### UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON D.C., 20460



## MEMORANDUM

DATE:

THRU: March 4, 2013

Dana Spatz

,**Chie: lC::::::::::::~** **.t** 

## Rosanna Louie-Juzwiak, RAPL

Melissa Panger, Ph.D., Senior Bio s
James Hetrick

, Ph.D., Senior Advisor

E nvi r onmental Risk Branch 3

Environmental Fate and E ffects Division (7507P)

TO : Carissa Cyran, Chemical Review Manager

Neil Anderson

, Chief

Risk Management and I mplementation Branch 1

Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P) OFFICE OF
CHEMICAL SAFETY AND

POLLUT I ON PREVENTION



## The E nvironmental Fate and Effects Division (E FE D) has completed the problem formulation

for the ecological risk and drinking water exposure assessments to be conducted as part of the Registration Review of EPTC. This document is intended to provide an overview of what is currently known regarding the environmental fate and ecological effects associated with EPTC

and its degradation products, and outlines uncertainties regarding attributes of the parent compound and its transformation products. 

## It describes the preliminary ecological risk hypothesis and the processes that will be used during the completion of the ecological risk

assessment in s u pport of Registration Review.



# '

# 2 1. INTRODUCTION

EPTC is a pre-emergence (pre-plant) and early post-emergence thiocarbamate herbicide used to control the growth of germinating annual weeds, including broadleaves, gr asses, and sedges. Due to its volatility, EPTC must be mechanically inco rporated, injected in th e subsurface of the soil, applied in irrigation water, or be watered-in after application. Thiocar bamates inhibit both cell division and elongation, fatty acid an d lipid biosynthesis, protein synthesis, and may alter plant hormonal distribution within a plant. EPTC exer ts its herbicid al action through inhibition of cuticle formation at the early st ages of seedling growth which i nhibits germination and seedling development.

EPTC is used throughout the United States in ag ricultural production for a wide variety of food and non-food crops. The registered uses are alfalfa, almond, be ans (dried, castor, snap or succulent), broccoli, carrot, citrus, clover, conifers (seed orchard), corn (field, pop, silage, sweet, unspecified), cotton, grapefruit (bearing, nonb earing), fallow, lemon (bearing, nonbearing), lespedeza, lettuce, orange (bearing, nonbearing) , ornamentals (ground cover, herbaceous plants, seed orchard, woody shrubs and vines, trees), potato (white/Irish), safflower, sugar beets, sunflower, sweet potato, tangerine , tomato, trefoil and walnut. Th e label application rates range from 1.5 to 14.9 pounds of active in gredient per acre (lb a.i./A; Table 2 ). The uses with the greatest total annual pounds of EPTC used include alfalfa, potato, sugar beet, safflower, beans (all types), corn, carrots, and almonds.

EPTC is formulated either as an emulsifiable concentrate or a granular . Application equipment and methods for EPTC include ground application, soil band treatment, soil broadcast, direct spray, chemigation, flood treatm ent, and aerial application.

The structure of EPTC, as well as the chemical name and other identif iers are provided in Table

1

.

Table 1. EPTC Chemical Identifiers

Parameter Identifier

Chemical Structure H 3 

## C S N CH 3



## CH 3 

## O

Chemical Name Carbamothioic acid

N,N-dipropyl-, S-ethyl ester
SMILES C(C)CN (CCC)C(SCC)=O

CAS Number 759-94-4

# 3 In addition to the technical products (Reg. No. 10163-282, and 19713-557), there are 13 end-use products that contain EPTC: three of the products are co-formulated with an additional active ingredient, Acetochlor: 2-chloro-2'-methyl-6 '-ethyl-N-ethoxymethylacetanilide (PC code 121601). A summary of all the EPTC fo rmulated products is provided in Table 2

.

Table 2. EPTC Formulated Products

Reg # Product name Active Ingredient(s)

100-1083 DOUBLEPLAY SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 67.8 % EPTC;

16.9 % Acetochlor: 2- chloro-2'-methyl-6'- ethyl-N-ethoxymethylacetanilide

10163-281 EPTAM 20-G GRANULES 20 % EPTC

10163-283 EPTAM 7-E SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 87.8 % EPTC

10163-284 ERADICANE 6.7-E 82.6 % EPTC

10163-285 GOWAN EPTAM/ACETOCHLOR

67.8%/16.9% EC HERBICIDE 67.8 % EPTC;

16.9 % Acetochlor: 2- chloro-2'-methyl-6'- ethyl-N-ethoxymethylacetanilide

19713-101 DREXEL EPTC-7EC 87.8 % EPTC

19713-561 EPTC 7EC 87.8 % EPTC

19713-562 RAZENCANE 6.7E 82.6 % EPTC

19713-564 EPTAM 7-E SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 87.8 % EPTC

19713-568 DREXEL POWER PLAY HERBICIDE 67.8 % EPTC;

16.9 % Acetochlor: 2- chloro-2'-methyl-6'- ethyl-N-ethoxymethylacetanilide

AZ060004 EPTAM 7-E SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 87.8 % EPTC

CA080024 EPTAM 7-E SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 87.8 % EPTC

FL070007 EPTAM 7-E SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 87.8 % EPTC



# Based on the usage report prepared by OPP’ s Biological and Economic Analysis Division, private market pesticide usag e data show EPTC's annual (2006 - 2011) agricultural usage averaged 1.6 million pounds of active ingred ient treating an average of 592,000 acres. 1



# From 2006-2011, potatoes (47%), dry beans/peas (32%), and beans (11%) accounted for the largest percentages of usage in terms of total pounds of active ingredient applied. For the same period of time (2006-2011), potatoes (40%), dry beans (38%), and beans (11%) accounted for the largest percentages of total ar ea treated. Relative proportions indi cate that the application rate for potatoes is somewhat higher than the overall aver age rate while that for dry beans and peas is somewhat lower. A summary of the maximum rate s for currently registered uses of EPTC is provided in Appendix D.

2. PREVIOUS RISK ASSESSMENTS

Recent assessments include a Section 3 New Uses assessment on sunflower, transplanted watermelon, and citrus in 2012 (D397779), a Section 3 New Use assessment for newly planted and established grass conducte d in 2010 (D371023) and ecological risk assessments on the potential direct and indirect effects to the Ca lifornia red-legged frog (CRLF) and Delta smelt

1 

## BEAD Chemical Profile for Registration Review: S-ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate or EPTC (041401), dated December 5, 2012.

# 4 (DS) and potential modification to designated critical habitat from uses of EPTC, dated 2008 2



# and 2010 3 

# (see Table 3 ). Prior to these risk a ssessments, a risk assessment for all EPTC uses was conducted in support of the EPTC Reregi stration Eligibility Decision (RED, 1999 4 

# ). Citrus and sunflower uses were previously as sessed as part of the latter thr ee assessments. They were being re-assessed in 2012 because proposed label chan ges were national in scope and the 2008 and 2010 assessments only assessed risks for citrus and sunflower production in California. These

uses were also revaluated because risk assessm ent exposure models have been updated since the

last nation-wide assessment of these uses in 1999. EFED evaluated these assessments for EPTC

in association with the current toxicity, exposure, and usage information to determine if

sufficient data are available and if further updates are needed to support registration review.

Table 3

. Summary of Past Risk Assessments on EPTC.

DP

Barcode Year Use site Target

Pest Action

n/a 1999 alfalfa, almonds, beans, birdsfoot tr efoil, citrus, clover, corn (field and sweet), cotton, garden beets, lesped eza, potatoes, safflo wer, sunflower, sugar beets, sweet potatoes, tomatoes , walnuts, citrus nursery stock, non-bearing orange orchards, non-bearing grapefruit, evergreens, deciduous trees, scrubs, pine seedling nurseries, ornamentals (plant, flowers), parks, ornamentals, shade trees, evergreens, flower gardens, aquatics (drainage systems), turf (orn amental), golf course sand traps. Broadleaf and grass

weeds Reregistr

ation Eligibilit

y Decision (RED)

n/a 2008 California: alfalfa, clover, lespedeza, birdsfoot trefoil, almonds, walnut, citrus, grapefruit, lemon, orange, tangerine, broccoli, cabbage, cauliflower, field corn, silage, popcorn, sweet corn, sunflower, cotton, conifers (seed orchards), pine seed orchards, lettuce, herbaceous ornamentals, woody shrubs and vines, white/Irish potato, sweet potato, beans, carrot, castor bean, snap b eans, sugar beet, tomato, safflower, agricultural fallow/idle land. Broadleaf and grass

weeds Californi

a RedLegged Frog

ESA Litigation

n/a 2010 California: alfalfa, almond, beans (dried, castor, snap or succulent), broccoli, cabbage, carrot, citrus, clover, conifers (seed orchard), corn (field, pop, silage, sweet, unspecifi ed), cotton, grapefruit (bearing, nonbearing), lemon (bearing, nonbear ing), lespedeza, lettuce, orange (bearing, nonbearing), ornamentals (ground cover, herbaceous plants, seed orchard, woody shrubs), potato (white/Irish), safflower, sugar beets, sunflower, sweet potato, tangerine, tomato, trefoil, walnut. Broadleaf and grass

weeds Delta

Smelt

ESA Litigation

371023 2010 Grass: Newly Planted and Established Broadleaf and grass

weeds Section

3: New

Use

397779 2012 Expansion of Citrus Uses to Crop Group 10-10, and Expansion of Sunflower Uses to Crop Subgroup 20b Uses. Broadleaf and grass

weeds Section

3: New

Use



# Potential direct risk to terrestri al and aquatic vascular and non-v ascular plants from the use of EPTC is expected. There is also the potential for various indirect effects on non-target animal species due to the effects on plants (for exam ple, depletion of food sources and habitat). Potential

2 

## http://www.epa.gov/espp/litstatus/eff ects/redleg-frog/index.html#eptc

3 

## http://www.epa.gov/espp/litstatus/eff ects/redleg-frog/index.html#eptc

4 

## http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/REDs/0064red.pdf

# 5 risk was identified from both aerial and ground applic ations, and potentia lly through irrigation water that has received EPTC runoff. The major risk concerns thus far for EPTC are summarized

in Table 4 and are briefly discussed in the subsections below.

