### Page 2 of 63



# Preliminary Problem Formulation for the Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk , Endangered Species

, and Drinking Water Assessment s in Support

of the R eg istration Review of Isoxaflutole

(5

- cyclopropyl

- 4

- isoxazolyl)[2

- (methylsulfonyl)

- 4

- (trifluoromethyl)phenyl]methanone (CAS 141112

- 29

- 0 )

Prepared by: Kristina Garber, Senior Biologist Wm. J. Shaughnessy, Ph

. D

. , Environmental Scientist U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Environmental Risk Branch I I 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Mail Code 7507P Washington, DC 20460 Reviewed by: Jean Holmes, DVM, MPH, Risk Assessment Process Leader Greg Orrick, Environmental Scientist

Brian Anderson , Branch Chief

### Page 3 of 63



### Table of Contents 1. Purpose

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 4 2. Nature of Regulatory Action

................................ ................................ .......................... 4

3. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments

................................ .............................. 4

4. Stressor Source and Distribution

................................ ................................ .................... 6

4.1. Mechanism of Action

................................ ................................ .............................. 6 4.2. Overview of Pesticide Usage

................................ ................................ .................. 6 4.3. Environmental Fate and Transport

................................ ................................ .......... 8 5. Receptors

................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 11 5.1. Effects to Aquatic Organisms

................................ ................................ ............... 11

5. 2 . Effects to Terrestrial Organisms

................................ ................................ ........... 11 5.3. Ecological Incidents

................................ ................................ .............................. 15

6. Ecosystems Potentially at Risk

................................ ................................ ................. 15 7. Assessment Endpoints

................................ ................................ ................................ . 16

8. Conce ptual Model

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 16 8.1. Risk Hypothesis

................................ ................................ ................................ .... 16 8.2. Conceptual Diagram

................................ ................................ ............................. 17 9. Analysis Plan

................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 18

9.1. Stressors of Concern

................................ ................................ ............................. 19 9.2. Measures of Exposure

................................ ................................ ........................... 21

9.3. Measures of Effect

................................ ................................ ................................ 22 9.4. Integration of Exposure and Effects

................................ ................................ ..... 23 9.5. Endangered Species Assessments

................................ ................................ ......... 24 9.6. Drinking Water Assessment

................................ ................................ ................. 24

10. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

................................ ................................ .... 25 11. Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps

................................ ................................ ..... 25

11.1. Fate

................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 25

11.2. Effects

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 26

12. References

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 32

### Page 4 of 63



# 1. P urpose

The purpose of problem formulation is to provide the foundation for risk assessment . It sets the

assessment objectives, evaluates the nature of the problem, and provides a plan for analyzing the data and characterizing the risk. This problem formulation provide s a plan for analyzing data

relevant to isoxaflutole and for conducting environmental fate and ecological risk, endangered species

, and drinking water assessments as part of the registration review of its registered uses

. Additionally, this problem formulation identif ies data gaps

, uncertainties

, and potential assumptions used to address those uncertainties

, relative to characterizing the ecological risk

associated with the registered uses of isoxaflutole

.



# 2. Nature of Regulatory Action

The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 mandated the E nvironmental P rotection A gency (EPA) to implement a new program for assessing the risks of pesticides

, i.e ., reg istration review ( http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/registration_review/ )

. All pesticides distributed or sold in the United States gene rally must be registered by EPA. The decision to register a pesticide is based

on the consideration of scientific data and other factors showing that it will not cause unreasonable risks to human health, workers, or the environment when used as dire cted on product labeling. The registration review program is intended to ensure that, as the ability to assess risk evolves and as policies and practices change, all registered pesticides continue to meet the statutory standard of no unreasonable adverse effects to human health and the

environment . Changes in science, public policy, and pesticide use practices will occur over time. Through the new registration review program, the Agency periodically ree valuates pesticides to

ensure that as change occurs, products in the marketplace can be used safely.

As par t of the implementation of the new r egistration r eview program pursuant to Section 3(g) of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act ( FIFRA )

, the Agency is beginning i t s evaluation to det ermine whe ther isoxaflutole continues to meet the FIFR A standard for registration. This problem formulation for the environmental fate and ecological risk assessment chapter in suppo rt of the registration review is intended for the initial docket

, opening the public phase of the review process

.



# 3. Conclusions from Previous Risk Assessments

An ecological risk assessment was completed by EFED on May 2 , 1997 (D P barcodes 225503 + ) for the proposed registration of isoxaflutole as a pre

- plant or pre

- emergence herbicide for the control of grassy and broadleaf weeds in field corn. At the time, the proposed label specified a single ground spray application rate of 0.1875 lb a.i./A (0.208 kg a.i./ha). A brief summary of

the risk f rom the proposed use of isoxaflutole from the 1997 assessment is provided below. There is phytotoxicity risk to non

- target aquatic and terrestrial plants from runoff of parent isoxaflutole and its transformation products.

### Page 5 of 63



### There is phytotoxicity risk to n on

- target terrestrial plants from ground spray drift of parent isoxaflutole.

Minimal adverse affects to non

- target aquatic plants are expected from ground spray drift. Endangered plant species may be directly affected from the use of isoxaflutole.

Chroni c risk to birds, mammals, shrimp and estuarine fish cannot be determined because data on the transformation products have not been submitted. [Note that d ata submitted subsequent to the 1997 assessment has indicated that only the Agency‟s level of concer n ( LOC ) for chronic risk to estuarine invertebrates is exceeded at rates of application at corn use sites. Chronic risk LOC s for birds, mammals, and fish

are not exceeded. ] EFED expects that the transformation products will persist and accumulate in surfa ce water and shallow ground water surrounding treated areas. [Note that u pdated data since the 1997 assessment support this finding. Laboratory studies suggest that RPA 202248 (DNK) and RPA 203328 are stable to hydrolysis and photolysis in aqueous syste ms and hence pose a possible environmental concern. ] There is a potential risk to other crops from the presence of potentially phytotoxic transformation products in irrigation water. However, the major areas of corn production that use irrigation (Western U. S. corn belt) have deep aquifers with slow recharge rates that are not likely to have sufficient concentrations of the transformation products to adversely affect other crops. In other parts of the United States where corn is also grown

and where shallo w ground water is used for irrigation, sporadic irrigation is used for other crops. Crops such as soybeans, which are rotated with corn and are sensitive to irrigation waters containing isoxaflutole residues, could be adversely affected. Estimated

maximum concentrations of isoxaflutole residues in ground water exceed the phytotoxic triggers to non

- target plants ( e.g. , other crops) up to 4,500 times, presuming that the transformation products are as toxic as parent isoxaflutole. [Note that u pdated data since the 1997 assessment indicate that isoxaflutole‟s terminal metabolite, RPA 203328, does not demonstrate phytotoxicity for terrestrial plants . A developmental toxicity study in rats conducted with RPA 203328 has been submitted to the Agenc y (MRID 45655906). The results of the study show that in the presence of

mater n al toxicity at the highest doses tested (750 mg/kg/day), there was no teratogenicity or developmental toxicity. These results and those of other toxicology studies and plant

s tudies on the compound suggest that RPA 203328 is not toxicologically significant. ]

On April 16, 2010, EFED completed an ecological risk assessment for a n Experimental Use Permit (EUP) request from Bayer CropScience for Isoxaflutole use on soybeans (DP Ba rcode 370959). In this assessment, EFED assumed that the treated field would be rotated between corn and soybean on a seasonal basis to reflect the crop rotation patterns typically practiced by farmers. Accordingly, modeling was conducted by EFED with he rbicide application rates that reflected use of the parent compound on corn (0. 1 4 lb a.i./A ) and soybean (0. 094 lb a.i./A ). The parent isoxaflutole and the diketonitrile (DKN) degradate RPA 202248 were assessed for potential risk to non

- target organisms. The conclusions of the EUP ecological risk assessment

were: The Agency‟s LOC for terrestrial non

- target plants was exceeded for runoff and spray drift
exposure routes.

### Page 6 of 63



### Runoff from soybean and/or corn fields may contain residues of isoxaflutole parent a nd its phytotoxic degradate, RPA 202248 (DNK). These waters if used for irrigation on non

- target plants (crops) may exceed the Agency‟s LOC for non

- target plants by up to 310X. The Agency‟s LOC for aquatic non

- target plants was not exceeded for listed an d non

- listed species near soybean fields. The Agency‟s acute or chronic LOC s for birds or mammals (listed and non

- listed) w ere not
exceeded

. The Agency‟s acute or chronic LOC s for fish or invertebrates (freshwater or estuarine) (listed

and non

- listed) w ere not exceeded

.

EFED has recently conducted a new use assessment expanding the geographic extent of corn and considering the use of isoxaflutole on soybeans 1 

### . The conclusions of this assessment were the same as the assessment completed on April 16, 2010.



# 4. Stressor Source and Distribution

4.1. Mechanism of Action

Isoxaflutole is a pigment inhibitor ( i.e.

, 4

- hydroxyphenyl

- pyruvate

- dioxygenase (4

- HPPD) inhibitor) whose mode of action prevents the biosy nthesis of carotenoid pigments that protect chlorophyl l from decomposition by sunlight. Without carotenoid pigments, chlorophyll pigments are photo

- oxidized and chloroplasts break down. Without the energy collecting action of the chlorophyll, the whole plant eventually dies.

I soxaflutole degrades quickly in to two compounds, α

- (

- (cyclopropylcarbonyl)

- 2

- (methylsulfonyl)

- β

- oxo

- 4

- (trifluromethyl)benzenepropanenitrile) ( RPA 202248), and 2

- methylsulfonyl

- 4

- trifluoromethylbenzoic acid ( RPA 203328)

. Available data indicate that the

RPA 202248 metabolite has herbici dal activity ; 2 

### however, RPA 203328 does not appear to impact terrestrial plants.



## 4.2. Overview of Pesticide Usage

Isoxaflutole is only registered for use on corn, with a maximum single application rate of 0. 094 lb

a.i./ A. The herbicide is applied by ground spraying equipment. The herbicide is manufactured

1 Memorandum from Kristina Garber, Senior Biologist and Wm. J. Shaughnessy, Ph.D., Environmental Scientist, Environmental Risk Branch II, Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P ) to Kathryn Montague, Risk Manager Herbicide Branch, Registration Division (7505P), subj: Ecological Risk Assessment for the Isoxaflutole Proposed Section 3 Registration for Use on Soybeans and on Corn in Five Additional Southern States (South Carol ina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana), dtd March 15, 2011.

2 Rupprecht JK

, Liu A

, Kelly I

, Allen R

. Degradation of RPA 202248 [U

- 14C

- phenyl]alpha(

- (cyclopropylcarbony l)

- 2

- (methylsulfonyl)

- beta

- oxo

- 4

- (trifluromethyl)benzenepropanenitrile), the primary degradation product of isoxaflutole, in an outdoor aquatic microcosm system. J Environ Sci Health B. 2004;39(5

- 6):725

- 36.

### Page 7 of 63



### as an emulsifiable concentrate (EC) and as a dry flowable (DF) formulation. Appendix A contains a summary of herbicide application data listing uses with the associa ted maximum single application rate, method of application, and application timing

. Note that this appendix lists the maximum application rate as 0.14 lb a.i./A, which is no longer the maximum application

rate for isoxaflutole.

