Page 1 of 76 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

### UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C

. 20460 `

March 6, 2016 PC Code s : 056502 MEMORANDUM DP Barcode: D 429797

SUBJECT: Registration Review: Preliminary Problem Formulation for Environmental Fate,

Ecological Risk, Endangered Species, and Human Health Drinking Wat er Exposure Assessments for Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB)

FROM: Jim Carleton, Ph.D., Senior Fate Scientis t

Thomas Steeger, Ph.D., Senior Science Advisor Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

REVIEWED BY: Chery l Sutton, Ph.D., Environmental Scientist

Catherine Aubee, Senior Biologist Katrina White, Ph.D., Risk Assessment Process Leader

THROUGH: Jean Holmes

, D.V.M., Branch Chief

Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

T O: Veronica Dutch, Chemical Review Manager

Jill Bloom, Team Leader Risk Manage ment and Implementation Branch V Pesticide Re

- evaluation Division (7508P)

1. Executive summary

The Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) ha s completed the preliminary p roblem formulation for the ecological risk, environmental fate, endangered species, and drinking water assessments to be conducted as par t of the R egistration R eview of pentachloronitrobenzen e ( PCNB; CAS No. 82

- 68

- 8 ; PC C ode 056502 )

. The Registration Revie w co nsiders existing uses of PCNB as a contact fungicide via soil and seed treatment as well as via foliar applications

. The available environmental fate data f

or PCNB indicate that the compound is persistent and moderately volatile

. A lthough PCNB i s not c onsidered to be mobile, it nevertheless has the potential to leach into groundwater in sandy soils

, and to move into surface water through runoff , particularly in the form of residues sorbed to mobilized sediment ( i.e
., erosion)

, a s well as via spray drift

. As with other chlorinated benzenes with moderate volatility, PCNB can also move to areas distant from use sites via long

- range atmospheric transport

. T he compound is s ubject to aqueous photolysis and, to a lesser extent, microbially

- mediated degradatio n, including under anaerobic conditions

. D egradatesPage 2 of 76

of concern include: pentachloroaniline (PCA) , pentachlorothioanisole (PCTA)

, pentachlorothioanisole sulfoxide (PCTASO) , pentachlorothioanisole sulfone (PCTASO 2 )

, pentachlorophenol (PCP) and pentachlorobe nz ene (PCB)

, all of which are structurally similar to the parent and expected to be persistent

.

This problem formulation describes the methods planned to be used during the completion of drinking water and ecological risk assessments in support of Registr ation Review

, and provides an overview of the environmental fate, ecological effects, and potential ri sks associa ted with the us ag e of PCNB

, as well as sources of uncertaint y

. This document also identifies additional studies that would address uncertaintie s in assessing ecological risk ass ociated with current uses of PCNB

. The risk assessment will consider not only parent PCNB, but also degradates that have been identified as residues of eco toxicological concern (PCA , PCTA, PCTASO, PCTASO 2 , PCP , PCB ) in pr evious
assessments 1

, and manufacturing by

- products of concern including hexachlorobenzene (HCB)

, pentachlorobenzene (PCB

- both a manufacturing by

- product and a degradate)

, and congeners (structurally related chemicals) of polychlorinated diben z o

- p

- dioxins /dibenzofurans (dioxins/furans).

The fate database is in complete based on the environmental fate data requirements outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 40 Part 158 (40CFR158) Subpart N 2 and uncertainties discussed in the environmental fate a nd ecological risk assessment 3 written in support of the R eregistration Eligibility Decision ( RED) 4

. In 2009, EFED completed a post

- RED data call

- in justification for PCNB (DP Barcode D291273) in which multiple st udies were identified

. Data needs have agai n been considered, based on current scientific understanding and Agency policy, and the data that are now recommended to be required differ somewhat from those identified in 2009. With respect to environmental fate, the following studies are recommended:

 Photodegradat i on in Water (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 835.2240)

 Photodegradation in Water (PCA) (Guideline 835.2240)

 Photodegradation in Air (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 835.2370)

 Photodegradation in Air (PCA) (Guideline 835.2370)

 Aerobic Soil Metabolism (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 835.4100)

 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 835.4200)

 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 835.4300)

 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 835.4400)

 Foliar Dissipation (PCNB TEP ) (Guideline 835.6100SS; Special Study)

 ECM/ILV for Water (PCNB) (Guideline 850.6200)

1 USEPA. 2012. Risks of Pentachloronitrobenzene Use to the Federally Threatened Bay Checkerspot Butterfly ( Euphydryas editha bayensis ), California Tiger Salamander ( Ambystoma californiense ), Central California Distinct Population Segment, and Delta Smelt ( Hypomesus transpacificus ) and the Federally Endangered California Clapper Rail ( Rallus longirostris obsoletus ), California F reshwater Shrimp ( Syncaris pacificus ), California Tiger Salamander ( Ambystoma californiense ) Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment and Santa Barbara County Distinct Population Segment, San Francisco Garter Snake ( Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia ) and Ti dewater Goby ( Eucyclogobius newberryi) Pesticide Effects Determinations. PC Code 056502. June 28, 2012. http://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/endanger/litstatus/effects/redleg

frog/2012/pcnb/assessment.pdf#_ga=1.190689199.520862732.1416572410

2 CFR. 2015 . Title 40 (Protection of the Environment), Chapter 1 (Environmental Protection Agency), Subchapter E (Pesticide Programs), Part 158 (Data Requirements for Pesticides), Subpart N (Environmental Fate) http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi

- bin /text

idx?c=ecfr&SID=ff5c7fef3645e7cd5abceca0b597bccb&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr158_main_02.tpl

3 USEPA. 2005

. Revised Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk assessment of Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) dated February 15, 2005

. DP Barcode D291276.

4 US EPA. 2006

. Reregistration Eligibility Decision for Pentachloronitrobenzene List A Case No. 0128

. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (formerly the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances)

. July 11

, 2006

. Available on

- line at: http://archive.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/web/pdf/pcnb_red.pdf or http:/ /www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

OPP

- 2004

- 0202

- 0057

.Page 3 of 76  ECM/ILV for Soil (PCNB) (Guideline 850.6100)

 ECM/ILV for Sediment (PCNB) (Guideline 850.6100)

Studies are recommended primarily for PCNB, however it should be note d that two studies are also

re commended for PCA because PCA formed at the highest relative percentage (up to 86.6% of applied radioactivity) of any PCNB degradate identified in the currently available fate studies , and in those studies appears to be persistent

. Photolytic studies on P CA are recommended in particular because aqueous photolysis represents a relatively rapid degradation pathway for parent PCNB, yet the products of photolytic degradation of PCNB have not been identified. If photolysis prove s to be a similarly important de gradation route for PCA, then adequate identification of the photodegradates of PCA will be importan t for understanding the risks pose d by PCNB usage

. Anaerobic aquatic data are recommended to be required because no fully acceptable aquatic data (aerobic or anaerobic) have yet been submitted. Additional a naerobic soil data are also required because the available data were determined to be supplemental only , and these previously submitted data are the only fate data in which PCP has appeared as a degradate

. EPA needs to better understand the signific ance of this pathway

. With respect to the special study of PCNB foliar dissipation, the study should include relevant environmental chemistry methods (ECM) for soil, water and sediment with independent laborat ory validation (ILV).

The ecological database is also in complete based on the ecological effects data requirements outlined in the 40CFR Part 158 Subpart G 5 and uncertainties discussed in the environmental fate and ecological risk assessment (USEPA 2005 6 ) written in support of the RED ( USEPA 200 6 7 ) and more recent guidance on assessing risks to bees

. T he data that are now recommended to be required differ somewhat from those identified in the RED

. Additional toxicity data on the following taxa

are recom mended for PCNB :

 Terrestrial plant toxicity data, Tier I/Tier II (Seedling Emergence and Vegetative Vigor) (PCNB TEP ) (Guidelines 850.4100 and 850.4150)

 Aquatic plant toxicity data (PCNB TGAI ) (Guidelines 850.4400 and 850.5400)

 Estuarine/marine fish lif e cycle (PCNB TGAI )

 Estuarine/marine invertebrate life cycle (PCNB (TGAI ) (Guideline 850.1350)

 Whole sediment (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline s 850.1735 and 850.1740 ; three benthic species. )

 Whole sediment; chronic (PCNB TGAI ) (Special Study)

 Acute toxicity freshwat er fish (PCA ; two species ) (Guideline 850.1075)

 Acute toxicity estuarine/marine fish (PCA) (Guideline 850.1075)

 Mysid Acute Toxicity (PCA) (Guideline 850.1035)

 Acute toxicity

– freshwater invertebrates (PCA) (Guideline 850.1010)

 Fish early life stage

– fre shwater (PCA) (Guideline 850.1400)

 Fish full life cycle

— freshwater (PCNB) (Guideline 850.1500) **

 A quatic invertebrate life cycle (freshwater) (PCA) (Guideline 850.1300)

 Aquatic Food Chain Transfer (Guideline 850.1850)

 Avian acute oral toxicity

– passerine (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 850.2100)

5 CFR. 2015 . Title 40 (Protection of the Environment), Chapter 1 (Environmental Protection Agency), Subchapter E (Pesticide Programs), Part 158 (Data Requirements for Pesticides), Subpart G (Ecological Effects) http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi

- bin/text

idx?SID=184ddf1c19b82301b18d48a454a60c6d&mc=true&node=sp40.24.158.g&rgn=div 6

6 Ibid USEPA. 2005

. 7 Ibid USEPA. 2006

.Page 4 of 76  Pollinator toxicity data con sisting of :

o acute oral test with adult honey bees (PCNB TGAI) (OECD 213);

o acute honey bee larvae test (PCNB TGAI ) (OECD 237);

o 10

- day adult honey bee test (PCNB TGAI ) (draft OECD guideline); and,

o 21

- day larval honey bee toxicity test (PCNB TGAI ) (draft OECD guidance)

o Semi

- field whole colony test (PCNB TEP) (OECD 75)*

o Full

- field whole colony test (PCNB TEP) (850.3040)*

o Residues in pollen/nectar * (TEP; non

- guideline)

* pending outcome of lower

- tier pollinator studies

** fish full life cycle study can be waived pending successful completion of medaka extended one generation test (MEOGRT; Guidelin e 890.2200)

2. Introduction

PCNB (1,2,3,4,5

- pentachloro

- 6

- nitro benzene , or quintozene ; CAS No.: 82

- 68

- 8 ) is a n organochlorine ( i.e ., chlorinated benzene) contact fungicide first registered in the United States in 1964 that is intended to provide preventative and residual protection against soil

- borne fungal diseases

. The chemical acts through inhibition of hyphal growth in fungi by means of competitive inhibition of inositol

.

PCNB was last assessed nationally in 2 005 for the Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( USEPA 200 6 8 ) although a more recent assessment for speci fic Federally listed threatened/endangered species in California 9 was conducted in 2012

. No new uses have been assessed since that time ; however, multiple uses were cancelled subsequently

. EFED considered the most recent ecological risk assessment for PCNB in association with any available updated toxicity, exposure, and usage information to determine if sufficient data are available or if further updates are needed to support Registration Review

. EFED ha s also considered the latest Agency science policies and risk assessment methodologies in compiling this problem formulation

.

3. Use Characterization

PCNB is an active ingredient register ed for the control of fungal diseases on agricultural crops

, ornamental plants, bulbs, and turf

. According to a screening

- l evel assessment of PCNB uses conducted by the Biological and Economic Analysis Division, the average number of pounds of active ingredient applied annually to agricultural crops during the reporting period of 2004

– 2013,

was approximately 324,500 lbs

. T h is is reduced from the average reported by the USGS (887,548 lbs) for 1999 to 2004. The majority of agricultural us ag e from 2004

– 2013 w as on potatoes, cotton and green beans which represented 61%, 18% and 6% of total agricultural usage, respectively. US GS

- estimated average agricultural usage by year and crop for PCNB is depicted in Figure 1 and indicates a relatively steady decline in use from 1994 to 2012. Although agricultural use is depicted as declining, non

- agricultural use ( e.g ., turf, sod farms) i s not included in these estimates and the

8 Ibid USEPA. 2006

. . 9 USEPA. 2012. Risks of Pentachloronitrobenzene Use to the Federally Threatened Bay Checkerspot Butterfly ( Euphydryas editha bayensis ), California Tiger Salamander ( Ambystoma californien se ), Central California Distinct Population Segment, and Delta Smelt ( Hypomesus transpacificus ) and the Federally Endangered California Clapper Rail ( Rallus longirostris obsoletus ), California Freshwater Shrimp ( Syncaris pacificus ), California Tiger Salama nder ( Ambystoma californiense ) Sonoma County Distinct Population Segment and Santa Barbara County Distinct Population Segment, San Francisco Garter Snake ( Thamnophis sirtalis tetrataenia ) and Tidewater Goby ( Eucyclogobius newberryi) Pesticide Effects Deter minations. PC Code 056502. June 28, 2012. http://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/endanger/litstatus/effects/redl eg

frog/2012/pcnb/assessment.pdf#_ga=1.190689199.520862732.1416572410Page 5 of 76

general decline may not apply. However, in July 2009, certain residential and other uses were cancelled, so a reduction in usage on non

- agricultural sites would not be unexpected. Later use terminations and the e xecution of a stop

- sale order may have impacted overall usage as well.

Figure 1 . PCNB estimated agricultural use (in milli o n s of pounds) by year and crop (USGS Pesticide National Synthesis Project https://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pnsp/usage/maps/show_map.php?year=2012&map=QUINTO ZENE&hilo=L&disp=Quintozene )

PCNB is formulated as a flowable concentrate and as a granule

. The maximum si ngle application
rate for ornamentals equates to roughly 21 3

. 4 pounds of active ingredient per acre (lbs a

. i

. /A)

. There are formulations of PCNB containing other active ingredients ( e.g ., metalaxyl 10

, chlorothalonil 11 and propioconazol e 12 )

. Historically, PCNB has commonl y been used in combination with insecticides and other fungicides ( e.g ., carbaryl, imazalil, triadimenol, fuberidazole), particularly for soil applications to cotton ( e.g ., with etridiazole, disulfoton, and phorate), turf , potato, and peanuts ( e.g. , with ethoprop); and for seed treatment applications ( e.g. , with captan, carboxin, metalaxyl, TBZ, and Bacillus subtilis ; PCNB is no longer registered for seed
treatment )

. Application methods that are used in the field include broadcast or row drench, pre

- emergent broadcast, row spray, in

- furrow (spray and granular), furrow, foliar spray, band, transplant solution, and chemigation

. Applications of PCNB are typically made only once a season, although the labels allow for repeat applications for some uses, such as turf

. PCNB may be applied at seed planting , a pre

- emergent, at planting or transplant, or as a post

- emergent (either at mid

- season for beans, peanuts, potatoes or ornamentals; or at the first appearance of disease on tur f)

. On November 23, 2011, the Agency approved a request by the sole technical registrant of PCNB ( i.e ., Amvac) that resulted in the following amendment to the terms and conditions of its PCNB registration s :

10 Ridomil gold PC GR ® (EPA Reg No. 100

- 823)

11 Andersons 3

- day Snow Mold Fungicide ® (EPA Reg No. 9198

- 227)

12 Andersons 3

- day Snow Mold Fungicide ® (EPA Reg No. 9198

- 227)Page 6 of 76

 Amvac agreed not to sell, distribute, or formu late any Technical Grade PCNB (EPA Reg. # 5481

- 197) with concentrations of dioxin s /furans greater than a particular limit. Amvac agreed to report the results of its analyses of the technical material.

 The technical registrant agreed to market only three P CNB products (labeled to conform to the other elements of the approved amendments)

-- technical grade PCNB, Turfcide ® 10% Granular (Reg. # 5481

- 8988) and Turfcide ® 4F (Reg. # 5481

- 8992).

 The technical registrant agreed to request cancellation of all non

- li quid/non

- granular registrations of PCNB.

The Biological and Economic Analysis Division ( BEAD ) lists the uses associated with active registrations of PCNB

. EFED will rely on the data from BEAD when estimating environmental
exposure s that result from these registered uses

. Additionally, in order to be protective, EFED will utilize the use information that result s in maximum exposure ( e.g. , concentration) estimates for a given use pattern for the drinking water and ecological risk assessment s

. If the labels ( and consequently the BEAD chemical profile) do not include all information needed to enable estimat ion of maximal exposure s , EFED will make conservative assumptions regarding these use parameters

.

4. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments

a. Ecological Ris k Assessment

In 2005 , EPA completed an environmental fate and ecological risk assessment of PCNB 13 in support of the Reregistra t ion Eligibility Decision

. Based on that screening

- level risk assessment for the use of PCNB at maximum application rates

, on us e sites for which it was registered at the time

, chronic risk to terrestrial animals (birds , reptiles, terrestrial

- phase amphibian, and mammals) and both acute and chronic risk s to aquatic animals (fish , aquatic

- phase amphibian and invertebrates) were iden tified

. Although PCNB is slightly mobile (based on United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization mobility classification scheme) in most soils, the chemical and its degradates are sufficiently persistent to possibly result in environmental concentration s similar to those that have, in laboratory studies, resulted in adverse effects to non

- target animals

. PCNB and its degradates were expected to bioconcentrate; thus, envi ronmental concentrations can accumulate in the tissues of exposed organisms to levels at which effects are more likely

. Additionally, the assessment noted that the effects of PCNB may not be limited to organisms in close proximity to PCNB us ag e since the chemical is also subject to long

- range atmospheric transport

. In the absence of data ( e.g., terrestrial and aquatic plants), the potential risk is uncertain.

b. Assessment of Bioaccumulation and Long

- Range Transport Potential of PCNB (PCNB) and Associated Risks

In 2010, EPA completed an assessment 14 (DP Barcode D291271) of the bioaccumulation and long

range transport potential of PCNB, including its degradates and contaminants based on input from

13 Ibid USEPA. 20 05

. 14 K. Garber, 3/22/10, “2008 Science Advisory Panel Meeting Follow Up: Assessment of the Bioaccumulation and Long

- Range Transport Potential (LRTP) and of Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) and Associated Ecological Risks” can be found at http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

- OPP

- 2004

- 0202

- 0265

.Page 7 of 76

a FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel in 2008 15 on a n EFED White Paper 16 concerning methods for assessing ecological risks of pesticides with persistent, b ioaccumulative and toxic characteristics

. The assessment concluded that PCNB, its degradates and its contaminants were sufficiently persistent and likely to bioaccumulate in aquatic food chains to constitute a chronic risk to mammals and birds that consume aquatic organism s

. Also, PCNB was expected to move considerable distances from its site of application through long

- range atmospheric transport

. As discussed in the assessment, PCNB contains several contaminants, including hexachlorobenzene, polychlorinat ed dibenzodioxins and polychlorinated dibenzofurans, which are listed under the Stockholm Convention as Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), and the weight of evidence suggested that PCNB, when considered with its residues and contaminants of concern, is a persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic chemical (PBT)

.

c. Risk Conclusions from OPP’s previous PCNB Federally listed Species Effect Determination

In 2012, EPA completed an effects determination 17 for PCNB on multiple Federally listed threatened and endanger e d species for marketed uses of PCNB on cole crops, cotton, potatoes and turf in California

. Although not considered in the 2005 ecological risk assessment chapter for the PCNB RED (because at the time of that document’s writing EPA was unaware of their pr esence)

, polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) present in PCNB formulations as contaminants were considered to be of concern in the effects determination since they are persistent, bioaccumulative and not readily metabolized by mammals and would be expected to bioaccumulate to a greater extent than PCNB

. EPA made a likely to adversely affect (LAA) determination for each of the species evaluated and also determined that there was a potential for modification of the designated critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly ( Euphydryas editha bayensis ), Delta smelt ( Hypomesus transpacificus ), tidewater goby ( Eucyclogobius newberryi ), and the Central California distinct population segment and the Santa Barbara Count y distinct population segment of the California tiger salamander ( Ambystoma californiense ).

The major environmental fate and ecological risk conclusions identified in previous assessments are summarized in Table and 2

.

Table 1. Potential fate concerns identified in previous assessments for PCNB. Bioconcentration/ Bioaccumulation 1 Ground w ater

Contamination 2 Presence in

Sediment Persistence Residues of Concern Volatilization

Yes Yes Yes Yes PCNB, PCA, PCTA, PCTA SO, PCTASO 2 , PCP PCB , HCB Yes

Abbreviations: pentachlorothioanisole (PCTA), pentachlorothioanisole sulfoxide (PCTASO), pentachlorothioanisole sulfone (PCTASO 2 ), pentachlorophenol (PCP) and pentachlorobenzene (PCB)

1 Based Aquatic Bioaccumulation Model ( KABAM) for chemicals with log K ow >3.

2 Sandy soils

.

15 SAP

. 2008

. FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel Meeting

. Selected Issues Associated with the Risk Assessment Pr ocess for Pesticides with Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Characteristics

. Octob er 28

– 31, 2008. Meeting materials and minutes are available on

line at: http://archi ve.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/meetings/web/html/index

- 13.html

16 USEPA. 2008 b. White paper on methods for assessing ecological risks of pesticides with persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic characteristics. Submitted to the FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panel for rev iew and comment. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Available online at: http://www.epa.gov/scip oly/sap/meetings/2008/october/sap_pbt_whitepaper_final_Oct_7_08d.pdf

. 17 Ibid USEPA. 2012.Page 8 of 76

Table 2. Potential for direct effects identified in previous assessments for PCNB. 1 Listed/or

non listed Birds 2 Mammals Terrestrial Invertebrates Aquatic

Vertebrates 3 Aquatic

Invertebrates Terrestrial

Plants Aquatic

Plants

Non

listed Yes Yes Presumed 4 No No UNC 5 UNC 5

Listed Yes Yes Presumed 4 Yes Yes UNC 5 UNC 5

1 Risk concerns were identified when the RQ exceeded the corresponding level of concern in a previous risk assessment or were identified as a potential concern based on weight of evidence.

2 Birds serve as surrogates for terrestrial

- phase amphibians and reptiles.

3 Fish serve as surrogates for aquatic

- phase amphibians.

4 Toxicity data not available, risk presumed.

5 UNC=uncertain due to lack of data

d. Drinking Water Exposure Assessments

The most recent drinking water assessment was a refined Tier II assessment completed in 20 05 18

. Estimated drinking water exposure concentrations (EDWCs) were based on residues of parent PCNB plus PCA (identified as resi dues of concern by a Health Effects Division Metabolism Assessment Review Committee (MARC) on May 27, 2003), and were developed for the five major crops ( i.e ., turf, peanuts, cabbage, potatoes and cotton) evaluated in the environmental fate and ecological risk assessment written in support of the RED. Based on that assessment, the peak surface water numbers (acute=183 μg/L; chronic=12.2 μg/L) for PCNB use on peanuts were selected ( Table 3 )

. Although EDWCs were higher initially for turf (acute=268 μg/L and chronic=28.7 μg/L), once the turf concentrations were adjusted using the golf course adjustment factor (GCAF), they were lower than the estimates for peanuts. Groundwater

- derived acute and chronic drinking water estimates were based on use rates for bulbs and turf, respectively ( Table 3 ).

Table 1

. Maximum Tier 1 Estimated Drinking Water Con centrations of parent PCNB in groundwater and s urface water based on PCNB use on peanuts at 10 lb s a . i

. /A by ground spray application. Drinking Water Source (Model Used) Use/Rate Modeled (lb

a . i

. /A) Maximum Estimated Drinking Water Concentration (EDWC; pp b )

Groundwater (SCI

- GROW) 213.4 lbs/A x 1 applic ation to bulbs;
32.67 lbs/A x 2 applications to turf Acute and Chronic 30.6 19 (bulbs) ;
9.38 (turf )

Surface Water (PRZM/EXAMS ) Ground spray/1 application for total of 10 lbs a

. i

. /A Acute 183 (peanuts)

Aerial spray/0.013 x 3 application for total of 0.039 Chronic 12.2 (peanuts)

18 USEPA. 2005. Revised/Refined Tier II Aquatic Exposure Values for the Drinking Water and Ecological Assessments of PCNB for Use During Phase 6

– Risk Mitigation. D P Barcode D318569.