Table 4. Summary of Risk Concerns Identi fied for EPTC in Previous Assessments

Birds Mammals Terrestrial

Plants Terrestrial

Inverts Fish Aquatic

Inverts Aquatic

Plants Groundwater

Contamination Persistence Degradates

of Concern √ √ √

- √ √ √

- - -



# Previous Drinking Water Assessments

A summary of previous drinking water assessments is provided in Tables 5 & 6 . The drinking water assessment prepared for the RED (Reregistr ation Eligibility Decision) considered only the parent EPTC (USEPA, 1999). More recent dr inking water assessments for EPTC were completed in 2008 (D339490), 2010 (D371028), and 2012 (D397831). The estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWC) fr om these assessments differed from the RED due to updates in the PRZM and EXAMS models, and the inclusio n of the EPTC sulfoxide (ESO) and EPTC sulfone transformation products (that can form vi a chlorination during water treatment). EDWCs presented in the 2012 assessment were modeled us ing the current versi on of PRZM and EXAMS to estimate concentrations in surface water, and groundwater concentrations were estimated using the PRZM-GW groundwater exposure model. In general, modeled EPTC surface water concentrations are conservative but comparab le to EPTC surface water monitoring data.

In the environmental fate studies, EPTC transf ormation products, ESO and EPTC sulfone, were either not observed or occurred as minor degradat ion products and appeared to be less persistent than EPTC. Consequently, ESO and EPTC sulfone are not expected to form in the environment

at levels that would contribut e to the overall environmental exposure to EPTC residues. However, ESO and EPTC sulfone can potentially form in treated drinki ng water via chemical oxidation during chlorination. The transforma tion process of ESO and EPTC sulfone is sequential process. Because these degradation products may be formed during water treatment and present in treated drinking wa ter, the estimated concentrati on in drinking water (ECDW) for

ESO and EPTC sulfone will be estimated assu ming 100% transformation of EPTC to ESO or

EPTC sulfone.

Table 5. EPTC Drinking Water Assessment Summary (Surface Water).

DP Barcode Year Use Site and/or Regulatory Action Compound Surface Water (Tier II)

Peak

Concentratio

n

μ g/L (ppb) Yearly Mean

Concentratio

n μ g/L (ppb) Average of Yearly

Concentratio

ns

μ g/L (ppb)

Reregistratio n Eligibility

Decision 1999 Reregistration eligibility of all registered uses in

US at the time of the

evaluation EPTC 6.35 to 57.35 0.40 to 3.40 0.19 to 3.80

# 6 D339490 2008 Fallow/Idle Sunflower (regional expansion)

Sunflower and Potato

label modifications a 

## EPTC

ESO

EPTC

Sulfone 259.4

281.1

303.2 19.6

21.2

22.9 9.7

10.5

11.3

D371028 2010 Grasses grown for seed EPTC

ESO

EPTC

Sulfone 126.05

136.64

147.35 8.13

8.81

9.50 4.38

4.75

5.12

D397831 2012 Watermelon New Use Citrus fruit group (Group 10-10) Sunflower (subgroup 20B) EPTC

ESO

EPTC

Sulfone 215.46

233.56

251.87 12.41

13.45

14.51 5.00

5.42

5.85

Bold font indicates the highest EDWCs resulted from uses modeled in this assessment and were the recommended

EDWCs for consideration in the most recent human health assessment (2012).

a 

## Label modifications were as follows: adding post-emergent application to sunflowers, reducing PHI on potatoes, and increasing the post-plant pr e-emergence rate on potatoes.



# Table 6. EPTC Drinking Water Assessment Summary (Groundwater)

DP Barcode Year Use Site and/or Regulatory

Action Compound Groundwater (Tier I)

Peak

Concentration

μ g/L (ppb) Yearly Mean

Concentratio

n μ g/L (ppb) Reregistratio n Eligibility

Decision 1999 Reregistration eligibility of all

relevant uses in US EPTC 1.84 to 5.89

D339490 2008 Fallow/Idle Sunflower regional expansion

Sunflower and Potato label

modifications a 

## EPTC

ESO

EPTC Sulfone 2.87

11.2

11.2

D371028 2010 Grasses grown for seed EPTC

ESO

EPTC Sulfone 1.02

4.35

4.69

D397831 2012 Watermelon New Use Citrus fruit group (Group 10-10) Sunflower (subgroup 20B) EPTC b



## ESO c



## EPTC

Sulfone c 

## 224

-

- 176

-

-

a 

## Label modifications were as follows: adding post-emergent application to sunflowers, reducing PHI on potatoes, and increasing the post-plant pr e-emergence rate on potatoes.

b 

## Concentrations calculated using the PRZM-GW groundwater exposure model.

c 

## The 2012 assessment assumes that ground water does not undergo chlorination water treatment, and consequently ESO and EPTC Sulfone are not produced in groundwater.



# Clean Water Act Programs

An Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria document has not been published specifically

for EPTC. Based on EPA’s WA TERS Expert Query Tool ( http://iaspub.epa.gov/pls/wate rs/f?p=ASKWATERS:EXPERT:0 :::::), EPTC has not been identified as a cause of impairment for any wate r bodies listed as impaired under section 303(d)

of the Clean Water Act. It does no t appear as though any US states , territories, or tribes have developed Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) criteria for EPTC.

# 7 3. ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND TRANSPORT

Physical and Chemical Properties of EPTC

The physicochemical properties of EPTC are shown in Table 7 . Based on these properties alone, EPTC is expected to be highly volatile in soil and water.

Table 7. Selected Physical/Chemical Parameters 

# of EPTC

Parameter Value Source/Classification

Molecular mass (molecular formula) 189.32 g/mol (C 9 

## H 19 

## NOS) EPI Suite 4.1

Vapor pressure (20°C) 1.60 x 10 -2 

## mm Hg MRID 42120801

Henry’s Law coefficient (calculated from partial pressure and solubility

@20 o 

## C) 1.08 x 10 -5 

## atm-m 3 

## /mol MRID 42120801

Aqueous solubility (20  C) 370 mg/L MRID 42120801

Log octanol-to-water partition

coefficient (log K O W 

## ) (PAI, 25  C) 3.34 MRID 42120801



# Environmental Fate Properties of EPTC

Environmental fate properties of EPTC are summarized in Table 8 . The primary dissipation process for EPTC is volatiliz ation, though runoff and leaching ar e also important dissipation processes for EPTC. EPTC is expected to be moderately mobile in soil

. The major degradation process for EPTC is microbial-mediated metabol ism in soil. Since the major dissipation and degradation pathways of EPTC appear to be volatilization and microbi al-mediated metabolism, respectively, EPTC may be more pe rsistent in soil substrata with lower microbial activity, or in ground water and deep surface water. The overall results of its mechanisms of dissipation and degradation indicate that EPTC has low to moderate persistence in the environment. Abiotic hydrolysis and photodegradation are not impor tant degradation pathways for EPTC.

Because EPTC is fairly volatile , it is important to understand the fate of EPTC once in the atmosphere. Majewski and Capel 5 

# report observed concentrations of EPTC ranging from 1 to 28 μg/L (ppb) in rain water. An atmospheric chemistry study conducted for thiocarbamates by Kwok, E.S. et al. indicated that the domina nt removal process for EPTC in air during daylight

hours was reaction with OH - 

# , and that EPTC would have a shor t atmospheric lifetime of less than one day due to its reaction with OH - 

# radicals (MRID 42541001). Analyses of the residues produced in the OH - 

# radical reaction showed that S-ethyl N-formyl-N-propylthiocarbamate was the only significant product formed.

5 

## Majewski, M. and D. Capel. 1995, Pesticides in th e Hydrologic System: Pesticides in the Atmosphere – Distribution, Trends, and Governing Factors. Ann Arbor Press, Page 159.

# 8 Because volatilization is a pr imary dissipation pathway for EPTC, preliminary estimates for possible exposure of terrestrial organisms to EPTC vapor after fi eld application were calculated. These exposure estimates represent the worst- case scenario and are based on the maximum EPTC vapor flux rate reporte d in a field volatility study (MRID 40420404). In this study, a flood-irrigated EPTC application to post-emergent alfalfa at a rate of 2.68 lb a.i./acre resulted in a maximum vapor flux rate of 18.5 lb a.i./hour. No te that while this field volatility study provides sufficient data to estimate inhalation exposures for ecological risk assessment, additional volatility data may be needed to estimate potenti al human exposures to EPTC given the inherent

uncertainties associated with us ing this study to estimate EPTC i nhalation exposure, as described in the paragraphs below.

Field volatility studies are typica lly conducted in a manner similar to terrestrial field dissipation studies (OCSPP 835.6100); therefore, the maximum single application rate of all uses is normally recommended for such studies. However, the EPTC field volatility study available for consideration was conducted using an application rate (2.68 lb a. i/acre) much lower than the maximum single application rate of 14.8 lb a.i. /acre currently permitted for ornamental trees, shade trees, and ornamental woody shrubs and vines. In addition to this ornamental tree, shrub, and vine use, numerous other uses also have maximum single application rates higher than those used in the available flux study (see Appendix D ).

In the absence of flux data from application rate s greater than 2.68 lb a.i. /acre or data suggesting

EPTC flux rates do not incr ease linearly with respect to the a pplication rate, the EPTC vapor flux rate was assumed to be directly pr oportional to the application rate ( i.e. , an application rate of

14.8 lb a.i./acre would result in a vapor flux rate of 102 lb a.i./hou r). This assumption is justified, as one would expect less materi al to leave the field if the application rate were lowered. However, there is some uncertainty with scaling up the application rate, as it is unclear as to how

the diffusion of EPTC into the air would be impacted by the increase in the amount of formulation applied.

Using an estimated vapor flux rate of 102 lb a.i./hour to represent th e worst-case scenario ( i.e. , a scenario representative of the highest a pplication rate for EPTC), a maximum 1-hour concentration of EPTC vapor was calculated using the AERSCREEN model (accessible at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/dispersion_screening.htm#aerscreen ). The output from the

AERSCREEN model run is located in Appendix C . The results of this screen indicate that a maximum 1-hour post-application air concentration of 34.06 mg/m 3 

# may be expected 400 meters from the center of a square 80-acre field ( i.e. , a field with four sides each measuring 568.99 meters) after an application of 14.8 lb a.i./acre.