The estimated annual nation al us ag e of isoxaflutole in 1999

- 2002 was 373,000 lbs. A national map showing the estimated poundage of isoxaflutole in 2002 is presented in Figure 1. The map was downloaded from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), National Water Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) website: http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/pnsp/usage/maps/show_map.php?year=02&map=m4004. The map represents typical agricultural use patterns over a five year period from 1999 through 2002. It does not reflect any new registrations, label changes, changing use patterns, or mitigation measures that may have occurred between that time and the time of this problem formulation. The map is an illustration of the current extent of isoxaflutole use. The risk assessment will be

based on the labeled uses at the time the assessment is conducted.

Figure 1 . 2002 Estimated Annual Agricultural Use Map for Isoxaflutole (Source: USGS)



### As indicated in Table 1 , an estimated 300,000 lbs of isoxaflutole were applied annually to corn

. The estimated agricultural uses in total pounds of active ingredient in ranking order were b ased

### Page 8 of 63



### on the Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA) performed by the Biological and Economic Analysis Division ( BEAD )

. SLUA data sources include:

USDA

- NASS (United States Department of Agriculture's National Ag ricultural Statistics Service)

Private Pesticide Market Research NPUD 2002 (National Pesticide Use Database) of the CropLife America Foundation California DPR (Department of Pesticide Regulation)

Table 1

. Ann ual Screening Level Estimates of Agricultural Uses of Isoxaflutole (As of August 2, 2010)

Crop Lbs. A.I. * Percent Crop T reated

Avg. Max.

Corn 300,000 5 10

Sorghum + <500 <1 <2.5

* All numbers rounded.

<500 Less than 500 pounds of active ingredient

< 2.5 Less than 2.5 percent of crop treated

<1 Less than 1 percent of crop treated

+ Crops not known to be listed on active end use product registrations or as Section 18 emergency exemptions when this report was run



## 4.3

. Environmental Fate and Transpo rt

Isoxaflutole, the active ingredient in Balance, Corvus, Prequel, and Radius corn herbicides (See Appendix A) and a co

- formulant with the herbicide flufenacet in the product EPIC, is readily degraded in soil and water to RPA 202248 α(

- (cyclopropylcarbonyl)

- 2

- (methylsulfonyl)

- β

- oxo

4

- (triflur omethyl)benzenepropanenitrile). Air photolysis and laboratory volatility data have been

submitted.

Parent isoxaflutole rapidly degrades by abiotic hydrolysis ( 20.1 hours at pH7 ) 

### and microbially mediated metabolism. Although isoxaflutole is mobile (Koc of 112 L/kg OC 

### ) and has limited potential to volatilize (vapor pressure of 1.0 x 10 - 6 

### Pa (7.5x10 - 9 

### Torr) at 25 o 

### C and Henry ‟s Law

Constant of 1. 85 x 10 - 10 

### atm

- m 3 

### /mole )

, 

### rapid degradation in both soil and water reduces the potential for parent isoxaflutole to be transported to either surface or ground water. Half

- lives of isoxaflutole in laboratory soil degradation studies range from 12 hours to 13.9 days. Aerobic aquatic metabolism data for the parent and degradates have not been submitted.

Through physical

, chemical and microbial action, isoxaflutole degrades quickly into two compounds, the primary metabolite ( RPA 202248 ), and the terminal metabolite, 2

- methylsulfonyl

- 4

- trifluoromethylbenzoic acid ( RPA 203328)

. The structures of isoxaflutole and its degradates are provided in Figure 2.

### Page 9 of 63 

### Isoxaflutole 202248 203328

Figure 2. Structu res of isoxaflutole, RPA 202248 and RPA 203328.

Laboratory studies suggest that RPA 202248 is stable to hydrolysis and photolysis in aqueous systems and hence poses a possible environmental concern. As part of a program of work towards understanding the actual field situation, an outdoor microcosm study of RPA 202248

was carried out. Over the course of the 29

- day study, residues remained predominantly in the aqueous phase. A slow but steady degradat ion of RPA 202248 was observed leading to the

formation of RPA 203328. The aqueous degradation half

- life of RPA 202248 was calculated to be 103 days. These findings indicate that aqueous degradation should be considered as a potential route of dissipatio n when assessing the fate of RPA 202248.

Isoxaflutole‟s terminal metabolite, RPA 203328 is expected to persist and accumulate.

In aerobic soil metabolism studies

, RPA 202248 and RPA 203328 were detected a t maximum

concentrations of 52

- 79% of the applied in 7 days, and 30

- 65% of the applied in 1

- 6 months

post

- treatment, respectively. A summary of isoxaflutole degradates is presented in Table 2.

Table 2

. Isoxaflutole Degradates Degradate IUPAC Name Formation

Route Degradate

Classification (% AR)* Reference

R202248 α

- (

- (cyclopropylcarbonyl)

-

2

- (methylsulfonyl)

- β

- oxo

- 4

- (trifluromethyl)benzeneprop anenitrile) Hydrolysis

Aerobic

metabolism

in soil

Soil photolysis Major (up to

79% AR in

aerobic soil studies) MRID

43573254

MRID

43588006

MRID

45658804

MRID

43588005

MRID

45658805

R203328 (2

- methylsulfonyl

- 4

-

trifluoromethylbenzoic acid) Aerobic soil

metabolism Major (up to

65% AR) MRID

43588006

MRID

45658804

### Page 10 of 63

* % RA

- Percent of applied radioactivity



### Registrant

- submitted data defining the physical, chemical, environmental fate and transport

characteristics associated with isoxaflutole are summarized in Table 3

.

Table 3 . General physico

- chemical and environmental fate properties of isoxaflutole

.

Par ameter Value Reference

Molecular Weight 359.2 g∙ mol

- 1 Calculated from chemical

structure

Water Solubility 6.2 mg∙L
- 1 at 20 o C MRID 43573205

Vapor P ressure 1.0 x 10
- 6 Pa at 25 o C

(7.5 x10

- 9 Torr) MRID 43573208

Henry's Law Constant 1.85 x 10
- 10 atm

- m 3 /mole T OXNET: http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi

bin/sis/search/a?dbs+hsdb:@ter

m+@DOCNO+7275

Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient

(K

ow ) P=219 (log P=2.34) @ 20 o C MRID 43573206

Organic Carbon Adsorption Coefficient

(Koc) 112 L/kg OC MRID 44065801

Hydrolysis t 1/2 pH 5

pH 7 pH 9 11.1 hours

20.1 hours

3.2 hours MRID 43573254

Aqueous Photolysis t 1⁄2 6 .7 days MRID 43588004

Soil Photolysis t 1⁄2 23 hours MRID 43588005

MRID 45658805

Aerobic Soil M etabolism t 1⁄2 12 hours to 13.9 days MRID 43588006

MRID 45658804

Anaerobic Aquatic M etabolism t 1⁄2 <2 h ours MRID 43588007

Column Leaching slightly mobile in columns (30

- cm length) of sandy loam, silty clay loam, silt loam, and

loamy sand soils MRID 43588008

Terrestrial Field Dissipation 1.4 to 3.0 days MRID 43904838

MRID 44092101

MRID 44291504

MRID 44291505

MRID 45658806

MRID 45658807

### Page 1 1 of 63



# 5. Receptors

Consistent with the process described in the Overview Document (USEPA 2004), the risk

assessment for isoxaflutole will rely on a surrogate species approach. Toxicological data generated from surrogate test species, which are intended to be representative of broad taxonomic groups, are used to extrapolate to potential effects on a variety of species (rece ptors) included under these taxonomic groupings.

A cute and chronic toxicity data from studies submitted by pesticide registrants along with the available open literature are used to evaluate the potential direct and indirect effects of

isoxaflutole on aquatic and terrestrial receptors. These include toxicity data on the technical grade active ingredient, degradates, and when available, formulated products ( e.g . “Six

- Pack” studies). The open literature studies are identified using EPA‟s ECOTOX database ( USEPA

2007 d ), which employs a literature search engine for locating chemical toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife. The evaluation of both sources of data can also provide insight into the direct and indirect effects of isoxaflu tole on biotic communities from loss of species that are sensitive to the chemical and from changes in structure and functional

characteristics of the affected communities.



## 5.1. Effects to Aquatic Organisms

In acute toxicity tests with freshwater and saltwater fish exposed to isoxaflutole at the limit of solubility, no mortality was observed. This was also the case with freshwater invertebrates; however, for saltwater invertebrates, specifically the mysid shr imp, isoxaflutole is classified as very highly toxic. N on

- vascular aquatic plants were as sensitive to isoxaflutole as the mysid shrimp while vascular aquatic plants were more sensitive

.

In a chronic toxicity test with the mysid shrimp, mortality was obs erved at 1.9 μg a.i./L, resulting in a chronic NOAEC of 1.0 μg a.i./L. No other chronic toxicity data are available for aquatic animals exposed to isoxaflutole; however, these data could be estimated using the acute

- to

chronic ratio ( ACR ) for mysid shrimp exposed to isoxaflutole (17.8).

Table 4 provides a summary of the taxonomic groups and the surrogate species tested to characterize the potential acute and chronic effects of isoxaflutole on aquatic organisms.

TABLE 4 . Summary of the Most Sensitive En dpoints from Submitted Aquatic Toxicity Studies for

Isoxaflutole.

Taxa represented Species

(common name) Toxicity Value

( m g a.i./L) Citation

(MRID ) Comments

freshwater fish and aquatic

phase amphibians Oncorhynchus

mykiss (rainbow trout) 96

- hr LC 50 > 1.7 43573236 No observed mortalities at highest

treatment level . 1.7 ppm represents maximum water solubility obtainable

under test conditions.

### Page 12 of 63

Taxa represented Species

(common name) Toxicity Value

( m g a.i./L) Citation

(MRID ) Comments

NOAEC = 0.096 See

comments No toxicity data are available for this

taxa. NOAEC d erived using ACR for mysid sh rimp ( 17.8 ) and acute toxicity

value for rainbow trout

.

freshwater

invertebrates Daphnia magna

(waterflea) 48

- hr EC 50 >1.5 43573237 No observed immobility at highest

treatment level . 1.5 ppm represents maximum water solubility obtainable

under test conditions.

NOAEC = 0.084 See

comments No toxicity data are available for this

taxa. NOAEC d erived using ACR for mysid shrimp ( 17.8 ) and acute toxicity

value for waterflea

.

Estuarine/

Marine fish Cyprinodon

variegates (Sheepshead minnow) 96

- hr LC 50 >6.4 43573238 No observed mortalities at highest

treatment level . 6.4 ppm represents maximum water solubility obtainable

under test conditions.

NOAEC = 0.36 See

comments No toxicity data are available for this

taxa. NOAEC d erived using ACR for mysid shrimp ( 17.8 ) and acute toxicity

value for sheepshead minnow

.

Estuarine/

Marine

Invertebrates Mysidopsis

bahia (mysid shrimp) 96

- hr EC 50

= 0.0178 43573240 Slope = 2.9

NOAEC = 0.001 43904821 LOAEC = 0.0019 based on effects to

survival.

