UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

### MAR**2~** 

### 2013

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: 

### BEAD Chemical Profile for Registration Review: 1,3-Dichloropropene (1,3-D) (029001) FROM:

THRU:

TO: 

### Carl Chen, Plant Pathologist Biological Analysis Branch Cynthia Doucoure, Environmental Protection Specialist 

## t-**~** Science Information and Analysis Branch Derek Berwald, Economist 

# V r;)_ lAJ\

# l~ Economic Analysis Branch 

# \j. 

# j ,.'-X Biological and Economic Ana sis Division (750 Amet Jones, Chief Biological Analysis Br Diann Sims, Chief

# A-L.--~.~---~ Science Information and Analysis Branch Timothy Kiely, Chief 

# CrJr**~** Economic Analysis Branch

### ~ ) Biological and Economic Analysis Divisio (7503P) Andrea Mojica, Chemical Review Manager Risk Management and Implementation Branch 4 Pesticide Reevaluation Division (7508P)
Product Review Panel Date: February 13, 2013



### Page 1 

### of10

### INTRODUCTION The purpose ofthis document is to convey usage information and a broad overview ofthe pest management role of 1,3-Dichloropropene (1,3-D, also known as Telone) that is beginning to undergo registration review. The anticipated audience consists ofthe team ofEPA staff currently evaluating the registration status of 1,3-D, and eventually the general public. This document builds uponthe data already provided inthe "Usage and Label Use DataPackages" that are also provided to the Registration Reviewteam by BEAD. The document is based on information and data available to BEAD as ofJanuary 2013. 1,3-D is a broad spectrum fumigant with nematicidal, fungicidal, herbicidal, and insecticidal properties that was initially registered inthe U.S. in 1954 and reregistered in 1998. Ithas·been widely used to control soil-borne pests in a variety ofcrops and has made the top ofthe list in total area treated by fumigants in 2011, approximately 40% more than the second highest (Proprietary Data). However, there could be some limiting factors such as restrictions for 1,3-D use onkarst soils and township caps for 1,3-D use in California. Nematodes are the main pest targeted by its use. As a nematicide, the chemical penetrates into nematodes via mouth and cuticle. 1,3-D can be mixed with chloropicrinto enhance plantpathogen and weed control. InLine®, Telone® C-17, Telone® C-35, and Pic-Clor 60 EC are commonly used combination products with 1,3-D and chloropicrin, and the total amount of 1,3-D inthese four products accounted for approximately a quarter ofall 1,3-D used in 2011 (Proprietary Data). Any changes inuse patterns due to risk mitigation for one ofthese fumigants will affect use patterns for the other; currently there are additional mitigation measures on 1,3-D product labels that also contain chloropicrin.


### HISTORY OF BEAD ASSESSMENTS FOR 1,3-D BEAD has done little significant work onthe benefits of 1,3-D alone. In 1998 EPA issued aReregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for 1,3-D that contained only a briefmention that 1,3-D has value for nematode control. That RED discussion also predicted increased benefits for 1,3-D as methyl bromide was phased out. Although pastBEAD work has not estimated the value of 1,3-D to growers, it is useful to note that growers choose 1,3-D to provide protection to crops with high value per acre, such as potatoes, strawberries, vegetables and orchards. BEAD has done substantial work onthe benefits ofother fumigants, and 1,3-D was sometimes included as either an alternative fumigant, or because it is applied in combination with fumigants such as chloropicrin. In general, BEAD work has found substantial benefits to fumigants in general in a variety ofcrops. When evaluating methyldithiocarbamate salts such as metam sodium and metam potassium, 1,3-D was frequently mentioned as a part ofan alternative fumigant program to those featuring metam sodium or metam potassium. In general, these alternative programs featuring 1,3-D (sometimes in combination with chloropicrin) were less cost-effective alternatives to those featuring metam sodium or metam potassium. This should
Page 2 oflOnotbe interpreted as implying a lowvalue for 1,3-D, because that these were evaluations ofpest management systems where growers hadnot chosen to use 1,3-D. 1,3-D is often applied in combination with chloropicrin in

_ some crops, and that combinationhas substantial value to growers. It isn'tpossible to say, based onpast BEAD evaluations, what benefits are derived from the 1,3-D portion ofthat combination. 1,3-D, in combination with other fumigants is also frequently included inthe list ofalternatives to methyl bromide as use ofthat chemical isphased out. As the phaseout completes, the relative importance of 1,3-D as part ofan alternative programto methyl bromide use canreasonably be expected to increase. Grower groups in Californiapoint outthattownship caps onthe use of 1,3- D may restrict its adoption as an alternative to methylbromide. Use inFlorida also faces restrictions inuse nearkarst formations.


