Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

2 of 40

MRID Summary Table

MRID No. Study Type Comments

48510505 860.1500 and 860.1520 Wheat (Foliar) New DER; 48510505.DER and 48510505.DER2

48510506 860.1500 Wheat (Pre-plant) New DER; 48510506.DER

This document was originally prepared under contract by Versar, Inc. (6850 Versar Center, 

Springfield, VA 22151; submitted 1/2/12). The DER has been reviewed by the Health Effects 

Division (HED) and revised to reflect current Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) policies.

Executive Summary

Flumioxazin belongs to the N-phenylphthalimide class of herbicides (Group 14). It is a lightdependent peroxidizing herbicide (LDPH) which acts by blocking heme and chlorophyll 

biosynthesis, resulting in an endogenous accumulation of porphyrins which are known to have a 

phototoxic mode of action in plants and possibly in fish. Flumioxazin is currently registered for 

pre- and post-emergence applications on a variety of fruit, vegetable, and field crops for the 

control of susceptible weeds.

Valent U.S.A Corporation is seeking the registration of flumioxazin on field pea, flax, lentils, 

sunflower, safflower, and wheat. The end-use products (EUPs) relevant to this registration 

request are ValorTM Herbicide (EPA Reg. No. 59639-99) and ChateauTM Herbicide (EPA Reg. 

No. 59639-119). Both products are water-dispersible granular (WG) formulations containing 

51% flumioxazin. The 51% WG formulations are proposed for preplant/preemergence/postplanting applications to field pea and wheat at 0.064 lb ai/A. In addition, harvest aid foliar use is 

proposed on wheat at 0.096 lb ai/A with a 10-day preharvest interval (PHI) and on field pea, flax, 

lentil, sunflower, and safflower, at 0.096 lb ai/A, with a 5-day PHI. 

Concurrently, Valent is requesting the establishment of permanent tolerances for residues of the 

herbicide flumioxazin, 2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-

4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione, in/on the following commodities:

Dried shelled pea and bean (except soybean), Crop Subgroup 6C, seed .....0.1 ppm

Rapeseed, Crop Subgroup 20A, seed...........................................................0.35 ppm

Rapeseed Crop Subgroup 20A, meal ...........................................................0.04 ppm

Rapeseed Crop Subgroup 20A, refined oil ..................................................0.02 ppm

Sunflower, Crop Subgroup 20B, seed..........................................................0.5 ppm

Sunflower, Crop Subgroup 20B, meal.........................................................0.03 ppm

Sunflower, Crop Subgroup 20B, refined oil ................................................0.02 ppm

Wheat, forage...............................................................................................0.02 ppm

Wheat, hay ...................................................................................................0.02 ppm

Wheat, grain.................................................................................................0.35 ppm

Wheat, straw ................................................................................................5 ppm

Wheat, aspirated grain fraction ................................................................110 ppm

Wheat, bran..................................................................................................0.35 ppm

Wheat, flour .................................................................................................0.05 ppm

Wheat, germ.................................................................................................0.35 ppm
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

3 of 40

Wheat, middlings.........................................................................................0.08 ppm

Wheat, shorts................................................................................................0.11 ppm

Flumioxazin tolerances are established under 40 CFR §180.568. Tolerances for residues in/on 

plant commodities are listed in 40 CFR §180.568[a] and are expressed in terms of residues of 

flumioxazin, including its metabolites and degradates, to be determined by measuring only

flumioxazin. Tolerances range from 0.02 to 8.0 ppm on a wide variety of fruits, vegetables, and 

field crops. A tolerance for combined residues of flumioxazin and metabolites 482-HA and APF 

in freshwater fish is established at 1.5 ppm. No livestock tolerances have been established.

Based on the submitted data, no tolerances for indirect or inadvertent residues are required for 

flumioxazin. 

The nature of flumioxazin residues in plants and animals is adequately understood based on 

acceptable soybean, peanut, corn, sugarcane, grape, hen, and goat metabolism studies. The 

nature of the residue in rotational crops is also understood based on studies conducted on carrots, 

lettuce, and wheat. In primary and rotated crops, the residue of concern is only the parent 

compound. For ruminants, the residues of concern are parent, 3-OH-flumioxazin, 4-OHflumioxazin, plus Metabolites B, C, and F. For poultry, the residues of concern are parent, 3-

OH-flumioxazin, 4-OH-flumioxazin, and 4-OH-S-53482-SA.

An adequate gas chromatography/nitrogen-phosphorus detection (GC/NPD) method, Valent 

Method RM30-A-1, is available for enforcing tolerances for residues of flumioxazin in/on plant 

commodities. The reported method limits of quantitation and detection (LOQ and LOD) for 

flumioxazin in/on plant commodities are 0.02 and 0.01 ppm, respectively. The data collection 

method used to analyze samples collected from the crop field trial and processing studies was 

Method RM-30A-3, a more recent version of the enforcement method that uses GC/NPD or GC 

with mass selective detection (GC/MSD). The validated LOQ (determined as the lowest level of 

method validation; LLMV) was 0.02 ppm for flumioxazin in/on all matrices. The method was

adequate for data collection based on acceptable concurrent method recoveries, and the 

fortification levels used in concurrent method recovery were adequate to bracket expected 

residue levels (within an order of magnitude for canola seed).

The requirements for multiresidue methods testing data for flumioxazin are fulfilled. The 

available data indicate that flumioxazin could not be recovered through application of the 

multiresidue protocols.

HED has previously concluded that there is no reasonable expectation of quantifiable residues of 

flumioxazin in livestock commodities [40 CFR §180.6(a)(3)] from the uses associated with 

previous flumioxazin petitions. The uses proposed herein will not result in a significant increase 

in the dietary burden to ruminants; therefore, no tolerances are required for ruminant

commodities. Likewise, despite an increase in the dietary burden for swine, tolerances are not 

required for hog commodities. 

Adequate storage stability data are available to support the storage conditions and intervals of 

samples from the submitted crop field trials and processing studies.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

4 of 40

Acceptable field trial data on canola, field pea, sunflower, and wheat were submitted reflecting 

the proposed use patterns for the 51% WG formulations; the submitted field pea data will support 

the proposed use on lentil. Spray adjuvants, including methylated seed oils (MSOs), non-ionic 

surfactants (NISs), and/or crop oil concentrates (COCs) were used in all trials. The maximum

per trial average residues of flumioxazin were 0.25 ppm in/on canola, 0.056 ppm in/on dried pea, 

0.29 ppm in/on sunflower seed, and 0.31 and 3.71 ppm in/on wheat grain and straw (foliar, 

harvest-aid use pattern); residues of flumioxazin were below the LOQ (<0.02 ppm) in/on all 

samples wheat forage and hay (pre-plant use pattern). The available data are sufficient for 

establishing tolerances of 0.40 ppm for rapeseed subgroup 20A, 0.50 ppm for sunflower 

subgroup 20B, 0.40 ppm for wheat grain, 6.0 ppm for wheat straw, and 0.02 ppm for wheat 

forage and hay. The submitted dried pea data together with the available dried bean data are 

sufficient for establishing a tolerance of 0.07 ppm for pea and bean, dried shelled, except 

soybean, subgroup 6C. HED believes difference in proposed and recommended tolerances may 

be attributed to the petitioner’s used the NAFTA tolerance calculation procedures for 

determining the tolerance and HED’s having used the OECD tolerance calculation procedures. 

The submitted canola, sunflower, and wheat processing studies, reflecting application at ~5x the 

maximum proposed seasonal application rates are adequate. The data indicate that residues of 

flumioxazin do not concentrate canola oil or meal, sunflower oil or meal, or wheat bran, flour, 

middlings, shorts, or germ. Flumioxazin may concentrate in wheat aspirated grain fractions 

(AGF), with a processing factor of 308x. The available data indicate that tolerances are not 

needed for the regulated commodities of canola, sunflower, and wheat; however a tolerance is 

needed for grain, aspirated fractions at 100 ppm. 

The previously submitted confined rotational crop study is adequate for the proposed uses on the 

requested crops. Based on the results of the confined accumulation study, HED concludes that 

the existing rotational crop plantback intervals (PBIs) are acceptable, and that field trials and 

tolerances are not necessary.

There are no Codex, Canadian or Mexican MRLs established for residues of flumioxazin on 

commodities associated with this petition.

Regulatory Recommendations and Residue Chemistry Deficiencies

HED has examined the residue chemistry database for flumioxazin. Pending submission of a 

revised Section B and Section F and updated certificate(s) of analysis or new analytical reference 

standard(s) as specified below, there are no residue chemistry issues that would preclude granting 

conditional registration for the requested use of flumioxazin on field pea, flax, lentils, sunflower, 

safflower, and wheat. The proposed use and the submitted data support the following tolerances 

for residues of flumioxazin in/on the following commodities:

Pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C.........................0.07 ppm

Rapeseed subgroup 20A...............................................................................0.40 ppm

Sunflower subgroup 20B .............................................................................0.50 ppm

Wheat, forage...............................................................................................0.02 ppm

Wheat, hay ...................................................................................................0.02 ppm

Wheat, grain.................................................................................................0.40 ppm
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

5 of 40

Wheat, straw ................................................................................................6.0 ppm

Grain, aspirated fractions................................................................................100 ppm

A human health risk assessment for flumioxazin is forthcoming.

860.1200 Directions for Use

The following label revisions/clarifications are required:

The general label instructions regarding feeding/grazing restrictions should be omitted 

from the label: Except for alfalfa, field corn, and almond hulls do not graze treated fields 

or feed treated forage or hay to livestock. EPA OPPTS 860.1000 guideline states that 

there are only three cases where a label restriction should be allowed: peanut hay, 

soybean forage, and soybean hay.

The stated preplanting interval of “[7] 14 days” for preplant weed control in wheat should 

be clarified. The submitted data will support a minimum preplanting interval of 7 days.

OPPTS 860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

The petitioner should submit a revised Section F reflecting the recommended tolerances 

and commodity definitions presented in Table 12.

OPPTS 860.1650 Submittal of Analytical Reference Standards

The standard for flumioxazin has expired on 4/1/2012. An updated certificate of analysis 

or a new analytical reference standard must be provided to the EPA National Pesticide 

Standards Repository.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

6 of 40

Background

The nomenclature and physicochemical properties of flumioxazin are presented below in Tables 

1 and 2. The chemical names and structures of flumioxazin residues of concern are presented in 

Appendix I.

Table 1. Flumioxazin Nomenclature.

Compound

N

N

O

F

C

H2

O

O

HC C O

Common name Flumioxazin

Company experimental name VC-1152

IUPAC name N-(7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-prop-2-ynyl-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl)cyclohex1-ene-1,2-dicarboxamide

CAS name 2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-4,5,6,7-

tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-dione

CAS registry number 103361-09-7

End-use products(EPs) ValorTM Herbicide (EPA Reg. No 59639-99) and ChateauTM Herbicide (EPA 

Reg. No 59639-119). Both products are WG formulations containing 51% 

flumioxazin. 

Table 2. Physicochemical Properties of Flumioxazin. 

Parameter Value Reference

Melting point/range 202-204°C EPA Fact Sheet for 

Flumioxazin issued April 

12, 2001.

pH 7.29 at 25°C

Density 1.51 g/ml at 20°C

Water solubility (25°C) 1079 mg/L 

Solvent solubility Not available

Vapor pressure 2.41 x10-6 mm Hg

Dissociation constant, pKa None

Octanol/water partition coefficient, 

Log(KOW)

2.55 at 20°C

UV/visible absorption spectrum λ218

λ216

λ216

MRID No. 44295004

860.1200 Directions for Use

Valent is proposing new uses of flumioxazin for weed control in field pea and wheat and for use 

as a harvest aid on field pea, flax, lentils, sunflower, safflower, and wheat. The formulations 

being proposed for these uses include two 51% WG formulations (VALOR® Herbicide, EPA 

Reg. No. 59639-99 and CHATEAU® WDG Herbicide, EPA Reg. No. 59639-119).