Aquatic Plants Skeletonema

cosatum (marine diatom) 5

- d EC 50 = 0.11

NOAEC =

0.0022 43573247 none

Lemna gibba (duckweed) 14

- d EC 50 =

0.0049 NOAEC

= 0.0011 43573246 Slope = 1.55



### Several studies are available that allow for a comparison of the acute toxicity of isoxaflutole to degradates 202248 and 203328 ( Table 5 ). As with isoxaflutole, no mortalities were observed in rainbow trout, sheepshead minnow or waterflea (MRIDs 43904822, 43904825, 45065801, 43573241, 43904823) . For the mysid shrimp, the most sensitive animal test species exposed to isoxaflutole, LC 50 

### values for degradates 202248 and 203328 are 2 and 4 orders of magnitude (respectively) higher than isoxaflutole (MRIDs 43904 824 and 44718801)

.

Table 5

. LC 50 and EC 50 values (mg a.i./L) for isoxaflutole and its degradates. Test Species (common name) Endpoint Isoxaflutole 202248 203328 Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout) 96

- h LC 50 >1.7 >30.6 160 Cyprinodon variegates ( Sheepshead minnow) 96

- h LC 50 >6.4 >78 NA Daphnia magna (waterflea) 48

- h EC 50 >1.5 >59.6 >150 Mysidopsis bahia (mysid shrimp) 96

- h LC 50 0.0178 3.6 145 Selenastrum capricornutum (green algae) 5

- d EC 50 0.14 5.0 5.9 Lemna gibba (duckweed) 14

- d EC 50 0.0049 0.075 >9.8



### Although no chronic toxicity data are available for aquatic animals exposed to isoxaflutole‟s degradates, these data could be estimated using the ACR for mysid shrimp exposed to isoxaflutole (17.8) and the acute toxicity data for isoxaflutole‟s degradates. The results include

### Page 13 of 63



### estimated NOAECs of 0.20 and 8.1 mg a.i./L for degradates 202248 and 203328 , respectively.

Available toxicity data for aquatic plants indicate that degradate 202248 is an order of magnitude

less toxic when c ompared to isoxaflutole (MRIDs 44399908 and 44399909 ). When considering toxicity data for green algae, degradate 203328 is also an order of magnitude less toxic than isoxaflutole; however, for duckweed, degradate 203328 is at least 3 orders of magnitude less toxic (MRIDs 43904826 and 44399910 ; Table 4 ).



## 5 .2. Effects to Terrestrial Organisms

Isoxaflutole is classified practically non

- toxic to birds and mammals on an acute oral exposure

basis. In available sub

- acute toxicity studies with birds, no mortalities were observed at the highest test concentration (4255 mg a.i./kg

- diet); however, since the highest test concentrations were below 5000 mg a.i./kg

- diet, isoxaflutole is classified slightly toxic to birds. On an acute contact and oral basis, isoxaflutole is practically non

- toxic to honey bees.

In a 2

- ge neration reproduction study (MRID 43904809), isoxaflutole was administered to Charles River Crl:CD®BR VAF/Plus® rats (30/sex/group) at nominal dietary levels of 0, 0.5, 2, 20 or 500 mg/kg

- food/day. The actual levels in males were 0, 0.45, 1.76, 17.4 or 41 4 mg/kg

food/day and in females, they females were 0, 0.46, 1.79, 17.7 or 437 mg/kg

- food/day, respectively). Decreased body weight, body weight gain and food consumption were observed in parents exposed to 500 mg/kg

- food (nominal) . In the offspring, decre ased body weights were observed at the 500 mg/kg

- food (nominal) treatment level. The NOAEC for this study was 20 mg/kg

- food/day , which corresponds to a measured concentration of 17.4 mg/kg

- food/day (based on exposure value for males)

.

No chronic toxicity data are available for birds exposed to isoxaflutole.

Seedling emergence and vegetative vigor data are available from a toxicity study where 10 species of terrestrial plants were exposed to technical isoxaflutole. Overall, vegetative vigor endpoints are m ore sensitive when compared to seedling emergence. Of the dicot species, the turnip was the most sensitive, with EC 25 

### values of 0.00047 and 0.00001 lb a.i./A for effects to seedling emergence and vegetative vigor, respectively. Of the monocot species, onio n was the most sensitive for seedling emergence with an EC 25 

### of 0.01576 lb a.i./A

, while oat was the most sensitive for vegetative vigor with an EC 25 

### of 0.0021 lb a.i./A. Additional studies are available where terrestrial plants were exposed to formulated products containing isoxaflutole; however, the endpoints generated from these studies were less sensitive.

Although not summarized here, a number of studies have been submitted by the registrant where terrestrial plants were exposed to isoxaflutole throug h spray drift, runoff and irrigation. These studies will be considered at the time the ecological risk assessment is conducted for this

chemical.

Table 6 provides a summary of the taxonomic groups and the surrogate species tested to

characterize the potential acute and chronic effects of isoxaflutole on terrestrial organisms.

### Page 14 of 63



### TABLE 6 . Summary of the Most Sensitive Endpoints from Submitted Terrestrial Toxicity

Studies for technical Isoxaflutole

.

Taxa represented Species Toxicity Value Citation (MRID) Comments

Birds,

terrestrial

phase amphibians and reptiles Colinus

virginianus (bobwhite quail) LD 50 >2150 mg/kg

- bw 43573231

No observed mortalities at highest treatment level LC 50 >4255 mg/kg

- food 43573233

Anas platyrhynchos (Mallard Duck) LD 50 >2150 mg/kg

- bw 43573232

LC 50 >4255 mg/kg

- food 43573234

Terrestrial

mammals Rattus

norvegicus (laboratory rat) LD 50 >5000 mg a.i./kg

- bw 43573212 Acute inhalation LC50 >5.23 mg/L (MRID 43573214)

NOAEC = 17.4 mg a.i. /kg

food 43904809 Value based on exposure to males; LOAEC = 414 mg/kg

food based on decreased body weight in parents and offspring

Terrestrial

invertebrates Apis mellifera

(Honey bee) LD 50 > 100 μg/bee (contact) 43573248 No observed mortalities at highest treatment level . Oral

LD 50 >168.7 μg/bee.

Non

- target
terrestrial and

wetland plants

- monocots onion Seedling Emergence:

EC 25 = 0.01576 lb a.i./A

NOAEC = 0.012 lb a.i./A 43573242 This endpoint is based on a study with TGAI.

oat Vegetative Vigor:

EC 25 = 0.0021 lb a.i./A

NOAEC = 0.0048 lb a.i./A 43573242 This endpoint is based on a study with TGAI.

Non

- target
terrestrial and

wetland plants

- dicots turnip Seedling Emergence:

EC 25 = 0.00047 lb a.i./A

NOAEC = 0.00011 lb a.i./A

Vegetative Vigor:

EC 25 = 0.00001 lb a.i./A

NOAEC = <0.00001 lb a.i./A 43573242 These endpoints are based on a study with TGAI.



### Several studies are available that allow for a comparison of the acute toxicity of isoxaflutole to its major environmental degradates ( i.e., 202248 and 203328). In toxicity studies conducted with bobwhite quail (MRIDs 43940302 and 44693501) and the laboratory rat (MRIDs 4390 4810 and 43904812), degradates 202248 and 203328 were practically non

- toxic ( Table 7 ).

Table 7 . EC 25/

50 

### values (ppm) f

or isoxaflutole and its degradates.

Test Species (common name) Endpoint Isoxaflutole 202248 203328 Colinus virginianus (bobwhite quail) LC 50 (mg/kg

- food) >4255 >5230 >5265
Rattus norvegicus (laboratory rat) LD 50 (mg/kg

- bw) >5000 >5000 >5000

Brassica oleracea (cabbage) EC 25 (lb a.i./A) 0.00014* 0.00013* >0.14
Brassica rapa (turnip) EC 25 (lb a.i./A) 0.00013* 0.0001 6 * >0.14

Lactuca sativa (lettuce) EC 25 (lb a.i./A) 0.00023* 0.0001 8 * >0.14 *Endpoint is whole plant weight. Study did not report root or shoot weight.



### In a reproductive study with the northern bobwhite quail exposed to degradate 202248, no parental or reproductive effects were observed relative to controls at the highest treatment level

### Page 15 of 63



### of 500 mg/kg

- food (MRID 45011501)

.

In two screening vegetative vigor studies with 3 plant species ( Table 7 ), EC 25 

### values based on decreased plant weight were 0.00013

- 0.00023 lb a.i./A for isoxaflutole and 0.00013

- 0.00018 lb a.i./A for degradate 202248 (MRIDs 45535404 and 45535405). This indicates that for terrestrial plants, degradate 202248 is of similar toxicity to isoxaflutole.

In a seedling emergence study (MRID 44399907), and a vegetative vigor study (MRID 44399906) involving degradate 203328, no significant effects were observed in 10 species exposed to 0.14 lb a.i./A. These species included the turnip and o nion, which were orders of magnitude more sensitive to technical isoxaflutole (MRID 43573242).



## 5.3. Eco logical Incidents

A review of the Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS, version 2.1), the „Aggregate Incident Reports‟ (v. 1.0) database, and the Avian Incident Monitoring System (AIMS) for ecological incidents involving isoxaflutole was completed on 3/16/2011

. The incidents reported

in each database are summarized below. These incidents will be described in more detail in the ecological risk a ssessment of isoxaflutole.

EIIS contains reports of 460 incidents involving isoxaflutole use on corn from 199 9 to 2005. All incidents relate to plant damage. The majority (94%) of these incidents involve damage to corn from direct application. The 6% of incidents involving non

- target plants occurred on fields planted to soybean or sugar beets that were damaged due to carryover of isoxaflutole degradate

residues in the soil.

The Aggregate Incident Reports‟ database contained reports of 8105 minor plant incidents that occurred from 1999 to 2010. These incidents involved several formulated products containing isoxaflutole, including: Epic, Balance Herbicide, Balance Pro, Radius SC4, Corvus Herbicide

and Balance Flexx.

AIMS contained no incident reports fo r isoxaflutole.



# 6. Ecosystems Potentially at Risk

The ecosystems potentially at risk are often extensive in scope; therefore, it may not be possible to identify specific ecosystems during the development of a nation

- wide ecological risk

assessment. Howe ver, in general terms, terrestrial ecosystems potentially at risk could include the treated field and immediately adjacent areas that may receive drift or runoff. Areas adjacent to the treated field could include cultivated fields, fencerows and hedgerows , meadows, fallow fields or grasslands, woodlands, riparian habitats, and other uncultivated areas.

Aquatic ecosystems potentially at risk include water bodies adjacent to, or down stream from, the treated field and might include impounded bodies such as ponds, lakes and reservoirs, or flowing

### Page 16 of 63



### waterways such as streams or rivers. For uses in coastal areas, aquatic habitat also includes marine ecosystems, including estuaries.



# 7 . Assessm ent Endpoints

Assessment endpoints represent the actual environmental value that is to be protected, defined by an ecological entity (species, community, or other entity) and its attribute or charac teristics ( US EPA 1998). For isoxaflutole , the ecological entities include the following: birds, reptiles,

terrestrial

- phase amphibians, mammals, freshwater fish , freshwater aquatic

- phase amphibians and invertebrates, estuarine/marine fish and invertebrates, terrestrial plants, insects, aquatic plants

, and algae. The attribute s for each of these entities include growth, reproduction, and

survival.



# 8. Conceptual Model

For a pesticide to pose an ecological risk, it must reach ecological receptors in biologically sig nificant concentrations. An exposure pathway is the means by which a pesticide moves in the environment from a source to an ecological receptor. For an ecological pathway to be complete, it must have a source, a release mechanism, an environmental transp ort medium, a point of exposure for ecological receptors, and a feasible route of exposure.