### COMMONFORMULATIONS AND APPLICATION METHODS 1,3-D is commonly formulated as pressurized gas, liquid ready to use, and emulsifiable and flowable concentrate applied as a soil fumigant via soil injection, drip irrigation, tarped and untarped broadcast applications using shank, plowsole or chisel equipment, as well as bedded applications using chisel equipment.


### USE SITES Agricultural Use Sites: 1,3-D is registered for use onthe soils of.agricultural crops including all vegetable crops (root crops such as beets, carrots, onions, potatoes, and radish; leafy vegetables such as lettuce; fruiting vegetables such as chili peppers; cole crops, and cucurbits, such as melons). 1,3-D is also registered for use on soils oflegumes such as beans, peanuts, and soybeans; flavoring and spice crops such as hops and mint; field crops such as corn and tobacco; fiber crops such as cotton; fruit crops such as citrus and pineapple; and nut crops. Non-Agricultural Use Sites: 1,3-D is registered for use on soils ofnonagricultural crops including all nursery crops (ornamental, non-bearing fruit/nut trees and forestry crops), ornamental lawns and turf, golfcourse turf, ornamental and/or shade trees, ornamental herbaceous and nonflowering plants, and ornamental woody shrubs and vines.


### USAGE Agricultural Use Trend, 1998-2011 Available data on.use of 1,3-D inthe U.S., as found inprivate market surveys, showthatthe overall pounds a.i. applied increasedbetween 1998 and 2011 as shown in Figure 1. The total areatreated (acres) with 1,3-D increased steadily until2006, after whichthe acre treatments declined with slight increases inrecent years as shown in Figure 2. Approximately 27,000,000 Page 3 oflO

### pounds of 1,3-D were applied on average annually to 310,000 acres at an overall average applicationrate of87 lbs ail 

### acre. As shown in

### Table 1, however, there is substantial variation in applicationrates in

### different crops. Figure 1: 1,3-D: Pounds A.l. Applied, 1998-2011

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

.2009 2010 2011 Year 

### Source: Proprietary Data, 1998-2011

Page 4 oflOFigure 2. 1,3-D: Total Area Treated, 1998-2011

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year Source: Proprietary Data, 1998-2011 Agricultural Use 2007-2011 During the 2007-2011 timeframe, approximately 32,000,000 pounds of 1,3-D were applied on average annually to 340,000 acres at an Qverall average applicationrate of94 lbs 

### ail acre. Thetop crops interms ofpounds a.i

..applied during this period were potatoes (45%), tobacco (14%), strawberries (6%), cotton (4%) and onions (4%) as shown in Figure 3 below. The top crops in terms oftotal areatreated were the same; however the percentages ofthe areaofpotatoes, strawberries, and onions treated were lower thanthe percentage ofpounds a.i. applied, implying higher than average a.i. rates ofapplication. Conversely, the percentage ofthe total area of tobacco and cottontreated was higherthan the percentage ofpounds a.i. applied, implying a lower than average a.i. rate ofapplication as shown in Table 1 below.

Page 

### 5 oflOFigure 3. 1,3-D Use: Top Crops, 2007-2011 

## Pounds AI Applied 32 million lb annually

Source: Proprietary Data, 2007-2011 

## Total Area Treated 340,000 acres annually

3%
Other crops include almonds, apples, asparagus, beans, broccoli, cabbage, caneberries, cantaloupes, carrots, cauliflower, cherries, cucumbers, garlic, grapes, lemons, oranges, peaches, peanuts, peppers, pumpkins, squash, sugar beets, sweet com, tomatoes, walnuts, and watermelons.