In support of the proposed uses, Valent has provided example labels containing the proposed use 

directions. A summary of the proposed use directions is presented in Table 3. 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

7 of 40

Table 3. Summary of Proposed Use Pattern of Flumioxazin.

Applic. Timing, 

Type, and Equip.

Formulation

[EPA Reg. 

No.]

Applic. 

Rate

(lb 

ai/A)

Max. No. 

Applic. per 

Season

Max. 

Seasonal 

Applic. 

Rate

(lb ai/A)

PHI

(days)

Use Directions and Limitations1

Field Pea

Preplant or 

preemergence, 

Broadcast,

Ground

51% WG

[59639-99

and

59639-119]

0.064 Not 

specified

(NS)

0.064 NS For weed control: Apply prior to planting 

or within 2 days after planting. For use in 

ID, MT, OR, and WA only. May be tank 

mixed with other labeled herbicides for 

broad spectrum weed control.

Postemergence, 

Broadcast,

Ground

(15-30 gal/A)

0.048-

0.096

NS 0.096 5 As a harvest aid: Apply when crop is 

physiologically mature and a minimum of 

80% of the pods are yellow to tan in color 

and 20% are yellow in color.

Use of a spray adjuvant (MSO at 1 qt/A) 

is required.

Tank mixing with glyphosate is 

recommended.

Flax

Postemergence, 

Broadcast, 

Ground

(15-30 gal/A)

51% WG

[59639-99 

and 59639-

119]

0.048-

0.096

NS 0.096 5 As a harvest aid: Apply when crop is 

physiologically mature and at least 75% 

of the bolls are brown in color.

Use of a spray adjuvant (MSO at 1 qt/A) 

is required.

Lentils

Postemergence, 

Broadcast, 

Ground

(15-30 gal/A)

51% WG

[59639-99 

and 59639-

119]

0.048-

0.096

NS 0.096 5 As a harvest aid: Apply when crop is 

physiologically mature and a minimum of 

80% of the pods are yellow to tan in color 

and 20% are yellow in color.

Use of a spray adjuvant (MSO at 1 qt/A) 

is required. 

Sunflower and Safflower

Postemergence, 

Broadcast, 

Ground

(15-30 gal/A)

51% WG

[59639-99 

and 59639-

119]

0.048-

0.096

NS 0.096 5 As a harvest aid: Apply when crop is 

mature (35% moisture or less). 

Use of a spray adjuvant (MSO at 1 qt/A) 

is required.

Wheat

Preplant or 

postplant, 

Broadcast, 

Ground

51% WDG 

[59639-99 

and 59639-

119]

0.064 NS 0.064 NS For weed control: Apply at least [7] 14

[sic.] days prior to planting or up to 2 

days after planting. 

Use only on no-till or minimum tillage 

fields where last year’s crop residue has 

not been incorporated into the soil.

Do not graze until wheat has reached 5 

inches in height.

Postemergence, 

Broadcast, 

Ground (min. 

10 gal/A) and 

aerial (min. 5 

gal/A)

0.064 NS 0.064 10 As a harvest aid: Apply when crop 

reaches the hard dough stage and grain 

has no more than 30% moisture.

Use of a spray adjuvant (MSO at 1 qt/A) 

is required.

Tank mixing with glyphosate is 

recommended.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

8 of 40

1 The general label instructions state: Except for alfalfa, field corn, and almond hulls do not graze treated fields or 

feed treated forage or hay to livestock. MSO = Methylated soybean oil.

Burndown Application (Preplant to Crop): Flumioxazin may be used in fall and spring

burndown programs in AZ, CA, and HI only, in sunflower and wheat at 0.032-0.064 lb ai/A. 

Applications must be made at least 30 days prior to planting. Flumioxazin may also be used in 

fall burndown programs in AZ, CA, and HI only in fields to be planted to field pea, flax, lentil, 

safflower, sunflower, and spring wheat at 0.064-0.128 lb ai/A. Applications are to be made at 

recommended rotational intervals prior to planting. Use of a spray adjuvant (COC, MSO, or NIS

at 0.25% v/v) is required for all burndown applications. Applications are to be made in spray 

volumes of 15-60 gal/A.

Rotational crop restrictions: Current label directions for both 51% WG formulations include the 

following statement: Do not plant any crop except cotton, peanut, soybean and sugarcane earlier 

than 30 days after application of flumioxazin. In addition, the labels specify a variety of PBIs for 

different field crops depending on the application rate. For the highest use rate on any rotated 

crop (0.38 lb ai/A), the specified PBIs are 9 months for cotton, field corn, peanut, rice, sorghum, 

soybean, sunflower, tobacco and wheat, and 12-18 months for all other crops not listed.

Conclusions. The use directions are adequate to allow evaluation of the field trial data for 

canola, field pea, sunflower, and wheat relative to the proposed uses. Although no use directions 

were submitted for canola, and flax are members of rapeseed subgroup 20A; therefore, the use 

directions for flax are adequate to allow evaluation of the field trial data for canola. The 

submitted field trial data for field pea will support use on lentil. 

The submitted canola, dried pea, sunflower, and wheat crop field trials were conducted according 

to the maximum proposed use pattern and reflected the use of an MSO, NIS, and/or COC spray 

adjuvants either in side-by-side plots or in separate trials. In general, there were no major 

differences between applications made with an MSO and those made with an NIS or COC, and 

no single adjuvant yielded consistently higher residues in any crop. HED believes the submitted 

data are sufficient to support use of the 51% WG formulations with an MSO, NIS, or COC 

adjuvant. 

In consideration of the proposed uses and submitted data, the following label 

revisions/clarifications are required:

The general label instructions regarding feeding/grazing restrictions should be omitted 

from the label: Except for alfalfa, field corn, and almond hulls do not graze treated fields 

or feed treated forage or hay to livestock. EPA OPPTS 860.1000 guideline states that 

there are only three cases where a label restriction should be allowed: peanut hay, 

soybean forage, and soybean hay.

The stated preplanting interval of “[7] 14 days” for preplant weed control in wheat should 

be clarified. The submitted data will support a minimum preplanting interval of 7 days.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

9 of 40

860.1300 Nature of the Residue – Plants.

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 301247, 7/23/04, W. Drew

MARC Decision Memo DP# 272652, 3/12/01, R. Loranger

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 259493, 3/12/01, D. Dotson 

Adequate plant metabolism studies are available depicting the uptake and metabolism of 

[

14C]flumioxazin following applications to soybean (preemergence), peanut (preemergence), corn

(preemergence), sugarcane (directed to the lower 3 feet of plants), and grapes (directed to soil 

surface surrounding vines). Based on these studies, HED determined that the parent compound 

only is the residue of concern to be used in risk assessments and the tolerance expression for 

primary and rotated crops. The available data are adequate to support the uses proposed herein. 

860.1300 Nature of the Residue – Livestock.

MARC Decision Memo DP# 272652, 3/12/01, R. Loranger

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 259493, 3/12/01, D. Dotson 

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 194594, 9/21/94, J. Garbus

Adequate ruminant and poultry metabolism studies are available depicting the metabolism of 

flumioxazin radiolabeled in either the phenyl or tetrahydrophthaloyl (THP) ring. The 

metabolism of flumioxazin is similar in both ruminants and poultry, involving the hydroxylation 

and reduction of the cyclohexene ring in the THP moiety, hydrolytic cleavage of the imide and 

amide linkages, and incorporation of sulfonic acid into the THP moiety. HED has determined 

that the residues of concern for ruminants should include parent, 3-OH-flumioxazin, 4-OHflumioxazin, and Metabolites B, C, and F. For poultry, the residues of concern are parent, 3-OHflumioxazin, 4-OH-flumioxazin, and 4-OH-S-53482-SA. 

860.1340 Residue Analytical Methods.

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 259493, 3/12/01, D. Dotson 

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 342963, 11/20/07, D. Rate 

Residue Chemistry Memo No DP#, 1/8/96, J. Garbus

Plant commodities

Enforcement method: An adequate GC/NPD method is available for enforcing tolerances for 

residues of flumioxazin in/on plant commodities (MRID 43935509, Valent Residue Method 

#RM-30A-1, Determination of Flumioxazin Residues in Crops; No DP#, 1/8/96, J. Garbus). 

This method has undergone a successful independent laboratory validation (ILV) trial and a 

successful petition method validation (PMV) trial by the Agency. The reported method LOQ and 

LOD for flumioxazin are 0.020 and 0.010 ppm, respectively. However, the validated LOQ was 

0.010 ppm for residues in soybean seed, forage, and hay in the PMV trial, and the LOD was 

0.005 ppm.

Data collection method: Samples of canola, dried pea, sunflower, and wheat raw agricultural and 

processed commodities from the submitted crop field trial and processing studies were analyzed 

for residues of flumioxazin using a GC/NPD/MSD method entitled “Determination of 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

10 of 40

Flumioxazin Residues in Crops: Residue Method RM-30A-3.” This method is a more recent 

version of Method RM-30A-1. 

Briefly, residues were extracted with acetone:water (4:1, v:v) and then partitioned into 

dichloromethane (DCM). After evaporation of the DCM, residues were purified by partitioning 

between hexane/acetonitrile (ACN). The residues in the ACN phase were then concentrated, redissolved in hexane/ethyl acetate, and purified using a Florisil column eluted with hexane:ethyl 

acetate (2:1 v:v). Residues in the eluate were concentrated, reconstituted in acetone, and then 

analyzed by GC/NPD or GC/MSD, using an external standard. 

The methods were adequately validated in conjunction with the analysis of samples from the 

field trial and processing studies. The fortification levels used in concurrent method recovery 

were adequate to bracket expected residue levels (within an order of magnitude for canola seed).

The validated method LOQ (determined as the LLMV) for flumioxazin was 0.02 ppm, and the 

LOD was 0.01 ppm, for all matrices.

Livestock commodities 

Adequate data collection methods were submitted in conjunction with the cattle feeding study 

(DP# 342963). Residues of flumioxazin and its two hydroxy metabolites (3-OH-flumioxazin and 

4-OH-flumioxazin) were determined in milk and tissues using two related LC/MS/MS methods, 

Valent Methods RM-30MK for milk and RM-30T for tissues. The methods were adequately 

validated in conjunction with the analysis of the feeding study samples using control samples of 

milk and tissues fortified with each analyte at 0.02 and 0.1 ppm. For both methods, the validated 

LOQ is 0.02 ppm for each analyte, and the reported LOD is 0.01 ppm. 

Conclusions. The available and submitted residue analytical methods data for plant 

commodities are adequate to satisfy data requirements for this petition. Adequate methods are 

available for tolerance enforcement purposes for the residues of concern in plant commodities, 

and samples of canola, dried pea, sunflower, and wheat commodities from the submitted crop 

field trial and processing studies were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using adequate data 

collection methods. 

No additional residue analytical methods data for livestock commodities are required at this time.

860.1360 Multiresidue Methods

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 259493, 12/MAR/2001, D. Dotson

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 397086, 22/FEB/2012, W.T. Drew

Data depicting the analysis of flumioxazin and degradates 482-HA and APF through FDA 

Multiresidue Protocols were submitted to FDA for review. The multiresidue method testing data 

indicate that flumioxazin is not recovered through Sections 304 and 402 of PAM, Vol. I. 