# 9 Table 8. Environmental Fate Parameters of EPTC

Parameter Value Source/Classification

Persistence

Hydrolysis half-life (25  C and 40  C) Stable MRID 00141373/ acceptable

Aqueous photolysis half-life (25  C) Stable MRID 42120803/ acceptable

Soil photolysis half-life (25  C) Stable MRID 42120804/ acceptable

Aerobic soil metabolism half-life [degradation half-life ] (28±1  C) 153.3 days 1 

## MRID 40420402/ supplemental

Estimate based on

EFED Guidance which

recommends using 3

times the Aerobic Soil

Metabolism half-life when data from only

one soil type are

available

Aerobic aquatic metabolism half-life [degradation half-life ] 306.6 days No data available

Calculations based on

EFED Guidance which

recommends using 2

times the Aerobic Soil

Metabolism half-life

Anaerobic soil metabolism half-life Assumed to be stable Lack sufficient data to

estimate

Anaerobic aquatic metabolism half-life Assumed to be stable No data available

Mobility

Organic carbon-normalized adsorption coefficient (K OC 

## )

Freundlich adsorption coefficient (K ads 

## ) sandy loam: 262 loamy sand: 146

loam: 143

silt loam: 136

sandy loam: 0.76 ( 1 

## /

n 

## = 0.90) loamy sand: 1.61 ( 1 

## /

n 

## = 0.93) loam: 2.57 ( 1 

## /

n 

## = 0.95) silt loam: 2.99 ( 1 

## /

n 

## = 0.90) MRID 42120808/ acceptable

# 10 Parameter Value Source/Classification

Adsorption ratios (K d 

## s) sandy loam: 0.38 loamy sand: 0.68 clay loam: 1.28

loam: 1.82 MRID 40420403/ acceptable

Field Dissipation

Terrestrial field dissipation half-life 18.8 days – corn application in CO 12.7 days – MN, crop not specified 9.9 days – corn application in NC 26.6 days – KY, crop not specified 56.8 days – corn application in OH MRID 98250/ supplemental

16.9 days – b are ground application in

MS MRID 146934/ supplemental

7.7 days – incorporated application to bare ground in FL MRID 146935/ supplemental

6 days – incorporated pre-plant

application to potatoes in MS MRID 40420405/ supplemental

8 days – incorporated pre-plant application to succulent beans in CA MRID 40420406/ supplemental

4.8 days – incorporated pre-plant application to corn in CA MRID 40420407/ supplemental

3 to 6 days – irrigated post-plant application to alfalfa in CA MRID 41724305/ supplemental

2 days – incorporated and irrigated

bare ground application in CA MRID 42120810/ supplemental

7 days – incorporated and irrigated

bare ground application in CA MRID 42120811/ supplemental

Fish Bioconcentration

Fish bioconcentration factor (steady state)

Depuration rate constant edible fish: 33x

whole fish: 57x

non-edible fish: 80x

edible fish: 0.14

whole fish: 0.15

non-edible fish: 0.21 Supplemental MRIDs 40575101, 40575102

1. The aerobic soil metabolism half-life estimate is based on an EPTC measurements in keeton soil from MRID 40420402, and do not include volatilization; i.e. , the total amount of EPTC residues remaining after application was calculated by adding EPTC extracted from the soil as well as EPTC extracted from foam plugs that had captured volatilized EPTC. See Appendix E for the keeton soil aerobic half-life calculation.

2. Range based on study conducted for four soil types: Keeton, Columbia, Sorrento, and Atterberry. K OC 

## variation was mostly attributable to soil organic carbon content.

# 11 Transformation Products

A few environmental fate studies, mainly mobility studies, have been submitted for the EPTC transformation products. EPTC doe s not appear to have any ma jor transformation/degradation products (>10% of applied) result ing from environmental processe s in soil and water. EPTC’s primary minor transformation/degr adation products in soil and wa ter are EPTC sulfoxide (ESO) and dipropylamine (a synonym is di-n-propylamine). Available data suggest that they occur as relatively low percentages of applied radio-labeled EPTC, do not accumulate, and degrade at rates similar to the parent EPTC.



# Table 9. Environmental Fate Parameters of EPTC Transformation Products

Transformation

Product Parameter Value Source/

Classification

Mobility



# EPTCSulfoxide (ESO) Organic carbon-normalized adsorption coefficient (K OC 

## )

Freundlich adsorption coefficient (K ads 

## ) K OC 

## ranges from 13 to 67

K ads 

## ranges from 0.13 to 1.15 45306701/ supplemental



# 4. RECEPTORS

Assessment of risk is based on the most sensiti ve species tested for terrestrial and aquatic organisms. The acute and chroni c toxicity values for the most sensitive aquatic animals and plants tested are presented in Table 10 . The most sensitive terrestr ial animal acute and chronic toxicity values are presented in Table 11 , and the terrestrial plant toxicity data are presented in

Table 12 . The complete available ecotoxicity dataset can be found in Appendix A

.

Aquatic Toxicity Summary

Table 10 summarizes the most sensitive ecological toxi city endpoints for aquatic organisms. On an acute exposure basis, EPTC is slightly toxic to freshwater and saltwater fish (LC 50 

# s = 14 and 17 mg a.i./L) and moderately to highly toxic to freshwater and saltwater invertebrates (6.5 and 0.63 mg a.i./L). The only aquatic animal chronic toxicity study available for EPTC is a daphnia study, which showed reproductive, su rvival and growth effects. Av ailable saltwater invertebrate data showed a higher sensitivity than freshwater invertebrates to EPTC acute toxicity. For crustaceans, saltwater shrimp ( Penaeus setiferus ) were an order of magnitude more sensitive than freshwater daphnia ( Daphnia magna ). A daphnid life-cycle study was available to assess the potential chronic risks of EPTC to freshwater invertebrates. An NOAEC of 0.81 mg/L based on a reduction in the number of offspring was establishe d in the study and used to calculate RQs. The

48-hr EC 50 

# was 6.5 mg/L. An acute to chronic ratio (ACR; acute divided by chronic endpoints, 6.5/0.8 = 8) from daphnid data was applied to wh ite shrimp acute data, resulting in a chronic endpoint of 0.08 mg a.i./L. EPTC is also toxic to aquatic vascular a nd non-vascular plants, impacting both growth and biomass.

# 12 Table 10 

# . Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoi nts from Aquatic Toxicity Studies for

EPTC

Assessment Endpoint Acute/

Chronic Species

Tested Toxicity Value

Used in Risk

Assessment Citation or

MRID Comment

Freshwater

fish Acute Bluegill

sunfish Lepomis

macrochirus 96-h LC 50 

## = 14 mg/L (nominal

concentrations 1 

## ) 00144208 Acceptable/Slightly

toxic 1


## NOAEC = 4.2 mg/L; LOAEC = 10 mg/L based

on sublethal effects. 100% mortality observed at ≥ 24 mg/L (nominal concentrations 1 

## )

Chronic -- No data.

--

Freshwater

invertebrates Acute Water flea Daphnia

magna 48-h EC 50 

## = 6.5 mg/L (mean

measured concentration) 42945601 Acceptable/ Moderately

toxic 1


## NOAEC = 1.7 mg/L (mean measured). LOAEC = 3.2 mg/L based on immobility (nominal

concentration 2 

## ).

Chronic Water flea D. magna Reproduction:

NOAEC = 0.8 mg/L

LOAEC = 1.3 mg/L (mean measured concentrations) 45075006 Acceptable

Survival: NOAEC = 1.3 mg a.i./L LOAEC = 2.7 mg a.i/L.

Growth: NOAEC = 1.3 mg a.i./L LOAEC = 2.7 mg a.i./L (mean measured concentrations)

Estuarine/

marine fish Acute Sheepshead

minnow Cyprinodon variegattis 96-h LC 50 

## = 17 mg a.i./L (mean measured concentrations) 46145903 Acceptable/Slightly

Toxic 1


## NOAEC = 10 mg/L; LOAEC = 18 mg/L

based on sublethal effects. 55% mortality observed at 18 mg/L (mean measured concentrations)

Chronic -- No Data --

Estuarine/

marine

invertebrates Acute Eastern

oyster

Crassostrea Virginica

White shrimp

Penaeus setiferus 96-h EC 50 

## = 1.8 mg a.i./L

48-h LC 50 

## = 0.63 mg a.i./L 46145901

40228401 Acceptable/ Moderately

Toxic 1



## Supplemental/ Highly

Toxic 2



## Chronic White shrimp

Penaeus setiferus NOAEC = 0.08 mg a.i./L N/A NOAEC calculated using daphnid ACR 3

# 13 Aquatic plants

Nonvascular Green Algae

Pseudokirch

neriella subcapitata 4-d EC 50 

## = 1.4 mg/L 42921202

42899801 Acceptable NOAEC = 0.9 mg/L LOAEC = 1.6 mg/L (%

inhibition and cell density)

Vascular Duckweed

Lemna gibba Biomass:

EC 50 

## = 5.6 mg

a.i./L

NOAEC = 0.89 mg a.i./L

Frond Number

EC 50 

## : 6.7 mg

a.i./L

NOAEC: 0.29 mg a.i./L 43096001 Acceptable LOAEC (biomass): 2.9 mg a.i./L LOAEC (frond number): 0.89 mg a.i./L

1 

## Based on EC 50 

## (mg/L): < 0.1 very highly toxic; 0.1-1 highly toxic; >1-10 moderately toxic; >10-100 slightly toxic; >100 practically nontoxic

2 

## EPTC has the potential to volatilize during aquatic toxicity tests; measured test concentrations from static daphnid, duckweed and algal studies show that EPTC volatilizes from water at levels ranging from 2 to about 50% losses. These data suggest that test concentrations at the end of 96-h static non-renewal aquatic studies would be 20 to 25 percent less than initial nominal concentrations. Applying an average between initial and predicted final test concentrations, estimated mean test concentrations would be 10 to 13 percent less than nominal test concentrations; thus, fish LC 50 

## values are approximately 10 percent lower than the toxicity values

listed above.

3 

## Acute to Chronic Ratio (ACR) from daphnid data (acute divided by chronic endpoints, 6.5/0.8 = 8).



# Terrestrial Toxicity Summary

Table 11 summarizes the most sensitive ecological toxi city endpoints for terrestrial organisms. On an acute exposure basis EPTC is practically non-toxic to slightly toxic to birds (most

sensitive LD 50 

# >1000 mg a.i./L), mammals (most sensitive LD 50 

# = 1465 mg/kg-bw), and honeybees (LD 50 

# >12.09 μg a.i./bee). Effects were repor ted for birds and mammals from dietary, reproduction, and inhalation studies. As expected from an herbicide, terrestrial plants are highly sensitive to EPTC ( Table 12 ).