For some·crops that do not top the list for pounds applied, a significantportion ofthe acreage is treated with 1,3-D. Based onthe BEAD SLUA for 2003-2010, crops thathave an average percent crop treated greater than 10% were cantaloupe, carrot, cucumber, peppers, potato, strawberry, and tobacco. Most ofthese crops havetoo small an acreage to showup as one ofthe primaryuses for 1,3-D, butthe use is still important for those growers. Table 1 1,3-D Use on Top Crops: Average AI. Rate, 2007-2011 

### Av_g. AI Rate Obs a.i./acre) Potatoes 137 Strawberries 159 Onions 155 Tobacco 75 Cotton 28 Source: Proprietary Data, 2007-2011 Thetop states 

### interms ofpounds a.i. applied during this period were Washington (20%), Idaho (19%), California (15%), and North Carolina (13%). However, thepercentage ofthe total area treated with 1,3-D 

### in California, Idaho, andWashingtonwas lowerthanthe pounds a.i. applied, implyinghigher than average a.i. rates ofapplication while inNorth Carolina, the percentage of the total areatreated was slightly higher than thepounds a.i. applied, implying slightly lower than average a.i. rates ofapplication. These differences are explained bythe application rates shown in Table 1, becausethe primaryuse inNorth Carolinais ontobacco, which

### has lower rates thanpotatoes and onions grown inthe Northwestor strawberries in California.

Page 

### 6 oflOFigure 4. 1,3-D Use: Top States, 2007-2011 

## Pounds AI Applied 32 million pounds annually

Source: Propriet¥Y Data, 2007-2011 

## Total Area Treated 340,000 acres annually CAliFORNIAIDAHO 1196

NORTH

CAROLINA

1596

Other states include AL, 

### AR. AK, CO, FL, GA, IN, KY, MI, MN, MO, NE, NM, NY, OR, PA, SC, TN, TX, VA, and WI. Agricultural Usage by Crop Reporting District Another mea5ure ofusage is the use intensity. 

### Inthis analysis, the use intensity is expressed as the pounds a.i. appliedper 1,000 acres ofland in farms. This differs from the applicationrate, which is expressed as the pounds a.i. appliedpertreated area. Figure 5 spatially represents 1,3- D'suse intensity inthe U.S. ·The average applicationrate of94pounds per acre would be equivalentto 94,000 poundsper 1,000 treated acres. 

### Incontrast, the maximum intensity represented inFigure 5 is about 1,200 pounds per 1,000 acres offarmland. Tpese areas ofhigh use intensity are seen in'Idaho, whichreflects highuse rates onlarge acreage ofpotato, and EasternNorth Carolina, where use ontobacco is common.

Page 7 oflOFigure 5. 1,3-D Usage 

### by Crop Reporting District 

### (2007- 2011)

Average Pounds Per 1,000 Acres of Farmland

- <88 88-230 c:::J 231-475 0 476-836 837- 1,203
This is a map ofagricultural pesticide usage at the Crop Reporting District (CRD) level prepared by BEAD for use in the Environmental Fate and Effects Division documents. These maps are used to help visualize where the pesticide being considered is most likely to be used and can be helpful in scenario selection and placing the exposure assessment in context. CRDs are boundaries created by USDA NASS which are aggregates ofcounties. Pesticide usage is displayed as average pounds (for the years 2007-2011) per 1,000 acres offarmland in a CRD to normalize for the variation in farmland between CRDs. Farmland acreage was obtained from USDA (2007). Farmland or "land in farms" is defined as follows: The acreage designated as "land in farms" consists primarily ofagricultural land used for crops, pasture, or grazing. It also includes woodland and wasteland not actually under cultivation or used for pasture or grazing, provided it was part of the farm operator's total operation. Large acreages of woodland or wasteland held for nonagricultUral purposes were deleted from individual reports durinr the edit process. Land in farms includes CRP, WRP, FWP, and CREP acres. Land in farms

. is an operating unit concept and includes land owned and operated as well as land rented from others. Land used rent free was reported as land rented from others. All grazing land, except land used under government permits on a per-head basis, was included as "land in farms" provided it was part ofa farm or ranch. Land under the exclusive use of a grazing association
1 CRP: Conservation Reserve Program; WRP: Wetland Reserve Program; FWP: Farmable Wetlands Program; CREP: Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program 