Additionally, the PAM extraction method for fatty commodities (304 E1) does not work for 482-

FIA or APF.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

11 of 40

860.1380 Storage Stability

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 342413, 1/31/08, D. Rate 

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 342963, 11/20/07, D. Rate 

Residue Chemistry Memo DP#310408, 3/15/06, W. Drew

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 301247, 7/23/04, W. Drew 

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 298647, 2/17/04, W. Drew 

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 259493, 3/12/01, D. Dotson 

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 194594, 5/21/94, J. Garbus 

Storage stability data for flumioxazin residues in various plant commodities are available from 

several earlier petitions. These data indicate that flumioxazin is reasonably stable under frozen 

storage (-20 oC) for at least the following intervals: 13 months in sugarcane; 12 months in 

cherries and soybean forage, hay, and seed; 10 months in peanut forage, hay, hulls, and nutmeats; 

9-11 months in mint tops and oil; 9 months in prunes, wet apple pomace, potatoes, and potato 

processed fractions; 6 months in apple juice, grapes, raisins, and almond nutmeats and hulls; 4 

months in dry bulb onions; 3 months in cotton seed, gin byproducts, hulls, and meal; 2 to 3 

months in grape juice, and sugarcane molasses and refined sugar; 30 months in alfalfa forage and 

hay; 22 months in dry beans; 7 months in tomatoes and asparagus; 5.8 months in blueberries; 4 

months in cantaloupes and pecans; 6 months in corn forage; and 13.3 months in corn grain and 

stover.

For the wheat processing study, HED has concluded that, in consideration of the nature of the 

processing procedures for wheat commodities (i.e., fractions are not heated or chemically treated 

during processing and are generally physically similar to whole grain), and the large amount of 

storage stability data available indicating that residues of flumioxazin are stable in/on a wide 

variety of raw agricultural and processed commodities, the available representative storage 

stability data may be translated to the processed wheat commodities for purposes of this petition. 

Sample storage intervals and conditions

Samples collected from the field trial and processing studies were stored frozen prior to residue 

analysis. Storage durations and conditions of samples are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Summary of Storage Conditions and Intervals of Samples from Field Corn Field Trials. 

Matrix Storage 

Temperature

(°C)

Actual Storage Duration (days)1Interval of Demonstrated Storage Stability 

(days)

Crop Field Trial Studies

Canola seed -20 134-417 days (4.4-13.7 months) 12 months in/on soybean seed 2

684 days (22.5 months) in/on dry bean seed3

Dried pea 61-134 days (2.0-4.4 months) 684 days (22.5 months) in/on dry bean seed3

Sunflower seed 277-342 days (9.1-11.3 months) 12 months in/on soybean seed 2

Wheat grain 329-501 days (10.8-16.5 months) 404 days (13.3 months) in/on corn grain 4

684 days (22.5 months) in/on dry bean seed3

Wheat straw 374-515 days (12.3-16.9 months) 404 days (13.3 months) in/on corn stover 4

929 days (30.6 months) in/on alfalfa hay.

3

Wheat forage 6-28 days (0.2-0.9 months) 417 days (13.7 months) in/on corn forage 4

Wheat hay 39-74 days (1.3-2.4 months) 929 days (30.6 months) in/on alfalfa hay 3
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

12 of 40

Table 4. Summary of Storage Conditions and Intervals of Samples from Field Corn Field Trials. 

Matrix Storage 

Temperature

(°C)

Actual Storage Duration (days)1Interval of Demonstrated Storage Stability 

(days)

Processing Studies

Canola seed 

(RAC)

-20 273 days (9.0 months) 12 months in/on soybean seed 2

Canola Oil 170 days (5.6 months) 267 days (8.8 months) in mint oil 5

Canola Meal 175 days (5.8 months) 93 days (3.1 months) in cotton meal 6; 

300 days (10 months) in peanut nutmeats7;

186 days (6 months) in almond nutmeats5

Sunflower seed 

(RAC)

320-323 days (10.5-10.6 months) 12 months in/on soybean seed 2

Sunflower Oil 228 days (7.5 months) 267 days (8.8 months) in mint oil 5

Sunflower Meal 230-238 days (7.6-7.8 months) 93 days (3.1 months) in cotton meal 6; 

300 days (10 months) in peanut nutmeats7; 

186 days (6 months) in almond nutmeats5

Wheat grain 

(RAC)

436 days (14.3 months) 404 days (13.3 months) in/on corn grain 4

684 days (22.5 months) in/on dry bean seed3

Bran 269 days (8.8 months) The available storage stability data

summarized above for a wide variety of raw 

agricultural and processed commodities may 

be translated to the processed wheat 

commodities.

Flour 287 days (9.4 months)

Middlings 280 days (9.2 months)

Shorts 280 days (9.2 months)

Germ 336 days (11.1 months)

AGF 370 days (12.2 months)

1 Interval from harvest or processing to analysis. Samples were analyzed within 1-32 days of extraction. Processing was 

completed within 85-115 days of harvest. At three canola trials, canola was swath cut and allowed to dry in the field for 6-16 

days prior to collection.

2

 DP# 194594, 5/21/94, J. Garbus (soybean seed)

3

 DP# 342963, 11/20/07, D. Rate (dry bean, alfalfa hay)

4

 DP# 342413, 1/31/08, D. Rate (corn grain, stover, and forage)

5

 DP# 301247, 7/23/04, W. Drew (mint oil, almond nutmeats)

6

 DP# 298647, 2/17/04, W. Drew (cotton meal)

7

 DP# 259493, 3/12/01, D. Dotson (peanut nutmeats)

Conclusions. The available storage stability data are adequate and support the sample storage 

durations for in canola seed, dried pea, sunflower seed, and wheat forage, hay, grain, and straw

samples and canola, sunflower, and wheat processed fraction samples. The data indicate that 

there are no storage stability issues, and no corrections for decline on storage are needed for these 

matrices. 

860.1400 Water, Fish, and Irrigated Crops

There are no proposed uses in the current petition that are relevant to this guideline topic.

860.1460 Food Handling

There are no proposed uses in the current petition that are relevant to this guideline topic.

860.1480 Meat, Milk, Poultry, and Eggs
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

13 of 40

DP# 342963, 11/20/07, D. Rate (Feeding study; alfalfa residues)

DP# 342413, 1/31/08, D. Rate (Dietary burden calculation)

DP#s 259493 and 268181, 3/12/01, D. Rate (Poultry metabolism study)

The following livestock feedstuffs are associated with the proposed uses in this petition: field 

pea vines/silage and hay; flax meal; sunflower and safflower meal; wheat forage, hay, grain, and 

straw; and aspirated grain fractions. 

The theoretical dietary burdens of flumioxazin were most recently calculated under PP#7E7243,

reflecting use on field corn (DP# 342413). The calculated dietary burdens were 0.96 ppm for 

beef cattle, 3.19 ppm for dairy cattle, and 0.02 ppm for both poultry and swine. The dietary 

burdens were evaluated in conjunction with the cattle feeding study and the poultry metabolism 

study, and the Agency concluded that the proposed use would not alter HED’s previous 

determination that a 40 CFR §180.6[a][3] situation existed for livestock commodities (DP# 

342963). 

The addition of uses on sunflower, safflower, and wheat, will have an impact on the dietary 

burdens to ruminants, poultry, and swine. 

The maximum reasonable dietary burden (MRDB) calculations reflecting the addition of the 

feedstuffs listed above are presented in Table 5. The current MRDBs of flumioxazin are 

estimated at 2.237 and 1.252 ppm for beef and dairy cattle, 0.168 ppm for poultry, and 0.142

ppm for swine.

Table 5. Calculation of Dietary Burdens of Flumioxazin Residues to Livestock.

Feedstuff Type1 % Dry 

Matter2

% Diet2 Expected Residue Dietary 

Contribution 

(ppm)3

ppm Value used

Beef Cattle [80% CC, 5% PC, 15% R]

Alfalfa, hay R 89 5 1.60 HAFT 0.090

Wheat, straw R 88 10 3.71 HAFT 0.422

Corn, field, grain CC 88 5 0.02 Median 0.001

Wheat, aspirated grain 

fractions

CC 85 5 27.72 Median x PF 1.631

Sugarcane, molasses CC 75 10 0.20 Tolerance 0.027

Wheat, grain CC 89 20 0.09 Median 0.020

Wheat, milled byproducts CC 88 40 0.09 Median 0.041

Sunflower, meal PC 92 5 0.10 Median 0.005

TOTAL BURDEN -- -- 100 -- -- 2.237

Dairy Cattle [45% CC, 10% PC, 45% R]

Alfalfa, hay (meal) R 89 20 1.60 HAFT 0.360

Alfalfa, silage (forage) R 40 20 0.91 HAFT 0.457

Wheat, straw R 88 5 3.71 HAFT 0.211

Wheat, grain CC 89 15 0.09 Median 0.015

Wheat, milled byproducts CC 88 30 0.09 Median 0.031

Alfalfa, meal PC 90 10 1.60 HAFT 0.178

TOTAL BURDEN -- -- 100 -- -- 1.252
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

14 of 40

Table 5. Calculation of Dietary Burdens of Flumioxazin Residues to Livestock.

Feedstuff Type1 % Dry 

Matter2

% Diet2Expected Residue Dietary 

Contribution 

(ppm)3

ppm Value used

Poultry [75% CC, 25% PC]

Wheat, grain CC 89 75 0.09 Median 0.068

Alfalfa, meal PC 89 5 1.60 HAFT 0.080

Sunflower, meal PC 92 20 0.10 Median 0.02

TOTAL BURDEN -- -- 100 -- -- 0.168

Swine [85% CC, 15% PC]

Corn, field, grain CC 85 35 0.02 Median 0.007

Wheat, milled byproducts CC 88 50 0.09 Median 0.045

Alfalfa, meal PC 89 5 1.60 HAFT 0.080

Sunflower, meal PC 92 10 0.10 Median 0.010

TOTAL BURDEN -- -- 100 -- -- 0.142

1 R: Roughage; CC: Carbohydrate concentrate; PC: Protein concentrates.

2 OPPTS 860.1000 Table 1 Feedstuffs (June 2008). 

3 Contribution = ([tolerance /% DM] X % diet) for beef and dairy cattle; contribution = ([tolerance] X % diet) for 

poultry and swine.

Cattle

Acceptable cattle feeding study with flumioxazin was previously reviewed (DP# 342963). Three 

groups of dairy cattle (3 cows per group) were dosed orally with capsules containing flumioxazin 

at levels equivalent to 2, 6 and 20 ppm in the diet for 28 consecutive days. Only samples from 

the 20-ppm dose group were analyzed; this dosing level corresponds to 8.9x the current MRDB 

for beef cattle of 2.236 ppm. In the 20-ppm dose group, residues of flumioxazin and its 

metabolites 3-OH-flumioxazin and 4-OH-flumioxazin were each non-detectable (<0.01 ppm; 

combined residues <0.03 ppm) in all samples of milk, skim milk, cream, liver, kidneys, muscle, 

and fat from all three cows. 

The current MRDBs for beef and dairy cattle of 2.237 and 1.252 ppm are comparable to those 

previously calculated reflecting use on field corn (DP# 342413). We note that changes in the 

residue values that HED uses to generate the dietary burden (i.e., use of HAFT residues for most 

feedstuffs, median residues for blended feeds, and median residues x processing factor for AGF, 

instead of tolerances) resulted in an MRDB for ruminants that is slightly lower than that 

previously calculated despite an increase in uses on significant livestock feedstuffs and the 

addition of foliar use on wheat. Based on the available cattle feeding study, HED concludes that 

a 40 CFR §180.6[a][3] situation still exists for ruminant commodities. 