# 14 Table 11. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endp oints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for

EPTC
Species Toxicity Value Used in

Risk Assessment Citation

MRID Comment

Mallard Duck Anas platyrhynchos LD 50 

## > 1000 mg a.i./kgbw 00131274 Supplemental. No more than slightly

toxic 1



## . NOAEL: 1000 mg/kg LOAEL > 1000 mg/kg. Regurgitation was observed in the two highest test concentrations, the NOAEL is based on regurgitation. Bobwhite Quail Colinus virginianus LC 50 

## = 20,000 mg a.i./kg-diet 00021834 Supplemental study. Practically nontoxic 1



## . NOAEC: 1800 mg a.i./kg diet LOAEC: 3200 mg a.i./kg diet

Mallard Duck Anas platyrhynchos NOAEC =242 mg a.i./kg

diet 46554301 Acceptable study. LOAEC: 593 mg a.i./kg diet based on reduction in proportion of viable embryos of eggs set at the 593 and 1490 mg a.i./kg diet levels (13 and 21%, respectively). Laboratory rat Rattus norvegicus Acute oral LD 50 

## = 1465 (1290-1663) mg/kg – bw (males) 00157868 Acceptable study. Slightly toxic 3



## . Acute oral LD 50 

## : 1712 (1324-2214) mg/kg (F), 1599 (1294-1976) mg/kg (combined). Laboratory rat Rattus norvegicus Parent/ NOAEL: 50 ppm (2.5 mg/kg bw/day) 00161597 Acceptable study. Parental Toxicity NOAEL: 50 ppm (2.5 mg/kg bw/day) LOAEL: 200 ppm (10 mg/kg bw/day) based on decreased body weight, degenerative cardiomyopathy, and renal tubule degeneration.

Offspring/Developmental Toxicity NOAEL: 200 ppm (10 mg/kg bw/day) LOAEL: 800 ppm (40 mg/kg bw/day).

Reproductive Toxicity NOAEL: 800 ppm (40 mg/kg bw/day) LOAEL: >800 ppm (40 mg/kg bw/day). Laboratory rat Rattus norvegicus Acute Inhalation

LC 50 

## Male and Female Combined 1.39 ppm 00157870 NOAEL 0.058 ppm based on myocardial degeneration observed at 21 days in a 90-day inhalation study Honey bee acute

contact 48-hour contact LD 50 

## : >12.09 μg a.i./bee 00036935 Acceptable/Practically non-toxic 2



## .

1 

## Acute Oral (avian/mammal): Based on LD 50 

## (mg/kg) <10 very highly toxic; 10-50 highly toxic; 51-500 moderately toxic; 501-2000 slightly toxic; >2000 practically nontoxic

2 

## Based on acute contact LD 50 

## ( μ g a.i./bee) <2 highly toxic; 2-10.99 moderately toxic; ≥ 11 practically

non-toxic



# Toxicity to Non-target Terrestrial Plants

The available seedling emergence studies (MRIDs 42120802 and 43217101) reported EC 25 

# values for emergence and shoot dry weight ( Table 12 ), in addition to qualit ative observations of

# 15 phytotoxicity. The former study tested 10 species of terrestrial plants, five of which had less than 70% seedling emergence in the control treatme nts. Based on the mode of action, EPTC is expected to greatly impact plant height (lengt h) due to developmental inhibition; however the available studies did not report this informa tion. Furthermore, in addition to inhibited germination, the provided phytotoxicity inform ation describes stunted and malformed plants early in the study extending to se nescence in later stages. These e ffects were noted with most of the species at all test concentrations, further s uggesting that plant height (length) may be more sensitive than dry weight. The registrant s ubmitted a follow-up seedling emergence study (MRID 43217101) which re-ran the earlier study using Triticum aestivum (poor control performance in the first study) as well as the first submitted test for Daucus carota . While control performance was adequate the study did not report the plant height endpoint. Therefore, the available seedling emergence endpoint information will not be used for calculating RQs, but may be used for risk

characterization.

The available vegetative vigor study (MRIDs 42120802) reported EC 25 

# values for shoot dry weight ( Table 12 ). The authors also report phytotoxici ty information describing stunted and malformed plants early in the study extending to senescence in later stages. These effects were noted with most of the species at all test concentrations, furt her suggesting that plant height (length) may be more sensitive than dry wei ght. Therefore, the available vegetative vigor endpoint information will not be used for cal culating RQs, but may be used for risk

characterization.

Table 12. Non-target Terrestrial Plant Seedling Emergence and Vegetative Vigor Toxicity (Tier II) Data (MRID 42120802).

Crop Type of Study Species NOAEC [EC 05] 

## ] (lb a.i./A) EC 25 

## (lb a.i./A) Most sensitive
parameter Slope

Seedling Emergence 1



## Monocot Purple nutsedge Cyperus rotundus) 0.17

0.0144 0.27

0

. 015 Seedling

emergence Dry weight 1.13±0.425

Dicot Morning glory Ipomea hederacea 7.4 [0.035]

0.23 >7.4

0.26

1.1 Seedling

emergence Dry weight Phytotoxicity 1.10±0.206

Vegetative Vigor 1



## Monocot Winter wheat

Triticum aestivum 0.925 [0.087] 2.9

0.22 Dry weight Phytotoxicity 2.33±0.740

Dicot Velvet leaf Abutilon theophrastii [0.085] [0.023] 2.0

7.4 Dry weight Phytotoxicity 0.704±0.370

1 

## Endpoints will not be used for RQ calculations (see preceding text).



# Degradate Toxicity

At least one degradate of EPTC was identified as EPTC sulfoxid e in the fate studies. One study on EPTC sulfoxide was submitted for evaluating acute toxicity to freshwater invertebrates (MRID 45442201). This study indicates less to xicity than the parent EPTC (LC 50 

# = 22 mg a.i./L,

# 16 NOAEC = 10 mg a.i./L, LOAEC = 18 mg a.i./L). Fa te studies suggest that EPTC degradates are shorter lived than the parent compound. Based on the volatility of EPTC, the shorter half-lives of the EPTC degradates (sulfoxide and sulfone), there is no need for additional acute aquatic toxicity tests for these degradates.

Ecological Incidents

A search of the Ecological Incident Inform ation System (EIIS) database on December 5, 2012 showed 3 “Possible” EPTC incidents affecting standing dry bean, alfalfa, and potato crops from direct applications, and impac ting as much as 2000 acres. Ther e was also one additional “Possible” incident caused by runoff following a runoff event after applic ation to corn. This incident resulted in a fish kill totaling 30 blue gill and 20 bass. The incident report (ID: B000150- 001) suggests that phorate, tank mixed with EPTC , atrazine, propachlor, 2,4-D, was the likely stressor causing the fish kill; however it also regards the pres ence of EPTC as a contributing factor. A search of the Incident Data System (IDS) and the Avian Incident Monitoring System (AIMS) databases did not provide any additional incident data.

5. CONCEPTUAL MODEL

The environmental fate properties of EPTC indicate that volatiliza tion, runoff, and leaching represent potential transport mechanisms. These pa thways may result in a wide range of potential aquatic and terrestrial exposure scenarios.

6. ANALYSIS PLAN

Ecological Risk Assessment



# Stressors of Concern

The exposure assessments will consider only th e parent, EPTC, as th e degradates are not expected to be present in envir onmentally relevant concentrations.



# Measures of Exposure

In order to estimate risks of EPTC exposure to aquatic and terres trial organisms, all exposure modeling and resulting risk conclusions will be made based on maximum application rates, application methods, and any mitigation measures specifically indicated on the label. The models that will be used to predict the estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) of EPTC are discussed on OPP’s model website. 6 

# These models include: PRZM (Pesticide Root Zone Model) and EXAMS (EXposure Analysis Modeling Sy stem), PRZM-groundwater (GW), AgDrift, AgDisp, T-REX, TerrPlant, and PERFUM (Pr obabilistic Exposure and Risk Model for FUMigants).

6 

## http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/science/models_pg.htm

# 17 The results of running the SIP and STIR models are presented in Appendix A and Appendix B

. While the SIP model suggests that there are expe cted concerns for both mammals and birds, the model does not perform well with chemicals that have a high aque ous solubility and have low acute toxicity to these organisms. This route of exposure is not likely to be significant enough to cause concern. The analysis with STIR indicate s that there are potenti al risks to birds and mammals through inhalation of EPTC.

To get a preliminary estimate for the possible ex posure of terrestrial organisms to EPTC vapor after field application, EFED used vapor flux data reported in a supplemental field volatility study (MRID 40420404) to estimate a maximum 1-hour concentration of EPTC vapor using the AERSCREEN model (see discussion in Environmental Fate Properties of EPTC ). The results of

this screen indicated that a maximum 1-hour post-application air co ncentration of 34.06 mg/m 3


# may be expected after use of 14.8 lb a.i./acre applied by flood irri gation to an 80-acre field of post-emergent alfalfa. Compared to th e estimated exposure using STIR (163 mg/m 3 

# ), the risk to mammals and birds through exposures to EPTC vapor is not expected to result in LOC

exceedances.

Given the high volatility of EPTC, there is the potential for non-ta rget organisms to be exposed

to EPTC that volatilizes from the treated field and redeposits outside the application area. To estimate the potential exposure to non-target ta xa from the deposition of vapor phase EPTC, an empirical model that estimates the Abovegr ound Produce Concentration Due to Air-to-Plant Transfer ( Pv ) 7 

# was used. This method is used to es timate concentrations in exposed and aboveground vegetation due to air-to-plant transfer.

The estimated AERSCREEN maximum 1-hour concen tration was used as the concentration of EPTC in air at the edge of the field (Cyv). The fraction of the concentration of EPTC in vapor phase was assumed to be 1. Following the recomme ndations the authors of the model provided in

7 

## USEPA. 2005. Human Health Risk Assessment Protoc ol for Hazardous Waste Co mpustion Facilities. EPA530-R05-006. Chapter 5.3.2.