19 Based on revised drinking water assessment; DP Barcode D291286 dated 12/22/2003.Page 9 of 76 e. Clean Water Act Programs

Although PCNB is not specifically identi fied as a cause of impairment for any water bodies listed as impaired under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act 20 , organochlorine pesticides, and dioxins

are all identified as such

. Tot al Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) have been developed for hexachlorobenzen e 21 , a contaminant of PCNB

. Aquatic life benchmarks 22 have been established for PCNB as well as for its PCA, PCB, and PCP degradates ; however, a ny data submitted or otherwise located as part of the Registration Review process that indicate greater sensitiv i ty than data currently available may be used to revise aquatic life benchmarks if applicable

.

5. Environmental Fate and Transport

PCNB is a persistent, moderately volatile chemical

, and v olatilization is expected to represent a relevant dissipation route for PCNB ; however, the overall persistence of PCNB and its degradates in the air is unknown. PCNB and its major degradate PCA are classified

, under the FAO mobility classification system, as s l ightly mobile to hardly m o bile in soil (with K OC s ranging from 1,588 to 17,508, and 3,337 to 10,580 respectively), wh ereas the major degradate PCTA is classified as hardly mobile (with K OC s ranging from 18,610 to 45,662)

. Nevertheless when applied to sandy (course

- textured) soils low in organic matter, the possibilit y exists for P CNB and/or its degradates to leach to groundwater

. PCNB may also m ov e to surface water via runoff particularly while sorbed
to ero ded sediment

, via spray drift (particularly for foliar applications such as to turf

, where in the material is no t soil

- incorporated )

, and /or via secondary drift

, i.e ., drift of volatilized or soil

- bou n d residues (dust) following application and leading to deposition onto nearby or more distant ecosystems

. PCNB is stable to hydrolysis and effectively stable to phot odegradation on soil ( half

- life of 80 days). Although laboratory data suggest a n important route of degradation for PCNB is aqueous photolysis (half

- life of 1.1 to 2.5 days) , the ideal circumstances that allow this mechanism to proceed ( i .e

. , clear, shall ow water) are expected to be often limited under natural conditions by turbidity, shading, and the attenuat ion of light with increasing water depth. Although aqueous photolysis represents a relatively rapid degradation pathway for parent PCNB, the product s of photolytic degradation of PCNB have not been identified. In addition, although the bio degradate PCA formed at the highest relative percentage (up to 86.6% of applied radioactivity) of any PCNB degradate that has been identified in the available fate studies, there is currently no data on the rate of photolytic degradation of PCA in soil or water, and no information about the identities of any further degradates that may be formed from PCA by these processes. Photolytic degradation studies on PCA are therefore included as data gaps in this problem formulation

.

Based on limited data PCNB is understood to biodegrade slowly in aerobic soils, with half

- lives of 77 and 189 days in submitted studies on sandy loam s (MRIDs 42911902, 41384501, 41713202, and 42 112801 )

. Note that due to deficiencies and ambiguities in submitted volatility data, calculation of these half

- lives involved conservatively adding volatilized residues to non

-

20 Specific state causes of impairment that make up the national pesticides cause of impairment group are listed at http://iaspub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/att ains_nation_cy.cause_detail_303d?p_cause_group_id=885

. 21 Specific state pollutants that make up the National Pesticides Pollutant Group and have TMDLs are listed at http://iaspub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/attains_nation.tmdl_pollutant_detail?p_pollutant_group_ id=885&p_pollutant_group_name=PES TICIDES

. 22 Aquatic Life Benchmarks are available at ( http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/ecorisk_ders/aquatic_life_benchmark.htm

.Page 10 of 76

volatilized residues. However d ata from the published literature tend to confi rm that PCNB degrade s slowly in aerobic soil environment s , with half

- lives of 4.7

- 9.7 months reported by Wang and Broadbent (1972 23 )

, and half

- lives of 213, 425, 535 and 699 days reported by Beck and Hansen (1974 24 ). While data in submitted anaerobic soil m etabolism studies include d insufficient sampling intervals to enable valid calculat ion of degradation half

- lives, substantial conversion of PCNB to degradates (particularly PCA and PCTA) under anaerobic conditions was found

, and the data suggest that under such conditions the se m ight be more persistent than the parent compound

. Schauerte et al. (1982 25 ) found quantitative conversion of PCNB to PCA and PCTA in the sediment phase of an experimental pond study, although Susarla et al. (1996 26 ) found that in ana erobic sediment, PCNB degraded to multiple less

- chlorinated anilines following an initial conversion to PCA. In the Schauerte et al. 27 study, the majority of PCNB residues remaining in the sediment at up to 145 weeks post

- treatment were found in the 0

- to 10

- cm depth layer, and decreased over time. In general, information concerning the rate and products of biodegradation of PCNB under both aerobic and anaerobic condition s is limited and incomplete. Like other chlorinated benzenes characterized by moderat e to high volatility, PCNB can move to areas distant from use sites via long

- range atmospheric transport

. Once in the atmosphere, PCNB is not expected to degrade by photooxidation

. In submitted terrestrial field dissipation studies, PCNB dissipated mor e rapidly in the plots in which the pesticide was not incorporated into soil , with a half

- life range of 39

- 57 days (MRIDs 430615

- 01; 438874

- 03; 412105

- 01, 420944

- 03 and 420944

- 04) versus a half

- life range of 128

- 324 days for plots with incorporated PCNB (M RIDs 438874

- 01; 438874

- 02; 417214

- 01; 412164

- 01 and 424859

- 01; 412164

- 02 and 424859

- 02) . Major degradates in those studies included PCA, PCTA and PCB. The manufacturing contaminant HCB was detected in all except one of the field studies, at maximum conce ntrations ranging from 0.03 to 0.076 ppm. In a study of field soils (cropped with potatoes) in Denmark to which PCNB had been applied over the previous 5 to 11 years, Beck and Hansen (1974) determined field half

- lives ranging from 117 to 1059 days, with a mean of 434 days (for 22 values). Degradates observed in the Danish field soils were PCA, PCTA and PCB.

Volatilization should be a more significant route of dissipation of the parent and the degradate PCA when PCNB is not incorporated, such as the foliar use on turf



### . In a field volatility study (MRID 437511

- 01) , PCNB (as Terraclor ® 75% WP) applied as a band application, at 10.2 lb s a

. i

. / A, volatilized from an unvegetated silt loam soil in Mississippi; approximately 65% of the total volatiles trapped were collected during the first two days of the study. Volati lized PCNB was at a maximum on D ay 0 and declined throughout the rest of the 13

- day study. The degradate PCA was also detected as a volatile with peak volatility on Day 0

. Weather may have confoun ded the study result though as sampling could not be conducted due to rain. The available data suggest that depending on use conditions, PCNB and some of its degradates may volatilize and contribute to atmospheric loading of the chemical(s). The extent t o which this occurs cannot be quantified at this time; however, this loading would likely serve as a means through which PCNB could undergo long

- range atmospheric transport. The magnitude of transport via secondary drift depends on PCNB’s ability to be mob ilized into air and its eventual removal through wet and dry deposition of gases/particles and photochemical reactions in the atmosphere. Based on its vapor pressure (1.13 x

23 Wang, C.H. and F. E. Broadbent. 1972. Kinetics of losses of PCNB and DCNA in three California soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 36:742

- 745.

24 Beck, J. and K.E. Hansen. 1974. The degradation of quintozene, pentachlorobenzene, hexachlorobenzene and pentachloroaniline in soil. Pestic. Sci. 5:41

- 48.

25 Schauerte, W., J.P. Lay, W. Klein and F. Korte. 1982. Long

- term fate of organochlorine xenobiotics in aquatic ecosystems. Ecotoxicol. and Environ. Safety 6:560

- 569.

26 Susarla, S., S. Masunaga and Y. Yonezawa. 1996. Transfor mation of chloronitrobenzenes in anaerobic sediment. Chemosphere 32:967

- 977

27 Ibid Schauerte et al . 1982.Page 11 of 76

1 0

- 4 Torr at 25 o C), PCNB is expected to exist primarily in the vapor phase while i n the atmosphere. Therefore, physicochemical properties of PCNB that describe its potential to enter the air from water or soil ( e.g., Henry’s Law constant and vapor pressure), pesticide use data, modeled estimated concentrations in water and air, and ava ilable air monitoring data from the Central Valley and the Sierra Nevada Mountain s are important for evaluating the potential for atmospheric transport of PCNB to locations where it could impact the species listed above.

PCNB has the potential to bioaccu mulate in non

- target organisms. Based on the results of a guideline study (MRID 405802

- 02) PCNB has the potential to bio accumulate in the aquatic environment with bio con centration factors (BCF) in fish of 1800X. Residues in bluegill sunfish ( Lepomis macr ohirus ) exposed to [ 14 C]PCNB at 1.0 ppb were bioaccumulated to a greater extent in the viscera, with bioconcentration factors (BCF) of 1800X in each of two studies, versus in edible tissue, with BCF’s of 370X and 400X; in whole fish tissue, measured BCF va lues were 960X and 1100X. As reported in the literature, PCNB was bioaccumulated in rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) exposed to PCNB at 0.69 ppm, with BCF’s of 114

- 261X 28 . A BCF value of 238X 29 was reported for PCNB in topmouth gudgeon ( Pseudorasbora parv a). Reported BCF values for guppies ( Poecilia reticulate ) exposed to PCNB range from 363 to 1030X 30

. Although the compound can be metabolized and undergo moderately rapid depuration when the fish are no longer exposed to the compound, there is uncertainty r egarding the extent to which the compound is readily metabolized/depurated in other aquatic taxa. Higher BCF values have been reported for aquatic plants with BCF s of 3100X 31 and 4508X 32

.

Table 2

. Chemical Properties and Environme ntal Fate Parameters of PCNB and Degradates (Where Data are Available)
Parameter Value Description/Comments Source /MRID Selected Physical/Chemical Parameters
PC Code 056502

-- -- Molecular Mass 295.3 g/mol

-- -- Molecular Formula C 6 Cl 5 NO 2 -- -- Vapor pressure (2 5 o C) 1.13 x 10

- 4 mm Hg Moderate ly volatile Product Chemistry

Aqueous solubility ( 2 5 o C) 0.44 mg/L Product Chemist ry

H enry’s Law Constant 9.980E

- 005 atm

- m 3 /mole @ 25 o C

-- Estimated from water solubility and vapor
pressure

28 Niimi, A.J., H.B. Lee and G.P. Kissoon. 1989. Octanol/water partition coefficients and bioconcentration factors of chloronitrobenzenes in rainbow t rout ( salmo gairdneri )

. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 8:817

- 823

. 29 Kanazawa, 1981. Measurement of the bioconcentration factors of pesticides by freshwater fish and their correlation with physicochemical properties or acute toxicities. J. Pestic. Sci. 12:417

- 424

. 30 DeWolf, W., J.H.M. Debrujin, W. Selnen and J.L.M. Hermens. 1992. Influence of biotransformation on the relationship between bioconcentration factors and octanol

- water partition coefficients. Environ. Sci. Technol. 26:1197

- 1201

. 31 Korte, F., D. Freitag, H. Geyer, W. Klein, A. G. Kraus and E. Lahaniatis. 1978. Ecotoxicologic profile analysis: A concept for establishing ecotoxicologic priority lists for chemicals. Chemosphere 1:79

- 102.

32 Wang, X. , S. Harada, M. Watanabe, H. Koshikawa and H. J. Geyer. 19 96. Modeling the bioconcentration of hydrophobic organic chemicals in aquatic organisms. Chemosphere 32:1783

- 93

.Page 12 of 76 Parameter Value Description/Comments Source /MRID Log octanol

- to

water partition coefficient (Log K ow ) 4.64 @ 25 o C
-- Geyer et al . 1984 33

Air

- water partition coefficient (log K AW ) - 2.743

-- Estimated using EPISuite

Log octanol

- air partition coefficient (log K OA ) 7.38

-- Estimated using EPISuite

UV/visible light absorpt ion 301 mm

-- Khan et al ., 2011 34

Hydrolysis half

- life stable

-- 408653

- 01, 409726

- 01

Aqueous photolysis half

- life (at pH 5; in days ) t 1/2 = 2.5 days

t 1/2 = 1.12 days Chlorinated hydroxybenzenes and/or chloronitrophenols identified along with unident ified degradates. 426062

- 01, 426062

- 02 423362

- 01

Soil photolysis half

- life (days) stable

-- 410048

- 01, 417132

- 01

Aerobic soil metabolism half

life (days) t 1/2 = 77, 189 days (parent only);

t 1/2 = 983, 1052 days (total residues 3 ) (data on two sandy loam soils) PCA (0.90 ppm) PCTA (0.81 ppm) PCB (0.27 ppm) PCTASO (0.37 ppm) PCTASO 2 (0.61ppm) 429119

- 02, 413845

- 01,

417132

- 02, 421128

- 01

Anaerobic soil metabolism half

life insufficient sampling intervals to calculate half

- life PCA (87% in soil; 27%

in water ) PCTA ( 3.2% in soil) PCP (2% in soil) 412036

- 02, 420944

- 01,

413843

- 01, 416860

- 01, 417132

- 02, 421128

- 02

Aerobic aquatic metabolism half

life (20  C) No data

-- NA

Anaerobic aquatic metabolism half

life (20

- 26  C) No data

-- NA

Mobility

Solid

- water distr ibution coefficient (K d ) in L/kg

- soil 7.3, 15.5, 19.1, 210

-- 416482

- 01

33 Geyer, H., G. Politzki, and D. Freitag. 1984. Prediction of Ecotoxicological Behaviour of Chemicals: Relationship Between N

Octanol/Water Par tition Coefficient and Bioaccumulation of Organic Chemicals by Alga Chlorella . Chemosphere 13(2):269

- 284

34 Khan, F., D. Prakash, and R

. K

. Jain. 2011. Development of an HPLC method for determination of pentachloronitrobenzene, hexachlorobenzene and their pos sible metabol ites. BMC Chemical Biology 11:2 doi:10.1186/1472

- 6769

- 11

- 2Page 13 of 76 Parameter Value Description/Comments Source /MRID

Organic

- carbon normalized distribution coefficient (K oc ) PCNB

1588 L/kg ( silt loam ) ; 2912 L/kg ( sand ) ; 3870 L/kg ( sandy loam ) ; 17508 L/kg ( clay ) -- 416482

- 01

PCTA (degradate) 18610 L/kg ( sand ) 19395 L/kg ( sandy loam ) 45662 L/kg ( silt loam ) 37267 L/kg ( silty clay loam ) -- 435005

- 01

PCA (degradate) 3337 L/kg ( sand ) 7116 L/kg ( sandy loam ) 3581 L/kg ( silt loam ) 10580 L/kg ( silty clay loam ) -- 435005

- 02

Terrestrial Field Dissipation D issipation Half

- life 1,2 = 272 days, bareground, CA 459, bareground, GA 57, bareground, GA 324, potatoes, MN 39, turf, CA 128, broccoli, CA 193, MN, potatoes PCA (0.02

– 9.24 ppm) PCTA (0.008

– 0.73 ppm) PCB (0.02

- 0.24 ppm) PCTASO (0.07 ppm) PCTASO 2 (0.6 ppm) 417214

- 01 438874

- 01 438874

- 02 438874

- 03 430615

- 01 412105

- 01 & 420944

- 03 & 420944

- 04

412164

- 01 & 424859

- 01

412164

- 02

Volatility from Soil (Laboratory) 80% volatilized by 7 days, sandy

loam Maximum volatilization within 24 hours of
treatmen t. 411780

- 01 425074

- 01

Volatility from Soil (Field) PCNB: 21.45 to 67.49 ng/liter

(during four 2

- hr samplings on day 0; silt loam)

PCA: 3.32 to 9.61 ng/liter (during four 2

- hr samplings on day 0; silt loam) Total of 65% of volatiles (PCNB & PCA) collec ted by day 1 post

applic ation ., with max. of each compound volatilized on day 0. Since >5 inches of rain fell in the study area (precluding air sampling on days 4 and 9) from days 3 to 9, the observed volatilization cannot be considered to be representativ e of that which might occur over time under more typical field conditions or in more arid regions. 437511

- 01

Fish BioconcentrationPage 14 of 76 Parameter Value Description/Comments Source /MRID

Fish bioconcentration factors (steady

state) 370

- 400 L/kg wet wt ( edible tissue ) 1800 L/kg wet wt ( nonedible

tissue ) 960

- 1100 L/kg wet wt ( whole fish

tissue ) N

- acetyl S

pentachlorophenyl cystine (the cystinyl conjugate of PCNB): 0.8

- 1.2 ppb (edible); 25

- 31 ppb (nonedible) PCTA: 161

- 232 ppb (edible); 696

- 1095 ppb (nonedible) 405802

- 02, 412000

- 01

NA=not applicable.

1 Half

- lives were calculated using the single

- first order equation and nonlinear regression, unless otherwise specified.

2 The value may reflect both dissipation and degradation processes.

3 Total residues for the calculation include PCNB, PCA, PCTA, PCTASO, PCTASO 2 , PCB, PCP, and HCB
Monitoring data

PCNB was detected in surface water at concentrations ranging up to 6.4 μg/L in a study on a limited number of U.S. golf courses, according to a report (MRID 463270

- 01) submitted to the agency in support of reregistrat ion 35

. The possible presence of PCNB degradates was not addressed in the study report

. However the major degradate PCA has been monitored in the Mississippi River and some of its major tributaries (Illinois, Missouri, Ohio, Arkansas, White, and Yazoo Rivers ), and detected at concentrations ranging from 18 to 55 μg/L 36

.
In addition to the above, a ccording to data download ed from the Water Quality Portal ( http://waterqualitydata.us/portal/ ) on 01/07/2016, PCNB was also detected (presumably in surface water) a t 0.59, 0.8 and 1.33 μg/L in 1998, 2001, and 1997

, respectively

, by “ Dade Environmental Resource Management ” in Florida

. Downloaded data show that PCNB was also detected at 0.86 μg/L by the Shoalwater Bay Tribe in 2008 in Washington State , and by the Main e Department of Environmental Protection in 2009

, at up to 2.48 and 0.207 ng/g dry weight in “lipid” and “tissue” samples respectively, of unspecified nature or origin

. In a U.S. Geological Survey (1992

- 1995) monitoring study of semi

- volatile organic comp ounds in streambed sediment at 536 sites in 20 U.S. major river basins, PCNB was detected at 0.2% of the sites and at a maximum concentration of 180 μg/kg

. Based on information in the NAWQA database, PCNB was detected in bed sediment at 605 sites in 45 st ates during 1992

- 2001 with three exceptions: it was detected at three sampling sites, i.e ., Boulder Co., CO at 9 μg/kg, Adams Co., CO at 10 μg/kg, and Hillsborough Co., FL at 180 μg/kg)

. In California, the state with the highest usage of PCNB when evaluat ed for the RED 37 , the compound was not detected in the bed sediments at any of the NAWQA sampling sites at any sampling date ( National Center for Food and Agricultural Polic y 38 [NCFAP] Pesticide Use Database, 2000).

PCNB is not one of the analytes monitored in the USGS NAWQA Groundwater Monitoring program. Based on information contained in the USEPA’s Pesticides in Ground Water Database, A Compilation of Monitoring Studies: 1971

- 1991, National Summary , PCNB is not found in groundwater at significant levels or frequencies (USEPA, 1992a). In sampling of 1708 wells, only three detections of PCNB occurred, at a range of 0.008

– 0.275 μg/L. Sampled wells which did not

35 USEPA. 2005. Memo from E. Behl and C. Sutton to J. Bloom; DP Barcode D308564 dated 7/19/2005.

36 Rostad CE, W.F. Pereira, and T.J. Leiker. 1993. Distribution and transport of selected anthropogenic organic compounds on Mississippi River suspended sediment (USA), May/June 1988. J. Contam. Hydrol. 16:175

- 199.

37 Ibid USEPA 2005.

38 National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy

- NCFAP

. Pesticide Use Database at http://www.ncfap.org (200 0).Page 15 of 76

contain measurable levels of PCNB included 459 wells in California. However, there is no related information available with regard to whether the m onitoring sites corresponded with PCNB use sites or times of usage. In another groundwater monitoring study of 18 wells in three counties in California (July 1994

– 1995), PCNB was not detected (California EPA, 1995).

Based on information presented in the National Institute of Health/National Library of Medicine’s Hazardous Substances Data Bank 39 , PCA has been detected at a range of 0.1

- 3.75 mg/kg in soil samples from a field previously treated with PCNB 40

. In a study of soil from a field in which PCNB

was us ed extensively, PCA was detected at 10.1 mg/kg 41

. In a study of air samples collected in 1994 over areas of non

- farmed land near Larimore, ND, PCNB was detected in 1 of 7 samples, at a concentration of 0.0017 ng/m 3 (Hawthorne et al ., 1996 42 )

. In air monitor ing studies done in Canada, PCNB was detected over Saskatchewan despite no evidence of the application of PCNB in that area

. PCNB was detected in 10 of 11 samples (at 0.01

- 1.60 ng/m 3 ) collected during a 3

- month period in the summer of 1994 over Regina, Can ada, and in 2 of 5 samples collected during that time over Waskesiu, Canada; the compound was not detected in any of 7 samples collected over Yellowknife, Canada (Thompson et al ., 1997 43 )

. In an air monitoring study 44 of pesticides in Lompoc, California, PCN B was detected in ambient air at a maximum acute (24

- hr) concentration of 48 ng/m 3 , a maximum subchronic concentration of 18 ng/m 3 , and a maximum chronic concentration of 8.5 ng/m 3

. The detection of PCNB in the atmosphere over areas in which the pesticid e was not used is evidence of the possibility for long

- range transport of the compound

. It is noted that PCNB is a listed Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) for which standards must be set under the Clean Air Act (amended 1990)

. PCNB is not listed on the U.S. E PA’s list of Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) as found
at http://www.epa.gov/international

- cooperation/persistent

- organic

- pollutants

- global

- issue

global

- response#table ; however, several contaminants of PCNB ( e.g ., HCB and dioxins/furans) are listed

.

Monitoring studies of pesticide residues in honey bee colonies 45 46 ha ve demonstrated detectable quantities of PCNB in various hive matrices ( e.g ., wax, pollen )

. Residues in comb wax were detected at 2.5 ppb (limit of detection LOD=1 ppb) and in pollen at 4.7 ppb (LOD not specified).

A more recent review of monitoring data will be conducted at the completion of the PRA.

39 NIH. National Institute of Health, U.S. National Library of Medicine. Toxicology Data Network (TOXNET) Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB). http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov

40 Dejonckheere, W et al

. 1981. Meded F ac Landbouwwet, Rijksuniv Gent 40: 1187

- 97

41 Ohsawa, K et al. 1984 Residue Analysis of Pentachloronitrobenzene and its Related Compounds in Soils by Mass Fragmentography. J Pestic Sci 9 (2) : 339

- 3 4 4.

42 Hawthorne, S.B., D.J. Miller, P.K.K. Louie, R.D. Butle r, and G.G. Mayer

. J. Environ. Qual. 25:594

- 600 (1996).

43 Thompson, T.S., R.G. Treble, D.T. Waite, and A.J. Cessna

. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 58: 939

- 944 (1997).