Swine

For swine, the 20-ppm dosing level used in the cattle feeding study corresponds to 141x the 

current MRDB. Conversion of the expected residues of flumioxazin, 3-OH-flumioxazin, and 4-

OH-flumioxazin in ruminant tissues (<0.03 ppm) to a 10x feeding level, results in expected 

residues of 0.002 ppm, well below the method LOQ.

Poultry 

A poultry feeding study has not been submitted for flumioxazin. In the poultry metabolism study

(DP#s 259493 and 268181, 3/12/2001), hens were dosed for 14 days at 9.01 ppm. This dose rate 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

15 of 40

corresponds to ~54x the current MRDB of 0.142. HED previously concluded that the residues of 

concern in poultry commodities are flumioxazin, 3-OH-flumioxazin, 4-OH-flumioxazin, and 4-

OH-S-53482-SA. 

Presuming a method LOQ of 0.02 ppm for each analyte in poultry matrices (combined LOQ of 

0.08 ppm), if the maximum combined residues of flumioxazin, 3-OH-flumioxazin, 4-OHflumioxazin, and 4-OH-S-53482-SA in egg yolk and liver from the metabolism study are 

converted to a 10x dosing level, expected residues in egg yolk are still below the LOQ (see Table 

6). HED believes that based on the calculated expected residue levels, a poultry feeding study is 

not warranted at this time.

Table 6. Summary of Residues of Concern Identified in Eggs and Tissues from Laying Hens Dosed 

with THP-[

14C]Flumioxazin at a Feeding Level Equivalent to 9.01 ppm in the Diet for 14 

Consecutive Days.

Residue Component Egg yolk, Day 13

(TRR = 0.630 ppm)

Liver

(TRR = 1.137 pm)

Flumioxazin 0.053 0.079

3-OH-Flumioxazin 0.025 0.079

4-OH-Flumioxazin 0.037 0.121

4-OH-S-53482-SA 0.299 0.068

Combined Residues 0.414 0.347

Expected Residues at 1x Dosing level 0.00810.006

Expected Residues at 10x Dosing Level 0.077 0.065

1 Based on combined residues (0.414)/poultry feeding level (9.01) * dietary burden (0.168)

Conclusions. The available ruminant feeding study is acceptable to support the proposed new 

uses of flumioxazin on field pea, flax, sunflower and safflower, and wheat. Based on the current

dietary burden to ruminants, HED concludes that tolerances are not required for ruminant 

commodities. 

The available ruminant feeding study and the current MRDB for swine and poultry indicate that 

tolerances are not required (40 CFR §180.6[a][3]) despite the increase in MRDB. 

860.1500 Crop Field Trials

DER References: 48510501.DER1 (Canola)

48510502.DER (Dried pea, includes review of MRID 48510503)

48510504.DER1 (Sunflower)

48510505.DER1 (Wheat; foliar application)

48510506.DER (Wheat; pre-plant application)

Residue Chemistry Memo DP# 342963, D. Rate 11/20/07 (Dried bean)

Canola

Valent U.S.A. Corporation has submitted field trial data for flumioxazin on canola. Eight field 

trials were conducted in the United States during the 2009 growing season in the North American 

Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Growing Zones 2 (GA; 1 trial), 5 (MN; 1 trial), 7 (ND and MT; 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

16 of 40

3 trials), and 11 (ID and WA; 3 trials). 

Each trial consisted of one untreated plot and one or two treated plots. At each trial location, one 

treated plot received one foliar application of a 51% WG formulation of flumioxazin (Valor SX 

51 WDG) at 0.092-0.101 lb ai/A (~1x the maximum proposed seasonal application rate). At two 

trial sites (Norwich, ND, and Payette, ID), a second plot was treated at a 2x rate of 0.190-0.194 lb 

ai/A to evaluate the effect of application rate on residue levels. Applications were made using 

ground equipment in spray volumes of 15.1-21.5 gal/A. Adjuvants were added to each spray 

mixture, with five trials using an MSO and three trials using an MSO and an NIS in side-by-side 

treated plots. Samples of canola seed were harvested at maturity from all trials at a PHI of 4-5 

days. At one trial (Campbell, MN), additional samples were collected at PHIs of 1, 3, 5, and 8 

days to assess residue decline. In three trials, the canola was swath cut and allowed to dry in the 

field for 6-16 days prior to collection.

Samples were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using an acceptable GC/NPD or GC/MS 

method, Valent method RM-30A-3. The study is supported by adequate storage stability data. 

The results of the canola field trials are presented in Table 7. In samples of canola seed 

harvested 4-5 days following a single foliar application of the 51% WG formulation of 

flumioxazin at 0.092-0.101 lb ai/A with an NIS or MSO adjuvant, residues of flumioxazin (and 

per trial averages) were: 0.04-0.30 (0.04-0.25) ppm in/on canola seed following applications 

made with an MSO; and 0.02-0.12 (0.03-0.07) ppm in/on canola seed following applications 

made with an NIS. Overall residues (and per trial averages) for applications made with either 

adjuvant were 0.02-0.30 (0.03-0.25) ppm. Side-by-side comparison of residues following 

applications with NIS and MSO adjuvants suggested that residues in seed were slightly higher 

following applications made with an MSO. 

Following application of flumioxazin at a 2x rate of 0.190-0.194 lb ai/A with an MSO adjuvant, 

residues of flumioxazin (and per trial averages) in/on canola seed were 0.09-0.16 (0.10-0.16) 

ppm. There was a proportional increase in residues due to the application rate.

In the residue decline trial, residues of flumioxazin in/on canola seed remained constant at the 1-, 

3-, and 5-day PHIs (average of 0.16 ppm each), and decreased at the 8-day PHI (average of 0.04 

ppm). The petitioner indicated that a rain event (0.59”) which occurred between the Day-5 and 

Day-8 samplings may have accounted for the decline in residues.

Table 7. Summary of Residue Data from Canola Field Trials with Flumioxazin.

Commodity Adjuvant Total

Rate

(lb ai/A)

PHI 

(days)

Residue Levels (ppm)1

n Sample 

Min.

Sample 

Max.

LAFT2 HAFT2 Median Mean Std. 

Dev.

FLAX (proposed use = 0.096 lb ai/A total application rate, 5-day PHI)

1x Rate

Canola seed NIS 0.092-0.098 4-5 3 0.02 0.12 0.03 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.02

MSO 0.094-0.101 4-5 8 0.04 0.30 0.04 0.25 0.06 0.09 0.08

NIS/MSO 0.092-0.101 4-5 11 0.02 0.30 0.03 0.25 0.05 0.08 0.07

2x Rate
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

17 of 40

Table 7. Summary of Residue Data from Canola Field Trials with Flumioxazin.

Commodity Adjuvant Total

Rate

(lb ai/A)

PHI 

(days)

Residue Levels (ppm)1

n Sample 

Min.

Sample 

Max.

LAFT2 HAFT2 Median Mean Std. 

Dev.

Canola seed MSO 0.190-0.194 4-5 2 0.09 0.16 0.10 0.16 0.13 0.13 0.04

1

 Except for sample min/max, values reflect per trial averages; n = no. of field trials; for the combined results for NIS and MSO, 

side-by-side trials were counted as separate trials.

2

 LAFT = lowest average field trial; HAFT = highest average field trial.

Conclusions. The submitted canola crop field trial data are acceptable. The maximum use 

pattern for canola has not been provided; however, the study reflects the maximum proposed 

harvest aid use pattern for flax, a member of rapeseed subgroup 20A. The number and locations

of the field trials are in accordance with OCSPP 860.1500. An acceptable method was used for 

residue quantitation, and the data are supported by adequate storage stability data.

The submitted data for canola are sufficient for establishing tolerances of 0.40 ppm associated 

with the requested registration of the 51% WG formulations on flax. The tolerance calculations 

are presented in Appendix II.

Dried Pea

Valent U.S.A. Corporation has submitted field trial data for flumioxazin on dried pea. Thirteen

field trials were conducted in Canada and the United States during the 2009 growing season in 

the NAFTA Growing Zones 5 (ND; 2 trials), 7 (ND; 2 trials), 11 (OR and ID; 2 trials) and 14 

(MB and SK; 7 trials).

Each trial consisted of one untreated plot and one or two treated plots. At each trial location, one 

treated plot received one foliar application of a 51% WG formulation of flumioxazin (Valor SX 

51 WDG) at 0.093-0.100 lb ai/A (104.9-112.0 g ai/ha) (~1x the maximum proposed seasonal 

application rate). At two trial sites (Norwich, ND, and Payette, ID), a second plot was treated at 

a 2x rate of 0.193 lb ai/A (216.0-216.5 g ai/ha) to evaluate the effect of application rate on 

residue levels. Applications were made using ground equipment in spray volumes of 15.0-21.5 

gal/A (140.3-201.0 L/ha). Adjuvants were added to each spray mixture, with seven trials using 

an MSO, three trials using a COC, one trial using an NIS, and two trials using both MSO and 

NIS in side-by-side treated plots. Samples of dried pea were harvested at maturity from all trials 

at a preharvest interval (PHI) of 4-6 days. At one trial (in ND), additional samples were collected

at PHIs of 1, 3, 5, and 7 days to assess residue decline. 

Samples were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using an acceptable GC/NPD method, Valent

method RM-30A-3. The study is supported by adequate storage stability data. 

The results of the dried pea field trials are presented in Table 8. In samples of dried pea 

harvested 4-6 days following a single foliar application of the 51% WG formulation of 

flumioxazin at 0.093-0.100 lb ai/A (104.9-112.0 g ai/ha) with a COC, NIS or MSO adjuvant, 

residues of flumioxazin (and per trial averages) were: <0.02-0.033 (<0.02-<0.027) ppm in/on 

dried pea following applications made with a COC; <0.02-0.037 (<0.02-0.030) ppm in/on dried 

pea following applications made with an NIS; and <0.02-0.065 (<0.02-0.056) ppm in/on dried 

pea following applications made with an MSO. Overall residues (and per trial averages) for 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

18 of 40

applications made with any adjuvant were <0.02-0.065 (0.02-0.056) ppm. We note that the 

highest residues were observed in the Payette, ID trial (V-32857-F; MSO adjuvant), in which the 

petitioner reported that peas had been harvested after normal harvest and were drier than normal 

(7% moisture content). No differences were observed in side-by-side comparison of residues 

following applications made with NIS and MSO adjuvants. 

Following application of flumioxazin at a 2x rate of 0.193 lb ai/A (216.0-216.5 g ai/ha) with an 

MSO adjuvant, residues of flumioxazin (and per trial averages) in/on dried pea were <0.02-0.092 

(<0.02-0.079) ppm. The trials showed no effect on residues due to application rate.

In the residue decline trial, results for flumioxazin in dried pea were inconclusive because 

residues were near or below the LOQ at all harvest intervals. 

Table 8. Summary of Residue Data from Dried Pea Field Trials with Flumioxazin.

Commodity Adjuvant Total

Rate

lb ai/A

(g ai/ha)

PHI 

(days)

Residue Levels (ppm)1

n Sample 

Min.

Sample 

Max.

LAFT2 HAFT2 Median Mean Std. 

Dev.

FIELD PEA (proposed use = 0.096 lb ai/A total application rate, 5-day PHI)

1x Rate

Dried pea 

seed

COC 0.096-0.098 

(107.6-110.5)

6 3 <0.02 0.033 0.02 0.027 0.020 0.022 0.004

NIS 0.096-0.100

(107.3-112.0)

4-5 3 <0.02 0.037 0.02 0.030 0.021 0.024 0.006

MSO 0.093-0.098

(104.9-110.5)

4-6 9 <0.02 0.065 0.02 0.056 0.020 0.024 0.012

COC/NIS/MSO 0.093-0.100 

(104.9-112.0)

4-6 15 <0.02 0.065 0.02 0.056 0.020 0.024 0.009

2x Rate

Dried pea 

seed

MSO 0.193 (216.0-

216.5)

4-5 2 <0.02 0.092 0.02 0.079 0.050 0.050 0.042

1

 Except for sample min/max, values reflect per trial averages; n = no. of field trials; for the combined results for COC, NIS and 

MSO, side-by-side trials were counted as separate trials.