# 18 the appendix, the EPTC air to plant biotransfer factor ( BV ag 

# ) was calculated using the following

formulae:

Bvol = 10^(1.065*logKow-LOG10(0.0000108/0.000082053/298.15)-1.654)

and

BV ag 

# = 1.19* Bvol /(1-0.85)*770

The empirical correction factor ( VG ag 

# ) was assumed to be 1 based on the log Kow of EPTC.

The resulting estimation of the deposition of vapor phase EPTC in plant tissue ( Pv ) was 2.28 x

10 8 

# μg EPTC/g of plant dry weight . This concentration was converted to lb/acre units to compare

to the available Tier 2 terrestrial plant toxicity studies. This a ssumed one ton of dry weight grass per acre. The Pv estimate (0.114 lb EPTC/A) suggests that there is the potential for concentrations to be high enough to elicit effects on non-target te rrestrial plants ( Table 12

, EC 25 

# = 0.22 lb a.i./A; EC 05 

# = 0.023 lb a.i./A) and animals ( Table 11 , Chronic Mammal NOAEL= 50 ppm (2.5 mg/kg bw/day)) from the redeposited vapor phase EPTC from fields treated under currently labeled rates. EFED intends to us e the PERFUM model in the preliminary risk assessment to estimate the distance from the edge of the field where the concentration would be below levels of concern for non-target listed and non-listed pl ants and animals.



# Measure of Effects

Ecological effects data are used as measures of di rect and indirect effect s to biological receptors. Data are typically obtained from registrant-submitte d studies or from literature studies identified by ECOTOX. The ECOTOX database provides more ecological effects data in an attempt to bridge existing data gaps. ECOTOX is a source fo r locating single chemical toxicity data and potential chemical mixture toxicity data for aqua tic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife. ECOTOX was created and is maintained by the USEPA, Office of Research and Development, and the

National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory's Mid-Continent Ecology

Division.



# Integration of Exposure and Effects

Risk characterization is the integration of e xposure and ecological effects to determine the potential ecological risk from the use of pestic ides and the likelihood of direct and indirect effects to non-target organisms in aquatic and terrestrial habitats. For the assessment of risks, the risk quotient (RQ) method is used to compare exposure and measured toxicity values. EECs are divided by acute and chronic toxicity values. The resulting RQs are then compared to the Agency’s Levels of Concern (LOCs) (USEPA 20 04). These criteria will be used to indicate when EPTC use, as directed on th e label, has the potential to ca use adverse direct or indirect

# 19 effects to non-target organisms. In addition, inci dent data from the EIIS, IDS, and AIMS will be considered as part of the risk characterization.



# Endocrine Disruptor Scre ening Program (EDSP)

As required by FIFRA and FFDCA, EPA reviews num erous studies to asse ss potential adverse outcomes from exposure to chemicals. Collectiv ely, these studies includ e acute, subchronic and chronic toxicity, including asse ssments of carcinogenicity, ne urotoxicity, developmental, reproductive, and general or systemic toxicity. These studies include endpoints which may be susceptible to endocrine influe nce, including effects on endocri ne target organ histopathology, organ weights, estrus cyclicity, sexual maturatio n, fertility, pregnancy rates, reproductive loss, and sex ratios in offspring. For ecological hazard assessments, EPA evaluates acute tests and chronic studies that assess gr owth, developmental and reprod uctive effects in different taxonomic groups. As part of its reregistration decision, EPA reviewed th ese data and selected the most sensitive endpoints for relevant risk assessment scenarios from the existing hazard database. However, as required by FFDCA secti on 408(p), EPTC is subject to the endocrine screening part of the Endocrine Di sruptor Screening Program (EDSP).

EPA has developed the EDSP to determine whet her certain substances (including pesticide active and other ingredients) may have an effect in humans or wildlife similar to an effect produced by a “naturally occurring estrogen, or ot her such endocrine effect s as the Administrator may designate.” The EDSP employs a two-tiered approach to making th e statutorily required

determinations. Tier 1 consists of a battery of 11 screening assays to identify the potential of a chemical substance to interact with the estrog en, androgen, or thyroid (E, A, or T) hormonal systems. Chemicals that go th rough Tier 1 screening and are found to have the potential to interact with E, A, or T hormonal systems will proceed to the next stag e of the EDSP where EPA will determine which, if any, of th e Tier 2 tests are necessary base d on the available data. Tier 2 testing is designed to identify a ny adverse endocrine-related eff ects caused by the substance, and establish a dose-response relationship between the dose and the E, A, or T effect.

Under FFDCA section 408(p), the Agency must scre en all pesticide chemicals. Between October 2009 and February 2010, EPA issued test orders/data call-ins for the first group of 67 chemicals, which contains 58 pesticide active ingredients and 9 inert ingredients. EPTC was included on

that list and has been issued an order to conduc t the Tier 1 testing. Once all required Tier 1 and Tier 2 data have been received and reviewed, the endpoints and safety factors used for risk assessment purposes will be examined and a new risk assessment performed if necessary. For further information on the status of the EDSP, the policies and procedur es, the list of 67 chemicals, future lists, the test guidelines and the Tier 1 screening ba ttery, please visit our

website: http://www.epa.gov/endo/

.

# 20 Endangered Species Assessments

Consistent with the Agency’s responsibility under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Agency will evaluate exposure and potential risks to federally listed threatened and/or endangered (listed) species from registered uses of pesticides in registration review.

7. PRELIMINARY IDENTIFICATIO N OF DATA GAPS

Fate

Table 13 identifies the environmental fate studies submitted by the registrant, as well as study

classifications and whether or not additional data are needed in order to support the registration review of EPTC. Rationale for the additional data requested is also presented.

Table 13. Submitted Environmental Fate Data for Chemical EPTC

OCSPP

Guideline Data Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data

needed to

conduct risk

assessment? Comments

835.2120 Hydrolysis 00141373 acceptable no

835.2240 Aqueous photolysis 42120803 acceptable no

835.2410 Soil photolysis 4 2120804 acceptable no

835.4100 Aerobic soil

metabolism 40420402 supplemental

no 42120805 supplemental
42120806 supplemental

835.4200 Anaerobic soil

metabolism 40420402 supplemental

no 42120807 supplemental

835.4300 Aerobic aquatic

metabolism no data - Required in the December 21, 1999 reregistration DCI; has not been submitted/fulfilled by registrant.

835.4400 Anaerobic aquatic

metabolism no data no

835.1230

835.1240 Adsorption/ desorption and leaching 42120808 acceptable

no 40420403 acceptable
45306701 supplemental

835.1410 Volatility – laboratory 42120809 acceptable no

835.8100 Volatility – field 40420404 supplemental no

835.6100 Terrestrial field dissipation 00098250 supplemental

no Analytical method appropriate for

EPTC but not for ESO. 00146934 supplemental

00146935 supplemental

40420405 supplemental

40420406 supplemental

40420407 supplemental

41724305 supplemental

# 21 OCSPP

Guideline Data Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data

needed to

conduct risk

assessment? Comments

42120810 supplemental

42120811 supplemental

Analytical

method in soil 41724305 supplemental no

835.6200 Aquatic field dissipation no data no

850.1730 Fish

bioconcentration 40575101 supplemental

no 40575102 supplemental

45124301 none



# Effects

Table 14 and Table 15 identify the ecological effects studies , as well as study cl assifications and

whether or not further data are needed in order to support risk assessment.

Table 14. Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data for EPTC



# OCSPP

Guideline Data Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data

needed to

conduct

risk

assessment? Comments

850.1010 Freshwater

invertebrate acute toxicity 42945601 Acceptable No --

00144209 Acceptable

00131273 Acceptable

45442201 Supplemental

00016546 Supplemental

40094602 Supplemental

05001497 Supplemental

850.1025

850.1035

850.1045

850.1055 Saltwater

invertebrate acute toxicity 46145901 Acceptable No --

46145902 Acceptable

Meyer 1986 Supplemental

Butler 1965 Supplemental

850.1075 Freshwater fish acute toxicity 00144208 Acceptable No --

00021834 Acceptable

00022361 Supplemental

00131271 Acceptable

00131272 Acceptable

00025286 Supplemental

00025287 Supplemental

# 22 OCSPP

Guideline Data Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data

needed to

conduct

risk

assessment? Comments

00027992 Supplemental

00034683 Supplemental

00034684 Supplemental

00084743 Supplemental

00108342 Supplemental

40094602 Supplemental

850.1075 Saltwater fish acute toxicity 46145903 Acceptable No --

Meyer 1986 Supplemental

850.1300 Freshwater

invertebrate life cycle 45075006 Acceptable No --

850.1350 Saltwater

invertebrates life cycle 1 

## Yes Due to the moderate toxicity of

EPTC to freshwater and estuarine

invertebrates based on the

available acute and chronic toxicity data, and the potential for exposure based on the current labels, this chronic reproduction study would help to define the potential chronic and reproductive risks to

invertebrates in estuarine/marine

environments.

850.1400 Freshwater fish early-life

stage 1 

## Yes A Freshwater Fish early-life stage study is requested due to the moderate toxicity of EPTC to

freshwater and estuarine fish

based on the available acute toxicity data, and the potential for exposure based on the current labels. Since the bluegill sunfish was acutely the most sensitive fish species, it should be used as the test species.

850.1400 Saltwater fish early-life stage No This study is not requested at this time based on the expectation that this study using a freshwater

fish will be submitted.

850.1500 Fish life cycle No

-- 850.4400 Aquatic plant growth:

Tier II vascular plants 43096001 Acceptable No --

# 23 OCSPP

Guideline Data Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data

needed to

conduct

risk

assessment? Comments

850.4500 Aquatic Plant

Growth: Tier II Algal Toxicity 42921202 Acceptable No --

42921201 Acceptable

42899801 Acceptable

42940901 Acceptable

850.4550 Aquatic Plant

Growth:

Tier II Cyanobacteria Toxicity 42883501 Acceptable No --

1 

## This study is an outstanding data requirement identified in the data requirement table in the EFED science chapter of the RED, and in memos to the registration division dated January 9, 2002 (D274065), and April 4, 2002 (D277872, D278969, D274497). In the absence of this study, an acute to chronic ratio approach will be used.