44 CDPR. 2003. California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR). Lompoc Air Monitori ng Project. http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/specproj/lompoc/lompoc.htm

45 Mullin, CA, et al. “High Levels of Miticides and Agrochemicals in North American Apiaries: Implications for Honey Bee Health.” PLoS ONE 5.3 (2010): e9754. Web. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0009754

. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009754

46 Pettis, J.S., E. M. Lichtenberg, M. Andree, J. Stitzinger, R. Rose, and D. vanEngelsdorp

. 2013

. Crop Pollination Exposes Honey Bees to Pesticides which Alters their Susceptibility to the Gut Pathogen Nosema ceranae

. PLoS One 8(7): e70182. Doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0070182.Page 16 of 76 a. Degradat ion/

Transformation Products
The RED 47 identifies a total of 80 degradates for PCNB

. M ajor degradates of PCNB in the environment are depicted in Table 5 a and include : pentachloroaniline (PCA)

, pentachlorothioanisole (PCTA), and pentachlorobenzene (PCB; which is also present as an impurity); minor degradates are pentachlorothioanisole sulfoxide (PCTASO), and pentachlorothioanisole sulfone (PCTASO 2 )

. Information on maximum percentages formed of each degradate of concern in the available fate studies is present ed in Table 5b

. Pentachlorophenol (PCP) has been detected in several registrant

- submitted studies ; however, there is uncertainty regarding the conditions and quantities under which it occurs. 

### Large Henry’s Law constants for the degradates PCA, PCTA, PCB and PCP (on the order of 10

- 7 to 10

- 4 a 

### tm

- m 3



### - mol) indicate that volatilization may also be an important environmental fate process for these compounds.

Table 3 a . Structures of PCNB and Its Environmental Transformation Products Cod e Name/ Synonym/ Chemical Name/ Formula/MW/ SMILES Chemical Structure Occurrence

PCNB, Quintozene IUPAC: Pentachloronitrobenzene CAS: 1,2,3,4,5

- P entachloro

- 6

- nitrobenzene CAS Number: 82

- 68

- 8 Formula: C 6 Cl 5 NO 2 MW: 195.33 g/mole SMILES: O=N(=O)c(c(c(c(c1Cl) Cl)Cl)Cl)c1Cl All matrices

PCA, Pentachloroaniline IUPAC: 2,3,4,5,6

- Pentachloroaniline CAS Number: N ot available Formula: C 6 H 2 Cl 5 N MW: 265.35 g/mole SMILES: c1(c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)N Aerobic & anaerobic soil, Terrestrial field dissipation (major)

PCTA, Pentachlorothioanisole IUPAC: 1,2,3,4,5

- P entachloro

- 6

- methylsulfanyl

- benzene CAS Number: N ot available Formula: C 7 H 3 Cl 5 S MW: 296.43 g/mole SMILES: CSc1c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl Aerobic & anaerobic soil, Terrestrial field dissipation, Bioaccumulation in fish

PCB, Pentachlorobenzene IUPAC: 1,2,3,4,5

- Pentachlorobenzene CAS Number: Not available Formula: C 6 HCl 5 MW: 250.34 g/mole SMILES: c1c(c( c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl Aerobic soil, Terrestrial field dissipation

Trihydroxydichloronitrobenzene IUPAC Name: 4,5

- Dichloro

- 6

- nitro

- benzene

1,2,3

- triol CAS number: Not available MW: 239.99 g/mole Formula: C 6 H 3 Cl 2 NO 5 SMI LES: c1(c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)O)O)O)[N+](=O)[O

- ] Aqueous photolysis (Tentatively identified: MRID 42336201)

47 Ibid USEPA. 2006

.Page 17 of 76

Cod e Name/ Synonym/ Chemical Name/ Formula/MW/ SMILES Chemical Structure Occurrence

HCB, Hexachlorobenzene IUPAC: 1,2,3,4,5,6

- H exachlorobenzene CAS Number: Not available Formula: C 6 Cl 6 MW: 284.78 g/ mole SMILES: c1(c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl Terrestrial field dissipation

PCP, Pentachlorophenol IUPAC Name: 2,3,4,5,6

- Pentachlorophenol CAS number: Not available MW: 266.34 g/mole Formula: C 6 HCl 5 O SMILES: c1(c(c(c( c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)O Anaerobic soil, Terrestrial field dissipation

PCTASO, Pentachlorothioanisole sulfoxide, PCPM sulfoxide, Pentachlorophenylmethyl sulfoxide , Metabolite 6 IUPAC Name: 1,2,3,4,5

- Pentachloro

- 6

- methyls ulfinyl

- benzene CAS number: Not available MW: 312.43 g/mole Formula: C 7 H 3 Cl 5 OS SMILES: CS(=O)c1c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl Aerobic soil, Terrestrial field dissipation, Bioaccumulation in fish

PCTASO 2 , Pentachlorothioani sole sulfone, PCPM sulfone, Pentachlorophenylmethyl sulfone IUPAC Name: 1,2,3,4,5

- Pentachloro

- 6

- methylsulfonyl

- benzene CAS number: Not available MW: 328.43 g/mole Formula: C 7 H 3 Cl 5 O 2 S SMILES: CS(=O)(=O)c1c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl Aerobic soil

TCTASO2, Tetrachlorothioanisole sulfone IUPAC Name: 1,2,3,4

- Tetrachloro

- 5

- methylsulfonyl

- benzene CAS number: Not available MW: 293.98 g/mole Formula: C 7 H 4 Cl 4 O 2 S SMILES: CS(=O)(=O)c1cc(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl Terrestrial field dissipation

N

- Acetyl S

- Pentachlorophenyl cystine, Cystinyl conjugate of PCNB IUPAC Name: 2

- Acetamido

- 3

- (2,3,4,5,6

- pentachlorophenyl)sulfanyl

- propanoic acid CAS number: Not available MW: 411.52 g/mole Formula: C 11 H 8 Cl 5 NO 3 S SMI LES: CC(=O)NC(CSc1c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)C(= O)O Bioaccumulation of Fish (Major)Page 18 of 76

Cod e Name/ Synonym/ Chemical Name/ Formula/MW/ SMILES Chemical Structure Occurrence

PCHA, Pentachlorohydroxyaniline IUPAC Name: N

- (2,3,4,5,6

- pentachlorophenyl)hydroxylamine CAS number: Not available MW: 281.35 g/mole F ormula: C 6 H 2 Cl 5 NO SMILES: c1(c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)NO Aerobic soil metabolism (MRID 42911902; Reference compound)

TCA , Tetrachloroaniline IUPAC Name: 2,3,5,6

- Tetrachloroaniline CAS number: Not available MW: 230 .9 g/mole Formula: C 6 H 3 Cl 4 N SMILES: c1c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)N)Cl)Cl Aerobic soil metabolism (MRID 42911902; Reference compound)

TCNB , Tetrachloronitrobenzene IUPAC Name: 1,2,3,5

- Tetrachloro

- 4

- nitro

benzene CAS number: Not available MW: 260.89 g/mole Formula: C 6 HCl 4 NO 2 SMILES: c1c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)[N+](=O)[O

- ])Cl Aerobic soil metabolism (MRID 42911902; Reference compound)

2,3,4,5

- TCNB , 2,3,4,5

- Tetrachloronitrobenzene IUPAC Name: 1,2, 3,4

- Tetrachloro

- 5

- nitro

benzene CAS number: Not available MW: 260.89 g/mole Formula: C 6 HCl 4 NO 2 SMILES: c1c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)Cl)Cl)[N+](=O)[O

- 

### ] Hydrolysis (MRID 40865301, 40972601); Soil Photolysis (MRID 41004801) (Refer ence compound)

2,3,5,6

- TCNB, 2,3,5,6

- Tetrachloronitrobenzene IUPAC Name: 1,2,4,5

- Tetrachloro

- 3

- nitro

benzene CAS number: Not available MW: 260.89 g/mole Formula: C 6 HCl 4 NO 2 SMILES: c1c(c(c(c(c1Cl)Cl)[N+](=O)[O

- ])Cl)Cl Hydrolysis (MRID 40865301, 40972601); Soil Photolysis (MRID 41004801) (Reference compound)

Table 5b . Maximum amount of applied radioactivity present as a specified compound in environmental fate studies submitted on PCNB

Compound Study

Type Max %AR (Sa mpling

Interval) Final %AR (Sampling Interval) Comment MRID

Parent Hydrolysis 102.0% (7 d) 100.0% (30 d) pH 5 40865301

100.0% (0 d) 98.2% (30 d) pH 7 40865301Page 19 of 76

Compound Study

Type Max %AR (Sa mpling

Interval) Final %AR (Sampling Interval) Comment MRID

102.0% (14 d) 100.3% (30 d) pH 7 40865301

104 .3% (7 d) 99.6% (30 d) pH 9 40865301

101% (1 d) 98.2% (30 d) pH 5 40972601

103% (1 d) 96.0% (30 d) pH 7 40972601

103% (1 d) 101% (30 d) pH 7 40972601

106% (13 d) 100% (30 d) pH 9 40972601

Aqueous Photolysis 100.0% (0 h) 21.0% (3 2 h) pH 5 42336201

99.76% (0 d) 13.39% (7 d) pH 5 42606201 42606202
Soil Photolysis 100.0% of Time 0 (7 d) 74.7% (30 d) Sandy loam 41004801 41713201

Aerobic Soil 9.96 μg/g (0 d) 2.33 μg/g ( 365 d) Sandy loam 42911902

94.9% (0 d) 3.1% (365 d) Sandy loam 4 1384501 41713202 42112801

Anaerobic Soil 85.9% of rec (1 d) 3.8% of rec (90 d) Sandy loam (in soil) 41203602

42094401 4.9% of rec (90 d) 4.9% of rec (90 d) Sandy loam (in water)

94.9% (0 d) 0.7% (90 d) Sandy loam 41384301 41686001 41713203 4211280 2

Terrestrial Field Dissipation 59.539 ppm (0 d) 0.041 ppm (535 d) Georgia, Loamy sand 43061501

245.0 ppm (0 d ) 66.0 ppm ( 241 d ) California, Loamy sand (Bare) 43887401

191.0 ppm (0 d ) 188.0 ppm ( 269 d ) Georgia, Sandy loam 43887402

9.1 ppm (0 d) 3.3 ppm (5 15 d) Minnesota, Loam 41721401

9.9 ppm ( 1 d ) 0.40 ppm ( 543 d ) California, Loamy sand (Broccoli) 41216401

42485901

6.8 ppm ( 28 d ) 1.0 ppm ( 546 d ) Minnesota, Sandy loam 41216402

42485902

Bioaccumu lation in Fish ND ND (28 d) Edible tissues

43179301

9.5 ppb (28 d) 9.5 ppb (28 d) Non

- edible tissues 0.51 ppb (0 d) 0.106 ppb (28 d) Water extractsPage 20 of 76

Compound Study

Type Max %AR (Sa mpling

Interval) Final %AR (Sampling Interval) Comment MRID

930 μg/kg (35 d) 930 μg/kg (35 d) Whole Fish

41200001 41951701 350 μg/kg (35 d) 350 μg/kg (35 d) Edible tissues

1600 μg/kg (35 d) 160 0 μg/kg (35 d) Non

- edible tissues

1.2 μg/ L (14 d) 1.0 μg/ L (35 d) Water extracts

0.01 ppm (35 d) 0.01 ppm (35 d) Edible tissues (Organic extractable)

0.204 ppm (21 d) 0.022 ppm (35 d) Non

- edible tissues (Organic extractable)

0.0002 ppm (21, 28, 35 d) 0.0002 ppm (35 d) Water extracts (Organic extractable)

520 ppb (21, 28 d) 520 ppb (28 d) Whole Fish

40580202 200 ppb (21 d) 180 ppb (28 d) Edible tissues

990 ppb (28 d) 990 ppb (28 d) Non

- edible tissues
0.67 ppb (14 d) 0.54 ppb (2 8 d) Water extracts
Major Degradate

PCA Aerobic

soil 0.91 μg/g ( 12 0 , 180 d) 0.80 μg/g ( 365 d) Sandy loam 42911902

12.9% (122 d) 9.9% (365 d) Sandy loam 41384501 41713202 42112801

Anaerobic Soil 86.6% of rec (6 0 d) 84.1% of rec (90 d) Sandy loam (in soil) 41203602

42094401 28.3% of rec (90 d) 28.3% of rec (90 d) Sandy loam (in water)

70.3% (60 d) 66.5% (90 d) Sandy loam 41384301 41686001 41713203 42112802

Terrestrial Field Dissipation 9.24 ppm ( 1 d) 0. 29 ppm (535 d) Georgia, Loamy sand 43061501Page 21 of 76

Compound Study

Type Max %AR (Sa mpling

Interval) Final %AR (Sampling Interval) Comment MRID

0.93 ppm ( 210 d ) 0.83 ppm ( 241 d ) California, Loamy sand (Bare) 43887401

2.6 ppm ( 269 d ) 2.6 ppm ( 269 d ) Georgia, Sandy loam 43887402

1.1 ppm ( 515 d) 1.1 ppm (5 15 d) Minnesota, Loam 41721401

1.1 ppm ( 455 d ) 0.95 ppm ( 543 d ) California, Loamy sand (Broccoli) 41216401

42485901

1.4 ppm ( 546 d ) 1.4 ppm ( 546 d ) Minnesota, Sandy loam 41216402

42485902

N

- Acetyl S

Pentachlorophenyl cystine, Cystinyl conjugate of PCNB

Bioaccumu

lation in Fish 1.22 ppb (21 d) 0.76 ppb (28 d) Edible tissues

43179301

30.97 ppb (21 d) 24.89 ppb (28 d) Non

- edible tissues

0.274 ppb (21 d) 0.241 ppb (28 d) Water extracts

Unknown 4 Aqueous

Photolysis 26.26% (4 d) 24.6% (7 d) pH 5 426062 01 42606202

Unknown 5 Aqueous

Photolysis 20.46% (5 d) 18.38% (7 d) pH 5 42606201 42606202

Other Degradates

PCTA Aerobic

soil 0.81 μg/g ( 12 0 d) 0.53 μg/g ( 365 d) Sandy loam 42911902

1.9% (30 d) 0.7% (365 d) Sandy loam 41384501 41713202 42112801Page 22 of 76

Compound Study

Type Max %AR (Sa mpling

Interval) Final %AR (Sampling Interval) Comment MRID

A na erobic soil 9.1% of rec (0 d) ND (90 d) Sandy loam (in soil) 41203602

42094401

1.9% (30 d) <0.1% (90 d) Sandy loam 41384301 41686001 41713203 42112802

Terrestrial Field Dissipation 0.138 ppm ( 12 0 d) 0.027 ppm (535 d) Georgia, Loamy sand 43061501

0.26 ppm ( 210 d ) 0.21 ppm ( 241 d ) California, Loamy sand (Bare) 43887401

0.78 ppm ( 269 d ) 0.78 ppm ( 269 d ) Georgia, Sandy loam 43887402

0.25 ppm ( 125, 295 d) 0.17 ppm (5 15 d) Minnesota, Loam 41721401

0.45 ppm ( 2 8 d ) 0.18 ppm ( 543 d ) California, Loamy sand (Broccoli) 41216401

42485901

0.15 ppm ( 56 d ) 0.11 ppm ( 546 d ) Minnesota, Sandy loam 41216402

42485902

Bioaccumu lation in Fish 232.33 ppb (28 d) 232.33 ppb (28 d) Edible tissues

43179301

1094.61 ppb (21 d ) 696.41 ppb (28 d) Non

- edible tissues

0.336 ppm (35 d) 0.336 ppm (35 d) Edible tissues (Organic extractable) 41200001

41951701
0.985 ppm (35 d) 0.985 ppm (35 d) Non

- edible tissues (Organic extractable)

PCB A erobic

soil 0.27 μg/g (6 0 d) 0.20 μg/g ( 365 d) Sandy loam 42911902

Terrestrial Field Dissipation 0.03 ppm ( 158 d) 0.006 ppm (535 d) Georgia, Loamy sand 43061501

0.076 ppm ( 241 d ) 0.076 ppm ( 241 d ) California, Loamy sand (Bare) 43887401Page 23 of 76

Compound Study

Type Max %AR (Sa mpling

Interval) Final %AR (Sampling Interval) Comment MRID

0.24 ppm ( 26 9 d ) 0.24 ppm ( 269 d ) Georgia, Sandy loam 43887402

0.24 ppm ( 84 d ) 0.879 ppm ( 543 d ) California, Loamy sand (Broccoli) 41216401

42485901

0.22 ppm ( 546 d ) 0.22 ppm ( 546 d ) Minnesota, Sandy loam 41216402

42485902

PCP A na erobic

soil 2.0% of rec (90 d) 2.0% of rec (90 d) Sandy loam (in soil) 41203602

42094401 7.5% of rec (60 d) 6.6% of rec (90 d) Sandy loam (in water)
Terrestrial Field Dissipation 0.161 ppm ( 14 d) <0.005 ppm (535 d) Georgia, Loamy sand 4306150 1

PCTASO (Metabolite 6) Aerobic

soil 0.37 μg/g (365 d) 0.37 μg/g ( 365 d) Sandy loam 42911902

Terrestrial Field Dissipation 0.069 ppm ( 270 d) 0.055 ppm (535 d) Georgia, Loamy sand 43061501

Bioaccumu lation in Fish 0.85 ppb (21 d) ND ppb (28 d) Edible tissues

43179301

8.47 ppb (21 d) ND ppb (28 d) Non

- edible tissues

0.013 ppb (21 d) ND ppb (28 d) Water extracts

PCTASO 2

Aerobic

soil 0.61 μg/g (365 d) 0.61 μg/g ( 365 d) Sa ndy loam 42911902

HCB

Terrestrial

Field Dissipation 0.047 ppm ( 1 d) <0.005 ppm (535 d) Georgia, Loamy sand 43061501

0.055 ppm ( 0 d ) <0.025 ppm ( 241 d ) California, Loamy sand (Bare) 43887401

0.075 ppm ( 269 d ) 0. 075 ppm ( 269 d ) Georgia, Sandy loam 43887402Page 24 of 76

Compound Study

Type Max %AR (Sa mpling

Interval) Final %AR (Sampling Interval) Comment MRID

0.032 ppm ( 455 d ) 0.015 ppm ( 543 d ) California, Loamy sand (Broccoli) 41216401

42485901

0.029 ppm ( 546 d ) 0.029 ppm ( 546 d ) Minnesota, Sandy loam 41216402

42485902

TCTASO 2

Terrestrial

Field Dissipation 0.013 ppm ( 460 d) 0.011 ppm (535 d) Georgia, Loamy sand 43061501

Trihydroxydichloro nitrobenzene

Aqueous

Photolysis Not provided Not provided (3 2 h) pH 5 (Tentatively identified) 42336201

CO 2 

### O=C=O Aerobic

Soil 0.67% (365 d) 0.67% (365 d) Sandy loam 42911902

0.4% (365 d) 0.4% (365 d) Sandy loam 41384501 41713202 42112801

Anaerobic Soil 0.65 μg/g (30 d) 0.51 μg/g ( 365 d) Sandy loam 41203602 42094401

Polar compunds 1 Aerobic

So il 6.1% (122 d) 5.1% (365 d) Sandy loam 41384501 41713202 42112801

Unknown Anaerobic

Soil 7.0% (60 d) 6.2% (90 d) Sandy loam 41384301 41686001 41713203 42112802

Unextracted Residues Aerobic

Soil 17.06% (365 d) 17.06% (365 d) Sandy loam 42911902

7.4% ( 273 d) 6.1% (365 d) Sandy loam 41384501 41713202 42112801

Anaerobic Soil 11.7% of rec (60 d) 9.48% of rec (90 d) Sandy loam 41203602 42094401Page 25 of 76

Compound Study

Type Max %AR (Sa mpling

Interval) Final %AR (Sampling Interval) Comment MRID

10.4% (60 d) 9.7% (90 d) Sandy loam 41384301 41686001 41713203 42112802

b. Contaminants
PCNB contains the man ufacturing contaminant hexachlorobenzene (HCB)

. Based on s tudies reported in the open literature, PCNB also contains the manufacturing contaminants consisting of PCB and various congeners of tetrachlorodibenzo

- p

- dioxin (TCDD) and tetrachlorodibenzofuran (T CDF) 48 49 50

. T he presence and concentrations of most or all of these contaminant s in the PCNB manufacturing

- use product were not reported , even though r egistrants are obligated to identify such contaminants on a product’s “Confidential Statement of Formula” or CSF. Consequently , in 2010

, EPA issued a stop sale, use or removal order (S S URO 51 ) for the PCNB product

. In response to that order, the registrant agreed to monitor TCDD and TCDF residues in their product and maintain them below a specified level , and t he order was lifted

. There are 210 different congeners of dioxin s /furan s (75 PCDDs and 135 PCDFs); however, only 17 congeners are considered to be of toxicological concern (listed in Table 4 )

. For these 17
congene rs, evidence is sufficient to conclude that a common mechanism of action, involving binding of the chemicals to the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) as the initial step, underlies 2,3,7,8

- TCDD

- like toxicity elici ted by these PCDDs, PCDFs, and p olychlorinate d biphenyls (PCBs) (Van den Berg et al. , 1998 52 , 2006 53 ; Hahn, 2002 54 )



### .
A great deal of research has been conducted to characterize the toxicities of PCDDs and PCDFs especially relative to each other, since these compounds are often present together in the environment

. Demonstrated toxic effects of 2,3,7,8

- TCDD and other similar

- acting PCDD, PCDF and PCB congeners in fish, birds, and mammals

, includ ing adverse effects on reproduction, development, and endocrine functions; wasting syndrome; immunotoxicity; an d mortality in both laboratory and field settings

, were discussed in the 2008 White Paper (USEPA 2008 b 55 ). The EPA (USEPA 2008 b ) and the World Health Organization (Van Den Berg et al. 1998 56 and 2006 57 ) have established toxicity equivalency factors (TEFs) for dioxin s /furan s as they relate to mammals, to

48 Huang J. J. Gao, G. Yu, N. Yamazaki, S Deng, B. Wang and R. Weber

. 2014

. Unintentional formed PCDDs, PCDFs, and DL

- PCBs as impurities in Chinese pentachloronitrobenzene products

. Environ. Sci Pollut Res DOI 10.1007/s11356

- 0 14

- 3507

- 2.
49 Holt E., R. Weber, G. Stevenson, and C. Gaus . 2010. Polychlorinated dibenzo

- p

- dioxins and dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs) impurities in pesticides: a neglected source of contemporary relevance. Environ Sci Technol 44:5409

– 5415

50 Holt, E., R. Weber, G . Stevenson, and C . Gaus . 2012

. Formation of dioxins during exposure of pesticide formulations to sunlight

. Chemosphere 88: 364

– 370.

51 USEPA. 2010

. STOP SALE, USE OR REMOVAL ORDER AMVAC AND AMVAC Chemical Corporation

. Memo from Rosemarie A. Kelly, Direc tor, Waste and Chemical Enforcement Division.

52 Van den Berg, M., L. Birnbaum, A.T. Bosveld et al . 1998. Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for PCBs, PCDDs, PCDFs for humans and wildlife. Environ. Health Perspect. 106(12):775

- 792.

53 Van den Berg, M., L.S. Birn baum, M. Denison et al . 2006. The 2005 World Health Organization re

- evaluation of human and mammalian toxic equivalency factors for dioxins and dioxin

- like compounds. Toxicol. Sci. 93(2):223

- 241.

54 Hahn, M. E. 2002. Aryl hydrocarbon receptors: diversity a nd evolution

. Chem. Biol. Interact. 141: 131

– 160.

55 Ibid USEPA 2008 b

56 Ibid van den Berg et al . 1998 57 Ibid van den Berg et al

. 2006Page 26 of 76

birds and to fish ( Table 4 ). In the TEF approach, the toxicities of individual congeners are related to 2,3,7,8

- TCDD, which is the most toxic congener of dioxin s /furan s to animals (USEPA 2008a; Table 4 )

. For each PCDD and PCDF, the concentration (or mass) of the chemical is multiplied by its TEF. The sum of the product for each PCDD and PCDF represents the toxicity equivalent (TE Q) concentration relative to 2,3,7,8

- TCDD ( Equation 1 ; USEPA 2008a).