2

 LAFT = lowest average field trial; HAFT = highest average field trial.

Conclusions. The submitted dried pea crop field trial data are acceptable. The studies reflect the 

maximum proposed use pattern for field pea, and the number and locations of the field trials are 

in accordance with OCSPP 860.1500. An acceptable method was used for residue quantitation, 

and the data are supported by adequate storage stability data. The submitted data will support 

use on lentil. The submitted data for dried pea are sufficient for establishing a tolerance of 0.07 

ppm associated with the requested registration of the 51% WG formulations on dried pea seed. 

The tolerance calculations are presented in Appendix II.

Dried Bean

The Interregional Research Project No. 4 (IR-4) previously submitted acceptable field trial data 

for flumioxazin on dried beans (DP# 342963) reflecting application of a 51% WG formulation of 

flumioxazin to dried bean varieties as a single preharvest, broadcast application at 0.091-0.096 lb 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

19 of 40

ai/A, with a COC added to the spray mixture. Beans were harvested at a 4- to 6-day PHI, and 

dried prior to shelling. 

Following a single preharvest broadcast application of flumioxazin at 0.091-0.096 lb ai/A, 

residues were ND-0.05 ppm in/on 26 samples of dried beans harvested at a 4- to 6-day PHI; 

residues were <LOQ (<0.02 ppm) in/on 22 of these 26 samples. Based on the submitted data, a 

tolerance was established for bean, dry seed at 0.05 ppm.

Sunflower

Valent U.S.A. Corporation has submitted field trial data for flumioxazin on sunflower. Eight

field trials were conducted in the United States during the 2009 growing season in the NAFTA 

Growing Zones 5 (KS, MN, and ND; 3 trials), 7 (MT, ND, and NE; 4 trials), and 8 (OK; 1 trial).

Each trial consisted of one untreated plot and one or two treated plots. At each trial location, one 

treated plot received one foliar application of a 51% WG formulation of flumioxazin (Valor SX 

51 WDG) at 0.094-0.099 lb ai/A (~1x the maximum proposed seasonal application rate). At two 

trial sites (Stafford, KS and Norwich, ND), a second plot was treated at a 2x rate of 0.193-0.195 

lb ai/A to evaluate the effect of application rate on residue levels. Applications were made using 

ground equipment in spray volumes of 15.4-22.1 gal/A. Adjuvants were added to each spray 

mixture, with four trials using an MSO, one trial using an NIS, and three trials using both in sideby-side treated plots. Samples of sunflower seed were harvested at maturity from all trials at a 

PHI of 4-5 days. At one trial (in MN), additional samples were collected at PHIs of 1, 3, 5, and 7 

days to assess residue decline. In one trial (NE), the sunflower heads were collected and dried 

indoors for 1 day prior to collection.

Samples were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using an acceptable GC/NPD or GC/MS 

method, Valent method RM-30A-3. The study is supported by adequate storage stability data. 

The results of the sunflower field trials are presented in Table 9. In samples of sunflower seed 

harvested 4-5 days following a single foliar application of the 51% WG formulation of 

flumioxazin at 0.094-0.099 lb ai/A with an NIS or MSO adjuvant, residues of flumioxazin (and 

per trial averages) were: 0.03-0.34 (0.03-0.29) ppm in/on sunflower seed following applications 

made with an MSO; and 0.03-0.18 (0.04-0.18) ppm in/on sunflower seed following applications 

made with an NIS. Overall residues (and per trial averages) for applications made with either 

adjuvant were 0.03-0.34 (0.03-0.29) ppm. In the side-by-side trials with NIS and MSO, residues 

were much higher following application with NIS in one set of trials (average residues of 0.18 

ppm for the NIS vs. 0.06 ppm for the MSO); however, differences in the other two trials were 

slight, and a consistent pattern of higher residues was not observed for either adjuvant. 

Following application of flumioxazin at a 2x rate of 0.193-0.195 lb ai/A with an MSO adjuvant, 

residues of flumioxazin (and per trial averages) in/on sunflower seed were 0.14-0.20 (0.14-0.17) 

ppm. There was not a proportional increase in residues due to the application rate.

In the residue decline trial, residues of flumioxazin in sunflower seed generally decreased with 

increasing PHIs.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

20 of 40

Table 9. Summary of Residue Data from Sunflower Field Trials with Flumioxazin.

Commodity Adjuvant Total

Rate

(lb ai/A)

PHI 

(days)

Residue Levels (ppm)1

n Sample 

Min.

Sample 

Max.

LAFT2 HAFT2 Median Mean Std. 

Dev.

Sunflower subgroup 20B (proposed use = 0.096 lb ai/A total application rate, 5-day PHI)

1x Rate

Sunflower 

seed

NIS 0.097-0.098 5 4 0.03 0.18 0.04 0.18 0.13 0.12 0.06

MSO 0.094-0.099 4-5 7 0.03 0.34 0.03 0.29 0.06 0.11 0.10

NIS/MSO 0.094-0.099 4-5 11 0.03 0.34 0.03 0.29 0.10 0.11 0.08

2x Rate

Sunflower 

seed

MSO 0.193-0.195 5 2 0.14 0.20 0.14 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.02

1

 Except for sample min/max, values reflect per trial averages; n = no. of field trials; for the combined results for NIS and MSO, 

side-by-side trials were counted as separate trials.

2

 LAFT = lowest-average-field-trial; HAFT = highest-average-field-trial.

Conclusions. The submitted sunflower crop field trial data are acceptable. The study reflects the 

maximum proposed use pattern for sunflower and safflower, and the number and locations of the 

field trials are in accordance with OCSPP 860.1500. An acceptable method was used for residue 

quantitation, and the data are supported by adequate storage stability data.

The submitted data for sunflower are sufficient for establishing a tolerance of 0.50 ppm 

associated with the requested registration of the 51% WG formulations on sunflower. The 

tolerance calculations are presented in Appendix II.

Wheat

Valent has submitted two wheat field trial studies, one reflecting the proposed pre-plant weed 

control use pattern and the collection of wheat forage and hay samples (3 trials), and one 

reflecting the foliar harvest aid use pattern and collection of wheat grain and straw samples (26 

trials). The results of the wheat field trials are presented in Table 10.

The study design for the wheat field trials was in accordance with EPA recommendations, 

resulting from a meeting between R. Loranger (HED) and S. Shen (Valent) on 7/13/09, and 

subsequent e-mail correspondence from 7/21/09 to 7/24/09. The revised meeting minutes (dated 

7/22/09) and e-mail communication are provided in Appendix 10 of MRID 48510506. The EPA 

recommendations are summarized below:

Study design for preplant/preemergence weed control use: Three field trials conducted 

using the weed control (pre-plant) use pattern. At each trial, two plots to be 

established: one with a 1x application rate and a 14-day pre-plant interval (PPI), and

one with a 2x application rate and a 7-day PPI. Forage to be harvested when the plants 

reach 5” in height (with a corresponding grazing restriction added to the label); hay to 

be collected at the normal harvest timing (early flower (boot) to soft dough stage). If 

residues of flumioxazin in forage and in hay are <LOQ for the samples from the 2x/7-

day PPI application, tolerances for forage and hay will be set at the method LOQ. If 

residues in either the forage or hay are greater than the LOQ for samples from the 2x/7-day 

PPI application, tolerances will be established based on residue results from the 1x/14-day 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

21 of 40

PPI application, providing residues are not much higher, and the label will need to be 

revised to reflect a PPI of 14 days. If residues are significantly above the LOQ from the 

1x/14-day PPI trials, additional trials will likely be required. On the product labels, grazing

should be allowed based on wheat height (5 inches) instead of an interval in days. 

Study design in support of harvest aid (dessication) use: 20 field trials conducted in 

the regions designated OCSPP 860.1500. Product to be applied 10 days before 

harvest. Both spring and winter wheat scenarios to be covered by a wide range of 

application timing from late May to late September 2009. The residue profile to be 

used to establish tolerances for straw and grain.

Table 10. Summary of Residue Data from Wheat Field Trials with Flumioxazin.

Commodity Adjuvant Total

Rate

(lb ai/A)

PHI 3

(days)

Residue Levels (ppm)1

n Sample 

Min.

Sample 

Max.

LAFT2 HAFT2 Median Mean Std. 

Dev.

WHEAT (proposed pre-plant weed control use = 0.064 lb ai/A total application rate; PHI not specified

4

)

1x Rate (7-14 days pre-plant)

Wheat forage NIS 0.062-0.064 71-129 3 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 N/A

Wheat hay NIS 0.126-0.128 172-262 3 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 N/A

2x Rate (7 days pre-plant)

Wheat forage NIS 0.062-0.064 64-129 3 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 N/A

Wheat hay NIS 0.126-0.128 172-255 3 <0.02 <0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 N/A

WHEAT (proposed harvest aid use = 0.064 lb ai/A total application rate, 10-day PHI)

1x Rate

Wheat grain NIS 0.062-0.066 9-11 12 0.03 0.31 0.04 0.31 0.11 0.12 0.08

MSO 0.063-0.064 9-11 14 0.03 0.19 0.04 0.16 0.08 0.08 0.03

NIS/

MSO

0.062-0.066 9-11 26 0.03 0.31 0.04 0.31 0.09 0.10 0.06

Wheat straw NIS 0.062-0.066 9-11 12 0.21 3.63 0.23 3.22 1.52 1.61 0.88

MSO 0.063-0.064 9-11 14 0.66 3.95 0.76 3.71 1.83 2.09 0.85

NIS/

MSO

0.062-0.066 9-11 26 0.21 3.95 0.23 3.71 1.73 1.86 0.88

2x Rate

Wheat grain MSO 0.127-0.130 9-10 3 0.03 0.24 0.04 0.23 0.14 0.14 0.10

Wheat straw 2.11 4.21 2.37 3.63 3.35 3.12 0.66

1

 Except for sample min/max, values reflect per trial averages; n = no. of field trials; for the combined results for NIS and MSO, 

side-by-side trials were counted as separate trials.

2

 LAFT = lowest average field trial; HAFT = highest average field trial.

3

 Wheat forage was harvested at ~5 in. tall and hay was harvested at early flower (boot) to soft dough stage.

4

 The labels include the following grazing restriction: Do not graze until wheat has reached 5 inches in height.

Pre-Plant Application

Valent U.S.A. Corporation has submitted field trial data for flumioxazin on wheat. Three field 

trials were conducted in the United States during the 2009-2010 growing season in the North 

American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Growing Zones 4 (MS; 1 trial) and 8 (KS and TX; 2 

trials). 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

22 of 40

Each trial consisted of one untreated plot and two treated plots. At each trial location, one 

treated plot received a single soil broadcast application of a 51% WG formulation of flumioxazin 

(Valor SX 51 WDG) at 0.062-0.064 lb ai/A (~1x the maximum proposed seasonal application 

rate) made 7-14 days pre-planting. A second plot received one application at a 2x rate of 0.126-

0.128 lb ai/A made 7 days pre-planting to evaluate the effect of application rate on residue levels. 

We note that the target preplanting intervals for the low and high application rates were 14 and 7 

days, respectively; however, based on planting and application dates, both plots in the MS trial 

were treated 7 days pre-planting. Applications were made using ground equipment in spray 

volumes of 19.5-20.1 gal/A. An adjuvant (NIS) was added to each spray mixture. Samples of 

wheat forage were harvested when the wheat plants were ~5 inches tall, at a 64- to 129-day PHI; 

samples of hay were harvested at the early flower (boot) to soft dough stage (172- to 262-day 

PHI) and were allowed to dry in the field for 4-5 days prior to collection.

