UNITED ST ATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND 

POLLUTION PREVENTION 

MEMORANDUM 

Date: September l , 2015 

SUBJECT: Uni conazole: Tier I (Scoping) Review of Human Incidents and Epidemiology 

PC Code: 128976 DP Barcode: 0428899 

Decision No.: 508172 

Petition No.: NA 

Registration No.: NA 

Regulatory Action: NA 

Risk Assessment Ty1>e: NA Case No.: NA 

TXR No.: NA CAS No.: 83657-17-4 

!RID No.: A 40 CFR: A 

FROM: 

THROUGH: 

TO: 

Shanna Recore, lndustrial Hygienist 

Toxicology and Epidemiology Branch 

Health Effect Division (7509P) 

and 

Elizabeth Evans, Environmental Protection Specialist 

Toxicology and Epidemiology Branch 

Health Effects Division (7509P) /)/ 

David Miller, Acting Branch Chief d:J~ Toxicology and Epidemiology Branch 

Health Effects Division (7509P) 

Jaime D"Agostino, Risk Assessor 

Risk Assessment Branch II 

Health Effects Division (7509P) 

and 

Matthew Manupella, Chemical Revi ew Manager 

Risk Management & Implementation Branch 4 

Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P) 

Summary and Conclusions 

Ver.Apr.OS 

There were no incident cases reported, involving uniconazole, to either lDS or SENSORPcsticides. There does not appear to be a concern at this time that would wan-ant further 

investigation. The Agency will continue to monitor the incident information and if a concern is 

triggered, additional anal ysis will be included in the risk assessment. 

Page I of 3 
Detailed Review 

I. ACTION REQUESTED 

This review is intended to fulfill our requirement to docket summaries of incident data that were 

reported to the Agency, as well as to ensure human incident data and the Agricultural Health 

Study (AHS) are part of the problem formulation phase of registration review. Reports of 

adverse health effects allegedly due to a specific pesticide exposure (i.e., an " incident") are 

largely self-reported and therefore, generally speaking, ne ither exposure to a pesticide or 

reported symptom (or the connection between the two) is validated or otherwise confim1ed. 

Typically, causation cannot be determined based on incident data. However, incident 

information can be an important source of feedback to the Agency: incidents of severe outcome, 

or a suggested pattern or trend among less severe incidents, can signal the Agency to further 

investigate a particular chemical or product. Observational epidemiology studies relate the risk 

of disease, e.g., cancer, and exposure to an agent such as a pesticide product in the general 

population or specific sub-groups like pesticide applicators. 

II. BACKGROUND 

Uniconazole is a triazole fungic ide and plant growth regulator. It is registered for use in 

commercial greenhouses on various ornamental plants and fruiting vegetables. 

For this evaluation, both the OPP Incident Data System (IDS) and the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (CDC/N IOSH) 

Sentinel Event Notification System for Occupational Risk-Pesticides (SENSOR) databases were 

consulted for pesticide incident data on the active ingredient uniconazole (pc code: 128976). 

The purpose of the database search is to identify potential patterns in the frequency and severity 

of the health effects attributed to uniconazole exposure. Uniconazole is not included in the AHS, 

and therefore this study does not provide infonnation for this report. 

III. RESULTS/DISCUSSION 

a. IDS (Incident Data System) 

OPP's IDS includes reports of alleged human health incidents from various sources, including 

mandatory Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticidc Act (FIFRA) Section 6(a)(2) reports 

from registrants, other federal and state health and environmental agencies, and individual 

consumers. Since 1992, OPP has compiled these reports in IDS. lDS contains reports from 

across the U.S. and most incidents have all relevant product information recorded. Reports 

submitted to the IDS represent anecdotal reports or allegations onl y, unl ess otherwise stated in 

the report. 

IDS records incidents in one of two modules: Main IDS and Aggregate IDS: 

o Main IDS contains incidents resulting in higher severity outcomes and provides 

more detail with regard to case specifics. This system stores incident data for 

Page 2of3 
death, major and moderate incidents, and it includes information about the 

location, date and nature of the incident. Mai n IDS incidents involving only one 

active ingredient (as opposed to pesticide products with multiple active 

ingredients) are considered to provide more certain information about the 

potential effects of exposure from the pesticide. 

o Aggregate IDS contains incidents resulting in less severe human incidents (minor, 

unknown, or no e ffects o utcomes). These are reported by registrants only as 

counts in what are aggregate summaries. 

There were no incidents involving uniconazole reported to Main or Aggregate IDS. from January 

1, 2010 to May 27, 2015. 

b. SENSOR-Pesticides 

The SENSOR-Pesticides database covers 12 states from 1998-201 1, a lthough reporting varies 

from state to state. Cases of pesticide-related illnesses are ascertained from a variety of sources, 

including: reports from local Poison Control Centers, state Department of Labor workers' 

compensation claims when reported by physicians, repo11s from State Departments of 

Agriculture, and physician reports to state Departments of Health. Although both occupational 

and non-occupational incidents are included in the database, SENSOR-Pesticides focuses on 

occupational pesticide incidents, and is of particular value in providing that information. The 

state coordinator at each of the 12 respective state Departments of Health conducts case followup activities such as obtaining medical records to verify symptoms and severity. Using 

standardized protocol and case definitions derived from poison center reporting, the state 

SENSOR-Pesticide coordinator enters the incident information into the state-based system which 

is sent to N IOSH annually to be aggregated. 

A review of SENSOR-Pesticides I 998-201 1 identifies no incidents involving uniconazol e. 

c. Agricultural Health Study (AHS) 

The AHS is a high quality, prospective epidemiology study evaluating the link between pesticide 

use and various health outcomes including cancer. The AHS includes private and commercial 

pesticide applicators and their spouses. ff there are AHS findings relevant to a particular 

pesticide going through registration review, the Agency will ensure they are considered in the 

problem formulation/scoping phase of the process and, if appropriate, fully reviewed in the risk 

assessment phase of the process. The AHS includes information on use of 80 different pesticide 

active ingredients commonly used in agriculture. Uniconazole is not included in the AHS, and 

therefore this study does not provide information for this report. 

IV. CONCLUSION 

There were no incident cases reported, involving uniconazole, to either IDS or SENSORPesticides. There does not appear to be a concern at this time that would warrant further 

investigation. The Agency will continue to monitor the incident information and if a concern is 

triggered, additional analysis will be included in the risk assessment. 

Page 3of3