Equation 1

The TEQ approach described above will be used to assess the potential contribution of dibenzodioxin/dibenzofuran contaminants of PCNB to the to tal risk based on both estimated and measured residues of these contaminants in formulated products of PCNB.

Table 4

. Dioxin /furan congeners that are of toxicological concern. Toxicity equivalency factors for mammals, birds and fis h associated with each isomer are from USEPA 2008 a . Congener* Mammal TEF Bird TEF Fish TEF

2378

- TCDF 0.1 1 0.05 12378

- PeCDF 0.03 0.1 0.05 23478

- PeCDF 0.3 1 0.5 123478

- HxCDF 0.1 0.1 0.1 123678

- HxCDF 0.1 0.1 0.1 234678

- HxCDF 0.1 0.1 0.1 123789

- HxCDF 0 .1 0.1 0.1 1234678

- HpCDF 0.01 0.01 0.01 1234789

- HpCDF 0.01 0.01 0.01 OCDF 0.0003 0.0001 <0.0001 2378

- TCDD 1 1 1 12378

- PeCDD 1 1 1 123478

- HxCDD 0.1 0.05 0.5 123678

- HxCDD 0.1 0.01 0.01 123789

- HxCDD 0.1 0.1 0.01 1234678

- HpCDD 0.01 <0.001 0.001 OCDD 0.0003 0.001 <0.001 *Abbreviations are as follows: TCDD = tetrachlorodibenzodioxin; PeCDD = pentachlorodibenzodioxin; HxCDD = hexachlorodibenzodioxin; HpCDD = Heptachlorodibenzodioxin; OCDD = Octachlorodibenzodioxin; TCDF = Tetrachlorodibenzofuran; PeCDF = Pentachlorodibenzofuran; HxCDF = Hexachlorodibenzofuran; HpCDF = Heptachlorodibenzofuran; OCDF = octachlorodibenzofuran

6. Receptors

Tables 7 and 8 provide a summary of the most sensitive acute and chronic toxicity values for PCNB across aquatic and terre strial taxonomic groups, respectively

. Based on the available ecotoxicity information, PCNB is highly toxic to freshwater fish and invertebrates and very highly toxic to estuarine/marine fish and invertebrates on an acute exposure basis

. PCNB is practicall y non

- toxic to terrestrial invertebrates (via contact) , birds

, and mammals on an acute exposure basis

. NoPage 27 of 76

guideline toxicity data are available to assess the toxicity of PCNB to terrestrial or aquatic plants

. Since no data are available specific to aquatic

- phase amphibians, freshwater fish are used as surrogates

. Since no data are available for reptiles or terrestrial

- phase amphibians, birds serve as a surrogate for these taxa

.

Table 5

. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Aquati c Toxicity Studies for PCNB

.

Taxonomic Group Study

Type Surrogate Species Toxicity Value Acute Toxicity Classification Source

(MRID)

Freshwater Fish Acute Bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus 96

- hr LC 50 =0. 10 m g a.i./L Highly toxic 406180

- 0

Chron ic Rainbow trout

( Onchorhynchus mykiss ) NOAEC = 0.013 m g a.i./L LOAEC = 0.032 mg a.i./L NA 416634

- 01

Freshwater invertebrates Acute Waterflea Daphna magna 48

- hr EC 50 0.77 m g a.i./L Highly toxic Acc

. No. 114167

Chronic Waterflea ( Daphnia

magna ) NOAEC = 0.018 m g a.i./L LOAEC = 0.030 mg a.i/L NA 413213

- 01

Estuarine/marine fish Acute S heepshead minnow ( Cyprinodon variegatus) 96

- hr LC 50 =7.9 m g a.i./L Highly toxic 408829

- 03

Chronic No data

Estuarine/marine shrimp Acute Mysid shrimp ( Americamysis bahia ) 9 6

- hr LC 50 = 0.012 m g a.i./L Very highly toxic 408323

- 01

Estuarine/marine mollusk Acute Eastern oyster shell deposition ( Crassostrea virginica ) 96

- hr EC 50 =0.023 mg a.i./L Very highly toxic 408829

- 02

Estuarine/marine invertebrate Chronic No data

Aquatic pl ants Vascular No data

Non

vascular No data

NA=not applicable

c. Effects to Terrestrial Organisms

Table 6

. Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Terrestrial Toxicity Studies for PCNB

.Page 28 of 76

Taxonomic Group Acute/

Chronic Surrogate Species Toxicity Value Acute Toxicity Classification Source

(MRID)

Birds (surrogate for terrestrial

phase amphibians and reptiles) A cute

Oral Bobwhite quail

( Colinus virginianus ) LD 50 > 2250 mg

a.i./kg bw Practically non

toxic 406180

- 01

Subacute Dieta ry Bobwhite quail

( Colinus virginianus ) LC 50 >54,000

mg/kg diet Practically non

toxic 406526

- 02

C hronic Bobwhite quail

( Colinus virginianus ) NOAEC= 600

mg/kg diet LOAEC=1200 mg/kg diet NA 413328

- 01

Mammals A cute Laboratory rat Rattus norvegicus LD 50 >5,0 50 mg/kg bw Practically non

toxic 414431

- 01

C hronic Laboratory rat

Rattus norvegicus NOAEL=200 mg/kg/day LOAEL= 2,000 NA 434693

- 03

Terrestrial invertebrates A cute Honeybee Apis mellifera LC 50 >100 μg

a

. i

. /bee Practically

non

- toxic 405061

- 02

Terrestrial Plants N/A Seedling Emergence Monocots No data

N/A Seedling

Emergence Dicots No data

N/A Vegetative Vigor

Monocots No data

N/A Vegetative Vigor

Dicots No data

NA=not applicable

d. Ecological Incidents

A review on September 21

, 201 5 of the Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS, version 2.1.1), which is maintained by the Agency’s Office of Pesticide Programs, identified two incident s reported for PCNB in the Ecological Incident Informat ion System

. One incident (IO10837

- 012) pertains to cotton plant damage ( 655 acres of planted with cotton failed to germinate in South Carolina ) following a registered use in which there was unincorporated granular application of PCNB in May 2000 ; however, no data were available to evaluate the effects of PCNB on either terrestrial or aquatic plants

. The second incident (IO15152

- 001) was characterized as an accidental misuse in which PCNB f ormulated product Rival ® was inadvertently mixed with thiabendazole, captan, and tebuconazole and used to treat soybean seeds and resulted in damage (stunting) to 21,494 acres of soybeans in the Midwest in 2004

. Growers were instructed to destroy soybean crops to which the mixture was applied.Page 29 of 76

There are a total of sixte en incidents involving freshwater fish kills that are associated with the degradate PCP with as many as 424,678 fish dead; however, the incident reports are not detailed enough to determine the source of the PCP

. It is likely that PCP at a sufficient conce ntration to result in acute mortality would have originated from the use of this chemical as a wood preservative.

Other residues of concern identified for PCNB are either not listed in the EIIS or are listed ( e.g ., HCB), but have no incidents associated w ith them.

Other incident reporting systems ( e.g ., Avian Incident Monitoring System maintained by the American Bird Conservancy , National Pesticide Information Center maintained by Oregon State University ) will be reviewed in advance of the preliminary ris k assessment.

7. Exposure Pathways of Concern

The environmental fate properties and use patterns of PCNB indicate that direct spray, spray drift, leaching through soil (to groundwater or to surface water vi a subsurface lateral flow), runoff

, volatilization

, and long

- range atmospheric transport represent potential tran sport mechanisms of PCNB for exposure to non

- target aquatic and terrestrial organisms

. Drinking water and inhalation exposure pathways were screened using the SIP (Screening Imbibition Program) and STIR (Screening Tool for Inhalation Risk) screening models

. STIR indicated the inhalation pathway was not likely significant for mammals; however, for birds and based on the ratio of the droplet inhalation does to the adjusted inhalation LD 50 , inhalat ion may be a significant pathway. STIR recommended proceeding to refinements ( Appendix B )

. PCNB is practically non

- toxic to birds and mammals on an acute oral exposure basis and chronic exposure resulted in no

- observe d adverse effect levels of 600 mg/kg di et for birds and at 2 00 mg/kg bw for mammals . T he SIP model indicated exposure through drinking water alone was not of potential concern for acute and ch ronic risk to birds or mammals ( Appendix B )

. The SIP and STIR models are described in detail at http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/terrestrial/index.htm

. Consistent with other chlorinated benzenes with moderate to high volatility, PCNB and other residues of concern can also move to a reas distant from use sites via long

- range atmospheric transport. Once in the atmosphere, PCNB is not expected to degrade by photo

- oxidation and isPage 30 of 76

expe cted to persist

. Other residues of concern are also volatile and the extent to which they too are subjec t to long

- range transport is uncertain.

The presence of PCNB in benthic sediments is expected to serve as a likely route of exposure to benthic fauna and serve as a means of entry into aquatic food chains where the compound and/or its degradates may bioma gnify as well

.

8. Analysis Plan

e. Stressors of Concern

i. Ecological Risk Assessment

For aquatic ecological risk assessment, estimated environmental concentrations will be based on total residues of PCNB ( i.e. , parent plus PCA, PCTA, PCTASO, PCTASO 2 , PCP )

. R isks from additional stressors such as manufacturing by

- products of concern including hexachlorobenzene (HCB) , pentachlorobenzene (PCB ; also a degradate ), and congeners (structurally related chemica ls) of polychlorinated dibenzo dioxins/dibenzofurans (dioxi ns/furans) will be addressed qualitatively

.

ii. Drinking Water

EFED recently introduced the PRZM

- GW model for determining estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) in groundwater . For this reason, because EFED anticipates having new fate data to work with in assessing exposure, as well as to address any newly

- approved uses that have not yet been assessed, an updated drinking water assessment will be completed

. The human Health Effects Division (HED) will likely conduct a new dietary exposure and risk assessment if there are significant changes in the EDWCs

. EDWCs wi ll be calculated for P CNB and its residues of concern

. Historically, EDWCs have been generated for PCNB and PCA

, and EFED will work with HED to identify the appropriate residues for EDWCs

.

f. M easures of Exposure

EFED will use standard available models (identified in Table 7 ) to evaluate potential exposures to aquatic and terrestrial organisms as described at http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

assessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

- risk

- assessment

. EFED will use a total toxic residues (TTR) approach for assessing risk to biota f rom residues of PCNB and its degradates and contaminants of concern

. Accordingly

, i n the absence of sufficient data to estimate formation and degradation rates for all separate component s of concern, the Agency will follow a TTR approach in estimating deg radation half

- lives for use in aquatic residue modeling.

Since the previous exposure assessments were completed, four main changes in standard procedures have been made:

1) The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Guidance for Evaluating and Calcul ating Degradation Kinetics in Environmental Media ( USEPA, 2012b 58 ) was completed

. Degradation kinetics may be recalculated consistent with the updated approach.

58 USEPA. 2012. NAFTA Guidance for Evaluating and Calculating Degradation Kinetics in Environmental Media

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 08/documents/ftt_nafta_guidance_evaluate_calculate_degradation_kinetics.pdfPage 31 of 76

2) The Pesticide in Water Calculator has replaced the older version of PR ZM/EXAMS and will be used to evaluate runoff from fields treated with irrigation water

. 3) The Pesticide Root Zone Model

– Groundwater (PRZM

- GW) will be used for estimating concentrations in groundwater from fields treated with irrigation water ( USEPA 2012 59 )

. 4) The Bee

- REX Model is a screening

- level tool intended for assessi ng exposure o f bees to pesticides and to calculate risk quotients for individual bees (USEPA 2015 60 ). 5) The K ow - based Aquatic Bioaccumulation Model (KABAM) will be used to estimate potential bioaccumulation of hydrophobic organic pesticides in freshwater aqua tic food webs and subsequent risks to mammals and birds via consumption of contaminated aquatic prey (USEPA 2009 61 ).

The most up

- to

- date procedures 62 63 64 65 and models will be used in the Registration Review exposure assessments

. Nonstandard modeling procedu res that may be used in the risk assessment are discussed below

. In the absence of data to the contrary, the T

- REX model will employ the default 35

- day foliar dissipation half

- life value

.

Drinking Water for Ecological Organisms

Screening

- level calculati ons using SIP indicates tha t drinking water exposure is not likely to pose

a significant risk for terrestrial organisms ( Appendix B )

.

Table 7

. List of the various models and the related taxa for which the models will be used.

Env ironment Taxa of

Concern Exposure

Pathway Model(s) or

Pathway Link

Aquatic Fish/

Invertebrates / Plants Runoff and spray

drift to water PWC h ttp://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

assessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

risk

- assessment Direct application
to water PFAM

Terrestrial Vertebrate Residues in/on dietary items T

- REX (dietary item) http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

a ssessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

risk

- assessment#trex

59 USEP A . 2012. PRZM

- GW Version 1.07 Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters for Modeling Pesticide Concentration sin Groundwater Using the Pesticide Root Zone Model

. Version 1.0 October 15, 2012

. http://www2.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

assessing

- pesticide

- risks/przm

- gw

- version

- 107

- guidance

- selecting

- input

60 USEPA 2015. BeeREX Version 1.0. http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

- assessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

- risk

assessment

. 61 USEPA. 2009. KABAM (K ow (based) Aquatic Bioaccumulation Model

. Version 1.0 Dated April 7, 2009

. http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

- assessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

- risk

- assessment#kabam 62 USEPA. 2014. Development of Community Water System Drinking Water Intake Percent Cropped Area Adjustment Factors for use in Drinking Water Exposure Assessments: 2014 Update . 9/9/14. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available on

- line at : http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/document s/development_and_use_of_community_water_system.pdf

. 63 USEPA. 2014. Guidance for Addressing Unextracted Residues in Laboratory Studies . Memorandum From to E. F. a. E. Division. September 12, 2014. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pestici de Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. Available on

- line at : http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- scienc e

- and

- assessing

- pesticide

- risks/guidance

- addressing

unextracted

- pesticide

- residues

. 64 USEPA. 2014. Toxicity Testing and Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Benthic Invertebrates . April 10, 2014. Environmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesti cide Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available on

- line at : http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

- assessing

- pesticide

- risks/toxicity

- testing

- and

ecological

- risk

- assessment

. 65 USEPA. 2013. Guidance on Modeling Offsite Deposition of Pesticides Via Spray Drift for Ecological and Drinking Water Assessment

. Enviro nmental Fate and Effects Division. Office of Pesticide Programs. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available on

- line at: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

- OPP

- 2013

- 0676Page 32 of 76 Env ironment Taxa of

Concern Exposure

Pathway Model(s) or

Pathway Link

Invertebrate Contact and

ingestion of residues pollen/nectar Bee

- REX http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

assessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

risk

- assessment#beerex

Plant Runoff to plants TerrPlant (Run

- off) http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

assessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

risk

- assessme nt#terrplant

Residues in irrigation water Results from Aquatic

Models http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

assessing

- pesticide

- risks/ models

- pesticide

risk

- assessment

Vertebrates Residues in

aquatic prey items KABAM http://www.epa.gov/pesticide

- science

- and

a ssessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

risk

- assessment#kabam
Human Health EDWC Vertebrate Surface Water PWC PFAM http://www.epa.gov/pes ticide

- science

- and

assessing

- pesticide

- risks/models

- pesticide

risk

- assessment Ground w ater PRZM

- GW

i. Available Monitoring Data

The Agency is aware of pesticide monitoring conducted by federal and state agencies

. T his information will be considered in the assessment

, to the extent that data on PCNB are available

. As noted earlier, measured resid ues of PCNB in pollen and nectar will be used to refine dietary

- based risk estimates for honey bees.

g. Measures of Effect

The most sensitive toxicity data pr esented in Section 6 of this problem formulation will be used to calculate risk quotients for the respective taxa

. Any additional information submitted by the registrant or found in the open literature prior to conduct of the risk assessment will also be

c onsidered

. The open literature studies are identified using EPA’s ECOTOXicology database ( ECOTOX) ( USEPA 2015 66 ) , which employs a literature search engine for locating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife

. The evaluation of both sources of data that meet the Agency’s standard for inclusion in risk assessments can also provide insight into the direct and indirect effects of pesticides on biotic communities from loss of species that are sensitive to the chemicals, and from changes in structure and functional characteris tics of the affected communities.

9. Endangered Species Assessments

Consistent with the Agency’s responsibility under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Agency will evaluate risks to listed species from registered uses of pesticides in Registration Review

. The process for evaluating potential risks to listed species is further described at

66 USEPA. 2015

. ECOTOXicology knowledgebase http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/Page 33 of 76

http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/endanger/litstatus/riskasses.htm

.

10. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

PCNB was included in the first group of 67 chemicals issued an order to conduct Tier 1 EDSP testing for which EPA has received all of the required Tier 1 assay data

. The Agency has reviewed all of the assay data received for the appropriate List 1 chemicals and conclusions of those reviews are available in the chemical

- specific public dockets (see http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/fi les/2015

- 06/documents/pcnb

- 056502_2015

- 06

- 29_txr0057138.pdf

)

. For additional information on the EDSP, visit http://www.epa.gov/endo/

.

11. Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps

a. Environmental Fate

Some of the studies listed below were previously captured as data gaps in the RED 67 , while others reflect either newer data gaps or the need for new data which are of sufficient quality to meet current standards for OPP’s risk characterization needs

. Additionally, some of the listed studies reflect the need for data on the PCNB degradate pentachloroaniline (PCA)

. These data are needed to more completely and accurately characterize the fate and effects of PCNB and its degradates in the environment, as well as to ass ess the potential of the pesticide for long

- range transport given that its chemical fate properties are consistent with PBT (persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic) chemicals.

The environmental fate and ecological risk assessment chapter 68 written in suppor t of the RED 69 for PCNB characterized the compound as a persistent, moderately volatile compound

. U nder the FAO system, PCNB and its degradates are classified as s lightly mobile to hardly mobile

. The current risk hypothesis for PCNB suggests the chemical an d its degradates are persistent (P), bioaccumulative (B) and toxic (T); as such, PCNB, viewed collectively with its degradates, has properties consistent with chemicals that are termed PBTs

. The properties of the PBTs and of PCNB as well, lend themselves t o long

- range atmospheric transport leading to potential exposure of non

- target organisms distant from registered use sites and resultant accumulation and magnification of residues in food chains

. However, because of the variability in available data and in some cases because of the lack of acceptable data, there is uncertainty regarding the extent to which PCNB and its degradates [that retain toxicity] are indeed persistent and prone to bioaccumulation and atmospheric transport

. Additionally, there is uncer tainty regarding the extent to which both the parent compound and its degradates are toxic to a broader range of taxa than those for which there are currently available data.

Based on environmental fate studies available at the time the RED chapter was w ritten, three major degradates of PCNB were identified, i.e

. , pentachloroanaline (PCA), pentachlorothioanisole (PCTA) and pentachlorobenzene (PCB)

. Of these, PCA is of the most significance due to its stability , its mobility, and the magnitude of its conce ntrations in fate studies relative to the other degradate s

. Several minor degradates were also identified and there was uncertainty regarding the extent to which pentachlorophenol (PCP) formed

. The chapter identified aqueous photolysis as a primary degrada tion pathway for PCNB when the compound is present in an unsorbed state; however, the conditions under which aqueous photolysis can occur at meaningful rates are

67 Ibid USEPA 2006.

68 Ibid USEPA 2005.

69 Ibid USEPA 2006Page 34 of 76

relatively limited, i.e. , clear, shallow water, low in organic matter

. The identities of major photodegradates were not determined in the available studies, and primarily for this reason additional aqueous photolysis data are required

. Because of its stability in the environment and because it is the primary persistent degradate, an aqueous photoly sis study of the microbial degradate PCA is also necessary

. More comprehensive information on the environmental fate behavior of PCA would facilitate separate modeling estimates for this main degradate and in doing so more accurately characterize the fate of PCNB in aquatic and terrestrial habitats

. In the absence of these data, EFED has assumed that in general PCNB would degrade to PCA in soil and that the PCA would then remain stable to further degradation in both the aquatic and terrestrial environments. This assumption is consistent with results seen in submitted fate studies, with PCA not decreasing by the time of study termination.

The RED characterized PCNB as moderately volatile; however, there was uncertainty regarding the fate of the parent compo und and degradates once it had volatilized

. Based on air monitoring data demonstrating the presence of PCNB and uncertainty regarding the extent to which the compound would be subject to photodegradation in the atmosphere (when present in water vapor

or so rbed to particulates) or atmospheric photo

- oxidation, and based on QSAR estimates of atmospheric photo

- oxidation rates, the parent compound was assumed to be stable and subject to atmospheric transport

. Given that PCA is the major degradate remaining after microbial degradation, and is a volatile compound, photodegradation in air data are being required for both PCNB and PCA to more accurately characterize the extent to which either PCNB and/or PCA will persist in the atmospheric compartment and be availabl e for long

- range transport

. In the absence of these data, EFED will continue to presume that PCNB is likely to volatilize from applications where it is not incorporated into soil, that it will be stable to degradation in the atmosphere, and that it will be subject to long

- range atmospheric transport

. Similar assumptions will be made for PCA

. This assumption could result in overstating the potential for long

- range transport of PCNB and PCA.

At this time there is uncertainty regarding the extent to which PC NB is subject to biotic degradation in both the terrestrial and aquatic environments

. The RED characterized the parent as likely to biodegrade slowly under aerobic conditions, though noted that PCNB was metabolized more rapidly under anaerobic soil conditi ons

. However the anaerobic soil study in question has since been downgraded to supplemental because insufficient sampling intervals took place following the development of anaerobic conditions to permit the calculation of a valid half

- life. Thus the decay rate of PCNB under anaerobic conditions is an uncertainty

. No guideline aquatic metabolism studies are available for PCNB

. There is uncertainty regarding the potential formation of PCP and pentachlorobenzene (PCB), although the lat t er is known to be a manu facturing impurity along with hexachlorobenzene (HCB) during the production of PCNB

. In part b ecause the available studies do
not adequate ly characterize the formation and decline of degradation products in soil studies

, aerobic and anaerobic soil metaboli sm studies are being required . Because no aquatic metabolism data have been submitted, anaerobic aquatic data are also required

. In the absence of these data, EFED will continue to assume that PCA, PCTA and PCB are major degradates which are stable to fur ther degradation and contribute to total persistent residues of PCNB

. This assumption could result in overstating the persistence of PCNB residues and risk to aquatic and terrestrial organisms.

There is considerable uncertainty regarding the persistence o f PCNB on the surface of plants (including grasses) following foliar applications

. Given that PCNB is moderately volatile and may be subject to photolysis, the compound could potentially dissipate rapidly from foliar surfaces

. Because no data were availabl e on the foliar dissipation of PCNB, the RED relied on the defaultPage 35 of 76

foliar dissipation value of 35 days based on the Willis and McDowell (1987) 70 publication

. The foliar dissipation half

- life is used to estimate residues on terrestrial forage items used in e stimating risk to terrestrial animals

. A faster foliar dissipation rate could reduce chronic risk estimates for terrestrial animals

. Therefore, a special study to document the foliar dissipation half

- life of PCNB is required

. As part of this study, the res idues and dissipation rates for the three major degradates (PCA, PCTA and PCB) and the minor degradates/contaminants (PCP and HCB) must be quantified. It should be noted that a submitted terrestrial field dissipation study of PCNB applied to turf (MRID 43 887403) is inadequate to fulfill this requirement, for a variety of reasons that have been previously detailed (DP335819 memo to Jill Bloom, 2/25/2010).

 Photodegradaton in Water (PCNB ) (Guideline 835.2240)

 Photodegradaton in Water (PCA) (Guideline 835.224 0)

 Photodegradation in Air (PCNB) (Guideline 835.2370)

 Photodegradation in Air (PCA) (Guideline 835.2370)

 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism (PCNB) (Guideline 835.4200)

 Aerobic Soil Metabolism (PCNB) (Guideline 835.4100)

 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism (PCNB) (Guideline 835.4300)

 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism (PCNB) (Guideline 835.4400)

 Foliar Dissipation (PCNB) (Guideline 835.6100SS; Special Study)

 ECM/ILV for Water (PCNB) (Guideline 850.6200)

 ECM/ILV for Soil (PCNB) (Guideline 850.6100)

 ECM/ILV for Sediment (PCNB) (Guid eline 850.6100)

Table 10 identifies environmental fate studies by MRID that offer data for each guideline requirement, as well as study classifications and whether or not further data are needed in order to support risk assessment.