Samples were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using an acceptable GC/NPD or GC/MS 

method, Valent method RM-30A-3. The study is supported by adequate storage stability data. 

The results of the wheat field trials are presented in Table 10. Residues of flumioxazin were 

below the LOQ (<0.02 ppm) in/on all samples of wheat forage and hay harvested 64-129 and 

172-262 days, respectively, following a single soil broadcast application of the 51% WG 

formulation of flumioxazin at 0.062-0.064 lb ai/A made 7-14 days pre-planting or at a 2x rate of 

0.126-0.128 lb ai/A made 7 days pre-planting. 

No residue decline data were submitted with the study; these data are not needed to support the 

pre-planting use pattern. 

Foliar Application

Valent U.S.A. Corporation has submitted field trial data for flumioxazin on wheat for the harvest 

aid use pattern. Twenty field trials were conducted in the United States during the 2009 growing 

season in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Growing Zones 2 (GA; 1 trial), 4 

(MS; 1 trial), 5 (IA, IL, IN, MO, and NE; 5 trials), 7 (MT, ND, and NE; 5 trials), 8 (TX, KS, and 

OK; 7 trials), and 11 (ID; 1 trial). The two OK trials and two of the NE trials were conducted at 

the same trial locations. Careful examination of the field trial records indicates that the two OK 

trials differed from each other only in the crop variety used, a 1-day off-set in initiation, and the 

tank mixes used for application. HED has concluded that these trials constitute a single trial with 

replicate samples for purposes of 860.1500 data requirements. Examination of the field trial 

records for the NE trials indicates that although the trials reflected the same variety, there were 

sufficient differences between the trials, including an 11-day off-set in initiation, that each trial 

constitutes a separate trial for purposes of 860.1500 data requirements. The adjustment in trial 

numbers results in a total of 19 field trials, with 5 trials conducted in NAFTA Zone 8.

Each trial consisted of one untreated plot and one or two treated plots. At each trial location, one 

treated plot received one foliar application of a 51% WG formulation of flumioxazin (Valor SX 

51 WDG) at 0.062-0.066 lb ai/A (~1x the maximum proposed seasonal application rate). At 

three trial sites (Carlyle, IL, Norwich, ND, and Wellington, TX), a second plot was treated at a 2x

rate of 0.127-0.130 lb ai/A to evaluate the effect of application rate on residue levels. 

Applications were made using ground equipment in spray volumes of 14.8-22.7 gal/A. 

Adjuvants were added to each spray mixture, with seven trials using a MSO, five trials using a 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

23 of 40

NIS, and seven trials using both in side-by-side treated plots. Samples of wheat grain and straw 

were harvested at maturity from all trials at a PHI of 9-11 days. At two trials (in MS and OK), 

additional samples were collected at PHIs of 3-4, 7, 10, and 13 days to assess residue decline. 

Samples of wheat forage and hay were not collected from any trial.

Samples were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using an acceptable GC/NPD method, Valent 

method RM-30A-3. The study is supported by adequate storage stability data. 

The results of the wheat field trials are presented in Table 10. In samples of wheat grain and 

straw harvested 9-11 days following a single foliar application of the 51% WG formulation of 

flumioxazin at 0.062-0.066 lb ai/A with an NIS or MSO adjuvant, residues of flumioxazin (and 

per trial averages) were: 0.03-0.31 (0.04-0.31) and 0.21-3.63 (0.23-3.22) ppm in/on wheat grain 

and straw, respectively, following applications made with an NIS; and 0.03-0.19 ppm (0.04-0.16 

ppm) and 0.66-3.95 ppm (0.76-3.71 ppm) in/on wheat grain and straw, respectively, following 

applications made with an MSO. Overall residues (and per trial averages) for applications made 

with either adjuvant were 0.03-0.31 ppm (0.04-0.31 ppm) for wheat grain and 0.21-3.95 ppm 

(0.23-3.71 ppm) for wheat straw. Side-by-side comparison of residues following applications 

with NIS and MSO adjuvants suggested that residues in grain were more often slightly higher 

following applications made with an NIS, while residues in straw were more often higher or 

slightly higher following applications made with an MSO. 

Following application of flumioxazin at a 2x rate of 0.127-0.130 lb ai/A with an MSO adjuvant, 

residues of flumioxazin (and per trial averages) in/on wheat grain and straw, respectively, were 

0.03-0.24 (0.04-0.23) and 2.11-4.21 (2.37-3.63) ppm. In the straw samples, there was a 

proportional increase in residues due to the application rate; the grain trials showed no effect on 

residues due to application rate.

In the residue decline trials, residues of flumioxazin increased in grain from the 10-day to the 13-

day PHI in one trial (average residues of 0.07 and 0.18 ppm, respectively), but decreased slightly 

in the second trial (average residues of 0.11 and 0.09 ppm, respectively). In wheat straw, 

residues declined or did not increase from the 10- to the 13-day PHI. 

Conclusions. The submitted wheat crop field trial data are acceptable and reflect HED’s 

recommendations for supporting pre-plant and harvest aid uses of flumioxazin on wheat. For the 

preplant trials, the study reflects three trials conducted at the maximum proposed use pattern, and 

the application and sampling timing are in accordance with Agency recommendations. For the 

harvest aid trials, the study reflects the maximum proposed use pattern, and the number and

locations of the field trials are in accordance with OCSPP 860.1500. An acceptable method was 

used for residue quantitation, and the data are supported by adequate storage stability data.

The submitted data for wheat reflecting application at ~0.064 lb ai/A (foliar and pre-plant 

applications) are sufficient for establishing tolerances for wheat commodities associated with the 

requested registration of the 51% WG formulations on wheat: the data will support tolerances at 

the LOQ of 0.02 ppm for forage and hay, and tolerances of 0.40 and 6.0 ppm for wheat grain and 

straw. The tolerance calculations for wheat grain and straw are presented in Appendix II.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

24 of 40

860.1520 Processed Food and Feed

DER References: 48510501.de2 (Canola)

48510504.de2 (Sunflower)

48510505.de2 (Wheat)

There are no processed commodities associated with the proposed use on field pea. Valent 

Corporation has submitted processing data for canola, sunflower, and what. The processing 

factors are summarized in Table 11.

Table 11 Summary of Processing Factors for Flumioxazin

RAC Processed 

Commodity

Total Rate

lb ai/A

(maximum 

proposed 

seasonal 

application 

rate)

PHI

(days)

Flumioxazin 

(ppm)

Processing 

Factor

Theoretical 

Maximum 

Concentration 

Factor1

Canola Canola 0.483

(~5)

5 0.5 -- --

Oil 0.02 <0.04x 3.0x

Meal 0.06 0.1x 1.9x

Sunflower Sunflower seed 0.486

(~5)

5 2.31 -- --

Oil <0.02 <0.01x 2.5x

Meal 0.15 0.06x 4.5x

Wheat Grain 0.307

(~5)

10 0.36 -- --

Bran 0.34 0.9x 7.7x

Flour 0.05 0.1x 1.4x

Middlings 0.08 0.2x --

Shorts 0.11 0.3x 8.3x

Germ 0.37 1.0x --

AGF 111 308x --

1 Based on OCSPP Guidelines 860.1520, Table 3.

Canola

Valent U.S.A. Corporation has submitted a processing study for flumioxazin on canola. In one 

trial conducted in WA, a 51% WG formulation of flumioxazin (Valor SX 51 WDG) was applied 

as a single foliar application to canola at an exaggerated rate of 0.483 lb ai/A (~5x the maximum 

proposed seasonal application rate) in a spray volume of 20.1 gal/A. An adjuvant (MSO) was 

added to the spray mixture. Canola seed was harvested at a 5-day PHI and was dried in the field 

for 9 days, after which it was processed into oil and meal using simulated commercial 

procedures. Processing was conducted by GLP Technologies, Inc. (Navasota, TX). Adequate 

descriptions were provided of the processing procedures, including material balance summaries.

Samples were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using an acceptable GC/NPD method, Valent

method RM-30A-3. The study is supported by adequate storage stability data. 

The processing factors for canola are summarized in Table 11. Average residues of flumioxazin 

were 0.51 ppm in/on canola and 0.06 ppm in meal; residues were below the LOQ (<0.02 ppm) in 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

25 of 40

oil. The processing data indicate that residues of flumioxazin do not concentrate in oil or meal 

(processing factors of <0.04x and 0.1x, respectively). 

The processing factors calculated in this study were less than the maximum theoretical 

concentration factors for canola of 1.9x for meal and 3.0x for oil (based on separation into 

components; OCSPP 860.1520, Table 3).

Conclusions. The submitted processing study is adequate. The data indicate that flumioxazin

does not concentrate in oil or meal following processing of canola seed bearing quantifiable 

residues following application of Flumioxazin at 5x the maximum proposed seasonal application 

rate. 

The available data indicate that tolerances are not needed for the regulated commodities of canola

oil and meal. 

Sunflower

Valent U.S.A. Corporation has submitted a processing study for flumioxazin on sunflower. In 

one trial conducted in OK, a 51% WG formulation of flumioxazin (Valor SX 51 WDG) was 

applied as a single foliar application to sunflower at an exaggerated rate of 0.486 lb ai/A (~5x the 

maximum proposed seasonal application rate) in a spray volume of 15.3 gal/A. An adjuvant 

(MSO) was added to the spray mixture. Sunflower seed was harvested at a 5-day PHI and was 

processed into oil and meal using simulated commercial procedures. Processing was conducted 

by GLP Technologies, Inc. (Navasota, TX). Adequate descriptions were provided of the 

processing procedures, including material balance summaries.

Samples were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using an acceptable GC/NPD or GC/MS 

method, Valent method RM-30A-3. The study is supported by adequate storage stability data. 

The processing factors for sunflower are summarized in Table 11. Average residues of 

flumioxazin were 2.31 ppm in/on sunflower seed and 0.15 ppm in meal; residues were below the 

LOQ (<0.02 ppm) in oil. The processing data indicate that residues of flumioxazin do not 

concentrate in oil and meal (processing factors of <0.01x and 0.06x, respectively). 

The processing factors calculated in this study were less than the maximum theoretical 

concentration factors for sunflower of 4.5x for meal and 2.5x for oil (based on separation into 

components; OCSPP 860.1520, Table 3).

Conclusions. The submitted sunflower processing study is adequate. The data indicate that 

flumioxazin does not concentrate in oil or meal following processing of sunflower seed bearing 

quantifiable residues following application of Flumioxazin at 5x the maximum proposed 

seasonal application rate. 

The available data indicate that tolerances are not needed for the regulated commodities of 

sunflower oil and meal. 

Wheat
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

26 of 40

Valent U.S.A. Corporation has submitted a processing study for flumioxazin on wheat. In one 

trial conducted in OK, a 51% WG formulation of flumioxazin (Valor SX 51 WDG) was applied 

as a single foliar application to wheat at an exaggerated rate of 0.307 lb ai/A (~5x the maximum 

proposed seasonal application rate) in a spray volume of 16.2 gal/A. An adjuvant (MSO) was 

added to the spray mixture. Wheat grain was harvested at a 10-day PHI and was processed into 

bran, flour, middlings, shorts, germ, and AGF using simulated commercial procedures. 

Processing was conducted by GLP Technologies, Inc. (Navasota, TX). Adequate descriptions 

were provided of the processing procedures, including material balance summaries.

Samples were analyzed for residues of flumioxazin using an acceptable GC/NPD method, Valent

method RM-30A-3. The study is supported by adequate storage stability data. 