# Table 15. Submitted Terrestrial Ecol ogical Effects Data for EPTC

OCSPP

Guideline Data Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data needed

for risk

assessment? Comments

850.2100 Avian oral toxicity 00131274 Supplemental Yes An acceptable acute avian oral toxicity study for exposures of bobwhite quail and a supplemental study for mallard duck were submitted for EPTC; however, data are not available for a passerine species. In addition to the CFR part 158 data requirements, the available data support the need for the passerine acute oral toxicity study to adequately assess the risk to passerine species. A passerine study protocol should be submitted for review by the Agency prior to initiation of this study.

An acceptable acute avian oral toxicity study for exposures of bobwhite quail or mallard duck was requested in a DCI for the degradate EPTC sulfoxide. This study was requested in the RED and remains outstanding. 00144280 Supplemental

850.2200 Avian dietary toxicity 00016527 Supplemental No --

00016539 Supplemental

00021834 Supplemental

# 24 OCSPP

Guideline Data Requirement Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data needed

for risk

assessment? Comments

00022361 Supplemental

00131275 Supplemental

00131276 Supplemental

00144207 Supplemental

850.2300 Avian reproduction 46554301 Acceptable No --

46554302 Acceptable

850.3020 Honey bee

acute contact toxicity 00142894 Acceptable No --

Honey bee

acute oral toxicity No --

850.3030 Honey bee

residue on foliage No --

850.3040 Field testing for pollinators No --

850.4100 Terrestrial plant toxicity: Tier II seedling

emergence 42120802

43217101 Supplemental Yes A Tier II Seedling Emergence study is needed for a typical end use product. Available toxicity data suggest that terrestrial plants are highly sensitive to EPTC, however the

available submitted studies did not report plant height and failed to maintain greater than 70% seedling germination in many of the controls.

850.4150 Terrestrial plant toxicity:

Tier II vegetative vigor 42120802 Supplemental Yes A Tier II Vegetative Vigor study is needed for a typical end use product. Available toxicity data suggest that terrestrial plants are highly sensitive to EPTC, however the

available submitted studies did not report plant height.



# Additional effects information that wo uld be useful to the Agency include:

1. ecological incidents (non-target plant damage and avian, fish, reptilian, amphibian and mammalian mortalities) not alr eady reported to the Agency

2. major degradate or transfor mation product toxicity data

3. information regarding effects of EPTC on plant reproduction ( e.g. , fruit numbers, seed numbers, volume and weight of seed, number of flowers)

# 25 4. label clarifications including maximum nu mber of applications per year, maximum application rate per year, and the minimum application treatment interval

# 26 APPENDIX A: RESULTS OF THE SIP MODEL
Table 1. Inputs

Parameter Value

Chemical name EPTC

Solubility (in water at 25 o 

## C; mg/L) 370

Mammalian LD 50 

## (mg/kg-bw) 1465
Mammalian test species laboratory rat Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Mammalian NOAEL (mg/kg-bw) 50 Mammalian test species laboratory rat Body weight (g) of "other" mammalian species

Avian LD 50 

## (mg/kg-bw) 1000
Avian test species mallard duck Body weight (g) of "other" avian species Mineau scaling factor 1.15

Mallard NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 242 Bobwhite quail NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) 1800 NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) for other bird species Body weight (g) of other avian species NOAEC (mg/kg-diet) for 2nd other bird species Body weight (g) of 2nd other avian species

Table 2. Mammalian Results

Parameter Acute Chronic Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 63.6400 63.6400 Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 1126.8202 38.4580 Ratio of exposure to toxicity 0.0565 1.6548

Conclusion* Drinking water exposure alone is NOT a potential concern for

mammals Exposure through drinking water alone is a potential concern for

mammals

Table 3. Avian Results

Parameter Acute Chronic Upper bound exposure (mg/kg-bw) 299.7000 299.7000 Adjusted toxicity value (mg/kg-bw) 519.2254 12.0062 Ratio of exposure to acute toxicity 0.5772 24.9620

Conclusion* Exposure through drinking water alone is a potential concern for

birds Exposure through drinking water alone is a potential concern for

birds *Conclusion is for drinking water exposure alone. This does not combine all routes of exposure. Therefore, when aggregated with other routes ( i.e ., diet, inhalation, dermal), pesticide exposure through drinking water may contribute to a total expos ure that has potential for effects to non-target

animals.

# 27 APPENDIX B: RESULTS OF THE STIR MODEL

Input for Sunflower Uses

Application and Chemical Information

Enter Chemical Name EPTC

Enter Chemical Use Sunflower

Is the Application a Spray? (enter y or n) y

If Spray What Type (enter ground or air) air

Enter Chemical Molecular Weight (g/mole) 189.3

Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 1.60E-02

Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 4.6

Toxicity Properties

Bird

Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 1000

Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15

Enter Tested Bird Weight (kg) 1.58

Mammal

Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 1465

Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC 50 (mg/L) 3.8

Duration of Rat Inhalation Study (hrs) 4

Enter Rat Weight (kg) 0.35

Output

Results Avian (0.020 kg )

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.63E+02

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.05E+01

Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.04E+01

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.97E+00 

## Proceed to Refinements

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inha lation Dose (mg/kg) 4.42E-01

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 4.24E-02 Exposure not Likely Significant

Results Mammalian (0.015 kg )

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.63E+02

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.58E+01

Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 2.26E+02

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.14E-01 

## Proceed to Refinements

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inha lation Dose (mg/kg) 5.55E-01

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 2.46E-03 Exposure not Likely Significant

# 28 Input for Watermelon Uses

Application and Chemical Information

Enter Chemical Name EPTC

Enter Chemical Use Watermelon

Is the Application a Spray? (enter y or n) n

If Spray What Type (enter ground or air) ground

Enter Chemical Molecular Weight (g/mole) 189.3

Enter Chemical Vapor Pressure (mmHg) 1.60E-02

Enter Application Rate (lb a.i./acre) 3.5

Toxicity Properties

Bird

Enter Lowest Bird Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 1000

Enter Mineau Scaling Factor 1.15

Enter Tested Bird Weight (kg) 1.58

Mammal

Enter Lowest Rat Oral LD 50 (mg/kg bw) 1465

Enter Lowest Rat Inhalation LC 50 (mg/L) 3.8

Duration of Rat Inhalation Study (hrs) 4

Enter Rat Weight (kg) 0.35

Output

Results Avian (0.020 kg )

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.63E+02

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.05E+01

Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.04E+01

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.97E+00 Proceed to Refinements

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalati on Dose (mg/kg) not applicable

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 not applicable not applicable

Results Mammalian (0.015 kg )

Maximum Vapor Concentration in Air at Saturation (mg/m 3 ) 1.63E+02

Maximum 1-hour Vapor Inhalation Dose (mg/kg) 2.58E+01

Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 2.26E+02

Ratio of Vapor Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 1.14E-01 Proceed to Refinements

Maximum Post-treatment Spray Inhalati on Dose (mg/kg) not applicable

Ratio of Droplet Inhalation Dose to Adjusted Inhalation LD 50 not applicable not applicable

# 29 APPENDIX C: AERSCREEN OUTPUT

AERSCREEN 11126 / AERMOD 1206 01/04/13

14:00:27

TITLE: EPTC TEST

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****************************** AREA PARAMETERS ****************************

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

SOURCE EMISSION RATE: 12.8600 g/s 102.063 lb/hr

AREA EMISSION RATE: 0.397E-04 g/(s-m2) 0.315E-03 lb/(hr-m2)

AREA HEIGHT: 0.18 meters 0.60 feet

AREA SOURCE LONG SIDE: 568.99 meters 1866.76 feet

AREA SOURCE SHORT SIDE: 568.99 meters 1866.76 feet

INITIAL VERTICAL DIMENSION: 0.00 meters 0.00 feet

RURAL OR URBAN: RURAL

INITIAL PROBE DISTANCE = 5000. meters 16404. feet

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- *********************** BUILDING DOWNWASH PARAMETERS **********************

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

BUILDING DOWNWASH NOT USED FOR NON-POINT SOURCES

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ************************** FLOW SECTOR ANALYSIS *************************** 25 meter receptor spacing: 1. meters - 5000. meters

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

MAXIMUM IMPACT RECEPTOR

Zo SURFACE 1-HR CONC RADIAL DIST TEMPORAL SECTOR ROUGHNESS (ug/m3) (deg) (m) PERIOD

----------------------------------------------------- 1* 0.050 0.3406E+05 45 400.0 ANN * = worst case diagonal

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- *************** ******* MAKEMET M ETEOROLOGY PARAMETER S ********* ************

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

MIN/MAX TEMPERATURE: 287.1 / 302.0 (K)

MINIMUM WIND SPEED: 0.5 m/s

# 30 ANEMOMETER HEIGHT: 10.000 meters

SURFACE CHARACTERISTICS INPUT: USER ENTERED

ALBEDO: 0.18

BOWEN RATIO: 0.30 ROUGHNESS LENGTH: 0.050 (meters)

METEOROLOGY CONDITIONS USED TO PREDICT OVERALL MAXIMUM IMPACT

-------------------------------------------------------------

YR MO DY JDY HR

-- -- -- --- -- 10 01 11 11 01

H0 U* W* DT/DZ ZICNV ZIMCH M-O LEN Z0 BOWEN ALBEDO REF WS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -0.37 0.019 -9.000 0.020 -999. 30. 1.7 0.050 0.30 0.18 0.50

HT REF TA HT

- - - - - - - - - - - 10.0 302.0 2.0

METEOROLOGY CONDITIONS USED TO PREDICT AMBIENT BOUNDARY IMPACT

--------------------------------------------------------------

YR MO DY JDY HR

-- -- -- --- -- 10 01 11 11 01

H0 U* W* DT/DZ ZICNV ZIMCH M-O LEN Z0 BOWEN ALBEDO REF WS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -0.37 0.019 -9.000 0.020 -999. 30. 1.7 0.050 0.30 0.18 0.50

HT REF TA HT

- - - - - - - - - - - 10.0 302.0 2.0

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ************************ AERSCREEN AUTOMATED DISTANCES **********************

OVERALL MAXIMUM CONCENTRATIONS BY DISTANCE

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

MAXIMUM MAXIMUM

DIST 1-HR CONC DIST 1-HR CONC (m) (ug/m3) (m) (ug/m3)

--------------------- --------------------- 1.00 0.2516E+05 2524.99 6143.

25.00 0.2583E+05 2550.00 6097.

50.01 0.2651E+05 2575.00 6051.

# 31 75.00 0.2715E+05 2600.00 6007.

100.00 0.2777E+05 2625.01 5963.