70 Willis, Guye H., and Leslie.L. McDowell, 1987. Pesticide Persistence on Foliage. in Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology . 100:23

- 73.Page 36 of 76

Table 8

. Submitted Environmental Fate Data and Study Classifications for PCNB and Degradates

OCSPP Guideline Data Requirement Submitted Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data needed

to conduct risk assessment? Justification and Assumptions EPA

w ill Make in Absence of Data

835.2120 Hydrolysis 408653

- 01 409726

- 01 acceptable

acceptable No

--

835.2240 Aqueous photolysis 426062

- 01 426062

- 02 423362

- 01 supplemental

supplemental supplemental Yes

(PCNB and PCA) Aqueous photolysis represents a

relativel y rapid degradation pathway for parent PCNB, yet the products of photolytic degradation of PCNB have not been identified.

835.2410 Soil photolysis 410048

- 01 417132

- 01 a cceptable No

--

835.4100 Aerobic soil

metabolism 429119

- 02 417132

- 02 acceptable

acc eptable Yes

( need data for PCNB on 3 additional soils) 90% upper confidence limit on the

mean half

- life will be calculated using the available data

835.4200 Anaerobic soil

metabolism 412036

- 02 420944

- 01

413843

- 01 416860

- 01 417132

- 02 supplemental

suppl emental Yes

(PCNB) Insufficient sampling intervals took

place following the development of anaerobic conditions to permit the calculation of a valid half

- life. Thus the decay rate of PCNB under anaerobic conditions is an uncertainty.

835.4300 Aerobic aqua tic

metabolism -- -- Yes (PCNB) PCNB TTR will be assumed to be stable

835.4400 Anaerobic aquatic

metabolism -- -- Yes (PCNB) PCNB TTR will be assumed to be stable

835.1230 835.1240 Adsorption/

desorption and leaching 416482

- 01 a cceptable No (PCNB, PCA, PCTA) --

835.6100 Terrestrial field

dissipation 430615

- 01

438874

- 01 438874

- 02 438874

- 03 417214

- 01

412164

- 01 424859

- 01 acceptable

supplemental supplemental acceptable acceptable

acceptable No

--

835.6200 Aquatic field

dissipation -- -- No

--

850.6100 E CM

- Soil 5

-- -- Yes Environmental chemistry methods needed for residues in soils.

850.6100 ECM

– Sediment 5

-- -- Yes Environmental chemistry methods needed for residues in benthic sediments.

850.6200 ECM

– Water 5

-- -- Yes Environmental chemistry method s needed for residues in water.

835.1730 Bioconcentration 405802

- 02 412000

- 01 431793

- 01 supplemental

supplemental No

--

3 ILV=independent laboratory validation

4 ECM=environmental chemistry method

5 LOQ will need to be low enough to ensure detectability at levels of toxicological concern . See ECM guidance (available at ) for details.Page 37 of 76 b. Effects

A number of ecological effect studies are required to address uncertainties regarding the potential effects of the parent compound and its primary persistent degra date PCA

. Because no registrant

submitted studies were available to assess the toxicity of PCNB degradates, the ecological risk assessment written in support of the RED relied on a combination of open literature and (quantitative) structure activity relati onships ((Q)SARs) to estimate the toxicity of degradates and demonstrate that toxicity estimates for the degradate /contaminants (PCA, PCB, PCP) ranged from being as toxic to more toxic than the parent compound

. Chronic toxicity data are being recommended o n the parent compound for estuarine/marine fish and invertebrates

. The previous assessment identified the missing chronic toxicity data for estuarine/marine animals as a major uncertainty and noted that based on acute toxicity estimates, estuarine/marine i nvertebrates appear to be more sensitive than their freshwater counterpar t s

. Vascular and non

- vascular aquatic plants studies of the parent compound are required as well as seedling emergence and vegetative vigor (Tier 1) studies of terrestrial plants

. The previous assessment identified terrestrial and aquatic plant toxicity data as major uncertainties in the risk assessment

. Acute toxicity data are being recommended on the PCA degradate for freshwater fish (two species) and invertebrates and estuarine/mari ne invertebrates while chronic toxicity data are recommended on the PCA degradate for freshwater fish and invertebrates

. The previous assessment identified that structure

- activity relationship

- based estimated toxicity values for the degradates demonstrate d considerable variability depending on the extent of chlorine substitutions on the benzene ring and as such there is uncertainty regarding the extent to which toxicity values for the parent compound are reflective of the degradates

. Although the previous assessment identified a mysid chronic toxicity study for the PCA degradate, EFED will rely on an acute

- to

- chronic ratio (ACR), based on the recommended freshwater invertebrate acute and chronic toxicity data on PCA, to estimate the chronic toxicity of PCA to estuarine/marine invertebrates. EFED proposes to apply the freshwater invertebrate ACR to the recommended acute toxicity data on PCA for the estuarine/marine mysid to derive the chronic toxicity endpoint for the estuarine/marine invertebrate

.

Based on the results of the weight

- of

- evidence (WoE) analysis conducted on PCNB 71 as part of the EDSP testing

, there was limited evidence across the Tier I battery of in vitro and in vivo tests to support potential interaction with the estrogen pathway in mammals

. H owever, there was compl e mentary evidence within the fish short

- term reproduction assay (FSTRA ; Guideline 890.1350 72 ) with fathead minnows ( Pimephales promelas ) to suggest potential interaction w ith the estrogen pathway in wildlife

. Expos ure to PCNB signifi cantly (p<0.05) decreased fecundity in fish and there was a concentration

- dependent increase (range 42

– 59%) in male gonado

- somatic index (GSI=weight of the gonad/total body weight); although only observed in the highest treatment
concentra tion, there was a n increase (35%) in female GSI along with histological changes in the ovaries. Therefore, Tier 2 testing with fish, i.e., the medaka ( Oryzias latipes ) extended one generation reproduction test (MEOGRT ; Guideline 890.2200 73 ) with PCNB is recommended as a

r esult of the EDSP Tier 1 assessment

. As noted in Table 11 , and based on the Code of Federal Regulations Part 158, a fish full life cycle study (850.1500 74 ) is required for PCNB given its current

71 USEPA 2015 a

. EDSP Weight of Evidence Conclusions on the Tier 1 Screening Assays for the List 1 Chemicals

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 06/documents/pcnb

- 056502_2015

- 06

- 29_txr0057138.pdf

72 USEPA. 2009

. Endocrine Disruptor Screening P rogram Test Guidelines. OPPTS 890.1350: Fish Short

- Term Reproduction Assay

. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) formerly the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (7101). EPA 740

- C

- 09

- 007. October 2009

. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2009

- 0576

- 0007

73 USEPA. 2015 b

. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program Test Guidelines OCSPP 890.2200: Medaka Extende d One Generation Reproduction Test (MEOGRT)

. Office of Chemical Safety an d Pollu tion Prevention (OCSPP) (7101)

. EPA No. 740.C

- 15

- 002. July 2015

. http://www.regulat ions.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2009

- 0576

- 0019

74 USEPA. 1996. Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1500 Fish life cy cle toxicity. Office of Chemical Safety andPage 38 of 76

outdoor uses; however, this data requirement can be fulfilled by successful completion of the MEOGRT. In the absence of a MEOGRT, the fish full life cycle study of PCNB is recommended.

The EDSP Tier 1 WoE 75 analysis also concluded that there is evidence of potential interaction of PCNB with the thyroid pathway in mammal s based on alterations in thyroid hormone levels and subsequent changes in thyroid histopathology in rats

. Since current mammalian toxicity endpoints used by the human Health Effects Division are more sensitive than doses where effects were seen in the mam malian studies examining the thyroid pathway in rats, no additional studies are required for mammals at this time

. In the amphibian metamorphosis assay (Guideline 890.1100 76 ) there was a slight but statistically significant (p<0.05) delay in the median tadp ole developmental stage at Day 21 at all PCNB treatment levels c ompared to the negative control; however, there were n o treatment

- related effects detected in thyroid histopathology, asynchronous development or normalized hind limb length (HLL)

. D ecrease s i n body weight and snout ventral length (SVL) were observe on Day 21 were observed on Day 21 at the high treatment g roup. Overall, these findings did not suggest that the delay in de velopment or decreased growth was thyroid

- related

. Therefore, Tier 2 testin g with other wildlife species were not recommended.

Depending on the nature of the sediment, PCNB is expected to partition to variable extents to the benthic sediment, and there is uncertainty regarding the extent to which benthic organism may be suscepti ble to effects from exposure to PCNB residues

. As such, both acute and chronic toxicity tests of aquatic (freshwater and estuarine/marine) invertebrates in the presence of sediment are required ; the need for chronic studies is dictated by the outcome of th e acute toxicity tests

. These studies are intended to better characterize the toxicity of the parent and its degradate to sediment

dwelling organism that may inhabit areas where the compounds are expected to partition and persist

. These organisms serve as a point of entry into aquatic food chain s and there is uncertainty regarding the extent to which residues are bioavailable and toxic to benthic invertebrates

. The RED assumed that partitioning is likely and that PCNB residues will accumulate and magnify in higher trophic levels of the aquatic organisms

. Data are recommended on aquatic food chain transfer to address uncertainties related to persistence and bioaccumulation in the aquatic environment; this study should account for the PCNB parent, PCA and PCDD and PCDF contaminants

. These data will be useful in addressing that portion of the risk hypothesis for PCNB.

Previous assessments have indicated that PCNB and its degradates are likely to bioaccumulate in aquatic food chains

. To characterize the extent t o which this occurs, EFED recommends an aquatic food chain transfer study (OCSPP Guideline 850.1300)

. A protocol should be submitted for EPA review prior to initiating the study

. In addition to the parent compound, the study should track the primary degrad ates of PCNB including PCA, PCTA, PCP, PCTASO2 and PCTACO.

Although PCNB is characterized as practically non

- toxic to upland game birds and water fowl on an acute exposure basis, there is uncertainty regarding the potential effects of the compound on
pass erine species

. Since PCNB is formulated as a granule, passerine species may inadvertently ingest the product while foraging in treated fields

. Therefore, an acute oral toxicity study with passerines is recommended.

Polluti on Prevention formerly the Office of Prevention, P esticides and Toxic Substances ( 7101). EPA 712

- C

- 96_122. April 1996. http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1500.pdf

75 Ibid USEPA 2015 a

. 76 USEPA. 2009

. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program Test Guidelines OPPTS 890.1100: Amphibian Metamorphosis (Frog)

. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention formerly t he Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (7101). EPA 740

- C

- 09

- 002. October 2009

. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2009

- 057 6

- 0002Page 39 of 76

Although PCNB is characterized as pract ically non

- toxic to honey bees on an acute contact exposure basis, additional pollinator toxicity data are needed since the current label allows for application to crops that may be in bloom, in which case bees may be exposed

. Pending the outcome of the lo wer

- tier laboratory

- based acute and chronic toxicity studies of individual adult and larval honey bees, higher

- tier studies, i.e ., semi

- field (OECD 75 77 ; 850.3030 78 ) and full

- field (850.3040 79 ) may be required

. Appendix C provides rationales for each of the p ollinator

- related data

. These data are consistent with those identified by EPA as providing a foundation for assessing risk potential risks to bees 80

.

Table s 1 1 and 1 2 identify ecological effect studies by MRID that offer data for each guideline requiremen t, as well as study classifications and whether or not further data are needed in order to support risk assessment

. T he database for the PCNB TGAI is in complete

. Specific toxicity data are not available for many of the degradates; in the absence of toxicit y data, the toxicity of these compounds will be assumed to be equivalent to parent PCNB.

 Terrestrial plant toxicity data, Tier 1 /Tier II (Seedling Emergence and Vegetative Vigor) (PCNB TEP ) (Guidelines 850.4100 81 and 850.4150 82 )

 Aquatic plant toxicity data (PCNB TGAI ) (Guidelines 850.4400 and 850.5400)

 Estuarine/marine fish life cycle (PCNB TGAI )

 Estuarine/marine invertebrate life cycle (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 850.1350 83 )

 Whole sediment (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline s 850.1735 84 and 850.1740 85 ; three benthic species )

 Wh ole sediment; chronic (PCNB TGAI ) (Special Study)

 Acute toxicity freshwater fish (PCA) (Guideline 850.1075 86 ; two species )

 Acute toxicity estuarine/marine fish (PCA) (Guideline 850.1075)

 M ysid Acute Toxicity (PCA) (Guideline 850.1035 87 )

77 OECD. 2007

. Guidance document on the honey bee ( Apis mellifera L.) brood test under semi

- field conditions. Series on Testing and Assessment No. 75. ENV/JM/MONO(2007)22. 78 USEPA. 2012 e

. “Honey Bee Toxicity of Residues on Foliage.” Ecological Eff ects Test Guidelines OCSPP 850.3030. EPA 712

- C

018 . Web. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2009

- 0154

- 0017 79 U SEPA. 2012

f . “Field Testing for Pollinators.” Ecological Effects Test Guidelines OCSPP 850.3040. EPA 712

- C

- 017

. Web. http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2009

- 0154

- 0018 80 USEPA. 2014

. Guidance for Assessing Pesticide Risks to Bees

. Office of Pesticide Programs United States Environmental Protection Agency, Health Canada Pest Management Regulatory Agency, California Department of Pesticide Regulation

. June 19, 2014

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014

- 06/documents/pollinator_risk_assessment_guidance_06_19_14.pdf 81 USEPA. 2012 a Ecologica l Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.4100. Seedling Emergence and Seedling Growth. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (7101) EPA 712

- C

- 012. January 2012 82 USEPA. 2012 b

. Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.4150. Vegetative Vigor. Of fice of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (7101) EPA 712

- C

- 011. January 2012 83 USEPA. 1996 a

. Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1350. Mysid Chronic Toxicity Test. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention former the Office of Prev ention, Pesticides and Toxic S ubstances (7101) EPA 712

- C96

- 120 April 1996

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1350.pdf 84 USEPA. 1996 b

. E cological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1035. Whole Sediment Acute Toxicity Invertebrates, Freshwater. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention former ly the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic S ubstances (7101) EPA 712

- C96

- 354 April 1 996

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1735.pdf 85 USEPA. 1996 c . Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1740. Whole Sediment Acut e Toxicity Invertebrates, Marine. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention former ly the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic S ubstances (7101) EPA 712

- C96

- 355 April 1996

. http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1740. pdf 86 USEPA. 1996 d

. Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1075. Fish Acute Toxicity Test, Freshwater and Marine. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention former the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic S ubstances (7101) EPA 712

- C96

- 118 April 1996

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1075.pdf

87 USEPA. 1996 e Ecological Effect Test Guidelines OPPTS 850.1035 Mysid Acut e Toxicity Test

. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) formerly Office of Pollution, Prevention and Toxic Substances (OPPTS) (7101) EPA 712

- C

- 96

- 136. April 1996

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1035.pdfPage 40 of 76  Acute toxicity

– fres hwater invertebrates (PCA) (Guideline 850.1010 88 )

 Fish early life stage

– freshwater (PCA) (Guideline 850.1400 89 )

 Fish full life cycle

— freshwater (PCNB) (Guideline 850.1500) **

 Aquatic invertebrate life cycle (freshwater) (PCA) (Guideline 850.1300 90 )

 Aquatic Food Chain Transfer (Guideline 850.1850 91 )

 Avian acute oral toxi city

– passerine (PCNB TGAI ) (Guideline 850 .2100 92 )

 Pollinator toxicity data consisting of :

o acute oral test with adult honey bees (PCNB TGAI) (OECD 213 93 );

o acute honey bee larvae test (PCNB TGAI) (OECD 237 94 );

o 10

- day adult honey bee test (PCNB TGAI) (dra ft OECD guideline) ; and

, o 21

- day larval honey bee toxicity test (PCNB TGAI) (draft OECD guidance)

. o Semi

- field whole colony test (PCNB TEP) (OECD 75 95 )*

o Full

- field whole colony test (PCNB TEP) (850.3040 96 )*

o Residues in pollen/nectar (PCNB TEP) (non

- guideline) *

* pending outcome of lower

- tier pollinator studies

** fish full life cycle study can be waived pending successful completion of medaka extended one generation test (MEOGRT; Guidelin e 890.2200)

Table 9

. Submitted Aquatic Ecological Effects Data and St udy Classifications for PCNB

.

OCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Study

Type Submitted Studies

(MRID) Study

Classification Are data

nee ded to conduct risk assessment Justification and

Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data

- Some Example texts are include

850.1010 Freshwater

invertebrate toxicity Acute Waterflea Daphnia magna Acc. No. 114167 Valid/satisfied Yes Current studies are on parent PCNB; data are needed on the PCA degradate.

850.1025 850.1035 850.1045 850.1055 Saltwater

invertebrate toxicity Acute Eastern oyster Crassostrea virginica 408829

- 02 Supplemental Yes Current studies are on parent PCNB; data are needed on the PC A degradate; data for PCA

88 USEPA. 1996

f Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1400. Aquatic Invertebrate Acute Toxicity Test, Freshwater Daphnids. Office of Chemical Safety and Poll ution Prevention former the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic S ubstances (7101) EPA 712

- C96

- 114 April 1996

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07 /documents/850

- 1010.pdf 89 USEPA. 1996 g

. Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1400. Fish Early

- life Stage Toxicity Test. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention former the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic S ubstances (7101) EPA 712

- C96

- 121 April 1996. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1400.pdf 90 USEPA. 1996 h. Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1300 . Daphnid Chronic Toxicity Test. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention former the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic S ubstances (7101) EPA 712

- C96

- 120 April 1996. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1300.pdf

91 USEPA. 1996 i. Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.1850

. Aquatic Food Chain Transfer

. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention former the Offic e of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (7101) EPA 712

- C96

- 133 April 1996

. http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015

- 07/documents/850

- 1850.pdf 92 USEPA

. 2012 c . Ecological Effects Test Guidelines. OPPTS 850.2100. Avian Acute Oral Toxicity Test. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention former the Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic S ubstances (7101) EPA 712

- C

- 025. January 2012 93 OECD. 1998 b . OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals. Honeybees, Acute Oral Toxicity Test. 213. http://lysander.sourceoecd.org/vl=5988235/cl=12/nw=1/rpsv/cgi

- bin/fulltextew.pl?prpsv=/ij/oecdjournals/1607310x/v1n2/s14/p1.idx 94 OECD. 201 3

. OECD Guidelines for Testing Chemicals. Honey bee ( Apis mellifera ) larval toxicity test, single exposure. http://www.oecd

- ilibrary.org/environment/test

- no

- 237

- honey

- bee

- apis

- mellifera

- larval

- toxicity

- test

- single

- exposure_978 9264203723

- en 95 OECD. 2007

. Guidance document on the honey bee ( Apis mellifera L.) brood test under semi

- field conditions. Series on Testing and Assessment No. 75. ENV/JM/MONO(2007)22. 96 U SEPA. 2012 d . “Field Testing for Pollinators.” Ecological Effects Te st Guidelines OCSPP 850.3040. EPA 712

- C

- 017

.Page 41 of 76 OCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Study

Type Submitted Studies

(MRID) Study

Classification Are data

nee ded to conduct risk assessment Justification and

Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data

- Some Example texts are include
Mysid shrimp Americamysis bahia 408323

- 01 Supplemental should be submitted on the estuarine/marine mysid.

850.1075 Freshwater fish Acute Bluegill sunfish Lepomis macrochirus 406180

- 04 Acceptable

Yes Current studies are on parent PCNB; data are needed on the PCA degradate. Most sensitive fish species from testing with PCNB TGAI should be used for testing PCA. Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss 409927

- 01 Acceptable

850.1075 Saltwater fish Acute Sheepshead minnow Cypri nodon variegatus 408829

- 03 Acceptable Yes Current studies are on parent PCNB; data are needed on the PCA degradate.

850.1300 Freshwater

invertebrates life cycle Chronic Water Flea Daphnia magna 413213

- 01 Acceptable Yes Current studies are on parent PCNB; data are needed on the PCA degradate.

850.1350 Saltwater

invertebrates life cycle Chronic No data Yes Data are needed on parent PCNB

850.1400 Freshwater fish

early

- life stage Chronic Rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss 416634

- 01 acceptable Yes Current studies are on parent PCNB; data are needed on the PCA degradate for two species.

850.1400 Saltwater fish

early

- life stage Chronic No data Yes Data are needed on parent PCNB

850.1500 Freshwater fish

full life cycle Chronic No data Yes Data requirement can be filled pending successful completion of OCSPP Guideline 890.2200 (medaka extended one generation reproduction test)

850.1735 850.1740 10

- day

Sediment Toxicity Test Subacute No data Yes PCNB is expected to partition to sediment; sediment toxicity t est triggered (log K ow ≥3; K oc ≥1000) for Hya lella
azteca , Chiro nomus tentans , and Leptocheirus plumulosus

. Pending outcome of 10

- day study, chronic whole sediment tests with freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates may be needed

.Page 42 of 76 OCSPP Guideline Data

Requirement Study

Type Submitted Studies

(MRID) Study

Classification Are data

nee ded to conduct risk assessment Justification and

Assumptions EPA will Make in Absence of Data

- Some Example texts are include

850.4400 Aquatic plan t

Toxicity Test using Lemna minor

. NA Duckweed Lemna gibba No data Yes Data are needed on parent PCNB

850.5400 Algal toxicity NA Green Algae
Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata No data

Yes Data are needed on parent PCNB NA Freshwater Diatom Navicula pellic ulosa No data

NA Marine Diatom

Skeletonema
costatum No data

850.4550 Cyanobacteria NA Blue

- green Algae Anabaena flos

aquae No data Yes Data are needed on parent PCNB.

Table 1 2

. Submitted Terrestrial Ecological Effects Data for PCNB.

OCSPP Guideli ne Data

Requirement Study

Type Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data

needed for risk assessment Current Additional Data Need

850.2100 Avian oral

toxicity Acute Northern Bobwhite quail Colinus virginianus 406180

- 01 Supplemental No

Pass erine Acute No data Yes PCNB is formulated as a granule and could be consumed by passerine species foraging in treated

areas.

850.2200 Avian dietary

toxicity Subacute Northern Bobwhite quail Colinus virginianus 406526

- 02 Acceptable

No

Mallard duck A nas platyrhynchus 406526

-- 03 Acceptable

850.2300 Avian

reproduction Chronic Mallard Anas platyrhynchus 413328

- 02 Acceptable NoPage 43 of 76 OCSPP Guideli ne Data

Requirement Study

Type Submitted

Studies (MRID) Study

Classifications Are data

needed for risk assessment Current Additional Data Need

Bobwhite Colinus virginianus 413328

- 01 Acceptable

850.3020 Honey bee

acute contact toxicity Acute Honey bee Apis melli fera 405061

- 02 409346

- 01 Acceptable No

Special Study Honey bee

acute oral toxicity (OECD 213) Acute No data Yes

Data are needed on parent PCNB Special Study Honey bee

larval toxicity test (OECD 237) Acute No data Yes

Special Study Honey bee

adult 10

- day toxicity test Chronic No Data Yes

Special St udy Honey bee 21

-

day larval toxicity test Chronic No Data Yes

850.3030 Honey bee

residue on foliage NA No data Yes 1 Pending outcome of Tier 1 tests, studies held in

reserve

.

850.3040 Field testing

for po llinators Chronic No data Yes 1 Pending outcome of Tier 2 (semi

- field studies) , full

field studies held in

reserve.
Special Study Residues in

pollen/nectar NA No data Yes Pending outcome of Tier 1 tests, studies held in

reserve.