The processing factors for wheat are summarized in Table 11. Average residues of flumioxazin 

were 0.36 ppm in wheat grain, 0.34 ppm in bran, 0.05 ppm in flour, 0.08 ppm in middlings, 0.11 

ppm in shorts, 0.37 ppm in germ, and 111 ppm in AGF. The processing data indicate that 

residues of flumioxazin may concentrate in AGF (308x), but do not concentrate in bran, flour, 

middlings, shorts, or germ (processing factors of 0.9x, 0.1x, 0.2x, 0.3x, and 1.0x, respectively). 

The processing factors calculated in this study were less than the maximum theoretical 

concentration factors for wheat of 7.7x for bran, 1.4x for flour, and 8.3x for shorts (based on 

separation into components; OCSPP 860.1520, Table 3).

Conclusions. The submitted wheat processing study is adequate. The data indicate that 

flumioxazin may concentrate in AGF (308x), but does not concentrate in bran, flour, middlings, 

shorts, or germ.

The available data indicate that tolerances are not needed for the regulated commodities of wheat 

bran, flour, middlings, shorts, or germ. Based the 308x processing factor for AGF and the HAFT 

residue of 0.31 ppm for wheat grain, the maximum expected residues in AGF are 96 ppm. A 

tolerance of 100 ppm is needed for grain, aspirated fractions.

860.1650 Submittal of Analytical Reference Standards

Analytical reference standards for flumioxazin and metabolites are currently available at the EPA 

National Pesticide Standards Repository (personal communication with T. Cole, ACB, 1/3/12) as 

follows: flumioxazin (expiration 4/1/2012), flumioxazin metabolite 482-HA (expiration 

10/13/2013), and flumioxazin metabolite APF (expiration 10/12/2013).

Because the standards for flumioxazin is due to expire, the registrant must either recertify the lot 

in the repository and send in an updated certificate of analysis (COA), or submit a new standard 

(different lot #) if the previous lots will not be recertified. 

If a new COA is being submitted, it should be faxed to the repository at 410-305-2999. If new 

standards are being submitted, they should be sent to the Analytical Chemistry Lab, which is 

located at Fort Meade, Maryland. They can be sent to the attention of either Theresa Cole or 

Thuy Nguyen at the address listed below. The full 9-digit zip code is mandatory or the mail will 

be returned to the registrant.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

27 of 40

USEPA

National Pesticide Standards Repository/Analytical Chemistry Branch/OPP

701 Mapes Road

Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-5350

The letter of transmittal should include the assay of the standards, names of the analytical 

methods used, a statement of principal impurities, purification procedures employed, storage 

requirements, and special precautions for safe handling. Replacement of standards may be 

required periodically if supplies are exhausted or if decomposition occurs during storage. 

Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) must accompany all analytical standards as specified by 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in 29 CFR 1910.1200.

860.1850/860.1900 Confined and Field Accumulation in Rotational Crops

Residue Chemistry Memo DP #259493, 3/12/01, D. Dotson

Residue Chemistry Memo DP #272652, 3/12/01, R. Loranger

The previously submitted confined rotational crop study is adequate for the proposed uses on the 

requested commodities. HED has concluded that the residue of concern in rotational crops is the 

parent compound only. Based on the results of the confined accumulation study, HED concluded

that the existing rotational crop plantback intervals (PBIs) are acceptable, and that field trials and 

tolerances in rotated crops are not necessary.

Current label directions for both 51% WG formulations include the following statement: Do not 

plant any crop except cotton, peanut, soybean and sugarcane earlier than 30 days after application 

of flumioxazin. In addition, the labels specify a variety of PBIs for different field crops 

depending on the application rate. For the highest use rate on any rotated crop (0.38 lb ai/A), the 

specified PBIs are 9 months for cotton, field corn, peanut, rice, sorghum, soybean, sunflower, 

tobacco and wheat, and 12-18 months for all other crops not listed.

860.1550 Proposed Tolerances

Tolerances for plant commodities are established under 40 CFR §180.568(a) for residues of 

flumioxazin per se. The tolerance expression proposed by the petitioner is appropriate.

The proposed and recommended tolerance for flumioxazin resulting from the subject action are 

listed in Table 12.

Adequate field trial data reflecting the proposed use patterns are available for purposes of 

establishing tolerances for pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 6C; rapeseed 

subgroup 20A; sunflower subgroup 20B; and wheat grain, straw, forage, and hay.

Residues in/on wheat forage and hay were below the LOQ; the available data will support the 

proposed tolerances at the LOQ of 0.02 ppm for these commodities.

Residues of flumioxazin were quantifiable in/on canola seed, dried pea, sunflower, and wheat 

grain and straw; therefore, the OECD tolerance calculation procedures were utilized in 
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

28 of 40

determining an appropriate tolerance level for these commodities. The tolerance calculations are 

presented in Appendix II. Using the OECD tolerance calculation procedures, the recommended 

tolerances are: 0.07 ppm dried pea, 0.40 ppm for rapeseed subgroup 20A, 0.50 for sunflower 

subgroup 20 B, 0.40 ppm for wheat grain, and 6.0 ppm for wheat straw. Although we were 

unable to confirm the means by which the petitioner established their proposed tolerances, HED 

believes the difference in the proposed and recommended tolerances for dried pea, rapeseed 

subgroup 20A, and wheat grain and straw are due to the petitioner’s having used the NAFTA 

tolerance calculation procedures in determining the proposed tolerance. 

The petitioner is proposing a tolerance on pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 

6C. Adequate field trial data are available reflecting the established/proposed use patterns on 

dried bean (maximum residues 0.05 ppm) and dried pea seed (maximum residues 0.065 ppm). A 

tolerance of 0.05 ppm is currently established for dry bean; the recommended tolerance for dried 

pea is 0.07 ppm. Because the maximum residues in dried bean and dried pea differ by <5x, a 

crop subgroup tolerance is appropriate for pea and bean, dried shelled, except soybean, subgroup 

6C at the maximum recommended tolerance level of 0.07 ppm. 

Adequate canola, sunflower, and wheat processing data have been submitted. The data indicate 

that tolerances are not needed for canola, sunflower, or wheat processed commodities. However,

a tolerance of 100 ppm is now needed for grain, aspirated fractions based on the concentration 

factor of 308x for AGF and the HAFT residue of 0.31 ppm for wheat grain.

There are no Codex, Canadian or Mexican MRLs for flumioxazin; therefore, there are no issues 

of international harmonization raised by this action. An International Residue Limit Status Sheet 

(IRLS) follows the references in this document.

Table 12. Tolerance Summary for Flumioxazin.

Commodity Established/Proposed 

Tolerance (ppm)

Recommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments;

Correct Commodity Definition

Dried shelled pea and bean 

(except soybean), Crop 

Subgroup 6C, seed

0.1 0.07

Pea and bean, dried shelled, except 

soybean, subgroup 6C 

Bean, dry seed 0.05 Remove

Rapeseed, Crop Subgroup 

20A, seed 0.35 0.40

Rapeseed subgroup 20A

Rapeseed Crop Subgroup 

20A, meal 0.04 --

Residues in canola meal and oil will 

be covered by the recommended 

Rapeseed Crop Subgroup tolerance for rapeseed subgroup 20A.

20A, refined oil 0.02 --

Sunflower, Crop Subgroup 

20B, seed 0.5 0.50

Sunflower subgroup 20B

Sunflower, Crop Subgroup 

20B, meal 0.03 --

Residues in sunflower meal and oil 

will be covered by the recommended 

tolerance for rapeseed subgroup 20A. Sunflower, Crop Subgroup 

20B, refined oil 0.02 --

Wheat, forage 0.02 0.02

Wheat, hay 0.02 0.02

Wheat, grain 0.35 0.40
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

29 of 40

Table 12. Tolerance Summary for Flumioxazin.

Commodity Established/Proposed 

Tolerance (ppm)

Recommended 

Tolerance (ppm)

Comments;

Correct Commodity Definition

Wheat, straw 5 6.0

Grain, aspirated fraction 110 100 Grain, aspirated fractions

Wheat, bran 0.35 -- Residues in wheat bran, flour, germ, 

middlings, and shorts will be covered 

by the recommended tolerance for 

wheat grain.

Wheat, flour 0.05 --

Wheat, germ 0.35 --

Wheat, middlings 0.08 --

Wheat, shorts 0.11 --

References

DP#: 194594

Subject: PP# 3G4250: New Chemical EUP: V-53482, Flumioxazin on Soybeans. 

Evaluation of Analytical Methods and of Residue Data.

From: J. Garbus

To: J. Miller, D. Kenny and A. Koscialski

Dated: 9/21/1994

MRID(s): 42884011-42884014, 42884016-42884019

DP#: None

Subject: PP# 3G4250: New Chemical EUP: Flumioxazin: Revised Tolerance 

Enforcement Method.

From: J. Garbus

To: J. Miller

Dated: 1/08/1996

MRID(s): 43935509

DP#s: 259493 and 268181

Subject: PP#s 7F4841 and 0F6171. Tolerance Petitions for the Use of Flumioxazin on 

Peanuts, Soybeans, and Sugarcane. Evaluation of Residue Chemistry and 

Analytical Methodology

From: D. Dotson

To: D. Kenny and J. Miller

Dated: 3/12/2001

MRID(s): 44013001, 44013002, 44295049 - 44295057

DP#: 272652

Subject: PP# 7F4841/0F6171; Flumioxazin in/on Peanuts, Soybeans and Sugarcane. 

Conclusions of the 12/20/2000 Meeting of the Metabolism Assessment Review 

Committee.

From: R. Loranger

To: Y. Donovan

Dated: 3/12/2001

MRID(s): None
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

30 of 40

DP#: 298647

Subject: Flumioxazin. Tolerance Petition Requesting Section 3 Registration for Food Use 

of Flumioxazin on Cotton. Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data. 

Petition Number 1F06296.

From: W. Drew

To: J. Miller

Dated: 2/17/2004

MRID(s): 45375506

DP#: 301247

Subject: Flumioxazin. Tolerance Petition Requesting Section 3 Registration for Food Use 

of the Herbicide Flumioxazin on Sugarcane, Grape, Almond/Pistachio, Mint, 

Tuberous/Corm Vegetables (Crop Subgroup 1C), and Dry Bulb 

Onion/Garlic/Shallot. Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data. 

Petitions Numbered 0F06171, 1F06296, 3E06777, 3E06779, 3E6788.

From: W. Drew

To: Joanne Miller/James Stone

Dated: 7/23/2004

MRID(s): 45244801, 45375503, 45375504, 45375505, 45375507, 45888501, 46109201, 

46114601, 46133901

DP#s: 310408 and 313783

Subject: Flumioxazin. Tolerance Petitions Requesting Section 3 Registration for Food Use 

of the Herbicide Flumioxazin on Pome Fruit (Crop Group 11), Stone Fruit (Crop 

Group 12), and Strawberries. Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue 

Data.

From: W. Drew

To: J. Stone, J. Miller and D. Rosenblatt,

Dated: 3/15/2006

MRID(s): 46229401, 46229402, 46229403, 46229404, 46229405, 46229406, 46229407, 

46229408, 46292501

DP#: 342963

Subject: Flumioxazin. Petitions for Tolerances on Alfalfa, Asparagus, Dry Beans, Fruiting 

Vegetables (Group 8, including Okra), Melons (subgroup 9A), Bushberries 

(subgroup 13B), and Tree Nuts (group 14), and a Request for an Amended Use on 

Garlic. Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data. PP#s: 6F7092 and 

6E7151.