The conceptual model for isoxaflutole provides a written description and visual representation of the predicted relati onships between isoxaflutole , potential route s of exposure, and the predicted effects for the assessment endpoint. A conceptual model consists of two major components: risk hypothes i s and a conceptual diagram ( US EPA 1998).



## 8.1. Risk Hypothesi

s

A r isk hypothes i s descri bes the predicted relationship among the stressor, exposure, and assessment endpoint response along with the rationale for their selection. For isoxaflutole , th e following ecological risk hypothesis is being employed for this national

- level ecological risk

assessment:

Isoxaflutole , when used in accordance with current label s , can result in off

- site movement of the compound and its two major degradates via runoff

, leaching to ground water and spray drift leading to exposure of nontarget plants and

animals. Direct a

pplications to foliar surfaces may ser ve a s a major source of

exposure of wildlife to isoxaflutole and its degradates

. Exposure in these environmental compartments will result in adverse effects upon the survival, growth, and reproduction of non

- target terrestrial and aquatic organisms. These

non

- target organisms include f ederally

- listed threatened and endangered species.

### Page 17 of 63



## 8.2. Conceptual Diagram

The environmental fate properties of isoxaflutole ind icate that runoff and spray drift represent potential transport mechanisms of isoxaflutole and its degradates to aquatic and terrestrial organisms. These transport mechanisms ( i.e., sources) are depicte d in the conceptual models below ( Figures 3 and 4 ) and result in the movement of isoxaflutole and its degradates into aquatic (water and sediment) and terrestrial (soil and foliage) habitats. The movement away from the site of application in turn represen ts exposure pathways for a broad range of biological receptors of concern (non

- target animals) and the potential attribute changes, i.e. , effects such as reduced survival, growth and reproduction, in the receptors due to isoxaflutole exposure.

Figure 3 . C onceptual model for i so xaflutole effects on aquatic organisms. Dotted lines indicate expo sure pathways that have a low likelihood of contributing to ecological risk. 

## Stressor

Source

Receptors

Attribute Change Isoxaflutole applied to use site ( i.e., corn) Isoxaflutole degrades to 202248 and 203328

Spray drift

Fish/aquatic

- phase amphibians Eggs

Larvae

Juveniles / Adults

Individual organisms

Reduced survival Reduced growth Reduced reproduction Food chain Reduction in algae Reduction in prey Habitat integrity Reduction in primary productivity

Reduced cover Community change Surface water/

Sediment Runoff

Aquatic Animals

Invertebrates

Vertebrates 

## Exposure

Media

Uptake/gills

or integument

Ingestion Ingestion Soil Groundwater

Uptake/gills or integument

Aquatic Plants

Non

- vascular

Vascular Uptake/cell, roots, leaves Riparian plant

terrestrial

exposure pathways see Figure 2 Atmosphere

### Page 18 of 63

Figure 4

. C onceptual model for isoxaflutole effects on terrestr ial organisms

.



# 9. Analysis Plan

In order to address the risk hypothesis, the potential for adverse effects on the environment is

estimated. T he use, environmental fate, an d ec ological effects of isoxaflutole are characterized and integrated to assess the risks. This is accomplished using a risk quotient (ratio of exposure concentration to effects concentration) appr oach. Although risk is often defined as the likelihood and magnitude of adverse ecological effects, the risk quotient

- based approach does not provide a quantitative estimate of likelihood and/or magnitude of an adverse effect. However, as outlined

in the Overview Document (USEPA 2004) , the likelihood of effects to individual organisms from particular uses of isoxaflutole is estimated using the probit dose

- response slope and either the level of concern (discussed below) or actual calculated risk quotient v alue.

This analysis plan will be revis i ted and may be revised depending upon the information submitted by the public in response to the opening of the r egistr atio n r eview docket for

isoxaflutole

. 

## Stressor

Source

Receptors

Attribute Change Isoxaflutole applied to use site ( i.e., corn) Isoxaflutole degrades to 202248 and 203328

Direct application Spray drift

Birds / Terrestrial

phase amphibians / reptiles /

mammals

Juvenile

Adult Terrestrial

insects

Individual organisms

Reduced survival Reduced growth Reduced reproduction Food chain Reduction in prey Habitat integrity

Reduction in primary productivity

Reduced cover Community change Terrestrial/riparian plants grasses/forbs, fruit, seeds (trees, shrubs) Atmosphere

Mammals 

## Exposure

Media Soil

Ingestion Ingestion

Ingestion Ingestion Dermal uptake/Ingestion

Root uptake

Birds / Amphibians Ingestion Runoff

### Page 19 of 63



## 9.1. Stressor

s of C oncern

The stressors of concern for di fferent taxa potentially exposed to isoxaflutole and its degradates

are summarized in the text below and in Table 8

.

Table 8 . Stressors of concern for isoxaflutole ecological risk assessment *

. Exposure

duration Taxa Isoxaflutole Degradate

202248 Degradate

203328

Acute freshwater fish no no no

estuarine marine fish no no no

freshwater fish invertebrate no no no

estuarine marine invertebrate yes no no

Mammals no no no

Birds, terrestrial

- phase amphibians and reptiles no no no

Chronic freshwater fish no yes yes

estuarine marine fish no yes yes

freshwater invertebrate no yes yes

estuarine marine invertebrate no yes yes

Mammals no yes yes

Birds, terrestrial

- phase amphibians and reptiles no yes yes

Not applicable Non

- vascular aquatic plants yes yes yes

Vascular aquatic plants yes yes no
Terrestrial plants yes yes no *Isoxaflutole and its degradates are not considered stressors of concern for some taxa under some durations due to factors including low application rates of isoxaflutole (maximum of 0.14 lb a.i./A) and resulting low estimated exposure concentrations, and toxicity data that indicate that isoxaflutole and its degradates will not cause effects at environmentally relevant exposure concentrations. Previous assessments have confirmed these assumptions.


### Animals:

As described previously, isoxaflutole has two major environmental degradates: 202248 and

203328. Available toxicity data for freshwater fish, freshwater inver tebrates, saltwater fish

, mammals , birds and terrestrial invertebrates indicate that these chemicals do not cause mortality on an acute exposure basis at environmentally relevant exposure levels

. Therefore, given the low application rates and resulting relatively low expected exposure values for isoxaflutole and degradates 202248 and 203328 , th ey are not expected to be of concern to freshwater fish, freshwater inver tebrates, saltwater fish , mammals , birds and terrestrial invertebrates on an acute exposure basis.

Acute toxicity data for estuarine/marine invertebrates indicate that isoxaflutole is of concern for this taxa; however, available toxicity data for estuarine/marine invertebrates indicate that degradates 202248 and 203328 are orders of magnitude less toxic to this taxa. Therefore, on an acute exposure basis, only parent isoxaflutole i s a stressor of concern for estuarine/marine

invertebrates.

### Page 20 of 63



### Available toxicity data for estuarine/marine invertebrates exposed to isoxaflutole indicate that this chemical has the potential to cause effects to this tax on on a chronic exposure basis. No

ad ditional chronic toxicity data are available for aquatic animals exposed to isoxaflutole. Also, there are no chronic toxicity data available for aquatic animals exposed to degradates 202248 and

203328. Because isoxaflutole is not persistent in the envir onment ( i.e., environmental half

lives are days), chronic exposures are not a primary concern

. Therefore, EFED presumes

that only degradates 202248 and 203328 may be of concern to aquatic animals on a chronic exposure basis.

Chronic toxicity data availab le for mammals indicate that isoxaflutole may cause effects to

mammals. No toxicity data are available for mammals exposed to degradates 202248 and 203328 on a chronic exposure basis. Also, no toxicity data are available for birds exposed to isoxaflutole and degradate 203328 on a chronic exposure basis. Available toxicity dat a for degradate 202248 indicate that no effects to bobwhite quail were observed at the highest treatment level; however because data have not been submitted for the mallard duck, insufficient data are available to eliminate degradate 202248 as a stressor o f concern. Because isoxaflutole is not persistent in the environment ( i.e., environmental half

- lives are days), isoxaflutole is

not considered to be a stressor of concern for chronic exposures. Therefore, EFED presumes that degradates 202248 and 203328 m ay be of concern to terrestrial animals on a chronic exposure basis.

Plants:

Available toxicity data for plants indicate that isoxaflutole may cause effects to non

- vascular and vascular aquatic plants. A lthough degradate 202248 is an order of magnitude less toxic when compared to isoxaflutole , it has the potential to cause effects to non

- vascular and vascular aquatic plants. Toxicity data for degradate 203328 indicate that it is also an order of magnitude

less toxic to non

- vascular plants when compared to isoxaflutole ; however, for vascular aquatic plants, this degradate is orders of magnitude less toxic. Therefore, for non

- vascular aquatic plants, the stressors of concern are isoxaflutole and degradates 202248 and 203328. For vascular aquatic plants, t he stressors of concern are isoxaflutole and degradate 202248.

Toxicity data indicate that isoxaflutole has the potential to impact the seedling emergence and vegetative vigor of terrestrial plants. Available data also indicate that the toxicity of degra date 202248 to plants is similar to that of the parent. Seedling emergence and vegetative vigor data for degradate 203328 indicate that this degradate does not impact terrestrial plants at 0.14 lb a.i./A, which is equivalent to the highest application rat e of isoxaflutole (assuming 100% conversion to degradate 203328 )

. Therefore, f or terrestrial plants, the stressors of concern are isoxaflutole and degradate 202248.

Mixtures:

Evaluation of pesticide mixtures is beyond the scope of this assessment because of the myriad factors that cannot be quantified based on the available data. Those factors include identification of other possible co

- contaminants and their concentrations, differences in the pattern and duration of exposure among contaminants, a nd the differential effects of other physical/chemical

### Page 21 of 63



### characteristics of the receiving waters ( e.g. organic matter present in sediment and suspended water). Evaluation of factors that could influence additivity/synergism is beyond the scope of

this asses sment and the capabilities of the available data to allow for an evaluation. However, it is acknowledged that not considering mixtures could over

- or under

- estimate risks depending on the type of interaction and factors discussed above. The assessment wi ll

, however, analyze the toxicity of formulated products (including formulations involving more than one active ingredient) and will determine whether formulated products are more toxic than the technical grade active ingredient data used for assessing bot h direct and indirect risks.