850.4100 Seedling

Emergenc e NA No data Yes Data are needed on formulated product.

850.4250 Vegetative

Vigor NA No data Yes Data are needed on formulated product.

* Review of study has not been finalized.Page 44 of 76



### Appendix B

. Ecological Model Results

A. Screening Imbi bi tion Model (SIP; v ersion 1.0)Page 45 of 76Page 46 of 76



### Appendix C

. Pollinator Data Requirements

Study Title: Honey bee Adult Acute Oral Toxicity Rationale for Requiring the Data Terrestrial invertebrates are likely to be impacted if exposed to pesticides in various use settings

. W ith eusocial bees, pesticide residues may be transferred to pollen and/or nectar of treated plants and subsequently brought back to the hive

. Therefore, potential acute effects to adult honey bee s and other insect pollinators from oral exposure to some pes ticides could exist

. Currently available toxicity studies do not address possible effects of oral exposure on adult terrestrial insect survival

. Because of the potential for pollen and nectar to be contaminated with pesticide residues, and subsequently bro ught back to the hive, it is important to determine the acute oral toxicity of this compound to adult honey bee s and other insect pollinators.

The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for bees using the h oney bee as a surrogate test species

. The guidances discusses Tier 1 laboratory

based acute oral toxicity studies of individual adult bees as a critical component of the screening

level risk assessment process for examining potential adverse effects from s pecific routes of exposure. The guidance can be found at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator

- protection/pollinator

- risk

assessment

- guidance

. Additional guidance on th e honey bee oral toxicity test design can be found in OECD Test Guideline 213 ( http://www.oecd

ilib rary.org/docserver/download/9721301e.pdf?expires=1423074617&id=id&accname=guest&ch ecksum=2F0764FCB4DCF01D32382952A2E995C3 ) Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? The Tier 1 acute oral toxicity d ata on adult honey bees serve as a found ation for the screening

- level assessment of potential risk non

- target organisms such as federally listed threatened or endangered and non

- listed terrestrial invertebrate insects, including pollinators, from acute oral exposures to pesticides. The data will be used to reduce uncertainties associated with the risk assessment for terrestrial invertebrates and will improve EPA’s understanding of the potential direct and indirect effects on a broad range of taxa. This study will also provide information with whi ch to compare whether oral toxicity estimates differ from contact toxicity estimates obtained from other Tier 1 studies. If acute oral effects data for adult honey bees are not available, risks to terrestrial insects from acute oral exposure will be assume d.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? The data will inform the determination required under FIFRA or the ESA as to whether continued registration of a pesticide is likely to result in unreasonable adverse effects to non

- target species or is likely to adversely affect listed threatened or endangered species and/or modify their designated critical habitat. Without these data, EPA may need to presume risk

, which will limit the flexibility of pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and the ESA, and could result in use restrictions.Page 47 of 76

Study Title: Honey bee Larvae Acute Oral Toxicity Rationale for Requiring the Data Terrestrial invertebrates are likely to be impacted if exposed to pesticides in various use settings

. With eusocia l bees, pesticide residues may be transferred to pollen and/or nectar of treated plants and subsequently brought back to the hive where developing larvae and pupae may be exposed

. Therefore, potential adverse effects to developing bees could result from e xposure to pesticide residues

. Available toxicity studies do not address possible effects on brood (larvae and pupae) survival/development

. Because of the potential for pollen and nectar to be contaminated with pesticide residues, and subsequently brought back to the hive, it is important to determine the acute toxicity of this compound to bee brood

. The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for bees using the honey bee as a surrogate test species

. The gui dances discusses Tier 1 laboratory

based acute toxicity studies of individual honey bee larvae as a critical component of the screening

level risk assessment process for examining potential risks from specific routes of exposure. The guidance be found at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator

- protection/pollinator

- risk

- assessment

guidance

. Additional guidance on larval honey bee toxicity test design can be found in OECD T est Guideline 237 ( http://www.oecd

ilibrary.org/docserver/download/9713171e.pdf?expires=1422485600& id=id&accname=guest&ch ecksum=D8E07C2B1DF77BF096C3B29F55BF86A7 )

. In some cases, information pertaining to acute toxicity to honey bee larvae may be obtained with the chronic honey bee larval test thereby negating the need for separate acute and chronic lar val toxicity tests. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? The Tier 1 acute toxicity d ata on honey bee larvae serve as a foundation for the screening

- level assessment of potential risk to non

- target organisms including federally listed threatened or endangered and non

- listed terrestrial invertebrates , including pollinators, and/or modify their designated critical habitat from acute exposures to pesticides. The data will be used to reduce uncertainties associated with the risk assessment for terrestrial invertebrates and will improve EPA’s understanding of the potential effects on terrestrial species and whether there is a differential sensitivity of larval bees relative to adult bees. If acute effects data for larvae are not available, ri sks to terrestrial insects from acute exposure will be assumed

.
How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? The data will inform the determination required under FIFRA or the ESA as to whether continued registration of a pesticide is li kely to result in unreasonable adverse effects to non

- target species or is likely to adversely affect listed threatened or endangered species and/or modify their designated critical habitat. Without these data, EPA may need to presume risk which will limit the flexibility of pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and the ESA, and could result in use restrictions.Page 48 of 76

Study Title: Honey Bee Adult Chronic Oral Toxicity Rationale for Requiring the Data Terrestrial invertebrates are likely to be impacted if exposed to pesticides in various use settings

. With eusocial bees, p esticide residues may be transferred to pollen and/or nectar of treated plants and subsequently brought back to the hive

. Therefore, potential chronic effects to adult honey bees and o ther pollinators from oral exposure to some pesticides could exist

. Currently available toxicity studies do not address possible lethal and sublethal effects of chronic oral exposure on adult terrestrial invertebrates and will assist in determining whether the sensitivity of adult bees differs from that of earlier life stages

. Because of the potential for pollen and nectar to be contaminated with pesticide residues, and subsequently brought back to the hive, it is important to determine the chronic oral tox icity of this compound to adult honey bee s and other pollinators.

The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for bees using the honey bee as a surrogate test species

. The guidances discusses Tier 1 laborato ry

based chronic oral toxicity studies of individual adult honey bee s as a critical component of the screening

- level risk assessment process for examining potential risks from specific routes of
exposure

. The guidance can be found at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator

- protection/pollinator

risk

- assessment

- guidance

. Although study design elements for the chronic 10

- day oral toxicity test with honey bees are similar to the OECD TG 213 acute oral toxicity test ( http://www.oecd

ilibrary.org/docserver/download/9721301e .pdf?expires=1422484908&id=id&accname=guest&ch ecksum=C38495D2A570AC2216CFB1F223D24AA7 ), EPA requires that the proposed protocol for this study be submitted for review and approval by EPA prior to initiating the test

. Practical Utility of the Data How wi ll the data be used? The Tier 1 chronic toxicity d ata on adult bees serve as a foundation for the screening

- level assessment of potential risk to non

- target organisms including federally listed threatened or endangered species and non

- listed terrestrial in vertebrates , including pollinators, from chronic oral exposures to pesticides. The data will be used to reduce uncertainties associated with the risk assessment for terrestrial invertebrates and will improve EPA’s understanding of the potential direct and indirect lethal and sublethal effects on a broad range of terrestrial species, particularly insect pollinators and to determine whether adult toxicity differs substantially from other life stages evaluated in other Tier 1 tests. If chronic oral effects dat a for adults are not available, risks to terrestrial insects from chronic exposure will be assumed.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? The data will inform the determination required under FIFRA or the ESA as to whether continu ed registration of a pesticide is likely to result in unreasonable adverse effects to non

- target species or is likely to adversely affect listed threatened or endangered species and/or their designated critical habitat. Without these data, EPA may need to presume risk which will limit the flexibility of pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and the ESA, and could result in use restrictions.Page 49 of 76

Study Title: Honey Bee Larvae Chronic Oral Toxi city Rationale for Requiring the Data Terrestrial invertebrate s are likely to be impacted if exposed to pesticides in various use settings

. For eusocial bees, pesticide residues may be transferred to pollen and/or nectar of treated plants and subsequently brought back to the hive where larvae and pupae may be exposed

. Therefore, potential effects to developing bees could result from chronic exposure to pesticide residues

. Available toxicity studies do not address possible chronic effects on brood (larvae and pupae) survival

. Because of the potential for pollen and ne ctar to be contaminated with pesticide residues, and subsequently brought back to the hive, it is important to determine chronic larval/pupal toxicity and whether adult emergence is adversely affected. This study will provide information on whether honey b ee larvae differ in sensitivity from adult bees following chronic exposure.

The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for bees using the honey bee as a surrogate test species

. The guidances discusses Tier 1 laboratory

based chronic toxicity studies of individual honey bee larvae as a critical component of the screening

- level risk assessment process for examining potential risks from specific routes of exposure. The guidance can be found at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator

- protection/pollinator

- risk

assessment

- guidance

. Additional information on larval honey bee toxicity repeat exposure test design can be found in the OECD draft guidance ( http://www.oecd.org/env/ehs/testing/Draft_GD_honeybees_rep_exp_for_2nd_CR_25_November _2013.pdf

)

. Although study design elem ents for the chronic 21

- day toxicity test with honey bee larvae have been drafted, EPA requires that the proposed protocol for this study be submitted for review and approval by EPA prior to initiating the test. Practical Utility of the Data How will th e data be used? The Tier 1 chronic toxicity d ata on bee larvae serve as a foundation for the screening

- level assessment of potential risk to non

- target organisms including federally listed threatened or endangered and non

- listed terrestrial invertebrates, including insect pollinators, from chronic exposures to pesticides

. These data will be used to reduce uncertainties associated with the risk assessment for terrestrial invertebrates and will improve EPA’s understanding of the potential direct and indirect lethal and sublethal effects on a broad range of terrestrial species, particularly insect pollinators. These data will also assist in determining whether early life stages of the bee differ in their sensitivity to pesticides relative to adults

. If chronic effects data for larvae are not available, risks to terrestrial insects from chronic exposure will be assumed.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? The data will inform the determination required under FIFRA or the ESA as to whet her continued registration of a pesticide is likely to result in unreasonable adverse effects to non

- target species or is likely to adversely affect listed threatened or endangered species and/or modify their designated critical habitat

. Without these data , EPA may need to presume risk which will limit the flexibility of pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and the ESA, and could result in use restrictions

.Page 50 of 76

Study Title: Semi

- field Testing for P ollinators (tunnel or colony feeding studies) Ration ale for Requiring the Data Tier 2 studies are conditional on the outcome of the screening

- level assessment where acute and/or chronic risk levels of concern have been exceeded for terrestrial invertebrates

. Terrestrial invertebrates are likely to be impac ted if exposed to pesticides in various use settings

. For eusocial bees, pesticide residues may be transferred to pollen and/or nectar of treated plants and subsequently brought back to the hive and may adversely affect developing brood (egg, larvae, and p upae) and adult bees

. Screening

- level (Tier 1 ) studies of individual bees do not address possible effects and/or exposure to pesticide residues at the colony

- level

. Because of the potential for pollen and nectar to be contaminated with pesticide residues, and subsequently brough t back to the hive, it is important to determine whether bee colonies may be negatively affected under relatively controlled exposure conditions of a semi

- field study. In addition to providing effects data, these studies can provide data on pesticide residues in pollen/nectar of treated plants.

The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for bees using the honey bee as a surrogate test species. This guidance describes the tiered testing process and can be found
at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator

- protection/pollinator

- risk

- assessment

- guidance , Additional information on honey bee colony studies un der semi

- field conditions can be found in the OECD Guidance 75 ( http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote= env/jm/mono% 282007%2922&do clanguage=en )

. Due to the complexities of this study, EPA requires that the proposed protocol for this study be submitted for review EPA prior to initiating the test. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? T ier 2 colony

- level data will be used to assess potential risk to non

- target organisms including listed and

non

- listed terrestrial social invertebrate species and to determine whether effects observed in the screening

level (Tier 1) laboratory

- based studies of individual bees are evident in colony

- level studies under semi

- field conditions. The Tier2 semi

- field test of whole colonies is a relatively controlled study, i.e ., bees are confined to a specific area, that is designed to represent potential field

- lev el exposure and account for hive dynamics, which are not achievable from other pollinator studies. This study will be used to determine whether adverse effects to insect pollinators at the whole colony level, may result for the use of pesticides and will h elp to refine risk estimates derived in the screening

- level risk assessment for beneficial terrestrial invertebrates. Measured residues in pollen/nectar can also be used to refine risk estimates derived from model

- based or default values in the screening

- l evel assessment.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? The data will inform the determination required under FIFRA or the ESA as to whether continued registration of a pesticide is likely to result in unreasonable adverse effects to non

- target species or is likely to adversely affect federally listed threatened or endangered species or their designated critical habitat. Without these data, EPA may need to presume risk which will limit the flexibility of pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and the ESA, and could result in significant use restrictions.Page 51 of 76

Study Title: Semi

- field Testing for P ollinators (tunnel or colony feeding studies) Rationale for Requiring the Data For eusocial bees, pesticide residues may be transferred to pollen and/or nectar of treated plants and subsequently brought back to the hive and may adversely affect developing brood (egg, larvae, and pupae) and adult bees. Tier 2 feeding studies are conditional on the outcome of the screening

- level assessment wher e acute and/or chronic risk levels of concern have been exceeded for terrestrial invertebrates based on Tier 1 studies of individual bees. Feeding studies utilize free foraging bee colonies that are “dosed” with specific quantities of test material and rep resent a means of ensuring exposure to the test material through spiked pollen and/or sugar solutions fed to the colony while still allowing the bees to forage freely

. Since bee colonies are not confined to enclosures, colonies can be exposed for longer du ration periods without subjecting the bees to stress that typically results from Tier 2 tunnel studies

. Available toxicity studies of individual bees (Tier 1) conducted to support screening

- level assessments do not address possible effects and/or exposure to pesticide residues at the colony

- level

. It is therefore important to determine whether bee colonies may be negatively affected where bees are free foraging and have the option to collect/consume alternative forage items beyond the spiked food. Since mul tiple dose levels can be more readily tested, feeding studies can help to define dose

- response relationships at the whole colony level.

The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for bees using the honey b ee as a surrogate

. This guidance describes the tiered testing process and can be found at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator

- protection/pollinator

- risk

- assessment

- gui dance

. Additional information on honey bee colony feeding studies can be found in the EPPO Guidance 170 ( www.nationalbeeunit.com/downloadDocument.cfm?id=191 )

. Although study design elements for the feeding study are available through the EPPO Guidance 170, EPA requires that the proposed protocol for this study be submitted for review and approval by EPA prior to initiating the test. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? Tier 2 colony feeding data will be used to assess potential risk to non

- target organisms including listed and

non

- listed terrestrial social invertebrate species. The colony feeding study is designed to represent potential field

- level exposure an d account for hive dynamics using longer duration exposure periods than are possible in Tier 2 tunnel studies. This study will be used to determine whether potential adverse effects to insect pollinators at the whole colony level when bees are able to fora ge naturally beyond the spiked food. Results from the feeding study will help to refine the screening

- level risk assessment for beneficial terrestrial invertebrates that were based on Tier 1 studies on individual bees. Since feeding studies can help to def ine a dose

- response relationship at the colony level, the studies can provide a means of determining exposure thresholds below which the likelihood of adverse effects on colonies may be low.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? The Tier 2 colony

- level data will be used to refine screening

- level risk estimates derived using Tier 1 laboratory

- based data on individual bees. The Tier 2 data will help to inform the determination required under FIFRA or the ESA as to whether continued registration of a pesticide is likely to result in unreasonable adverse effects to non

- target species or is likely to adversely affect federally listed threatened or endangered species or their designated critical habitat. Without these data, EPA may need to presume risk which will limit the flexibility of pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and the ESA, and could result in significant use restrictions.Page 52 of 76

Study Title: Field Testing for Pollinators Rationale for Requiring the Data Tier 3 studies are conditional on the outcome of the screening

- level assessment (Tier 1) where acute and/or chronic risk levels of concern have been exceeded for terrestrial invertebrates and where Tier 2 studies either under semi

- field tunnel conditions and/or feeding stud ies have indicated potential adverse effects at the colony level

. Available toxicity studies from lower

- tier studies do not address possible effects and/or exposure to pesticide residues at the colony

- level under actual pesticide use conditions and where s pecific uncertainties regarding the likelihood of exposure and/or effects remain

. Full

- field studies also provide an opportunity to measure residues in pollen and nectar as well as various matrices (beebread, honey, wax) within the colony to obtain a more realistic understanding of exposure.

The Office of Pesticide Programs has made available a guidance regarding ecological testing for bees using the honey bee as a surrogate

. This guidance describes the tiered testing process and can be found at: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator

- protection/pollinator

- risk

- assessment

- guidance

. Additional information on honey bee colony studies under full

- field conditions can be found in the OCSPP 850.3040 ( http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=EPA

- HQ

- OPPT

- 2009

- 0154

- 0018 )

. Useful guidance is also available through OCSPP 850.2500 (Field Testing of Terrestrial Wildlife; http://www.epa.gov/ocspp/pubs/frs/publications/Test_Guidelines/series850.htm ) Although design elements for the full

- field colony

- level study are available through the 850.3040 and 850.2500, EPA requires that the proposed protocol for this study be submitted for review and approval by EPA prior to initiating the test; the protocol should attempt to address specific uncertainties iden tified in lower

- tier studies. Practical Utility of the Data How will the data be used? Tier 3 colony

- level data will be used to further characterize potential risk to non

- target organisms including listed and non

- listed terrestrial social invertebrate s pecies and to refine screening

- level risk estimates that were based on individual bee responses. The semi

- field test is a controlled study that is designed to represent potential field

- level exposure under relatively controlled conditions and account for h ive dynamics, which are not achievable from lower

- tier pollinator studies. This study will be used to determine whether adverse effects to insect pollinators at the whole colony level, may result for the use of pesticides and will help to refine the screen ing

- level risk estimates for beneficial terrestrial invertebrates. This study will also be used to determine whether more refined (Tier 3) studies are needed to characterize risk.

How could the data impact the Agency’s future decision

- making? The data wi ll inform the determination required under FIFRA or the ESA as to whether continued registration of a pesticide is likely to result in unreasonable adverse effects to non

- target species or is likely to adversely affect federally listed threatened or endang ered species or their designated critical habitat. Without these data, EPA may need to presume risk which will limit the flexibility of pesticide products to comply with FIFRA and the ESA, and could result in significant use restrictions.Page 53 of 76

Appendix D

. Submitted Studies

056502 PCNB Fate/Chemistry Bibliography MRID

- Doc# Match

161

- 1 Hydrolysis

MRID Citation Reference

114176 Iacoviello, S.; Thomas, R. (1978) Analytical Investigations Con

cerned with the Rate of Hydrolysis of Terraclor Ring 14 C(U): 3346. (Unpublished study received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- J)

40506103 Bowman, B.; Fennessey, M. (1987) "Determination of t he Hydrolysis Rate of 14 C

- PCNB": ABC Preliminary Report #36005. Un

- published study prepared by Analytical Bio

Chemistry Laborato ries, Inc. 45 p.

40597301 Bowman, B. (1988) Determination of th e Hydrolysis Rate of 14 C

- PCNB: ABC Draft Final Report #36005. Unpublished study
pre

- pared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry La boratories, Inc. 47 p.

40865301 Bowman, B. (1988) Determination of the Hydrolysis Rate of 14 C

- PCNB: Project ID. 36821. Unpubli shed study prepared by Analyti cal Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 304 p.

40972601 final report Bowman, B.; Fennessey, M. (1988) Determination of th e Hydrolysis Rate of 14 C

- PCNB: ABC Final Rept. #36005. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 50 p.

161

- 2 Photodegradation

- water

MRID Citation Reference

142628 Thomas, R. (1983) Photochemical Degradation Studies of Terraclor [Ring

- [ 14 C ] (U)] (Pentachlo ronitrobenzene) in Aqueous Sol ution: CASR

- 3

- 83. Unpublished study prepared by Olin Research Center. 33 p.

40506104 preliminary Bowman, B.; Fennessey, M. (1987) Determination of th e Photolysis Rate of 14 C

- PCNB in pH

- 5 Aqueous Solution: ABC Prelimi nary Report #36006. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 54 p.

41090701 final Bowman, B.; Fennessey, M. (1989) Determination of the Photolysis Rate o f 14 C

- PCNB in pH

- 5 Aqueous Solution: FinalPage 54 of 76 Report: ABC Final Report #36006. Unpubli shed study prepared by Analyti cal Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 62 p.

41384401 Amended report Dykes, J.; Carpenter, M. (1989) Determination of th e Photolysis Rate of 1 4 C

- PCNB in pH

- 5 Aqueous Solution: Amended Final Report #36822. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 1409 p.

42143001 Interim report Horree, D. (1991) Aqueous Photolysis of PCNB : Interim Report: Lab Project Number: 9 127. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co., Inc. 33 p.

42336201 final Horree, D. (1992) Aqueous Photolysis of PCNB: Lab Project Number: 9127. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co., Inc. 51 p.

42606201 Bashir, M. (1992) A qu eous Photolysis of 14 C

Pentachloronitrobenzene: Lab Project Number: 368223. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs, Inc. 918 p.

42606202 Bashir, M. (1992) Aqueous Photolys is of 14 C

Pentachloronitrobenzene: Lab Project Number: 368223A. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs, Inc. 105 p.

101794 Hamadmad, N. (1966 ) Photolysis of Pentachloronitrobenzene, 2,3,5,6

- Tetrachloronitrobenzene, and Pentachlorophenol. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of California

-- Davis. (Unpublished study re ceived Dec 8, 1977 under 464

- 431; submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, MI; CDL:232663

- G ) In Water or Soil

161

- 3 Photodegradation

- soil

MRID Citation Reference

66616 Crosby, D.G.; Moilanen, K.W.; Wong, A.S. (1973) Environmental gen eration and degradation of d ibenzodioxins and dibenzofurans. Environmental Health Perspectiv es (Sep):259

- 266. (National In stitute of Environmental Science; published study; CDL:229320

- I)

101794 Hamadmad, N. (1966) Photolysis of P entachloronitrobenzene, 2,3,5,6

- Tetrachloronitrobenz ene, and Pentachlorophenol. Doctoral dissertation, Univ. of California

-- Davis. (Unpublished study re ceived Dec 8, 1977 under 464

- 431; submitted by Dow Chemical U.S.A., Midland, MI; CDL:232663

- G ) In Water or Soil

40972602 41014201 Bowman, B. (1988) Dete rmination of the Photolysis Rate of PCNB on the Surface of Soil: ABC Final Rept. #36007.Page 55 of 76 Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 54 p.

41004801 Carpenter, M.; Bowman, B. (1988) Photodegradation Study of
14 C

- PCNB on Soil Surface: ABC Final Report No. 36823. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 313 p.

41713201 Supplement

to MRID 41004801 Kabler, K. (1990) Photodegradation Study of 14 C

- PCNB on Soil

Surface: Supplement to MRID 41004801 : Lab Project Number: 368231. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

Chemistry Labs, Inc. 129 p.

42841106 42911901 Misra, B. (1993) PCNB: Photodegradation of Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) on a Sandy Loam Soil un der Artificial Sunlight Irradia tio n: Final Report: Lab Project No. ME 9200158. Unpublished study prepared by Pittsburgh Environmental Research Lab, Inc. 80 p.