From: D. Rate

To: D. Rosenblatt, J. Miller, J. Stone

Dated: 11/20/2007

MRID(s): 46889603, 46889604, 47005101, 47005102, 47005103, 47005104, 47005105, 

47005106, 47005107
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

31 of 40

DP#: 342413

Subject: Flumioxazin. Petition for the Establishment of Permanent Tolerances on Field 

Corn Commodities. Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data. 

PP#7E7243.

From: D. Rate

To: B. Hanson

Dated: 1/31/2008

MRID(s): 47184801

Attachments: 

International Residue Limit Status sheet

Appendix I - Chemical Names and Structures of Flumioxazin Residues of Concern.

Appendix II - Tolerance Assessment Calculations
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

32 of 40

International Residue Limits

Flumioxazin (129034; 1/9/12)

Summary of US and International Tolerances and Maximum Residue Limits 

Residue Definition:

US Canada Mexico2 Codex3

40 CFR 180.568:

Plant: flumioxazin, 2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-

oxo-4-(2-propynyl)-2 H -1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-

4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1 H -isoindole-1,3(2 H )-

dione, including its metabolites and degradates.

Compliance with the tolerance levels is to be 

determined by measuring only flumioxazin.

Livestock: N/A

None None

Commodity1 Tolerance (ppm) /Maximum Residue Limit (mg/kg)

US Canada Mexico2 Codex3

Pea and bean, dried shelled, 

except soybean, subgroup 6C

0.07

Rapeseed subgroup 20A 0.40

Sunflower subgroup 20B 0.50

Wheat, forage 0.02

Wheat, hay 0.02

Wheat, grain 0.40

Wheat, straw 6.0

Grain, aspirated fractions 100

Completed: 

1

Includes only commodities of interest for this action. Tolerance values should be the HED recommendations and 

not those proposed by the applicant.

2 Mexico adopts US tolerances and/or Codex MRLs for its export purposes.

3 * = absent at the limit of quantitation; Po = postharvest treatment, such as treatment of stored grains. PoP = 

processed postharvest treated commodity, such as processing of treated stored wheat. (fat) = to be measured on the 

fat portion of the sample. MRLs indicated as proposed have not been finalized by the CCPR and the CAC.
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

33 of 40

Appendix I. Chemical Names and Structures of Flumioxazin Residues of Concern.

Common name Chemical name Chemical structure

Flumioxazin 2-[7-fluoro-3,4-dihydro-3-oxo-4-(2-

propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-yl]-

4,5,6,7-tetrahydro-1H-isoindole-1,3(2H)-

dione N

N

O

F

C

H2

O

O

HC C O

3-OH-Flumioxazin 7-fluoro-6-(3-hydroxy-3,4,5,6-

tetrahydrophthalimido)-4-(2-propynyl)-

2H-1,4-benzoxazin-3(4H)-one

O N

N

F O

O

O

OH

4-OH-Flumioxazin 7-fluoro-6-(4-hydroxy-3,4,5,6-

tetrahydrophthalimido)-4-(2-propynyl)-

2H-1,4-benzoxazin-3(4H)-one

O N

N

F O

O

O

OH

Metabolite B, F Not available

O N

N

F O

O

O

OH

Metabolite C Not available

OH

O N

N

F O

O H

O

HO

O N

N

F O

O

H O

OH

OH

or
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

34 of 40

Common name Chemical name Chemical structure

4-OH-S-53482-SA 7-fluoro-6-(1-sulfo-4-hydroxy-1,2-

cyclohexanedicarboximido)-4-(2-

propynyl)-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-3(4H)-

one

O N

N

F O

O

O

SO3H

OH

482-HA [Fish] N-(7-fluoro-3,4-dihdyro-3-oxo-4-

prop-2-ynyl-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-6-

yl)cyclohex-1-ene-1-carboxamide-2-

carboxylic acid

HO

O

O

N

H

O

N

O

F

CH

APF [Fish] 3-oxo-4-prop-2ynyl-6-amino-7-fluoro3,4-dihydro-1,4-benzoxazin

O NH2

N

O

F

CH

Metabolite B, C, & F structures are not fully characterized (with Metabolite B & Metabolite F associated with Goat 

milk, liver, & kidney; and Metabolite C associated with Goat milk, kidney, and muscle).
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

35 of 40

Appendix II. Tolerance Assessment Calculations.

The OECD tolerance calculation procedures (March 2011 version), were used for calculating 

recommended tolerances for canola, dried pea, sunflower, wheat grain, and wheat straw. The 

statistical goal of the OECD tolerance calculation procedures is to produce an MRL proposal in 

the region of the 95th percentile of the underlying residues distribution. The average residue 

values used to calculate the tolerances are provided in Table I-1. 

Table I-1. Residue data used to calculate tolerances for flumioxazin.

Regulator: EPA

Chemical: Flumioxazin

Crop: Canola Dried Pea Sunflower Wheat Grain Wheat Straw

PHI: 4-5 4-6 5 10-11 10

App. Rate: 0.096 0.096 0.096 0.064 0.064

Submitter: Valent U.S.A. 

Corporation

Valent U.S.A. 

Corporation

Valent U.S.A. 

Corporation

Valent U.S.A. 

Corporation

Valent U.S.A. 

Corporation

MRID 

Citations:

48510501 48510502 and 

48510503

48510504 48510505 48510505

Flumioxazin (ppm)

0.04 0.019 0.04 0.04 1.82

0.05 0.026 0.03 0.05 3.71

0.16 0.02* 0.04 0.11 2.55

0.06 0.02* 0.05 0.08 0.76

0.03 0.02* 0.10 0.05 0.94

0.04 0.02* 0.14 0.04 1.83

0.075 0.02* 0.18 0.11 1.46

0.255 0.02* 0.18 0.08 1.26

0.04 0.02* 0.06 0.13 1.84

0.07 0.02* 0.12 0.11 2.35

0.06 0.02* 0.29 0.23 0.85

0.021 0.16 1.59

0.021 0.12 3.22

0.03 0.09 3.40

0.056 0.06 1.57

0.135 0.06 1.74

0.0125 0.07 3.20

0.09 1.06

0.10 1.55

0.31 3.19

0.13 1.71

0.05 1.83

0.10 0.23

0.06 1.88

0.1 1.57

0.05 1.37

*censored values
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

36 of 40

MSO= methylated seed oils; NIS=non-ionic surfactants, COC= crop oil concentrates 

Canola

The dataset used to establish a tolerance for flumioxazin on canola consisted of field trial data 

representing application rates of 0.092-0.101 lb ai/A lb ai/A flumioxazin with a 4- to 5-day PHI. 

The field trial application rates and PHI are within 25% of the maximum label application rate 

and minimum label PHI. The average residue values used to calculate the tolerance are provided 

in Table I-1. Residues of flumioxazin were quantifiable (LOQ = 0.02 ppm) in/on samples from 

all trials. Data reflecting applications made with both the NIS and MSO adjuvants were 

combined for the tolerance calculation. Using the OECD tolerance calculation procedures, the 

recommended tolerance is 0.40 ppm for residues of flumioxazin in/on canola.

Flumioxazin

Canola

USA

0.096 lb ai/A, 5-day PHI

Total number of data (n) 11

Percentage of censored data 0%

Number of non-censored data 11

Lowest residue 0.030

Highest residue 0.255

Median residue 0.060

Mean 0.080

Standard deviation (SD) 0.068

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue 0.250

- Mean + 4 SD 0.346

- CF x 3 Mean 0.235

Unrounded MRL 0.346

Rounded MRL 0.4
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

37 of 40

Dried Pea

The dataset used to establish a tolerance for flumioxazin on dried pea consisted of field trial data 

representing application rates of 0.093-0.100 lb ai/A lb ai/A flumioxazin with a 4- to 6-day PHI. 

The field trial application rates and PHI are within 25% of the maximum label application rate 

and minimum label PHI. The average residue values used to calculate the tolerance are provided 

in Table I-1. Residues of flumioxazin were quantifiable (LOQ = 0.02 ppm) in/on samples from 6 

of 15 trials. Data reflecting applications made with both the NIS and MSO adjuvants were 

combined for the tolerance calculation. Using the OECD tolerance calculation procedures, the 

recommended tolerance is 0.07 ppm for residues of flumioxazin in/on dried pea.

Flumioxazin

Dried Pea

USA

0.096 lb ai/A, 5-day PHI

Total number of data (n) 15

Percentage of censored data 60%

Number of non-censored data 6

Lowest residue 0.020

Highest residue 0.056

Median residue 0.020

Mean 0.024

Standard deviation (SD) 0.009

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 0.600

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue 0.056

- Mean + 4 SD 0.061

- CF x 3 Mean 0.043

Unrounded MRL 0.061

Rounded MRL 0.07

High uncertainty of MRL estimate.

[High level of censoring]
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

38 of 40

Sunflower

The dataset used to establish a tolerance for flumioxazin on sunflower consisted of field trial data 

representing application rates of 0.094-0.099 lb ai/A lb ai/A flumioxazin with a 4- to 5-day PHI. 

The field trial application rates and PHI are within 25% of the maximum label application rate 

and minimum label PHI. The average residue values used to calculate the tolerance are provided 

in Table I-1. Residues of flumioxazin were quantifiable (LOQ = 0.02 ppm) in/on samples from 

all trials. Data reflecting applications made with both the NIS and MSO adjuvants were 

combined for the tolerance calculation. Using the OECD tolerance calculation procedures, the 

recommended tolerance is 0.50 ppm for residues of flumioxazin in/on sunflower.

Flumioxazin

Sunflower

USA

0.096 lb ai/A, 5-day PHI

Total number of data (n) 11

Percentage of censored data 0%

Number of non-censored data 11

Lowest residue 0.030

Highest residue 0.290

Median residue 0.100

Mean 0.112

Standard deviation (SD) 0.081

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue 0.290

- Mean + 4 SD 0.436

- CF x 3 Mean 0.335

Unrounded MRL 0.436

Rounded MRL 0.5
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

39 of 40

Wheat 

The dataset used to establish a tolerance for flumioxazin on wheat grain and straw consisted of 

field trial data representing application rates of 0.062-0.066 lb ai/A lb ai/A flumioxazin with a 9-

to 11-day PHI. The field trial application rates and PHI are within 25% of the maximum label 

application rate and minimum label PHI. The average residue values used to calculate the 

tolerance are provided in Table I-1. Residues of flumioxazin were quantifiable (LOQ = 0.02 

ppm) in/on samples from all trials. Data reflecting applications made with both the NIS and 

MSO adjuvants were combined for the tolerance calculation. Using the OECD tolerance 

calculation procedures, the recommended tolerances are 0.40 and 6.0 ppm for residues of 

flumioxazin in/on wheat grain and straw, respectively. No detectable residues of flumioxazin 

(<0.01 ppm) were found in wheat forage and hay samples. 

Flumioxazin

Wheat Grain

USA

0.064 lb ai/A

Total number of data (n) 26

Percentage of censored data 0%

Number of non-censored data 26

Lowest residue 0.040

Highest residue 0.310

Median residue 0.090

Mean 0.099

Standard deviation (SD) 0.060

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue 0.310

- Mean + 4 SD 0.341

- CF x 3 Mean 0.298

Unrounded MRL 0.341

Rounded MRL 0.4
Flumioxazin Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue Data DP#: 391781

40 of 40

Flumioxazin

Wheat straw

USA

0.064 lb ai/A, 10-day PHI

Total number of data (n) 26

Percentage of censored data 0%

Number of non-censored data 26

Lowest residue 0.230

Highest residue 3.710

Median residue 1.725

Mean 1.865

Standard deviation (SD) 0.882

Correction factor for censoring (CF) 1.000

Proposed MRL estimate

- Highest residue 3.710

- Mean + 4 SD 5.391

- CF x 3 Mean 5.594

Unrounded MRL 5.594

Rounded MRL 6