEng Cntle(mg/kg/day)DermalEng Cntlf(LOC =100)InhalationEng Cntlg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– Eng CntlDermal +Eng CntlInhalation(LOC = 1)Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear; soil); Carrots(not CA); Celery (FL, PA, OH, MI,TX); Cucurbits (East of Rockies);Garlic (OR, SLN NY); Ginger Roots(HI); Dry Bulb Onions (MI, TX,OR, ID, WA, SLN NY, SLN WI);Sweet Potatoes (not in CA);Potatoes (U.S. except Northeast,Mid-Atlantic States)4(all soildirected)800.0086 0.083 0.039 0.00038200 1000 1.9Pineapples (not CA); Eggplants (notCA); Garlic (CA); Dry Bulb Onions(CA); Peppermint and Spearmint(ID, MI, MT, OR, WA, WI);Potatoes (SLN MD, SLN NY, SLNPA); Tobacco2 800.0086 0.083 0.02 0.00019410 2100 3.8Tomatoes (CA) 1.25 800.0086 0.083 0.012 0.00012 6503300 6.1Clover Grown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (West of Rockies); DryBulb Onions (, SLN CO, SLN NV,SLN UT); Eggplants (CA); Garlic(SLNWA); Peppers; Potatoes(Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States);Tomatoes (entire US)1 800.0086 0.083 0.0098 0.000095810 4100 7.7Cotton (AZ and CA) 1 2000.0086 0.083 0.025 0.00024330 16003.1Cotton (U.S. except CA and AZ) 0.5 2000.0086 0.083 0.012 0.00012650 3300 6.1Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates forGroundboomApplications (PHED)Celery (AZ, CA); Dry Bulb Onions(NM); Yams (Puerto Rico Only);Peanuts (not in CA)0.5 800.0086 0.083 0.0049 0.0000471600 8200 15Page 54 of 59APPENDIX C Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Engineering Controls.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplication Ratea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalEng Cntl(mg/lbai)InhalationEng Cntl(μg/lb ai)DermalEng Cntld(mg/kg/day)InhalationEng Cntle(mg/kg/day)DermalEng Cntlf(LOC =100)InhalationEng Cntlg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– Eng CntlDermal +Eng CntlInhalation(LOC = 1)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 400.0086 0.083 0.0098 0.000095810 4100 7.7Mixing/Loading LiquidConcentrates for AirblastApplications (PHED)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA, VA,WV); Citrus; Nonbearing Fruit(apple, cherry, citrus, peach, pear)1 400.0086 0.083 0.0049 0.0000471600 8200 15ApplicatorApples (WA only); Citrus; CloverGrown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (East of Rockies), Garlic(OR & CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, SLN NY); NonbearingFruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR,ID, WA, SLN CO, SLN NV, SLNNY, SLN UT, SLN WI); Peppermintand Spearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR,WA, WI); Peppers; Potatoes (alsoSLN PA); Tomatoes1 3500.005 0.068 0.025 0.00034320 1100 3.0Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 12000.005 0.068 0.086 0.0012 933300.86Cotton (not AZ and CA) 0.5 12000.005 0.068 0.043 0.00058190 670 1.7Applying Sprays viaAerial Equipment(PHED)dCelery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX); Peanuts (notCA)0.5 3500.005 0.068 0.013 0.00017640 2300 5.9Page 55 of 59APPENDIX C Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Engineering Controls.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplication Ratea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalEng Cntl(mg/lbai)InhalationEng Cntl(μg/lb ai)DermalEng Cntld(mg/kg/day)InhalationEng Cntle(mg/kg/day)DermalEng Cntlf(LOC =100)InhalationEng Cntlg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– Eng CntlDermal +Eng CntlInhalation(LOC = 1)Nonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear); Carrot (notCA); Celery (FL, PA, OH, MI, TX);Cucurbits (East of Rockies); Garlic(OR, SLN NY); Ginger Root (HI);Dry Bulb Onions (MI, TX, OR, ID,WA, SLN NY, SLN WI); SweetPotatoes (not in CA); Potatoes (U.S.except Northeast, Mid-AtlanticStates)4(all soildirected)800.0050.74(baselineinhalation)0.0230.0034(baselineinhalation)350120(baselineinhalation)1.8(baselineinhalation)Pineapple (not CA); Eggplant (notCA); Garlic (CA); Dry Bulb Onions(CA); Peppermint and Spearmint(ID, MI, MT, OR, WA, WI);Potatoes (SLN MD, SLN NY, SLNPA); Tobacco2 800.0050.74(baselineinhalation)0.0110.0017(baselineinhalation)700230(baselineinhalation)3.7(baselineinhalation)Tomatoes (CA) 1.25 800.0050.74(baselineinhalation)0.00710.0011(baselineinhalation)1100370(baselineinhalation)5.9(baselineinhalation)Clover Grown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (West of Rockies); DryBulb Onions (SLN CO, SLN NV,SLN U T); Eggplant (CA); Garlic(SLNWA); Peppers; Potatoes(Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States);Tomatoes (entire US)1 800.0050.74(baselineinhalation)0.00570.00085(baselineinhalation)1400460(baselineinhalation)7.3(baselineinhalation)Cotton (AZ and CA) 1 2000.0050.74(baselineinhalation)0.0140.0021(baselineinhalation)560180(baselineinhalation)2.9(baselineinhalation)Applying Sprays viaGroundboom Equipment(PHED)Cotton (U.S. except CA and AZ) 0.5 2000.0050.74(baselineinhalation0.00710.0011(baselineinhalation)1100 370(baseline5.9(baselinePage 56 of 59APPENDIX C Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Engineering Controls.