125.00 0.2831E+05 2650.00 5920.

150.01 0.2891E+05 2675.00 5878.

174.99 0.2949E+05 2700.00 5836.

200.00 0.3006E+05 2725.01 5795.

225.00 0.3060E+05 2749.99 5754.

250.00 0.3114E+05 2775.00 5714.

274.99 0.3165E+05 2800.00 5675.

300.00 0.3216E+05 2825.00 5636.

325.00 0.3265E+05 2849.99 5598.

350.00 0.3313E+05 2875.00 5561.

375.01 0.3360E+05 2900.00 5524.

400.00 0.3406E+05 2925.00 5487.

425.00 0.2981E+05 2950.01 5451.

450.00 0.2683E+05 2975.00 5416.

475.01 0.2474E+05 3000.00 5381.

500.00 0.2316E+05 3025.00 5347.

525.00 0.2161E+05 3050.01 5313.

550.00 0.2061E+05 3075.00 5279.

575.01 0.1975E+05 3100.00 5246.

599.99 0.1897E+05 3125.00 5214.

625.00 0.1828E+05 3150.00 5181.

650.00 0.1765E+05 3174.99 5150.

675.00 0.1707E+05 3200.00 5118.

699.99 0.1654E+05 3225.00 5087.

725.00 0.1606E+05 3250.00 5057.

750.00 0.1561E+05 3274.99 5027.

775.00 0.1519E+05 3300.00 4997.

800.01 0.1480E+05 3325.00 4968.

825.00 0.1444E+05 3350.00 4939.

850.00 0.1409E+05 3375.01 4910.

875.00 0.1377E+05 3400.00 4882.

900.01 0.1347E+05 3425.00 4854.

924.99 0.1318E+05 3450.00 4826.

950.00 0.1290E+05 3475.01 4799.

975.00 0.1264E+05 3499.99 4772.

1000.00 0.1240E+05 3525.00 4745.

1024.99 0.1216E+05 3550.00 4719.

1050.00 0.1194E+05 3575.00 4693.

1075.00 0.1172E+05 3599.99 4667.

1100.00 0.1152E+05 3625.00 4642.

1125.01 0.1132E+05 3650.00 4617.

1150.00 0.1113E+05 3675.00 4592.

1175.00 0.1095E+05 3700.01 4568.

1200.00 0.1078E+05 3725.00 4543.

1225.01 0.1061E+05 3750.00 4519.

1250.00 0.1045E+05 3775.00 4496.

1275.00 0.1029E+05 3800.01 4472.

1300.00 0.1014E+05 3825.00 4449.

1325.01 9998. 3850.00 4426.

1349.99 9858. 3875.00 4403.

1375.00 9723. 3900.00 4381.

1400.00 9591. 3924.99 4359.

1425.00 9464. 3950.00 4337.

1449.99 9340. 3975.00 4315.

# 32 1475.00 9220. 4000.00 4293.

1500.00 9105. 4024.99 4272.

1525.00 8992. 4050.00 4251.

1550.01 8881. 4075.00 4230.

1575.00 8775. 4100.00 4209.

1600.00 8672. 4125.01 4189.

1625.00 8571. 4150.00 4169.

1650.01 8474. 4175.00 4147.

1674.99 8378. 4200.00 4127.

1700.00 8285. 4225.01 4108.

1725.00 8195. 4249.99 4088.

1750.00 8107. 4275.00 4069.

1774.99 8020. 4300.00 4050.

1800.00 7936. 4325.00 4031.

1825.00 7854. 4349.99 4015.

1850.00 7774. 4375.00 3996.

1875.01 7696. 4400.00 3978.

1900.00 7619. 4425.00 3960.

1925.00 7544. 4450.01 3942.

1950.00 7471. 4475.00 3924.

1975.01 7399. 4500.00 3906.

1999.99 7330. 4525.00 3889.

2025.00 7264. 4550.01 3872.

2050.00 7197. 4575.00 3854.

2075.00 7130. 4600.00 3837.

2099.99 7067. 4625.00 3820.

2125.00 7004. 4650.00 3804.

2150.00 6942. 4674.99 3787.

2175.00 6881. 4700.00 3771.

2199.99 6822. 4725.00 3754.

2225.00 6764. 4750.00 3738.

2250.00 6706. 4774.99 3722.

2275.00 6650. 4800.00 3706.

2300.01 6595. 4825.00 3691.

2325.00 6541. 4850.00 3675.

2350.00 6488. 4875.01 3660.

2375.00 6436. 4900.00 3644.

2400.01 6386. 4925.00 3629.

2424.99 6335. 4950.00 3614.

2450.00 6285. 4975.01 3599.

2475.00 6238. 4999.99 3584.

2500.00 6190.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ********************** AERSCREEN MAXIMUM IMPACT SUMMARY *********************

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

3-hour, 8-hour, and 24-hour scaled concentrations are equal to the 1- hour concentration as referenced in SCREENING PROCEDURES FOR ESTIMATING THE AIR QUALITY IMPACT OF STATIONARY SOURCES, REVISED (Section 4.5.4) Report number EPA-454/R-92-019 http://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance_permit.htm under Screening Guidance

# 33 MAXIMUM SCALED SCALED SCALED SCALED

1-HOUR 3-HOUR 8-HOUR 24-HOUR ANNUAL

CALCULATION CONC CONC CONC CONC CONC PROCEDURE (ug/m3) (ug/ m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3) (ug/m3)

--------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- FLAT TERRAIN 0.3407E+05 0.3407E+05 0.3407E+05 0.3407E+05 N/A