### Page 8 oflOwas reported by the grazing association and included as land in farms. All land in American Indian reservations used for growing crops, grazing livestock, or the potential of grazing livestock was included as land in farms. Land in reservations not reported by reservation, individual American Indians or nonNative Americans was reported in the name ofthe cooperative group that used the land. In many instances, an entire American Indian reservation was reported as one farm (USDA, 2007)

. Usage is based on private market surveys ofpesticide use in agriculture (Proprietary Data, 2007-2011). The survey data are limited to the states that represent the top 80-90% of acreage for the individual crops, therefore, use may be occurring in regions outside the scope of the survey. CRDs showing no usage of pesticides may be due to either the lack ofpesticide use in the region or non-participation in the agricultural surveys. ·In addition, across the years, there may be variations in the specific crops included in the CRD survey. 1bismayresult in a lower annual average for the CRD. 1bis map displays ratio data (Le., average pounds per 1,000 acres offarmland) summarized at a very highlevel. Readers are strongly cautioned against trying to over interpret the map without examination of the underlying data. The underlying data may explain some ofthe many reasons that a Crop Reporting District may have a high value for a particular active ingredient such as significant acreage (compared with the CRD as a whole) ofa crop or crops with a high application rate and frequency ofapplication. The reader should pay particular attention to the figure legends and realize that a map prepared for a particular chemical is not directly comparable to a map prepared for a different chemical. Scale and units of measurement do matter and maybe different between maps. Sources: Proprietary Data
.2007-2011. USDA, 2007. Census ofAgriculture. Online: http:// www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/index

.asp. 

### Non-Agricultural Use BEAD reviewed available sources for non-agricultural usage information and found thatUSDA NASS surveys use of 1,3-D inNursery and Floriculture. 

### In2009, the survey reported that 319,000 pounds of 1,3-D was appliedto nursery and floriculture at an average rate of236.7 pounds per acre. Californiahas a Special Local Need label for 1,3-D use innursery for nematode control.


### BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS·RELEVANT TO 1,3-D 1,3-D is a non-selective fumigant. The risk for pests to develop resistance to 1,3-D is low. Itis used as a preplant soil fumigant to kill soil dwelling pests. The non-agricultural use of 1,3-D (nursery and floriculture) also involves preplant soil fumigation for killing soil-borne pests. However, CordonTM, a single active ingredientproduct of 1,3-D, maybe applied as a.postplant and postharvest soil treatment to suppress grape phylloxera andnematodes in established vineyards using drip irrigation systems.

Page 9 oflOOne ofreasons for the increase in 1,3-D use for soil fumigation is probably due to methyl bromidephaseout (http://www.epa.gov/ozone/mbrO. This is supported, for example, bythe use offumigants on cucumber

. Thetotal areatreated by 1,3-D increased more than 40% from 2010 to 2011, comparedto a decrease ofmethyl bromide use down to zero, where the total acreage of all other fumigants was negligible oncucumber in 2011 (Proprietary Data). 1,3-D has similar qualities ofmethyl bromide such as the effectiveness onnematodes and is important as one of alternatives ofmethyl bromide.

INFORMATION THAT MAY BE USEFUL FORBEAD'S FUTURE WORK ON 1,3-D Additional information ontypical1,3-D use inthe non-agricultural sector and 1,3-D use as a postplant soil treatment would improve future BEAD assessments ofthe importance of 1,3-D and maybe required as part ofthe registration review for this pesticide. Requested data should include, butnotbe limited to, applicationtiming, application rate, application method, and application frequency.

CONCLUSION 1,3-D is applied to a wide variety ofcrops as a fumigant to control soil-borne plantpests. Many ofthese crops are high invalue to the grower, and there are few alternative fumigants available. Forthese reasons, it is likely that 1,3-D has highbenefits and thatpotential risk mitigation measures that restrict its use mightbe costly. ·
REFERENCES Proprietary Data, 1998-2011

. USDA, 2006-2010. NASS Crop Reporting Districts. http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/arms/resourceregions/resourceregions.htm#nass

. USDA, 2007. Census ofAgriculture. http://www.agcensus.usda.gov /Publications/2007/index.asp

. USDA, 2009. NASS Agricultural Chemical Usage Reports, Nursery & Floriculture

Page 10 of10