## 9.2. Measures of Exposure

In ord er t o estimate risks of isoxaflutole exposures in aquatic and terrestrial environments, all exposure modeling and resulting risk conclusions w ill be based on maximum application rates

and methods cited in Section 4.2 and will be estimated for each use of isoxaflutole. Measures of exposure are based on aquatic and terrestrial models that predict estimated environmental

c once ntrations (EECs) of isoxaflutole

. The models used to predict aquatic EECs are the Pesticide Root Zone Model coupled with the Exposure Analysis Model ing System (PRZM/EXAMS). The model used to predict terrestrial EECs on food items is the Terrestrial Residue Exposure ( T

- REX ) . The model us ed to derive EECs relevant to terrestrial and wetland plants is TerrPlant. These models are parameterized using relevant reviewed environmental fate

data from registrant submissions and the literature ; model input values will be consistent with the

most re cent version of the input parameter guidance

. 3



### PRZM ( currently version 3.12.2; 5/15/05 ) and EXAMS ( currently version 2.98.04.06; 4/25/05 ) are simulation models coupled with the linkage program shell: PE ( P RZM E XAMS Model Shell;

v 5 .0; 11/15/06), which inco rporates the standard scenarios developed by EFED. The models

generate daily exposures and calculated 1

- in

- 10 year EECs of isoxaflutole residues of concern that may occur in surface water bodies adjacent to application sites

. PRZM simulates pesticide fate and transport as a result of leaching, direct spray drift, runoff and erosion from an agricultural field, and EXAMS estimates environmental fate and transport of pesticides in a surface water body for a 30

- year period. The co mbined model is designed to estimate pesticide concentrations found in water (standard pond) at the edge of the treated field. As such, it provides high

- end values of the pesticide concentrations that might be found in ecologically

sensitive environments following pesticide application. The location of the field is specific to the crop being simulated using site

- specific information on the soils, weather, cropping, and management factors associated with the scenario. The crop/location scenario is intended to represent a high

- end exposure site on which the crop is normally grown. Based on historical rainfall patterns, the receiving water body receives multiple runoff events during the years simulated. Weather and agricultural practices are simulated for 3 0 years so that the 10

- year exceedance probability at the site can be estimated. The simulation is generated using 30 years of meteorological data, encompassing the years from 1961 to 1990. Additional information on

these models can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/index.htm

.

3 Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticid es, Version 2.1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects

Division. 2009.

### Page 22 of 63



### The standard scenario s used for ecological pesticide assessments assume application to a 10

- hectare agricultural field that drains into an adjacen t 1

- hectare water body that is 2 meters deep (20,000 m 3 

### volume) with no outlet. PRZM/EXAMS is used to estimate screening

- level exposure of aquatic organisms to isoxaflutole . The measure of exposure for aquatic species is the 1

- in

- 10 year return peak or r olling mean concentration. The 1

- in

- 10 year peak is used for estimating acute exposures of direct effects to aquatic organisms

. The 1

- in

- 10

- year 60

- day mean is used for assessing chronic exposure to fish and aquatic

- phase amphibians

. The 1

- in

- 10

- year 21

- d ay mean is used for assessing chronic exposure to aquatic invertebrate s.

Ex posure estimates for terrestrial animals assumed to be in the target area or in an area exposed to spray drift are derived using the T

- REX model (version 1. 4 .1, 10 / 0 9 / 200 8 ). This model incorporates the Kenega nomograph, as modified by Fletcher et al. (1994), which is based on a large set of field residue data. The upper limit values from the nomograph represent the upper bound of residue values from actual field m easurements (Hoerg er and Kenega 1972). The

Fletcher et al. (1994) modifications to the Kenega nomograph are based on measured field residues from 249 published research papers, including information on 118 species of plants, 121 pesticides, and 17 chemical classes.

EECs for terrestrial plants inhabiting dry and wetland areas are derived using TerrPlant (version 1.2.2, 12/26/2006). This model uses estimates of pesticides in runoff and in spray drift to calculate EECs. EECs are based upon solubility, application rate and minimum incorporation depth.

Available monitoring data will be used to qualitatively characterize exposure and compare with modeling results. The Agency is aware of monitoring conducted by Federal and state agencies and this route of exposure will be considered in the assessment to the extent that data on

isoxaflutole are available

.

Two spray drift models, A g Disp and AgDRIFT are used to assess exposures of terr estrial plants

to isoxaflutole deposited i n terrestrial habitats by spray drift. A g Disp (ve rsion 8.13; dated 12/14/2004) (Teske and Curbishley 2003) is used to simulate aerial and ground applications. AgDrift (version 2.01; dated 5/24/2001) is used to simulate spray blast applications to orchard

crops

.



## 9.3. Measures of Effect

Ecological effect d ata are used as measures of dir ect and indirect effects to biological receptors

. Data were obtained from registrant

- submitted studies or from literature studies identified by

ECOTOX. The ECOTOXicology database (ECOTOX) was searched in order to provide m ore ecological effects data to bridge existing data gaps. ECOTOX is a source for locating single chemical toxicity data and potential chemical mixture toxicity data for aquatic life, terrestrial plants, and wildlife. ECOTOX was created and is maintained by the USEPA, Office of Research and Development, and the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory's

Mid

- Continent Ecology Division ( USEPA 2007 ).

### Page 23 of 63



### Information o n the potential effects of isoxaflutole on non

- target animals is also colle cted from the Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS; USEPA 2007 b ). The EIIS is a database containing adverse effect (typically mortality) reports on non

- target organisms where such

effects have been associated with the use of pesticides.

Where available, sublethal effects observed in both registrant

- submitted and open literature studies will be evaluated qualitatively. Such effects have included behavioral changes ( e.g. , lethargy, changes in coloration and olfaction effects ). Quantitative asse ssments of risks, though, are limited to those endpoints that can be directly linked to the Agency‟s assessment endpoints of impaired survival, growth and reproduction.

The assessment of risk for direct effects to non

- target organisms makes the assumption that toxicity of isoxaflutole to birds is similar to terrestrial

- phase amphibians and reptiles . The same assumption is made for fish and aquatic

- phase amphibians

.

The acute measures of effect use d for animals in this screening

- level assessment are the LD 50 

### , LC 50 

### and EC 50 

### . LD stands for "Lethal Dose", and LD 50 

### is the amount of a material, given all at once, that is estimated to cause the death of 50% of the test organisms. LC stands for “Lethal

Concentration” and LC 50 

### is the concentration of a chemical that is estimated to kill 50% of the test organisms. EC stands for “Effective Concentration” and the EC 50 

### is the concentration of a chemical that is estimated to produce a specific effect in 50% of the test organisms. Endpoints for chronic measures of exposure for listed and non

- listed animals are the NOAEL/NOAEC and

NOEC. NOAEL stands for “No Observed

- Adverse

- Effect

- Level” and refers to the highest tested dose of a substance that has been reported to have no harmful ( adverse) effects on test organisms. The NOAEC ( i.e. , “No

- Observed

- Adverse

- Effect

- Concentration”) is the highest test concentration at which none of the observed effects were statistically different from the control.

The NOEC is the No

- Observed

- Effects

- Co ncentration. For non

- listed plants, only acute exposures are assessed ( i.e. , EC 25 

### for terrestrial plants and EC 50 

### for aquatic plants) ; for listed plants, either the NOAEC or EC 05 

### is used.



## 9.4. Integration of Exposure and Effects

Risk characterization is the integration of exposure and ecological effects characterization to determine the potential ecologic al r isk from the use of isoxaflutole on crops listed in Section 4.2

and the likelihood of direct and indirect effects to non

- target organisms in aquat ic and terrestrial habitats. The exposure and toxicity effects data are integrated in order to evaluate the risks of adverse ecological effects on non

- target species. For the assessment of isoxaflutole risks, the risk quotient (RQ) method is used to comp are exposure and measured toxicity values. EECs are divided by acute and chronic toxicity values. The resulting RQs are then compared to the Agency‟s LOCs (USEPA 2004). These criteria ar e us ed to indicate when isoxaflutole‟s uses, as directed on the label, have the potential to cause adverse direct or indirect effects to non

- target organisms

. As noted previously, where data are lac king on the toxicity of isoxaflutole , risk will be presumed.

The quantitative assessment of risk will primarily depend on the deterministic point

- estimate based approach described in the risk assessment. An effort will be made to further qualitatively

### Page 24 of 63



### describe risk using probabilistic tools that the Agency has developed. These tools have been reviewed by FIFRA Scientific Advisory Panels and have been deemed as appropriate means of refining assessments where deterministic approaches have identified risks.



## 9.5. Endangered Species Assessments

Consistent with the Agency‟s responsibility under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), the Agency will evaluate risks to Federally

- listed threatened and/or endangered (listed) species from registered uses of isoxaflutole . This assessment will be conducted in accordance with the Overview Document (USEPA 2004), provisions of the ESA, and the Services‟ Endangered Species Consultation Handbook (USFWS/NMFS 1998).

The assessment of effects associated with the registration of isoxaflutole is based on an action area. The action area is considered to be the area directly or indi rectly affected by the federal action, as indicated by the exceedance of Agency LOCs used to evaluate direct or indirect effects. The Agency‟s approach to defining the action area under the provisions of the Overview Document (USEPA 2004) considers the re sults of the risk assessment process to establish boundaries for that action area with the understanding that exposures below the Agency‟s

defined LOCs constitute a no

- effect threshold. For the purposes of this assessment, attention will

be focused on the footprint of the action ( i.e ., the area where isoxaflutole application occurs), plus all areas where offsite transport may result in potential exposure that exceeds the Agency‟s LOCs. Specific measures of ecological effect that define the action area for listed species include any direct and indirect effects and/or potential modification of its critical habitat, including reduction in survival, growth, and reproduction as well as the full suite of sub

- lethal

effects available in the effects literature. Therefore, the action area extends to a point where environmental exposures are below any measured lethal or sub

- lethal effect threshold for any biological entity at the whole organism, organ, tissue, and /or cellular level of organization. In

situations w here it is not possible to determine the threshold for an observed effect, the action

area is not spatially limited and is assumed to be the entire United States.



## 9.6. Drinking Water Assessment

In order to bring the drinking water assessment up to date w ith current data, simulation models and guidance, a new drinking water exposure assessment will be conducted to support future

human hea lth dietary risk assessments of isoxaflutole

. The drinking water assessment will incorpo rate model estimates of isoxafl utole in surface water and ground wat er. Concentrations

of isoxaflutole in surface waters will be estimated using PRZM/EXAMS (see descr iption above)

.

A n Estimated Drinking Water Conc entration (EDWC) of isoxaflutole in groundwater will be estimated using the Tier I aquatic model SCIGROW (Screening Concentration in Ground Water, version 2.3; 8/8/2003). SCIGROW is a regression model used as a screening tool to estimate pesticide concentrations found in ground water used as drinking water. The output of

SCI GROW represents the concentrations that might be expected in shallow unconfined aquifers under sandy soils, which is representative of the ground water most vulnerable to pesticide contamination likely to serve as a drinking water source.

### Page 25 of 63



### At this time, the Health Effects Division considers degradate 202248 to be of concern for

human s . Therefore, estimates of exposure to this degradate through drinking water will also be estimated for both ground water and surface water.

The drinking water assessment wil l also include available surface a nd ground water monitoring

data with consideration of changes in use patterns that may have occurred . States are encouraged to submit monitoring data for review.



## 10

. Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

As required und er FFDCA section 408(p), EPA has developed the Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP) to determine whether certain substances (including pesticide active and other ingredients) may have an effect in humans or wildlife similar to an effect produced by a “naturally occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine effects as the Administrator may designate.” The EDSP employs a two

- tiered approach to making the statutorily required

determinations. Tier 1 consists of a battery of 11 screening assays to identi fy the potential of a chemical substance to interact with the estrogen, androgen, and or thyroid (E, A, or T) hormonal

systems. Chemicals that go through Tier 1 screening and are found to have the potential to interact with E, A, or T hormonal systems wil l proceed to the next stage of the EDSP where EPA will determine which, if any, of the Tier 2 tests are necessary based on the available data. Tier 2 testing is designed to identify any adverse endocrine related effects caused by the substance, and

establ ish a dose

- response relationship between the dose and the E, A, or T effect.