162

- 1 Aerobic soil metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

1712 Open lit Ko, W.H.; Farley, J.D. (1969) Conversion of pentachloronitrobenzene to pentachloroaniline in soil and the effect of these compounds on soil microorganisms. Phytopathology 59(1):64, 66

- 67. (Also in unpublished submission received Mar 24, 1970 under 9F0754; submitted by Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., New Haven, Conn.; CDL:091299

- O)

114171 Beck, J.; Hansen, K. (1974) The degradation of quintozene, penta

chlorobenzene, hexachlorobenzene and pentachloroaniline in soil. Pestic. Sci. 5:41

- 48. (Submitter 2300; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- D)

114175 Buser, H.; Bosshardt, H. (1975) Studies on the possible formation of polychloroazobenzenes in Quintozene treated soil. Pestic. Sci. 6:35

- 41. (Submitter 3236; also In unp ublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- I)

114179 Open lit Wang, C.; Broadbent, F. (1973) Effect of Soil Treatments on Losses of Two Chloronitrobenzene Fungicides. J. Environ. Quality 2(4) : 511

- 515. (Submitter 3370; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- M)Page 56 of 76

114182 Caseley, J. (1968) The loss of three chloronitrobenzene fungicides from the soil. Bulletin of Env ironmental Contamination & Toxicology 3(3):180

- 193. (Submitter 3490; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248282

- A)

114187 Okazaki, H. (1979) Formation of methyl pentachlorophenyl sulfoxide and sulfone from pentachloronitrobenzene in soil and plants. J. Pesticide Sci. 4:355

- 360. (Submitter 3577; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; sub

- mitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248282

- F)

41203601 Daly , D. (1989) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of 14 C

- Pentachlo

ronitrobenzene: Final Report No. 34904. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 53 p.

41384501 Cranor, W. (1989) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of 14 C|

- penta

chloronitrobe nzene: ABC Final Report # 36824. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 1088 p.

41713202 Cranor, W. (1990) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of 14 C

- Pentachloro

nitrobenzene: Supplement to MRID 41384501: Lab Project Number: 3682 41. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

Chemistry Labs, Inc. 117 p.

42112801 Cady, C.; Cranor, W. (1991) Supplement to: Aerobic Soil Metabolism of 14 C

- Pentachloronitrobenzene on Sandy Loam Soil: Lab Project Number: 368242. Unpublished study p re pared by ABC Labo ratories, Inc. 270 p.

42911902 Misra, B. (1993) Aerobic Soil Metabolism of Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB): Lab Project Number: ME 9100131. Unpublished study prepared by Pittsburgh Environmental Research Lab., Inc. 89 p.

114180 Open li t Wang, C.; Broadbent, F. (1972) Kinetics of losses of PCNB and DCNA in three California soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 36(5):742

- 745. (Submitter 3370; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Ol in Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- N)

114171 Open lit Beck, J.; Hansen, K. (1974) The degradation of quintozene, penta

chlorobenzene, hexachlorobenzene and pentachloroaniline in soil. Pestic. Sci. 5:41

- 48. (Submitter 2300; also In unpublished submissio n received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- D)

114175 Open lit Buser, H.; Bosshardt, H. (1975) Studies on the possible formation of polychloroazobenzenes in Quintozene treated soil. Pestic. Sci. 6:35

- 41. (Sub mitter 3236; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- I)Page 57 of 76

60790 Letter Thomas, R.J. (1969) Letter sent to E.J. Kuchar dated Jun 26, 1969: Metabolism of PCNB in soil. (Unpublished study, including let

- ter dated Jun 25, 1969 from E.J. Kuchar to H.H. Klein, received Mar 24, 1970 under 9F0754; submitted by Olin Mathieson Chem. Corp., New York, N.Y.; CDL:091299

- AE)

162

- 2 Anaerobic soil metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

41203602 Daly, D. (1989) Anaerobic Soil Metabolism of 14 C

- Penta

chloronitrobenzene: Final Report No. 35905. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 49 p.

41384301 Cranor, W.; Patterson, C. (1989) Anaerobic Soil Met abolism of Car

- bon 14|

- pentachloronitrobenzene: ABC Final Report #36825. Un

- published study prepared by Analytical Bio

Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 759 p

41686001 Cranor, W.; Patterson, C. (1990) Amended Final Report to: Anaerobi c Soil Metabolism of 1 4 C

- Pentachloronitrobenzene, MRID 41384301: Lab Project Number: #36825. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 49
p.
41713203 amended report Cranor, W. (1990) Anaerobic Soil Metabolism of 14 C

Pentachloro nitrobenzene: Su pplement to and Amended Final Report of MRID 413 84301: Lab Project Number: 368251. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Labs, Inc. 119 p.

114178 Murthy, N.; Kaufman, D. (1977) D egradation of Pentachloronitro benz ene (PCNB) in Anaerobic Soils: Olin| 3369. (U.S. Agri cultural Research Service; unpublished study; CDL:248281

- L)

42112802 Cady, C.; Cranor, W. (1991) Supplement to: Anaerobi c Soil Metabol ism of 14 C

- Pentachloronitrobenzene on Sandy Loam Soil: Lab Project Number: 368251. Un published study prepared by ABC Laboratories, Inc. 264 p.

42094401 White, C.K. (1991) Reply to EPA Rejection of PCNB Anaerobic Soil Metabolism Study; MRID#:41203602. Performed and Submitted by Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc.

163

- 1 Leach/adsorp tio n /desorption

MRID Citation ReferencePage 58 of 76

59118 Thomas, M.P. (1965) Letter sent to H.H. Klein dated Nov 3, 1965: Olin 2424 and Terraclor residues in soils from 1965 Terraclor Super X (EC) fall cotton seedling tests run in Texas. (Unpublished study received May 28, 1970 under 0F0997; submitted by Olin Chemicals, Consumer Products, Div. of Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:091717

- AA)

97769 Hartzfeld, E.G. (1965) New Mexico State University Soil Persistence Studies. (Unpublished study received May 14 , 1965 under 1258

- 279; prepared by New Mexico State Univ., Dept. of Botany and Entomology, submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL: 101584

- E)

114168 Iacoviello, S. (1978) Chemodynamic Parameter of Terraclor (Penta chloronitrobenzene) Soil Adsorpti on: 1414. (Unpublished study received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- A)

114173 Registrant

compilation Olin Corp. (1965) Data Pertinent to Persistence of Terraclor in

the Soil: 2322. (Compilation; unpublished study received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; CDL:248281

- F)

114180 Wang, C.; Broadbent, F. (1972) Kinetics of losses of PCNB and DCNA in three California soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 36(5):742

- 745. (Submitter 3370; also In unpublishe d submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- N)

114181 Esposito, A.; DeFelice, D.; Kuchar, E., et al . (1977) Laboratory Soil Leaching Studies Concerned with Terraclor (Pentachlor

nitrobenzene): 345 0. (Unpublished study received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL: 248281

- P)

114966 Dow Chemical Co. (1967) The Results of Tests on the Amount of Res idue Remaining, Including a Description of the Analytical Method Use d. (Compilation; unpublished study received Apr 13, 1967 under 7F0593; CDL:090764

- H)

41648201 Dykes, J. (1990) Soil Adsorption/Desorption with Carbon 14|

- PCNB: Lab Project Number: 38405. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratorie s, Inc. 509 p.

43500501 Wu, D. (1994) Adsorption and Desorption of 14 C

Pentachloroaniline in Four Agricultural Soils: Lab Project Number: 94039: RPT00210. Unpublished study prepared by XenoBiotic Lab., Inc. 120 p.

43500502 Wu, D. (1994) Adsorption an d Desorption of 14 C

Pentachlorothioanisole in Four Agricultural Soils. XBL Study No. 94038; XBL Report No. RPT00209. Unpublished StudyPage 59 of 76 Prepared by Xenobiotic Laboratories, Inc., Plainsboro, NJ and Submitted by AMVAC Chemical Corporation, Los Angeles, CA.

65859 and 5001190 Open lit Helling, C .S., D.G. Dennison and D.D. K aufman (1974) Fungicide Movement in Soils. Phytopathology 64(8):1091

- 1100. Also In Unpublished Submission Received Mar. 5, 1976 under 6G1754: Submitted by Kalo Laboratories, Inc., Kansas Ci ty, MO., CDL: 095981

- G.

163

- 2 Volatility

- lab

MRID Citation Reference

40506105 preliminary Teeter, D. (1988) Laboratory Volati lity of PCNB from Soil

-- Prelimi nary Report: ABC #36283. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Lab

- oratories, Inc. 4 6 p.

40580201 final Teeter, D. (1988) Laboratory Volatility from Soil of PCNB: Final Report No. 36283. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 25 p.

41178001 Bowman, B. (1989) Laboratory Volatility from Soil of PCNB: ABC Final Report #37090. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 311 p.

42507401 Vithala, R. (1992) Pentachloronitrobenzene: Laboratory Volatility Study of PCNB from Soil: Lab Project Number: ME9100134: 91148. Unpublis hed study prepared by Univ. of Pittsburgh. 65 p.

163

- 3 Volatility

- field

MRID Citation Reference

43751101 Merricks, D.; Jensen, M. (1995) PCNB Field Volatility Study: Lab Project Number: 1919: 9234: 92

- 109. Unpublished study prepared by A grisearch Inc. 143 p.

164

- 1 Terrestrial field dissipation

MRID Citation Reference

1661 Kuchar, E. J. (1973) Residues of Terraclor (R)I and Terrazole (R)I in Soil

-- 1972 Studies: CASR

- 19

- 73. (Unpublished study received Oct 20, 1976 under 1258

- 812; submitted by Olin Corp., Agricultural Div., Little Rock, Ark.; CDL:228143

- X)Page 60 of 76

59114 or 59115 Letter Kuchar, E.J. (1969) Letter sent to H.H. Klein dated Aug 7, 1969: Soybeans

-- Emory Fultz

-- soil. (Unpublished study received May 28, 1970 under 0F0997; submitted by Olin Chemicals, Consumer Products, Div. of Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:091717

- P)

59116 Letter Kuchar, E.J. (1969) Letter sent to H.H. Klein dated Aug 7, 1969: Soil

-- PAG Farm, Urbana, Illinois. (Unpublished study received May 28, 1970 u nder 0F0997; submitted by Olin Chemicals, Consumer Products, Div. of Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:091717

- R)

59118 Letter Thomas, M.P. (1965 ) Letter sent to H.H. Klein dated Nov 3, 1965: Olin 2424 and Terraclor residues in soils from 1965 Terraclor S uper X (EC) fall cotton seedling tests run in Texas. (Unpublished study received May 28, 1970 under 0F0997; submitted by Olin Chemicals, Consumer Products, Div. of Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:091717

- AA)

59152 Letter Thomas, M.P. (1965 ) Letter sent t o R.F. Philpitt dated Nov 11, 1965: Soils from 1965 Terraclor Super X(EC), fall cotton seed

- ling tests. (Unpublished study received Feb 16, 1968 under 1258

- 818; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL: 101585

- T)

59153 Letter Sisken, H.R. (1966) Le tter sent to H.H. Klein dated Dec 1, 1966: PCNB and 2424 residue in cotton. (Unpublished study received Feb 16, 1968 under 1258

- 818; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:101585

- W)

59154 Letter Sisken, H.R. (1967) Letter sent t o H.H. Klein dated Apr 11, 1967: Degradation of 2424 and PCNB in cotton soil and plants. (Unpub lished study received Feb 16, 1968 under 1258

- 818; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:101585

- X)

97659 Synopsis Mobay Chemical Corporation (1963) Synopsis of Analytic al and Resi due Information for Dexon in Soil Treatment of Cotton and Sugar Beets. Summary of studies 005626

- B and 005626

- C. (Unpublished study received May 8, 1964 under 3125

- 69; CDL:005626

- A)

97663 Compilation Mobay Chemical Corporation (1964) Dexon: Analytical and Residue Information of Seed Treatment of Various Vegetable Crops. (Com pilation; unpublished study received Jun 23, 1964 under 3125

- 69; CDL:007027

- A)

97755 Compilation Olin Corporation (1969) PCNB: Residues in Soil|. (Compilation; unpublis hed study received on unknown date under 9F0754; CDL: 097474

- M)

97766 Ackermann, H.J.; Hartzfeld, E.G. (1965) Half

- life Studies on Terra

- chlor. (Unpublished study received May 14, 1965 underPage 61 of 76 1258

- 279; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:1015 84

- B)

97767 Referenced

in fate
summary

Johnson, G. (1965) Gas Chromatographic Analyses of PCNB

Treated Soil Samples. (Unpublished study received May 14, 1965 under 1258

- 279; prepared by Colorado State Univ., Agricultural Experiment Station, Chemistry Se ction, submitted by Olin Corp., Stam

- ford, Conn.; CDL:101584

- C)

97768 Referenced

in fate
summary

Ashworth, L.J.; Price, J.D.; Langle y, B.C. (1965) Comparative

Per sistence of Pentachloronitrobenze Formulations in Field Soil. (Unpublished study received May 14, 1965 under 1258

- 279; pre

- pared by Texas A & M Univ., Agricultural Experiment Station, Depts. of Plant Sciences and Agricultural Analytical Services, Substation No. 20, submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:101584

- D)

97770 Open lit Reinha rt, J.H. (1965) Residual effectiveness of dust and granular formulations of pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB). Plant Disease Reporter 49(1):60

- 62. (U.S. Agricultural Research Administration, Bureau of Plant Industry, Soils and Agricultural Engineering, Div. o f Mycology and Disease Survey generated; published study; CDL:101584

- F)

114171 open lit Beck, J.; Hansen, K. (1974) The degradation of quintozene, penta

- chlorobenzene, hexachlorobenzene and pentachloroaniline in soil. Pestic. Sci. 5:41

- 48. (Submitter 23 00; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- D)

114172 Kuchar, E.; Griffith, W. (1974) Translocation Studies: Terraclor from Treated Soil, Oklahoma: 2315. (Unpublished study rec eived Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281

- E)

114966 compilation Dow Chemical Co. (1967) The Results of Tests on the Amount of Res idue Remaining, Including a Description of the Analytical Method Used. (Compilation ; unpublished study received Apr 13, 1967 under 7F0593; CDL:090764

- H)

158311 Letter Thomas, M. (1965) Letter sent to R. Philpitt dated Nov 1, 1965: Soils from 1965 Terrachlor Super X (EC): fall cotton seedling tests. 2 p.

41210501 Irissarri, G.; Lenge n, M. (1989) Fi eld Dissipation of Pentachloro nitrobenzene on a California Turf Site: Terraclor 75W: CAR # 69

- 87; Uniroyal #8785. Unpublished study prepared by California Agricultural Research, Inc. in cooperation with North Coast Laboratories, Inc. and Uni royal Chemical Co., Inc. 62 p.

41216401 Rice, F.; Jacobson, B.; Winberry, M. (1989) Terrestrial Field Dissipation for PCNB in Broccoli: Project ID's: ABC FinalPage 62 of 76 Report No. 35969; Uniroyal Project No. 8754B. Unpublished study pre

- pared by Analytical Bio

- chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 119 p.

41216402 Rice, F.; Jacobson, B.; Winberry, M. (1989) Terrestrial Field Dissipation for PCNB in Potatoes: Project ID's: ABC Final Report No. 35970; Uniroyal Project No. 8754C. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical B io

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 115 p.

41313501 Rice, F.; Jacobson, B.; Winberry, M. (1989) Terrestrial Field Dissipation for PCNB in Peanuts: ABC Final Report # 35968: 8754A. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 139 p.
41721401 Judy, D.; Jacobson, B.; Guyton, W. (1990) Terrestrial Field Dissi pation for PCNB in Potatoes: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 36971. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 1698 p.

41747001 Rice, F.; J acobson, B.; Guyton, B. (1990) Terrestrial Field Dissipation for PCNB in Broccoli: Lab Project Number: 36972. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 2052 p.

41752201 Beerbaum, C. (1991) PCNB Residues in Soil Taken Sept ember, 1990 Following Project No. 8754A: La b Project Number: 90100. Unpub lished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co., Inc. 23 p.

42094402 Noon, P. (1990) Storage Stability Study of Terraclor in Soil: Lab Project Number: 20.001. Unpublished study prep ared by North Coast Labs, Inc. 27 p.

42094403 White, C.K. (1991) Answers to EPA Questions about Terraclor Field Dissipation on Turf in California, Uniroyal Chemical Project No. 8785, MRID#:41210501. Performed and Submitted by Uniroyal Chemical Company, Inc.

42094404 Burger, R. (1991) Confirmation of PCNB and Metabolites for Uniroyal Project No. 8785: Field Dissipation of PCNB on a California Turf Site: Lab Project Number: 91140. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chem. Co., Inc. 41
p.
43061501 H arned, W.; Creeger, S. (1993) Field Dissipation of Pentachloronitrobenzene (Terraclor 1OG) in Georgia under Conditions for Treatment on Peanuts: Lab Project Number: 9173. Unpublished study prepared by Georgia Agri

- Scientific, Inc. and Centre Analytical Lab s, Inc. 465 p.

43887401 Leppert, B. (1995) Pentachloronitrobenzene: Terrestrial Field Dissipation of PCNB 10G on Bareground Plot in California: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 42126: SARS

- 94

- 75:Page 63 of 76 SARS

- 94

- CA

- 75. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs, I nc. and Stewart Agricultural Services, Inc. 232 p.

43887402 Leppert, B. (1995) Pentachloronitrobenzene: Terrestrial Field Dissipation of PCNB 10G on Bareground Plot in Georgia: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 42127: SARS

- 94

- 76: SARS

- 94

- GA

- 76. Unpublis hed study prepared by Stewart Agricultural Services, Inc. and ABC Labs, Inc. 217 p.

43887403 Leppert, B. (1995) Pentachloronitrobenzene: Terrestrial Field Dissipation of PCNB 75W on Turfgrass Plot in California: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 42128: SARS

- 94

- 77: SARS

- 94

- CA

- 77. Unpublished study prepared by Stewart Agricultural Services, Inc. and ABC Labs, Inc. 236 p.

44067701 Saxena, A. (1996) Pentachloronitrobenzene and Metabolites

-- Independent Method Validation: Final Report: Lab Project Number: N 001745

- A: SARS

- 95

- 78: N001745A. Unpublished study prepared by Battelle. 94 p.

44604501 Harned, W. (1997) Field Dissipation of Pentachloronitrobenzene (Terraclor 2 LB Emulsifiable) on Cotton in Texas: Lab Project Number: 92147: STBR

- 92

- CT

20: 004

- 26. Unp ublished study prepared by South Texas Ag Research and Centre Analytical Labs., Inc. 1031 p.

42485901 White, C. (1992) Answers to EPA Questions about Terraclor Field Dissipation on Broccoli in California, Uniroyal Chemical Project No. 8754B (MRID 412164 01). Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co. 66 p.

42485902 White, C. (1992) Answers to EPA Questions about Terraclor Field Dissipation on Potatoes in Minnesota, Uniroyal Chemical Project No. 8754C (MRID 41216402). Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co. 67 p.

165

- 0 Accumulation Studies

-- General

MRID Citation Reference

114191 Open lit Gile, J.; Gillett, J. (1979) Fate of selected fungicides in a terrestrial laboratory ecosystem

. J. Agric. Food Chem. 27(6): 11 59

- 1164. (Submitter 3633; also In unpublished submission re

ceived Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 17; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248282

- K)

114195 Open lit Alexander, A. (1979) Pesticide Interactions in the Laboratory Rice Paddy Model Ecosystem. Taken from: Dissertation Abstracts p. 3567

- B

- 3568

- B. (Abstract; Order No. 8004126;Page 64 of 76 Submitter 3687; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248282

- O)

165

- 1 Confined rotational c rop

MRID Citation Reference

41562905 Halls, J.; Timothy, D. (1990) Confined Accumulation Study of
14 C

- PCNB on Rotational Crops Treatment, Sampling and Combustion Analysis: Lab Project Number: 8755: 35971. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical B io

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 49 p.

42599201 Heath, J. (1992) PCNB: Accumulation in Confined Rotational Crops: Lab Project Number: 36920. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs, Inc. 92 p.

42841101 Overview Putterman, G. (1993) PCNB: Confined Rotati onal Crops: Study Overview. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co, Inc. 7 p.

42841102 Registrant

comments + raw data for 41562905 White, C. (1993 ) Uniroyal Comments Including Raw Data from

the In Life Study Entitled: "Confined Accumulation Study of (carbon 14)

-- PCNB on Rotational Crops Treatment, Sampling and Combustion Analysis: Lab Project Number: H632. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co, Inc. 99 p.

42841103 Murty, V.; Ford, C. (1993) Characterization of Pentachloronitro benzene Metabolites in Rotational Wheat: Lab Project Number: 8755: 35971: 9058. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co, Inc. and ABC Labs. 295 p.

42841104 Ford, C.; Murty, V. (1993) Characterization of Pentachloronitrobenzene Metabolites in Rotational Lettuce: Lab Project Number: 8755: 35971: 9039. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co, Inc. and ABC Labs. 143 p.

42841105 Ford, C.; Murty, V. (1993) Characterization of Pentachloronitrobenzene Metabolites in Rotational Turnip: La b Project Number: 8755: 9055: 35971. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Co, Inc. and ABC Labs. 97 p.

44348301 Harn ed, W.; Carter, D.; Parkins, M., et al . (1997) Confined Rotational Crop Analytical and Field Study on PCNB: (Final Report): La b Project Number: 9270: RPT00266: 92094. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs California; Uniroyal Chemical Co. Inc.; and XenoBiotic Labs, Inc. 737 p. {OPPTS 860.1850}Page 65 of 76

44577501 amended report Harned, W.; Carter, D.; Yu, W.

, et al . (1998) Confined Rota tional Crop Analytical and Field Study on PCNB: Amended Final Report: Lab Project Number: 9270: 92094: RPT00266. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Laboratories California, XenoBiotic Laboratories, Inc., Uniroyal Chemical Co., Inc. 969 p. {OPPTS 860.1850}

165

- 2 Field rotational crop

MRID Citation Reference

114187 Okazaki, H. (1979) Formation of methyl pentachlorophenyl sulfoxide and sulfone from pentachloronitrobenzene in soil and plants. J. Pesticide Sci. 4:355

- 360. (Submitter 3577; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; sub

- mitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248282

- F)

44081001 Gaydosh, K. (1996) Terraclor 10G Rotational Crop Study: Residue Levels of PCNB and Related Metabolites and Impurities in Wheat an d Lettuce Planted 30 and 120 Days After Terraclor 10G Applied to Bare Soil at Peanut Application Rates: Lab Project Number: RP

- 92009: KHG

- 92

- 004: CRA

- 92

- 002. Unpublished study prepared by S.T.A.R., Inc.; Hickey's Agri

Services Lab; and Centre Analytical La bs., Inc. 535 p.

44113501 Gaydosh, K. (1996) Terraclor 10G Rotational Crop Study: Residue Levels of PCNB and Related Metabolites and Impurities in Wheat, Turnip, and Lettuce Planted 365 Days After Terraclor 10G Applied to Bare Soil at Peanut Application Rates: Lab Project Number: RP

- 91029: KHG

- 91

- 068: CRA

- 91

- 081. Unpublished study prepared by Centre Analytical Laboratories, Inc.; S.T.A.R., Inc.; and Hickey's Agri

- Services Lab. 693 p.

165

- 4 Bioaccumulation in fish

MRID Citation Reference

1 42629 Wilkes, L.; Iley, E. (1983) Bluegill Sunfish Bioconcentration

Depu ration Study Using Carbon

- 14 Labeled PCNB: ADC Project #805

- 1. Unpublished study prepared in co operation with Analytical Deve lopment Corp. and Environmental Research and Technology, Inc. 62 p.

40506106 40580202 preliminary Forbis, A. (1987) Uptake, Depuration and Bioconcentration of
14 C|

- PCNB to Bluegill Sunfish ( Lepomis macrochirus ): Preliminary Report #35965. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, I nc. 52 p.Page 66 of 76

40580202 final Forbis, A. (1988) Uptake, Depuration and Bioconcentration of
14 C|

- PCNB to Bluegill Sunfish ( Lepomis macrochirus ): Final Report No. 35965. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 37 p.

41200001 See

41200000 Burgess, D. (1989) Uptake, Depuration and Bioconcentration of

14 C|

- PCNB by Bluegill Sunfish ( Lepomis macrochirus ): Rept. # 36872. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 346 p.