DISTANCE FROM SOURCE 401.00 meters

IMPACT AT THE

AMBIENT BOUNDARY 0.2516E+05 0.2516E+05 0.2516E+05 0.2516E+05 N/A

DISTANCE FROM SOURCE 1.00 metersAPPENDIX D: SUMMARY OF LABELED USES OF EPTC TO BE ASSESSED IN RISK ASSESSMENTGranular Formulation UsesSiteApplicationMethod TypeA. I.MaxAppRate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year(lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographicAreasIncorporationDepthReg#AGRICULTURALFALLOWIDLELANDCONSERVATIONRESERVESoil incorporatedtreatment.6.0NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preplant.NSNSmax4inches.10163‐281ALFALFACLOVERLESPEDEZATREFOILBroadcast. 3.0NS30 d 12Aircraft. Establishedplantings.NS NS NS 10163-281Ground. Establishedplantings.NS NS NS 10163-281Soil incorporatedtreatment.4.0NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Western, PacificNorthwest,NorthernNS NS 10163-2813.0NS30 d 12Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Establishedplantings.NS NS NS 10163-281NS NS Ground. Preplant. NS NS NS 10163-281BEANS Soilincorporatedtreatment.4.0NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.At planting. Northern, PacificNorthwestNS NS 10163-281Postplant. Northern, PacificNorthwestNS NS 10163-281Preplant. Northern, PacificNorthwestNS NS 10163-281BEANS,DRIED-TYPESoil incorporatedtreatment.4.5NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Fall. Minnesota,North DakotaNS NS 10163-281CONIFERS(PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES)Soil incorporatedtreatment.6.0NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Establishedplantings.NSNSNS10163‐281Preplant.NSNSNS10163‐281CORN field, sweet,(SILAGE)Soil incorporatedtreatment.3.0NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preemergence.Specificarea(refertotheissuesreport),Southeast,NorthernNS1.5inches.10163‐28135SiteApplicationMethod TypeA. I.MaxAppRate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year(lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographicAreasIncorporationDepthReg#GRAPEFRUIT,ORANGESoil incorporatedtreatment.6.0NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Nonbearingnurserystock.NS NS NS 10163-281POTATO, WHITE/IRISH Soil incorporatedtreatment.6.0NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Drag-off. Northern, PacificNorthwestNS NS 10163-281Preplant. Northern, PacificNorthwestNS NS 10163-2813.0NS NS NS Granuleapplicator.Drag-off. NS NS NS 10163-281Layby. Southwest,Western,SoutheastNS NS 10163-281Preplant. Southwest,Western,SoutheastNS NS 10163-281SAFFLOWER(UNSPECIFIED)Soil incorporatedtreatment.3.0NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preplant.NSNSNS10163‐281SUGAR BEETSoil incorporatedtreatment.4.5NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Fall.Minnesota,NorthDakotaNSNS10163‐281SUNFLOWER Soilincorporatedtreatment.4.5NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Fall.Minnesota,NorthDakotaNSNS10163‐28136Emulsifiable Concentrate FormulationsSiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#AGRICULTURALFALLOWIDLELANDCONSERVATIONRESERVESoilincorporated treatment.6.1NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. NS NS Incorporate toa maximumdepth of 4inches.10163-283ALFALFA Chemigation.4.01 NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Early fall. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-564Latesummer.PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-564Seedlingstage.Western NS NS 19713-564NS NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Early fall. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-101Establishedplantings.PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-101Latesummer.PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-101Postplant. Western, PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-1013.9NS NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Early fall. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-561Latesummer.PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-561Postplant. NS NS NS 10163-283Seedlingstage.Western NS NS 19713-5613.11 NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Earlysummer.PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-564Establishedplantings.Southwest,Northern, PacificNorthwest,WesternNS NS 19713-564Spring. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-564NS NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotEarlysummer.PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-10137SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#Irrigation.19713-561Establishedplantings.Northern,SouthwestNS NS 19713-101Southwest,Northern, PacificNorthwest,WesternNS NS 19713-561Spring. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-10119713-56112.3Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Establishedplantings.Western NS NS 19713-1013.0NS NS12.2Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Establishedplantings.NS NS NS 10163-283Soilincorporated treatment.4.01 NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Western, PacificNorthwest,NorthernNS NS 19713-564NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Western,NorthernNS NS 19713-1013.9NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Western, PacificNorthwest,NorthernNS NS 19713-561NS NS NS 10163-2833.7NS NS NS Ground. Preplant. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-1013.11 NS NS Ground. Preplant. Southeast,SouthwestNS NS 19713-564NS NS NS Ground. Preplant. Southeast,SouthwestNS NS 19713-561GroundSpray.Preplant. Southeast,SouthwestNS NS 19713-10138SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#ALMOND Chemigation.3.12 NS 6.1 Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Postemergence.Western NS NS 19713-5616.2Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Postemergence.Western NS NS 19713-564BEANS, DRIED-TYPE;FRESHBroadcast. 3.11 NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.At planting. Western, PacificNorthwest,SouthwestNS NS 19713-564Preplant. Western, PacificNorthwest,SouthwestNS NS 19713-564NS NS 6.1 Ground. Preplant. Southeast NS NS 19713-5616.2 Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Southeast NS NS 19713-1017 Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.At planting. Western NS NS 19713-561Layby. Western NS NS 19713-101Preplant. Western NS NS 19713-5617.9Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.At planting. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-561Layby. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-101Preplant. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-561Chemigation.4.01 NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Preplant. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-564NS NS7.9Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Postplant. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-101Preplant. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-10139SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#Directedspray.4.01 NS NS Ground. Postemergence.Western, PacificNorthwest,NorthernNS NS 19713-564NS NS 7 Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Layby. Western NS NS 19713-1017.9 Ground. Layby. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-1018.6GroundSpray.Layby. Northern NS NS 19713-101Soil bandtreatment.2.0NS NS 6.1 GroundSpray.Plant bed. Southeast NS NS 19713-561Preplant. Southeast NS NS 19713-5616.2 Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Southeast NS NS 19713-1017.8Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Southeast NS NS 10163-283Soilincorporated treatment.4.01 NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Northern, PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-564NS NS 7.9 Ground. Preplant. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-1018.6Ground. At planting. Northern NS NS 19713-101Soilinjectiontreatment.3.1NS NS 6.2 Ground. At planting. Southwest NS NS 19713-101Preplant. Southwest NS NS 19713-1017 Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.At planting. Western NS NS 19713-10119713-56140SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#Preplant. Western NS NS 19713-10119713-5617.9Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.At planting. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-10119713-561Preplant. PacificNorthwestNS NS 19713-10119713-561CARROT(INCLUDING TOPS)Soilincorporated treatment.3.0 NS NS9.1Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Germination. Specific County(refer to theissues report)NS NS CA080024Preplant. Specific County(refer to theissues report)NS NS CA080024CASTOR BEAN Soilincorporated treatment.2.01 NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preemergence.Northern NS NS 19713-56119713-564NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Postplant. Northern NS NS 19713-1017.8Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Postplant. Northern NS NS 10163-283CLOVER,TREFOIL, LESPEDEZAChemigation.3.9NS NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Postplant. NS NS NS 10163-283Soilincorporated treatment.4.01 NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Western, PacificNorthwest,NorthernNS NS 19713-56441SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. Western,NorthernNS NS 19713-101CONIFERS(PLANTATIONS/NURSERIES)Soilincorporatedtreatment.6.0NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preplant.NSNSNS10163‐281CORN:FIELD,POP,SWEET,SILAGE,(UNSPECIFIED)Broadcast. 6.1NS NS NS Mixer(mechanical).Preplant. EasternStates,CentralStates,WesternArizona,SpecificCounty(refer to theissuesreport)NS 10163-284Soil bandtreatment.6.1NS NS NS GroundSpray.Preplant. EasternStates,CentralStates,WesternArizona,SpecificCounty(refer to theissuesreport)NS 10163-284Soilincorporated treatment.6.1NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Preplant. EasternStates,CentralStates,WesternArizona,SpecificCounty(refer to theissuesreport)NS 10163-284Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Postplant. Specific County(refer to theissues report)NS NS 10163-284Preplant. EasternStates,CentralStates,WesternArizona,SpecificCounty(refer to theissuesreport)NS 10163-284COTTON(UNSPECIFIED)Broadcast. 2.0NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Establishedplantings.Specific area(refer to theissuesreport),Southwest,SoutheastNS NS 10163-283Soil bandtreatment.2.01 NS NS SoilincorporationPostemergence.Specific area(refer to theNS NS 19713-56142SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#/ injectionequipment.issuesreport),Southwest,Southeast19713-564Soilincorporated treatment.2.0NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Establishedplantings.Specific area(refer to theissuesreport),Southwest,SoutheastNS Incorporate toa maximumdepth of 3inches.19713-101GRAPEFRUIT Chemigation.3.11 NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Bearing. Southwest,Western,SoutheastNS NS 19713-564Directedspray.6.21 NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Nonbearing. Southwest,Western,SoutheastNS NS 19713-564NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Nonbearingnurserystock.Southwest,Western,SoutheastNS NS 19713-101Nonbearing. Southwest,Western,SoutheastNS NS 19713-101LEMON Chemigation.3.11 NS NS Sprinkler orCenter PivotIrrigation.Bearing. Western NS NS 19713-564Directedspray.6.21 NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Nonbearing. Western NS NS 19713-564NS NS NS Soilincorporation/ injectionequipment.Nonbearingnurserystock.Western NS NS 19713-101Nonbearing. Western NS NS 19713-101ORANGEChemigation.3.11NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Bearing.Southwest,Western,SoutheastNSNS19713‐564Directedspray.6.21NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Nonbearing.Southwest,Western,SoutheastNSNS19713‐56443SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#ORNAMENTALAND/ORSHADETREES;ORNAMENTALWOODYSHRUBSANDVINESBroadcast.6.2NS NSNSHosePosttransplant.NSNSNS19713‐101Pretransplant.NSNSNS19713‐101Spring.NSNSNS19713‐101GroundSpray.Posttransplant.NSNSNS19713‐101Pretransplant.NSNSNS19713‐101Spring.NSNSNS19713‐101Soilbandtreatment.6.1NS NSNSGroundSpray.Posttransplant.NSNSNS10163‐283Pretransplant.NSNSNS10163‐283Spring.NSNSNS10163‐283Soilincorporatedtreatment.14.8NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preplant.NSNSIncorporatetoadepthof6inches.10163‐283ORNAMENTALGROUNDCOVERORNAMENTALHERBACEOUSPLANTSBroadcast.5.1NS NSNSHosePosttransplant.NSNSNS19713‐101Spring.NSNSNS19713‐101GroundSpray.Posttransplant.NSNSNS19713‐101Spring.NSNSNS19713‐101Soilbandtreatment.5.0NS NSNSGroundSpray.Posttransplant.NSNSNS10163‐283Spring.NSNSNS10163‐28344SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#Soilincorporatedtreatment.14.1NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preplant.NSNSIncorporatetoadepthof6inches.19713‐101PINESEEDLINGSSoilincorporatedtreatment.6.2NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Beforeseeding.Southeast,SouthwestNSNS19713‐101POTATO,WHITE/IRISHBroadcast.1.51NSNSGround.Postplant.Southeast,SouthwestNSNS19713‐564NS NS3.1Ground.Postplant.SoutheastNSNS19713‐101Soilincorporation/injectionequipment.Postplant.SoutheastNSNS19713‐561Chemigation.6.21NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Postemergence.PacificNorthwestNSNS19713‐564NS NS6.2SprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Postemergence.PacificNorthwestNSNS19713‐1016.1NS NS12.2SprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Postemergence.NSNSNS10163‐28312.3SprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Postemergence.PacificNorthwestNSNS19713‐561Soilbandtreatment.7.8NS NS12.3Soilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preplant.NSNSNS10163‐283GroundSpray.Postplant.NSNSNS10163‐283Soilincorporatedtreatment.7.8NS NS12.3Soilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preplant.NSNSNS10163‐28345SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#SprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Postplant.SpecificCounty(refertotheissuesreport)NSNS10163‐283SAFFLOWER(UNSPECIFIED)Chemigation.3.0NS NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Postemergence.ArizonaNSNS19713‐561Soilincorporatedtreatment.3.1NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Preplant.Western,PacificNorthwest,NorthernNSNS19713‐101SUGARBEETBroadcast.3.1NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Postemergence.Western,PacificNorthwest,NorthernNSNS19713‐101Chemigation.3.12NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Postemergence.Western,PacificNorthwest,NorthernNSNS19713‐561Soilbandtreatment.3.1NS NS3.1Soilincorporation/injectionequipment.Postemergence.Western,PacificNorthwest,NorthernNSNS19713‐561Soilincorporatedtreatment.4.6NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Fall.Minnesota,NorthDakotaNSNS10163‐2833.1NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Postemergence.Western,PacificNorthwest,NorthernNSIncorporatetoamaximumdepthof3inches.19713‐101Soilinjectiontreatment.3.0NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Postemergence.Southwest,Northern,PacificNorthwest,WesternNSNS10163‐283SUNFLOWERChemigation.3.0NS NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Postemergence.NSNSNS10163‐283Soilincorporated4.6NS NSNSSoilincorporationFall.Minnesota,NorthDakotaNSNS19713‐10146SiteApplicationMethodTypeA. I. MaxApp Rate(lb/A)Max#Apps@MaxRateMinimumRetreatmentIntervalMaxDose/Year (lb/A)ApplicationMethodEquipmentApplicationMethodTimingAllowableGeographicAreasDisallowedGeographic AreasIncorporationDepthReg#treatment./injectionequipment.Preplant(Fall).NSNSNS10163‐283TANGERINESChemigation.3.11NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Bearing.Southwest,Western,SoutheastNSNS19713‐564TOMATOBroadcast.3.0NS NSNSGroundSpray.Pretransplant.FloridaNSNSFL070007Soilbandtreatment.3.11NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Postemergence.SpecificCounty(refertotheissuesreport)NSNS19713‐56119713‐564NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Layby.SpecificCounty(refertotheissuesreport)NSNS19713‐1013.0NS NSNSGroundSpray.Layby.SpecificCounty(refertotheissuesreport)NSNS10163‐283Soilincorporatedtreatment.3.1NS NSNSSoilincorporation/injectionequipment.Layby.SpecificCounty(refertotheissuesreport)NSNS19713‐101Soiltreatment(surface).3.0NS NSNSGroundSpray.Layby.SpecificCounty(refertotheissuesreport)NSNS10163‐283TransplantedWatermelonBroadcast,Bandorsubsurface3.5NS NSNSGroundsprayPretransplantAllregionsNSNS10163‐283Chemigation3.5NS NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.PretransplantAllRegionsNSNS10163‐283WALNUT(ENGLISH/BLACK)Chemigation.3.11NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Establishedplantings.Western,PacificNorthwestNSNS19713‐56119713‐564NS NSNSSprinklerorCenterPivotIrrigation.Establishedplantings.Western,PacificNorthwestNSNS19713‐10147APPENDIX E: AEROBIC METABOLISM HALF-LIFE CALCULATION USING R-TOOL