Between October 2009 and February 2010, EPA issued test orders/data call

- ins for the first group of 67 chemicals, which contains 58 pesticide active ingredients and 9 inert ingr edients. This list of chemicals was selected based on the potential for human exposure through pathways such as food and water, residential activity, and certain post

- application agricultural scenarios.

This list should not be construed as a list of know n or likely endocrine disruptors.

Isoxaflutole is not among the group of 58 pesticide active ingredients receiving EDSP test

orders. For information on the status of the orders issued under the EDSP for each chemical, please visit our website at http://www.epa.gov/endo/ and click on the "Status of EDSP Orders/DCIs" in the Highlights Box. Additional information on the EDSP, including the policies and procedures, the list of 67 chemicals, the test guidelines and the Tier 1 screening battery, can

al so be found at this website.



## 11. Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps

11.1. Fate

The environmental fate data base for isoxaflutole parent is almost complete. However, an aerobi c aquatic metabolism study and an aerobic soil metabolism study (with four soils) are needed.

Table 9 lists the studies submitted under each environmental fate guideline and identifies existing data gaps.

### Page 26 of 63

Table 9 . Available environm ental fate data for parent isoxaflutole and remaining data gaps.

158

Guideline (OPPTS) Description MRID Classification Data Gap? Comments

835.12 4 0 (163

- 1) Leaching 43588008 Acceptable No

835.12 3 0 (163

- 1) Adsorption/Desorption 43588009

43940301

44065801

44291503

46801704

48108101

48108102

48108103 Acceptable

Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable No

835.1410 (163

- 2) Laboratory Volatility 43573208 Acceptable No

835.2120 (161

- 1) Hydrolysis 43573254 Acceptable No

835.2240 (161

- 2) Photodegradation in

water 43588004 Acceptable No

835.2370 (161

- 4) Photodegradation in air 43588005

45658805 Acceptable

Acceptable No

835.2410 (161

- 3) Photodegradation on

soil 43588005 Acceptable No

835.4100 (162

- 1) Aerobic soil metabolism 43588006

45658804 Supplemental

Supplemental Yes Study results were not based on analysis of four soils.

835.4200 (162

- 2) Anaerobic soil

metabolism No Data N/A No Additional data are not expected to change risk

conclusions.

835.4300 (162

- 4) Aerobic aquatic

metabolism No Data N/A Yes

835.4400 (162

- 3) Anaerobic Aquatic

Metabolism 43588007 Acceptable No

835.6100 (164

- 1) Terrestrial Field

Dissipation 43904838

44092101

44291504

44291505

45658806

45658807 Acceptable

Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable No

835.6200 (164

- 2) Aquatic Field

Dissipation No Data N/A No Herbicide is not applied directly to water bodies.



### There have been no registrant submitted environmental fate studies for the compound‟s primary degradate. These data are necessary because chronic exposures are not likely to be important for parent chemical, but are assumed to be potentially important for the primary degradate because it is of toxicological concern

. The following environmental fate studies are required for the RPA 202248 degradate:

### Page 27 of 63



### Guideline 835.1230: Adsorption/Desorption Guideline 835.1240: Leaching Studies

Guideline 835.4100: Aerobic Soil Metabolism

Guideline 835.4200: Anaerobic Soil Metabolism Guideline 835.4300: Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism

Guideline 835.4400: Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Guideline 850.7100: Environmental Chemistry Methods for Water



## 11.2. Effects

Although many submissions have been made to provide data on the effects of isoxaflutole to aquatic and terrestrial organisms, data gaps still exist ( Tables 10

- 12 ); in particular for chronic toxicity studies involving degradates 202248 and 203328. These data are important because isoxaflutole is not persistent in the environment, but its major degradates form at high levels

relative to the parent chemical and may pose a chronic exposure concern.

Table 10

. Available ecological effects data for terrestrial animals e xposed to isoxaflutole and remaining data

gaps.

158

Guideline (OPPTS) Description MRID Classification Data Gap? Comments

850.2100 (71

- 1) Avian oral

toxicity 43573231 acceptable Yes

– passerine species * *At this time, EFED is

not requesting data to fulfill this gap.

* * This study was

conducted with degradate 202248.

* * *This study was

conducted with degradate 203328.

+ This study was

conducted with a formulated product containing isoxaflutole. 43573232 acceptable

850.2200 (71

- 2) Avian dietary

toxicity 43573233 acceptable

No

43573234 acceptable

43940302* * acceptable

44693501** * acceptable

850.2300 (71

- 4) Avian

reproduction 45011501* * acceptable Yes

– degradate

203328

850.3020 (141

- 1) Honeybee acute

contact toxicity 43573248 acceptable

No

471140 14 + supplemental

47114026 + supplemental



### Avian acute oral toxicity with a passerine species

According to the 40 CFR 158, acute oral toxicity data are required for a passerine species. Because no acute oral toxicity data have been submitted for a passerine species exposed to isoxaflutole, this is a data gap. No acute oral toxicity data involving i soxaflutole or its degradates have been identified in the scientific literature (using ECOTOX).

Available acute oral toxicity data for birds (MRIDs 435732

- 31 and

- 32) indicate that isoxaflutole

### Page 28 of 63



### is classified practically non

- toxic to the mallard duck and th e bobwhite quail on an acute oral exposure basis. In addition, in two sub

- acute toxicity studies with the bobwhite quail and the mallard duck, no mortalities were observed at the highest test levels ( i.e., 4255 mg a.i./kg

- food).

In sub

- acute dietary toxici ty studies with bobwhite quail exposed to degradates 202248 and 203328, no mortalities were observed (MRIDs 43940302 and 44693501) , resulting in a classification of isoxaflutole‟s degradates as practically non

- toxic to birds. In addition, no

sublethal effe cts were observed in these studies.

Given the low application rate of isoxaflutole ( i.e., 0.094 lb a.i./A), it is expected that the exposure of birds to isoxaflutole will be low. The maximum dose

- based EEC calculated by T

REX is 26 mg/kg

- bw . This value is 2 orders of magnitude below the dose where no mortalities were observed in bobwhite quail and mallard ducks ( i.e., 2150 mg/kg

- bw; MRIDs 435732

- 31

and

- 32). In order for isoxaflutole to pose an acute risk to birds, passerines would have to b e at least an order of magnitude more sensitive to isoxaflutole compared to mallards and bobwhite quail.

No ecological incidents involving birds exposed to isoxaflutole or its degradates have been

identified.

Therefore, EFED is not requesting oral toxic ity data for passerines exposed to isoxaflutole or its degradates

.

Avian reproduction studies involving degradates 202248 and 203328

The Part 158 data requirements [40 CFR Part 158] specify that 2 avian reproduction studies be

submitted a waterfowl and a n upland game species in cases where the pesticide has a terrestrial

use. In the original ERA for isoxaflutole, EFED requested chronic toxicity data for degradates 202248 and 203328 for both the northern bobwhite quail and the mallard duck. The rationale behind this request was that these degradates are persistent

. Since isoxaflutole is not persistent in the environment and it is only applied once per season, avian chronic toxicity data for isoxaflutole are not necessary

. At this time, only one acceptab le study with the northern bobwhite quail exposed to degradate 202248 (MRID 45011501), has been submitted. In order to fulfill the avian reproduction guideline requirement for isoxaflutole (guideline 850.2300), the following studies on its degradates must be submitted: an avian reproduction study conducted with mallard duck exposed to degradate 202248 ; an avian reproduction study conducted with mallard duck exposed to degradate 203328; an avian reproduction study conducted with northern bobwhite quail ex posed to degradate 203328.

### Page 29 of 63

Table 11

. Available ecological effects data for aquatic animals exposed to isoxaflutole remaining data gaps.

Guideline Description MRID Classification Data Gap? Comments

850.1075 (72

- 1) Freshwater fish

–

Acute toxicity 43573235 acceptable

No *This study was conducted

with degradate 202248.

** This study was conducted

with degradate 203328.

** * This study was conducted with a formulated product containing isoxaflutole.

+Studies should be conducted with degradates 202248 and

203328. 43573236 acceptable

43904822* acceptable

43904825* * acceptable

47114012** * invalid

47114030** * invalid

850.1075 (72

- 3) Saltwater fish

–

Acute toxicity 43573238 acceptable No

45065801 * supplemental

850.1010 (72

- 2) Freshwater

invertebrates

– Acute toxicity 43573237 acceptable

No

43573241 ** acceptable

43904823 * acceptable

47114011 *** supplemental

47114029 *** supplemental

850.1025

850.1035 (72

- 3) Saltwater

invertebrates

– Acute toxicity 43573239 acceptable

No

43573240 acceptable

43904824 * acceptable

44718801 ** acceptable

850.1300 (72

- 4) Freshwater

invertebrate

– life cycle test none NA Yes +

850.1350 (72

- 4) Saltwater

invertebrates

– life cycle test 43904821 acceptable Yes+

850.1400 (72

- 4) Freshwater fish

– early life stage test none NA Yes+

850.1400 (72

- 4) Saltwater fish

– early life stage test none NA Yes+



### Chronic toxicity data for aquatic animals exposed to degradates 202248 and 203328

According to 40 CFR Part 158, chronic toxicity data with freshwater fish and invertebrates (guidelines 850.1300 and 850.1400) are required for all pesticides with terrestrial uses. Chronic toxicity data for saltwater fish and invertebrates are required wh en “studies of other organisms indicate the reproductive physiology of fish and/or invertebrates may be affected.” Since chronic toxicity studies involving saltwater invertebrates indicate that isoxaflutole affects reproduction endpoints of animals (MRID 43904821), chronic toxicity data are also required for

estuarine/marine fish. As indicated previously, isoxaflutole is not persistent in the environment; however, degradates 202248 and 203328 are persistent. Therefore, chronic toxicity data are

necessary for degradates 202248 and 203328. At this time, no chronic toxicity data are available for aquatic animals exposed to these degradates. In order to fulfill the chronic toxicity guideline

### Page 30 of 63



### requirements for aquatic animals, the following studies on its deg radates must be submitted: freshwater invertebrate life cycle test (guideline 850.1300) with degradate 202248; freshwater invertebrate life cycle test (guideline 850.1300) with degradate 203328; freshwater fish early life stage test (guideline 850.1400) wi th degradate 202248; freshwater fish early life stage test (guideline 850.1400) with degradate 203328; saltwater invertebrate life cycle test (guideline 850.1350) with degradate 202248; saltwater invertebrate life cycle test (guideline 850.1350) with degra date 203328; saltwater fish early life stage test (guideline 850.1400) with degradate 202248; saltwater fish early life stage test (guideline 850.1400) with degradate 203328.

### Page 31 of 63

Table 12

. Available ecological effects data for plants exposed to isoxaflutole and remaining data gaps.

Guideline Description MRID Classification Data Gap? Comments

850.4100 (122

- 1) Terrestrial Plant

toxicity: Tier 1 seedling emergence 44399907 ** acceptable No *This study was conducted

with degradate 202248.

** This study was conducted

with degradate 203328.

** * This study was conducted with a formulated product containing isoxaflutole.

+Studies should be conducted with degradate 202248.