41200000 Burgess, D. (1989) Uptake, Depuration and Bioconcentration of
14 C

- PCNB by Bluegill Sunfish ( Lepomis macrochirus ). ABC Final Report No. 36872. Unpublished Study Performed by analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. and Submitted by AMVAC Chemical Corp., Los Angeles, CA.

4 1521001 Forbis, A. (1990) Bioconcentration of 14 C|

- PCNB to Channel Catfish ( Ictalurus punctatu s) and Bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) under Static Uptake Conditions: Final Report # 37033. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc., Aquatic Toxicology Div. 488 p.

41951701 Halls, T. (1991) Characterization of 14 C

- PCNB Residues in Water and Bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) Tissues: Lab Project Number: 37024. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs, Inc. 58 p.

43179301 Vithala, R. (1994) PCNB Metabolite Characterization in Fish and Water Samples from a Flow

- Through Bluegill Bioconcentration Study: Review in Conjunction with MRID 40580202: Lab Project Number: 92131: 40366. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs., Inc. and Uniroyal Chemical Co., Inc. 131 p.

Non Guideline Selections
1595 14322 64193 Kuchar, E.J. (1970) Determination of Terraclor (Pentachloronitro

benzene) and Terrazole (5

- Ethoxy

- 3

- Trichloromethyl

- 1,2,4

- Thia

diazole) in Soil: Analytical Method. Method CAM

- 12

- 70 dated Apr 28, 1970. (Unpublished study received May 28, 1970 under 0F0997; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:091717

- B)

1671 Nadeau, H.G.; Oaks, D., Jr. (1961) Separation and analysis of chlorobenzenes in mixtures by gas chromatography. Anal ytical Chemistry 33(9):1157

- 1159. (Also in unpublished submission received Jan 26, 1969 under 9F0754; submitted by Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., New York, N.Y.; CDL:091301

- K)

1672 Harple, W.W. (1966) Infrared Assay Method for Pentachloronitroben zene (P CNB): Analytical Method. Method CAM

- 2

- 66 dated Jan 26, 1966. (Unpublished study received Jan 26, 1969 under 9F0754; submitted by Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., New York, N.Y.; CDL:091301

- L)Page 67 of 76

1673 Finch, R.W.; Nichols, W.A. (1967) Assay of Pentachloronitr obenzene by Gas Chromatography: Analytical Method. Method CAM

- 2

- 67 dated Jan 17, 1967. (Unpublished study received Jan 26, 1969 under 9F0754; submitted by Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., New York, N.Y.; CDL:091301

- M)

1676 Geenty, F.O. (1968) Metabolic an d Material Balance Study of Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) in Cotton Plants: Analytical Method CASR

- 3

- 68. Method Dated May 3, 1968. Unpublished Study Received Jan. 26, 1969 under 9F0754, Submitted by Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., New York, NY, CDL: 09130 1

- 2.

1715 Ko, W.H.; Lockwood, J.L. (1968) Accumulation and concentration of chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides by microorganisms in soil. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 14(10):1075

- 1078. (Also in unpublished submission received Mar 24, 1970 under 9F075 4; sub

- mitted by Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., New Haven, Conn.; CDL: 091299

- R)

1716 Chacko, C.I.; Lockwood, J.L.; Zabik, M. (1966) Chlorinated hydro

- carbon pesticides: Degradation by microbes. Science 154(3750): 893

- 895. (Also in unpublished submiss ion received Mar 24, 1970 under 9F0754; submitted by Olin Mathieson Chemical Corp., New Haven, Conn.; CDL:091299

- S)

14332 100334 Iacoviello, S.A. (1977) Determination of Terrazole (R)I (5

- Ethoxy

- 3

- trichloromethyl

- 1,2,4

- thiadiazole) and Terraclor (R)I ( Penta

- chloronitrobenzene) Impurities and Allied Metabolites in Water Samples. Method CAM

- 30

- 77 dated Jun 1, 1977. (Unpublished study received Jul 6, 1979 under 1258

- 812; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:238774

- B)

86943 Wainwright, M.; Pugh , G.J.F. (1974) The effects of fungicides on certain chemical and microbial properties of soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 6:263

- 267. (Also in unpublished submission received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023

- 36; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:07 0503

- AX)

96647 Munnecke, D.E.; Domsch, K.H.; Eck ert, J.W. (1962) Fungicidal

ac tivity of air passed through columns of soil treated with fungicides. Phytopathology 52(Dec):1298

- 1306. (Also in unpublished submission received Mar 3, 1982 under 9386

- 15; sub mitted by Vinings Chemical Co., Atlanta, Ga.; CDL:247007

- B)

97772 Richardson, L.T.; Munnecke, D.E. (1964) A bioassay for volatile toxicants from fungicides in soil. Phytopathology 54(7):836

- 839. (Also in unpublished submission received May 14, 1965 und er 1258

- 279; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL: 101584

- H)

98854 Domsch, K.H. (1977) The Effect of Fungicidal Agents on Soil Res piration. A translation of: (Without title). PhytopathologischePage 68 of 76 Zeitschrift 49(3):291

- 302

. (Unpublished study re ceived Jan 4, 1978 under 239

- 1246; submitted by Chevron Chemical Co., Richmond, Calif.; CDL:232570

- M)

98856 Domsch, K.H. (1972) Interactions of soil microbes and pesticides. Symp. Biol. Hung. 11:337

- 347. (Also in unpublished submission received Jan 4, 1 978 under 239

- 1246; submitted by Chevron Chemical Co., Richmond, Calif.; CDL:232570

- O)

114189 Kaufman, D. (1975) Persistence and biodegradation of pesticide combinations. Roczniki Gleboznawcze XXVI(2):55

- 64. (Submitter 3622; also In unpublished submissi on received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248282

- I)

5001423 Kilgore, W.W.; White, E.R. (1970) Gas chromatographic separations of mixed chlorinated fungicides. Journal of Chromatographic Science 8:166

- 168.

45228 601 Long, S.; Batorewicz, W. (2000) Validation of the Analytical Method for the Determination of Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) and Pentachloroaniline (PCA) in Water: Lab Project Number: AC

- 7003: 99198. Unpublished study prepared by Uniroyal Chemical Comp any, Inc. 66 p. {OPPTS 850.7100}

46147101 Feiler, B.; Schocken, M. (2003) Amvac/ Crompton Corporation Response to EPA Concerning Pentachlorophenol (PCP) From the Fungicide Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB). Unpublished study prepared by Crompton Manufactur ing Company, Inc. 7 p.

3151 Mamadou, D. (1976) Evaluation of a Soil

- Plate Screening Technique in Developing Fungicidal Control for Southern Stem Rot of Peanuts. Master's thesi s , North Carolina State Univ., Dept. of Plant Pathology. (Unpublished study inc luding abstract, received Sep 13, 1976 under 400

- 129; submitted by Uniroyal Chemical, Bethany, Conn.; CDL:225604

- AA)

114193 Isensee, A.; Yockim, R. (1980) Freshwater Micro

- ecosystem Development and Testing of Substitute Chemicals. By U.S. Dept. of Agric ulture, Science and Education Administration, Pesticide Degradation Laboratory. Duluth, MN: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Research Laboratory. (EPA

- 600/3

- 80

- 008; Contract No. EPA

- IAG

- 05; Olin 3678 ; available from: NTIS, Springfield, VA: PB80

- 151533; published study; CDL:248282

- M)Page 69 of 76

PCNB Ecotoxicity Bibliography MRID

- Doc# Matchup

71

- 1 Avian Single Dose Oral Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

97774 Fletcher, D. (1974) Report to O lin Corporation: Acute Oral Toxicity Study with Terra

- coat Zn

- 2055 in Mallard Ducks: IBT No. 651

- 05846. (Unpublished study received Mar 31, 1975 under 1258

- 982; prepared by Industrial Bio

- Test Laboratories, Inc., submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:102573

- C)

40618001 Grimes, J.; Jaber, M. (1988) PCNB: An Acute Oral Toxicity Study with the Bobwhite: Final Repo rt: Project No. 117

- 157. Unpub lished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 39 p.

40652601 Fletcher, D. (1988) Technical Grade PCNB: 21

- day Acute Oral LD 50 Study in Bobwhite Quail: Rept. No. 88 QD 107. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Ltd. 26 p.

0160000 Hudson, R.; Tucker, R.; Haegele, M. (1984) Handbook of toxicity of pesticides to wildlife: Second edition. U S Fish and Wildlife Service: Resource Publication 153. 91 p.

71

- 2 Avian Dietary Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

2226 Dieterich, W.H. (1965) Acute Dietary Administration

- Wildfowl: Terraclor Super X: Final Report: Project No. 791

- 100. (Unp ublished study received Nov 5, 1965 under unknown admin. no.; prepared by Hazleton Laboratories, Inc., submitted by Squibb Institute for Medical Research, New Brunswick, N.J.; CDL:131392

- B) Mallard and Bobwhite studies

59122 Dieterich, W.H. (1965) Lett er sent to Sylvan I. Cohen dated Aug 2, 1965 Review of wildlife testing of Terraclor Super X status|. (Unpublished study received Sep 21, 1965 under 1258

- 740; pre

pared by Hazleton Laboratories, Inc., submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:050929

- C )

97702 114164 Fletcher, D. (1973) Report to Olin Corporation: 8

- day Dietary LC 50 Study with Terraclor in Bobwhite Quail: IBT No. 651

- 02932. (Unpublished study received Jun 25, 1973 under 1258

-Page 70 of 76 823; prepared by Industrial Bio

- Test Laboratories , Inc., s ubmitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:005786

- B)

97777 Dieterich, W.H. (1965) Acute Dietary Administration

-- Wildfowl: Project No. 791

- 100. (Unpublished study received on unknown date under unknown admin. no.; prepared by Hazleton Labo rato

ries, I nc., submitted by CDL:103201

- A)

104732 114165 Fletcher, D. (1973) Report to Olin Corporation: 8

- day Dietary LC 50 Study with Terraclor in Mallard Ducklings: IBT No. 651

- 02931. (Unpublished study received Jun 25, 1973 under 1258

- 823; prepared by Industr ial Bio

- Test Laboratories, Inc., submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:005786

- A)

40618002 Grimes, J.; Jaber, M. (1988) PCNB: A Dietary LC50 Study with the Mallard: Project No. 117

- 156. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 39 p.
40618003 Grimes, J.; Jaber, M. (1988) PCNB: A Dietary LC 50 Study with the Bobwhite: Project No. 117

- 155. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 40 p.

40652602 Fletcher, D. (1988) Technical Grade PCNB: 9

- day Acute Dietary LC 50 S tudy in Bobwhite Quail: Rept. No. 88 QC 108. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Ltd. 29 p.

40652603 Fletcher, D. (1988) Technical Grade PCNB: 9

- day Acute Dietary LC 50 Study in Mallard Ducklings: Rept. No. 88 DC 107. Unpublished study pre pared by Bio

- Life Associates, Ltd. 29 p.

41061001 Barnhill, H. (1988) Analysis of PCN B Residues in Avian Feed: Labo ratory Project: HLA 6012

- 223. Unpublished Study prepared by Hazleton Laboratories America, Inc. 15 p.

71

- 4 Avian Reproduction

MRID Citation Reference

41321101 Pedersen, C.; Fletcher, D. (1989) PCNB Technical: Toxicity and Reproduction Study in Bobwhite Quail: Lab Project Number: 88/QR/ 30. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Ltd. 153 p.

41321201 Pedersen, C .; Fletcher, D. (1989) PCNB Technical: Toxicity and Reproduction Study in Mallard Ducks: Lab Project Number: 88/DR/ 27. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Ltd. 147 p.

41332801 Beav ers, J.; Foster, J.; Lattin, A. et al. (1989) Pentachloro nitrobenzene (PCNB): A One

- generation Reproduction Study with the Bobwhite ( Colinus virginianus ):Page 71 of 76 Lab Project Number: 117/161. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 113 p.

41332802 Beavers, J.; Foster, J.; Lattin, A.; et al. (1989) P entachloronitrobenzene (PCNB): A One

- generation Reproduction Study with the Mallard ( Anas platyrhynchos ): Lab Project Number: 117/162. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 115 p.

43903301 Pedersen, C.; Solatycki, A. (1995) Toxicity and Reproduction Study with PCNB Technical in Mallard Ducks: (Final Report): Lab Project Number: 146

- 002

- 08. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Ltd. 521 p.

43980301 Pedersen, C.; Solatycki, A. (1995) Toxicity and Reproduction Study with PCNB Technical in Bobwhite Quail: Lab Project Number: 146

- 001

- 07. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Ltd. 729 p.

72

- 1 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Fish

MRID Citation Reference

1572 Dieterich, W.H. (1965) Acute Aqueous Expo sure

-- Fish: Terraclor Super X

-- Final Report: Project No. 791

- 101. (Unpublished study received Nov 5, 1965 under 734

- Q; prepared by Hazleton Laboratories, Inc., submitted by Squibb Institute for Medical Research, New Brunswick, N.J.; CDL:131392

- A) Rainbow trout and Bluegill sunfish

97773 114163 116561 Bentley, R.E. (1974) Acute Toxicity of Terr a

- coat Zn

- 2055 to Blue

- gill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) and Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss formerly Salmo gairdneri ). (Unpublished study received Mar 31, 1975 und er 1258

- 982; prepared by Biono mics, EG & G Environmental Con sultants, submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL: 102573

- A)

97776 Dieterich, W.H. (1965) Acute Aqueous Exposure

-- Fish: Project No. 791

- 101. (Unpublished study received on unknown date

un der unknown admin. no.; prepared by Hazleton Labo ratories, Inc., submitted by CDL:103200

- A)

97778 McCann, J.A. (1967) Terraclor: Bluegill|: Test No. 53. (U.S. Agricultural Research Service, Pesticides Regulation Div., Animal Biology Laboratory; unpublis hed study; CDL:103202

- A)

97779 McCann, J.A. (1967) Pentachloronitroben zene: Methyl Mercury Di cyandiamide: Rainbow Trout|: Test No. 43. (U.S. AgriculturalPage 72 of 76 Research Service, Pesticides Regulation Div., Animal Biology Laboratory; unpublished study; CDL:103 203

- A)

98672 Mc Cann, J.A.; Pitcher, F. (1973) PCNB 5 Zineb 5 Coated Granules: Bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus )|: Test No. 591. (U.S. Envi ronmental Protection Agency, Pesticides Regulation Div., Animal Biology Laboratory; unpublished study; CDL:129182

- A)

40618004 Surprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene Technical to Bluegill ( Lepomis macrochirus ) Under Flow

through Conditions: Report No. 88

- 4

- 2697; Study No. 41.1187.6108.105. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 37 p.

40618005 Surprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene Technical to Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss formerly Salmo gairdneri ) Under Flow

- through Conditions: Report No. 88

- 4

- 2698; Study No. 41.1187.6108.108. Unpublished st udy prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 36 p.

40650301 Surprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Terraclor 2EC to Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss formerly Salmo gairdneri ) under Flow

- through Conditions: SLS Report #88

- 5

- 2727: SLS Study #41.0388. 6113.108. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 39 p.

40650302 Surprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Terraclor 2EC to Bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus) under Flow

- through Conditions: SLS Report #88

- 5

- 2725: SLS Study #41.0388.6114.1 05. Unpublished study pre

- pared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 37 p.

40849001 Swigert, J. (1988) Acute Flow

- through Toxicity of PCNB to Bluegill Sunfish ( Lepomis macrochirus ): Final Report #36828. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemist ry Laboratories, Inc. 169 p.

40992701 Swigert, J. (1988) Acute Flow

- through Toxicity of PCNB to Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss formerly Salmo gairdneri) : Final Report #36829. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 279 p.

41060801 Bowman, J. (1989) Acute Flow

- through Toxicity of PCNB 2E to Blue

- gill sunfish ( Lepomis macrochirus ): Final Report No. 36937. Un

- published study prepared by A nalytical Bio

Chemistry Labora tories, Inc. 209 p.

41060802 Bowman, J. (1989 ) Acute Flow

- Through Toxicity of PCNB 2E to Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss formerly Salmo gairdneri ): Final Report No. 36938. Unpublished study prepared by Analytical Bio

- Chemistry Laboratories, Inc. 185 p.
USEPA Animal Biology Laboratory, Beltsvil le Md. Multiple tests with Rainbow trout and Bluegill sunfishPage 73 of 76 Mostly product mixture tests

72

- 2 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Invertebrates

MRID Citation Reference

114166 Dive, D.; LeClerc, H.; Persoone, G. (1980) Pesticide toxicity on the c iliate protozoan Colpidium campylum : Possible consequences of the effect of pesticides in the aquatic environment: (Submitter) 3685. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 4:129

- 133. (Also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; sub mitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248280

- H)

114167 EG & G Bionomics (1982) Acute Toxicity of T erraclor to the Water Flea Bionomics Report #BW

- 82

- 5

- 1170; 3761. (Unpublished study received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258

- 517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamfor d, CT; CDL:248280

- I)

72

- 3 Acute Toxicity to Estuarine/Marine Organisms

MRID Citation Reference

40832301 Suprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene Technical to Mysid Shrimp ( Americamysis bahia formerly Mysidopsis bahia ) Under Flow

- through Co nditions: SLS Report #88

- 6

- 2748: SLS Study #41.1187.6109.515. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 38 p.

40832302 Surprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene Technical to Sheepshead Minno w ( Cyprinodon variegatus ) under Flow

- through Conditions: SLS Report #88

- 7

- 2724: SLS Study #41.1187.61

- 09.505. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 38
p.
40832303 OR 41918801 Surprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronit robenzene Te chnical to Eastern Oysters ( Crassostrea virginica ) Under Flow

- through Conditions: SLS Report #88

- 4

- 2701. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 39 p.

40882901 Surprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronitroben zene to Mysid Shrimp ( Americamysis bahia formerly Mysidopsis bahia ) Under Flow

- through Conditions: Project ID: SLS Report No. 88

- 7

- 2773; SLS Study No. 11857.0488.6100.515. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 39 p.Page 74 of 76

40882902 Surpr enant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronitobenzene (PCNB) to Eastern Oysters ( Crassostrea virginica ) Under Flow

through Conditions: Project ID: SLS Report No. 88

- 6

- 2760; SLS Study No. 11857.0488.6101.504. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Li fe Sciences, Inc. 43 p.

40882903 Surprenant, D. (1988) Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene to Sheepshead Minnow ( Cyprinodon variegatus ) Under Flow

- through Conditions: Project ID: Report No. 88

- 7

- 2764; SLS Study No. 11857.0488.6100.505. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 39
p.
41918801 OR 40832303 Shepherd, S. (1991) Raw Data to Support the Study Entitled: Acute Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene Technical to Eastern Oysters ( Crassostrea virginica ) under Flow

- through Co nditions: Supplement to MRID 40832303 : Lab Project Number 88

- 4

- 2701: 41

- 1187

- 6110

- 130. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs. 7 p.

41926101 Suprenant, D. (1988) Raw Data for Acute Toxici ty of Pentachloronit robenzene (PCNB) to Eastern Oysters ( C rassostrea virginica ) und er flow

- through conditions: Lab Project Number: 88

- 6

- 2760

- 504. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 29 p.

42336901 Bettencourt, M. (1992) Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) Technical: Acute Toxicity to Sheepsh ead Minnow ( Cyprinodon variegatus ) under Flow

- through Conditions: Lab Project Number: 92

- 4

- 4244. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 60 p.

40228401 USEPA Gul f breeze Laboratory 1986

. Sheepshead minnow test

72

- 4 Fish Early L ife Stage/Aquatic Invertebrate Life Cycle Study

MRID Citation Reference

40832304 Surprenant, D. (1988) The Chronic Toxicity of Pentachloroni trobenz ene Technical to Daphnia magna Under Flow

- through Conditions: Report #88

- 5

- 2711. Unpublished

s tudy p repared by Springborn Li fe Sciences, Inc. 49 p.

40884001 Surprenant, D. (1988) The Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene Technical to Fathead Minnow ( Pimephales promelas ) Embryos and Larvae: Project ID: SLS Report No.88

- 9

- 2803; SLS Study 41.1187.6111.120. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Life Sciences, Inc. 49 p.

41321301 Burgess, D. (1989) Chronic Toxicity of PCNB to Daphnia
magna under Flow

- through Test Conditions: La b ProjectPage 75 of 76 Number: 36830. Unpub lished study prepared by Analytical Bio

Chemist ry Laboratories, Inc. 342 p.

41663401 Cohle, P.; Herzig, R. (1990) Early Life Stage Toxicity of PCNB to Rainbow Trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) in a Flow

- through System: Lab Project Number: 36871. Unpublished study prepared by Analyst Bio

- chemistry Labs., I nc. 1203 p.

41918802 Shepherd, S. (1991 ) Raw d ata to Support the Study Entitled: The Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene Technical to the Fathead Minnow ( Pimephales promelas ) Embryos and Larvae: S upplement to MRID 40884001 : Lab Project Number: 88

- 9

- 2803 : 41

- 1187

- 6111

- 130. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs. 30 p.

41918803 Shepherd, S. (1991) Raw d ata to Support the Study Entitled: The Chronic Toxicity of Pentachloronitrobenzene Technical to Daphnia magna under Flow

- through Conditions: Suppl ement to MRID 408323

- 04: Lab Project Number: 88

- 5

- 2711: 41

- 1187

- 6112

- 130. Unpub lished study prepared by Springborn Labs. 46
p.

141

- 1 Honey bee acute contact

MRID Citation Reference

40506102 Hoxter, K.; Jaber, M. (1987) PCNB: An Acute Cont act Toxicity Study with the Honey Bee: Project No.: 117

- 154A. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International, Ltd. 15 p.

40934601 Hoxter, K.; Jaber, M. (1988) PCNB: An Acute Contact Toxicity Study with the Honey Bee: Wildlife International Ltd. Pr oject No. 246

- 101B. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 26 p.

Non Guideline Selctions
2267 Hansing, E.D. (1966) Effect of Seed Treatment on Emergence of Win ter Wheat and Control of Bunt, M anhattan, Kansas, 1966. (Unpub lished stud y received Feb 16, 1968 under 1258

- 813; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:005784

- BF)

13099 Haglund, W.A. (1968) To Determin e the Effect of EDB and Chloro picrin on the Emergence and Survival of New Era Peas Grown in the Greenhouse. (Unpublish ed study including letter dated Oct 29, 1968 from W.A. Haglund to Bill Carroll, received Jan 31, 1969 under 5785

- 39; prepared by Washington State Univ., North western Washington Research and Extension Unit, submitted by Great Lakes Chemical Corp., West Lafa yette, Ind.; CDL:007782

- C)Page 76 of 76

97758 Borzelleca, J .F. (1974 ) Subchronic Oral (Dietary) Toxicity of Terraclor in Chickens. (Unpublished study received May 31, 1974 under 1F1083; prepared by Medical College of Virginia, Div. of Toxicology, submitted by Olin C orp., Stamford, Conn.; CDL:098613

- A)

98850 Tews, L.L. (1971) The effects of selected fungicides and soil fumigants upon the microfungi of a cattail marsh. Proc. 14th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 14:128

- 136. (Also in unpublished sub

- mission received Jan 4, 197 8 und er 239

- 1246; submitted by Chev ron Chemical Co., Richmond, Calif.; CDL:232570

- G)

5006642 Kappelman, A.J., Jr.; Buchanan, G.A. (1968) Influence of fungicides, herbicides and combinations on emergence and seedling growth of cotton. Agronomy Journal 60 (6):660

- 662.

Laboratory Mammal Data (check with HED)

23469301 23469302 23469303 Phillips, R. (1994) Two generation reproduction toxicity study in rats with pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) (MRD

- 89

- 505). Exxon Biomedical Sciences, Inc. Toxicology Laborat ory, East Millstone, New Jersey. Laboratory Project ID No. 150535, June 1, 1994. MRID 43469301, 43469302, 43469303. Unpublished.