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplication Ratea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalEng Cntl(mg/lbai)InhalationEng Cntl(μg/lb ai)DermalEng Cntld(mg/kg/day)InhalationEng Cntle(mg/kg/day)DermalEng Cntlf(LOC =100)InhalationEng Cntlg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– Eng CntlDermal +Eng CntlInhalation(LOC = 1)) inhalation)inhalation)Celery (AZ, CA); Dry Bulb Onions(NM); Yams (Puerto Rico Only);Peanuts (not in CA)0.5 800.0050.74(baselineinhalation)0.00290.00042(baselineinhalation)2800920(baselineinhalation)15(baselineinhalation)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 400.0194.5(baselineinhalation)0.0220.0051(baselineinhalation)37076(baselineinhalation)1.5(baselineinhalation)Applying Sprays viaAirblast Equipment(PHED)Apples for Thinning (NJ, PA, VA,WV); Citrus; Nonbearing Fruit(apple, cherry, citrus, peach, pear)1 400.0194.5(baselineinhalation)0.0110.0026(baselineinhalation)740150(baselineinhalation)3(baselineinhalation)FlaggerApples (WA only); Citrus; CloverGrown for Seed (SLN CA);Cucurbits (East of Rockies), Garlic(OR & CA - Modoc & Siskiyoucounties, SLN NY); NonbearingFruit (apple, cherry, citrus, peach,pear); Dry Bulb Onions (CA -Modoc & Siskiyou counties, OR,ID, WA, SLN CO, SLN NV, SLNNY, SLN UT, SLN WI); Peppermintand Spearmint (ID, MI, MT, OR,WA, WI); Peppers; Potatoes (alsoSLN PA); Tomatoes1 3500.000220.35(baselineinhalation)0.00110.0018(baselineinhalation)7300220(baselineinhalation)6.7(baselineinhalation)Flagging for AerialSprays Applications(PHED)Cotton (CA and AZ) 1 3500.000220.35(baselineinhalation0.00110.0018(baselineinhalation)7300 220(baselineinhalation)6.7(baselineinhalation)Page 57 of 59APPENDIX C Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Engineering Controls.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplication Ratea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalEng Cntl(mg/lbai)InhalationEng Cntl(μg/lb ai)DermalEng Cntld(mg/kg/day)InhalationEng Cntle(mg/kg/day)DermalEng Cntlf(LOC =100)InhalationEng Cntlg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– Eng CntlDermal +Eng CntlInhalation(LOC = 1))Cotton (U.S. except AZ and CA) 0.5 3500.000220.35(baselineinhalation)0.000550.00088(baselineinhalation)15000450(baselineinhalation)13(baselineinhalation)Celery (AZ, CA, FL); Dry BulbOnions (MI, NM, TX); Peanuts (notCA)0.5 3500.000220.35(baselineinhalation)0.000550.00088(baselineinhalation)15000450(baselineinhalation)13(baselineinhalation)Page 58 of 59APPENDIX C Occupational Short-Term and Intermediate-Term Dermal and Inhalation Oxamyl Doses and Riskwith Engineering Controls.Unit Exposurec, dDoseMOEsExposure ScenarioCrop or TargetApplication Ratea(lb ai/A)AreaTreatedDailyb(acres)DermalEng Cntl(mg/lbai)InhalationEng Cntl(μg/lb ai)DermalEng Cntld(mg/kg/day)InhalationEng Cntle(mg/kg/day)DermalEng Cntlf(LOC =100)InhalationEng Cntlg(LOC = 30)AggregatedRisk Indexi– Eng CntlDermal +Eng CntlInhalation(LOC = 1)Mixer/Loader/ApplicatorMixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrateswith Low PressureHandwand (PHED)Bananas, Plantains (PR) 3.6 2NotFeasibleNotFeasibleNot FeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleMixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrateswith Low PressureHandwand (ORETF,ground directed)Bananas, Plantains (PR) 3.6 2NotFeasibleNotFeasibleNot FeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNonbearing Fruit (apple, cherry,citrus, peach, pear)4 5NotFeasibleNotFeasibleNot FeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleMixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrateswith a Handgun Sprayer(LCO ORETF data)Apples; Pears (not CA) 2 5NotFeasibleNotFeasibleNot FeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleMixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrateswith a Handgun Sprayer(LCO ORETF data) contApples for Thinning (NJ, PA, VA,WV); Citrus1 5NotFeasibleNotFeasibleNot FeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleNotFeasibleFootnotesa. Application rates are maximum application rates from the labels.b. Science Advisory Council Policy # 9.1c. Unit Exposures based on PHED Version 1.1 and ORETF.EC = Engineering Control = closed systems for mixing/loading liquids, enclosed cockpits for aerial application, and enclosed cabs for groundboom andairblast application, and enclosed cabs for flaggers.Baseline inhalation exposure represents no respirator.d. Only engineering control (enclosed cockpit) data are available to assess dermal and inhalation risks to handlers operating aircraft.e. Dermal Dose (mg/kg/day) = daily unit exposure (mg/lb ai)x application rate (lb ai/acre) x acres treated / body weight (70 kg).f. Inhalation Dose (mg/kg/day) = daily unit exposure (μg/lb ai)x conversion factor (1 mg/1,000 μg) x application rate (lb ai/acre) x acres treated / body weight(70 kg).g. Dermal MOE = NOAEL (8 mg/kg/day) / dermal daily dose (mg/kg/day). Level of concern = 100.Page 59 of 59h. Inhalation MOE = NOAEL (0.39 mg/kg/day) / inhalation daily dose (mg/kg/day). Level of concern = 30.i Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) -- combined dermal and inhalation risks = 1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 100)). Level of concern = 1.