++Studies should be conducted with degradates

202248 and 203328. 850.4 100 (123

- 1) Terrestrial Plant

toxicity: Tier 2 seedling emergence 43573242 acceptable Yes +

44839702*** acceptable

44896902*** supplemental

47114013*** supplemental

47114032*** supplemental

850.41 5 0 (122

- 1) Terrestrial Plant

toxicity: Tier 1 vegetative vigor 44399906** acceptable No

850.4150 (123

- 1) Terrestrial Plant

toxicity: Tier 2 vegetative vigor 43573242 acceptable Yes +

44399905 acceptable

44896904 acceptable

44896905 acceptable

44906501 acceptable

45535401* supplemental

45535402 supplemental

45535403 invalid

45535404 supplemental

45535405* supplemental

47114002*** supplemental

47114003*** supplemental

47114033*** acceptable

850. 5 400 (123

- 2) Aquatic Plant

Growth: algae 43573243 acceptable Yes

++ 43573244 acceptable

43573245 acceptable

43573247 acceptable

43904826 ** acceptable

44399908 * acceptable

47114028 *** supplemental

47114010 *** supplemental

850.4400 (123

- 2) Aquatic Plant

Growth: vascular plants 43573246 acceptable No

44399909 * acceptable

44399910 ** acceptable

47114009 *** supplemental

47114027 *** supplemental

### Page 32 of 63



### Seedling emergence and vegetative vigor toxicity data for degradate 202248

Past ecological risk assessments of isoxaflutole have identified risks from isoxaflutole to non

target plants inhabiting terrestrial and semi

- aquatic habitats. Since degradates 202248 and 203328 are persistent in the environment, potential effects of these degradates on plants should

also be considered. EFED‟s original ecological risk assessment of isoxaflutole (completed in 1997) indicated that seedling emerge nce and vegetative vigor toxicity data are required for degradates 202248 and 203328. Toxicity data have been submitted for degradate 203328; however, no seedling emergence data have been submitted for degradate 202248. Supplemental vegetative vigor data for cabbage, lettuce and turnip exposed to degradate 202248 (MRID 45535405) indicate that the toxicity of degradate 202248 to plants is similar to that of the parent. In order to fulfill the guideline requirement s for seedling emergence (guideline 850. 41 00) and vegetative vigor (guideline 850. 4150), tier II studies with degradate 202248 must be submitted. These studies should be submitted for the 10 plant species required by the two guidelines.

Toxicity data for aquatic non

- vascular plants exposed to de gradates 202248 and 203328

According to the 40 CFR Part 158, toxicity data are required for aquatic non

- vascular plants (guidelines 850. 5 400) are required for all pesticides with terrestrial uses. Data are required for 4 species of non

- vascular plants, t ypically Selenastrum capricornutum (green algae), Navicula pelliculosa (freshwater diatom), Anabaena flos

- aquae (blue

- green algae), and Skeletonema

costatum (marine diatom). These data have been submitted for isoxaflutole (MRIDs 43573243, 43573244, 4357324 5 and 43573247, respectively). Available toxicity data for green algae indicate that degradates 202248 and 203328 are toxic to aquatic non

- vascular plants; however, these degradates are an order of magnitude less toxic when compared to isoxaflutole (MRIDs 43573243, 44399909 and 44399910 ). Since degradates 202248 and 203328 are persistent in the environment and cause toxicity to aquatic non

- vascular plants, the following toxicity data are required in order to fulfill the 850. 5 400 guideline requirement: Toxicity study with N. pelliculosa (freshwater diatom) exposed to degradate 202248 ; Toxicity study with N. pelliculosa (freshwater diatom) exposed to degradate 203328; Toxicity study with A. flos

- aquae (blue

- green algae) exposed to degradate 202248 ;
Tox icity study with A. flos

- aquae (blue

- green algae) exposed to degradate 203328; Toxicity study with S. costatum (marine diatom) exposed to degradate 202248 ; Toxicity study with S. costatum (marine diatom) exposed to degradate 203328.



# 12 . References

Fletcher, J.S., J.E. Nellessen, and T.G. Pfleeger. 1994. Literature review and evaluation of the

EPA food

- chain (Kenaga) nomogram, an instrument for estimating pesticide residues on plants.

Environ. Tox. Chem. 13 :1383

- 1391.

Hoerger, F. and E. E. Kenaga. 1972. Pesticide Residues on Plants: Correlation of Representative Data as a Basis for Estimation of their Magnitude in the Environment. In F. Coulston and F. Korte, eds., Environmental Quality and Safety: Chemistry, Toxic ology, and Technology, Georg Thieme Publ., Stuttgart, West Germany, pp. 9

- 28.

### Page 33 of 63



### USEPA. 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C. EPA/630/R

- 95/002F. April 1998. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=30759

USEPA. 2004. Overview of the Ecological Risk Assessment Process in the Office of Pesticide Programs. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs, Washington DC. January 23, 2004.



### USEPA. 2007. ECOTOXicology Database. Office of Research and Development National

Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory‟s (NHEERL‟s) Mid

- Continent Ecology Division (MED). http://cfpub.epa.gov/ecotox/

.

USEPA. 2007 b . Ecological Incident Information System. http://www.epa.gov/espp/consultation/ecorisk

- overview.pdf

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1998. Endangered Species Consultation Handbook: Procedures for Conducting Consultation an d Conference Activities Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. Final Draft. March

1998.

DP Barcodes 225503, 223678, 231444, 232445. Transmittal of EFED‟s registration chapter for

isoxaflutole and EFED‟s recommendations for isoxaflutole for its u se on corn. Memorandum from James Breithaupt, Michael Davy, David Wells and James Hetrick (EFED) to Joanne Miller (RD). May 2,1997.

DP Barcode 370959. Ecological Risk Assessment Addressing the “Crop Destruct” Experimental Use Permit (EUP) for Isoxaflutole and its End

- product Balance ® 

### PRO Herbicide for use on Selected Soybean Varieties . Memorandum from M. Davy and W. Shaughnessy (EFED) to Kathryn Montague and James Stone (RD). April 16, 2010.

Environmental Fate and Ecological Effects Studies Submitted for Isoxaflutole:

62

- 3 Analytical Method

MRID Citation Reference

### Page 34 of 63

43573202 Cousin, J. (1994) Technical RPA 201772: Analysis and Certification of Product Ingredients: Lab

Project Number: 93

- 128: R& D/CRLD/AN/9416425. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

Poulenc Secteur Agro. 162 p.

43573210 Helfant , L.; Wheeler, G.; King, S. (1994) EXP 31130A: Product Chemistry: Series 62

- Analysis

and Certification of Ingredients: Lab Project Number: PC

- 94

- 008: 44534. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Ag Co. 62 p.

43904802 Cousin, J. (1995) Technical Iso xaflutole: Analysis and Certification of Product Ingredients: Lab

Project Number: 95

- 37: R&D/CRLD/AN/9516707. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

Poulenc Sectuer Agro. 118 p.

43904803 Helfant, L. (1995) EXP 31130A Product Chemistry: Series 62

-- Analysis a nd Certification of

Ingredients: Lab Project Number: PC

- 95

- 003: 44975. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

Poulenc Ag Co. 61 p.

44234701 Siemann, L. (1997) EXP 31430A Product Chemistry: Lab Project Number: 4589

- F(01): MRI

F \ R4589

- 01: 0926

- 102(01). Unpubl ished study prepared by Midwest Research Institute. 137 p.

44236201 Siemann, L. (1996) EXP 31498A Product Chemistry: (Final Report): Lab Project Number:

4589

- F(02): MRI

- F \ R4589

- 02. Unpublished study prepared by Midwest Research Institute. 147 p. Relates to letter L0000178.

44237201 Siemann, L. (1997) EXP 31499A Product Chemistry: Lab Project Number: 4589

- F(03): MRI

F \ R4589

- 03: RHONE

- POULENC/4589

- F(03). Unpublished study prepared by Midwest Research Institute. 147 p.

44525501 Fontaine, L. (1998) Product Chemistry of FOE 5043 + Isoxaflutole 58 DF: Lab Project Number:

108241: 108230: 108223. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Corp. 135 p. {OPPTS 830.1550, 830.1600, 830.1620, 830.1650, 830.1670, 830.1700, 830.1750, 830.6302, 830. 6303, 830.6320, 830.7000, 830.7300, 830.1900}

44688802 Cousin, J. (1998) Technical Isoxaflutole Analysis of Batches from Kemira and Certification:

Lab Project Number: 97

- 175: R& D

- CRLD

- AN

- 9716864. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone Poulenc Agro. 105 p. {OPPTS 830.1700, 830.1750, 830.1800}

44688804 Emeric, G. (1998) Technical Isoxaflutole Analysis of Batches from Eastman: Lab Project

Number: 98

- 01: R&D

- CRLD

- AN

- 9816537. Unpublish ed study prepared by Rhone Poulenc Agro. 91 p. {OPPTS 830.1700, 830.1750, 830.1800}

44787601 Cookinham, J. (1999) Balance 4 SC Product Chemistry: Lab Project Number: 5376

- F: 0928

-

054. Unpublished study prepared by Midwest Research Institute. 120 p. {OPPT S 830.1550, 830.1600, 830.1650, 830.1670, 830.1700, 830.1750, 830.1800, 830.6302, 830.6303, 830.6304, 830.7300, 830.7000, 830.6314, 830.6315}

45352901 Fontaine, L. (2000) Product Chemistry of FOE 5043 + Isoxaflutole 65 DF: Lab Project Number:

TM C

- 12.33. 02: 109527: 109516. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Corp. 101 p. {OPPTS 830.1550, 830.1600, 830.1650, 830.1750, 830.1800, 830.6303, 830.7000, 830.7300}

45352902 Fontaine, L. (2000) Product Chemistry of FOE 5043 + Isoxaflutole 71.5 DF: Lab Project

Num ber: TM C

- 12.33.02: 109528: 109517. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Corp. 92 p. {OPPTS 830.1550, 830.1600, 830.1650, 830.1670, 830.1750, 830.1800, 830.6303, 830.7000, 830.7300}

46295701 Mitchell, H. (2004) Product Chemistry of Flufenacet & Isoxafluto le SC Herbicide. Project

Number: 5125162/1, 3414977/1, BR/2321. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Corp. 238 p.

47114001 Mitchell, H. (2007) Product Chemistry of SC 465 Herbicide. Project Number: BR/2554,

ANR/01807, RM/G01437. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer CropScience LP. 282 p.

### Page 35 of 63

47114022 Mitchell, H. (2007) Product Chemistry of SC 480 Herbicide. Project Number: BR/2556,

FOR0873/PC/01, FTA06/019. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Corp. 249 p.

161

- 1 Hydrolysis

MRID Citation Reference

43573254 Corgier, M.; Robin, J.; Plewa, A. (1994) (Carbon 14)

- RPA 201772 Hydrolysis: Lab Project

Number: 93

- 180: R&D/CRLD/AN/9415453. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Secteur Agro. 98 p.

161

- 2 Photodegradation

- water

MRID Citation Reference

43588004 Corgier, M.; Plewa, A. (1995) (Carbon 14)

- RPA 201772 (Isoxaflutole): Photodegradation in

Water: Lab Project Number: 94

- 11: R&D/CRLD/AN/9416822. Unpublished study prepared by

Rhone

- Poulenc Secteur Agro. 135 p.

161

- 3 Photodegradation

- soil

MRID Citation Reference

43588005 Ferreira, E. (1994) RPA 201772: Soil Photolysis: Lab Project Number: P93/122. Unpublished

study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agriculture Ltd. 77 p.

45658805 Ferreira, E.; Bullus , C.; Jones, M.; et al. (1996) RPA 201772: Rate of Degradation Under

Aerobic Conditions in Three Soil Types: Lab Project Number: P 94/093: B003827: 201036. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agriculture Limited. 138 p.

162

- 1 Aerobic soil metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

43588006 Ferreira, E.; Jones, M.; Newby, S. (1994) RPA 201772: Aerobic Soil Metabolism: Lab Project

Number: P 92

- 332. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agriculture Ltd. 79 p.

45658804 Burr, C. (1996) Herbicides: Isoxaflutole Route of Degradation (Aerobic Metabolism) in One

Soil: Final Report: Lab Project Number: P 94/094: B003826: 2001142. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agriculture Limited. 87 p.

162

- 3 Anaerobic aq uatic metabolism

MRID Citation Reference

### Page 36 of 63

43588007 Burr, C.; Jones, M.; Newby, S. (1995) RPA 201772: Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism: Lab

Project Number: P 93

- 045: 200730. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agriculture Ltd. 145 p.

163

- 1 Leach/adsorp/desorption

MRID Citation Reference

43588008 Newby, S.; Godward , P.; Jones, M. (1995) RPA 201772: Aged Leaching Study in Four Soils

and a Sediment: Lab Project Number: P93/124: 200778. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

Poulenc Agriculture Ltd. 88 p.

43588009 Burr, C.; Newby, S. (1993) RPA 201772: Adsorption/Desorp tion To and From Four Soils and an

Aquatic Sediment: Lab Project Number: P93/085. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

Poulenc Agriculture Ltd. 74 p.

43940301 Burr, C. (1995) RPA 202248: Adsorption/Desorption to and from Four Soils: Lab Project

Number: 20 0995: P 95/062. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agriculture Ltd. 69

p.

44065801 Burr, C. (1996) (Carbon 14)

- RPA 202248: Adsorption/Desorption to and from Four Soils and an

Aquatic Sediment: Lab Project Number: 11486: 201213. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

Poulenc Agriculture Ltd. 124 p.

44291503 Burr, C. (1996) (Carbon 14)

- RPA 203328: Absorption/Desorption to and from Four Soils and a

Sediment: Lab Project Number: 11487: 201220. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agriculture Ltd. 113 p.

46801704

48108101

48108102

48108103 Mills, E.; Simmonds , M. (2004) (Carbon 14)

- RPA 203328: Adsorption/Desorption in Five Soils.

Project Number: C040534, CX/03/061, MEISM001. Unpublished study prepared by Battelle Agrifood, Ltd. 105 p.

Mills, E., Simmonds, M.: (14C)

- RPA 203328: Adsorption/desorption in five s oils; Battele Agrifood Ltd., Ongar, Essex, United Kingdom; Report No., CX/03/061; Doc. No., M

- 229091

- 01

- 02; May 24, 2010 ;105 p

.

Lowden, P., Cooper, I.. Simmons, M., (14C)

- RPA 201772; Adsorption/desorption to and from four soils and an aquatic sediment

– A ddendum report; Battelle Agrifood Ltd., Ongar, Essex, United Kingdom; Report No., M

- 2521 60402

- 2; April 08,2004; 35 p.

Lowden, P., Cooper, I.. Simmons, M., (14C)

- RPA 202248; Adsorption/desorption to and from four soils and an aquatic sediment

– Addendum re port; Battelle Agrifood Ltd., Ongar, Essex, United Kingdom; Report No., C038598; Doc. No. M

- 251580

- 01

- 1; January 23, 2004; 24 p.

164

- 1 Terrestrial field dissipation

MRID Citation Reference

### Page 37 of 63

43904838 Chancey , E. (1995) A Terrestrial Soil Dissipation Study with Isoxaflutole (RPA 201772): Lab

Project Number: US93701R: 44947: US93701. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Ag Co. 2205 p.

44092101 Chancey , E. (1996) Supplemental Data in Support of the Study Titled "A Terrestrial Soil

Dissipation Study with Isoxaflutole (RPA 201772)": Final Report: Lab Project Number: 96707940: 45111. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Ag Co. 362 p.

44291504 Capp y, J. (1997) A Terrestrial Soil Dissipation Study with Isoxaflutole (RPA 201772):

Supplemental Data...(for)...MRID 43904838. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Ag Co. 13 p.

44291505 Gatzweiler, E. (1996) Summary of RPA 201772 Terrestrial Field S oil Dissipation Study on Four

European Soils: Lab Project Number: 201044. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agro. 10 p.

45658806 Hardy, I. (2001) Isoxaflutole: Kinetic Modelling Analysis of a European Terrestrial Field Soil

Dissipation Study: L ab Project Number: CX01033/: CX1033A: C015653. Unpublished study prepared by Battelle AgriFood, Ltd. 44 p.

45658807 Hardy, I. (2002) Isoxaflutole: Kinetic Modelling Analysis of Data from Laboratory Aerobic Soil

Degradation Studies: Lab Project Number: 29 056: CX/01/037: C015654. Unpublished study prepared by Battelle AgriFood, Ltd. 53 p.

71

- 1 Avian Single Dose Oral Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

43573231 Pedersen, C.; Thompson, S. (1994) RPA 201772 Technical: 14

- Day Acute

Oral LD50 Study in Bobwhite Quail: Lab Project Number: 108

- 025

- 03. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Inc. 50 p.

43573232 Pedersen, C.; Thompson, S. (1994) RPA 201772 Technical: 14

- Day Acute

Oral LD50 Study in Mallard Ducks: Lab Project Number: 108

- 026

- 04. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Inc. 50 p.

71

- 2 Avian Dietary Toxicity

MRID Citation Reference

43573233 Pedersen, C. (1994) RPA 201772 Technical: 8

- Day Acute Dietary LC50

Study in Bobwhite Quail: Lab Project Number: 108

- 023

- 01. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Inc. 146 p.

43573234 Pedersen, C. (1994) RPA 201772 Technical: 8

- Day Acute Dietary LC50

Study in Mallard Ducklings: Lab Project Number: 108

- 024

- 02. Unpublished study prepared by Bio

- Life Associates, Inc. 132 p.

43940302 Rodgers, M. (1995) RPA 202248: Subacute Dietary Toxicit y (LC50) to the

Bobwhite Quail: Lab Project Number: RNP 479: RNP 479/952517.

### Page 38 of 63 Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon Life Sciences Ltd. 51 p.

44693501 Gallagher, S.; Grimes, J.; Beavers, J. et al. (1998) RPA 203328: A Dietary

LC50 Study with the Norther n Bobwhite: Lab Project Number: 171

- 137. Unpublished study prepared by Wildlife International Ltd. 67 p.

71

- 4 Avian Reproduction

MRID Citation Reference

45011501 Brewer, L.; Taliaferro, M.; Miller, V. (1999) The Reproductive Toxicity Test

of RPA

- 202248 with the Northern Bobwhite (Colinus virginianus): Final Report: Lab Project Number: 029809. Unpublished study prepared by EBA, Inc. 321 p. Relates to L0000509.

72

- 1 850.1075 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Fish

MRID Citation Reference

43573235 Bettencourt, M. (1993) RPA 201772

-- Acute Toxicity to Bluegill Sunfish

(Lepomis macrochirus) Under Flow

- through Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 10566.0493.6283.105: 93

- 8

- 4886. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 72 p.

43573236 Bettencourt, M. (1993) RPA 201772

-- Acute Toxicity to Rainbow Trout

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) Under Flow

- through Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 10566.0493.6284.108: 93

- 7

- 4860. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 73 p.

43904822 Mc Elligott, A. (1995) RPA 202248: Acute Toxicity (96 Hours) to Rainbow

Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Under Semi

- Static Conditions: Lab Project Number: SA 95141. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agrochimie. 51 p.

4390 4825 Machado, M. (1995) RPA 203328

-- Acute Toxicity to Rainbow Trout

(Oncorhynchus mykiss) Under Flow

- Through Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 95

- 5

- 5861: 10566.0194.6328.108. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 71 p.

47114012 Grade, R.; Wydra, V. (2006) Acute Toxicity of Thiencarbazone

- Methyl +

Isoxaflutole + (Inert Ingredient) SC (90 + 225 + 150 g/L) Formulation to Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a 96

- Hour Static Test: Final Report. Project Number: 30173230, M/278096/01 /1. Unpublished study prepared by Institut fuer Biologische Analytik und Consulting IBACON. 56 p.

47114030 Nieden, D. (2007) Acute Toxicity of Cyprosulfamide & Isoxaflutole SC

240+240 to Fish (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Under Static Conditions. Project

Number: EBUBP107, E/280/3207/2, 01001. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag, Institute of Product Info. & Residue Analysis. 56 p.

72

- 2 850.1010 Acute Toxicity to Freshwater Invertebrates

### Page 39 of 63

MRID Citation Reference

43573237 Putt, A. (1993) RPA 201772

-- Acute Toxicity to Daphnids (Daphnia magna)

Under Flow

- through Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number:

10566.0493.6285.115: 93

- 7

- 4873. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 75 p.

43573241 Putt, A. (1994) RPA 203328

-- Acute Toxicity to Daphnids (Daphnia magna)

Under Flow

- through Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 94

- 7

- 5370: 10566.0194.6329.115. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 67 p.

43904823 Mc Elligott, A. (1995) RPA 202248: Acu te Toxicity (48 Hours) to Daphnids

(Daphnia magna) Under Semi

- Static Conditions: Amended: Lab Project Number: SA 95142. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Agrochimie. 51 p.

47114011 Grade, R.; Wydra, V. (2006) Acute Toxicity of Thiencarbazone

- Me thyl +

Isoxaflutole + (Inert Ingredient) SC (90 +225 + 150 g/L) Formulation to Daphnia magna in a 48

- Hour Immobilization Test: Final Report. Project Number: 30172220. Unpublished study prepared by Institut fuer Biologische Analytik und Consulting IBACON. 5 8 p.

47114029 Burns, E. (2007) Acute Toxicity of [inert ingredient] & Isoxaflutole SC 240 +

240 to the Waterflea Daphnia magna in a Static Laboratory Test System

- Limit Test. Project Number: E/320/3163/8, EBUBP106, 01001. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag, Institute of Product Info. & Residue Anal. 48 p.

72

- 3 Acute Toxicity to Estuarine/Marine Organisms

MRID Citation Reference

43573238 Bettencourt, M. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Acute Toxicity to Sheepshead Minnow

(Cyprinodon variegatus ) Under Flow

- through Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 94

- 5

- 5261: 10566.0194.6320.505. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 81 p.

43573239 Dionne, E. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Acute Toxicity to Eastern Oyster

(Crassostrea virginica ) Under Flow

- through Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 94

- 6

- 5292: 10566.0194.6321.504. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 86 p.

43573240 Bettencourt, M. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Acute Toxicity to Mysid Shrimp

(Mysidopsis bahia) Und er Flow

- through Conditions: Amended Final Report: Lab Project Number: 94

- 6

- 5312: 10566.0194.6319.515. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 82 p.

43904824 Collins, M. (1995) RPA 202248

-- Acute Toxicity to Mysids (Mysidopsis

bahia) Under Stat ic Renewal Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number:

95

- 12

- 6271: 10566.0895.6369.510. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 68 p.

44718801 Sousa, J. (1998) RPA 203328

-- Acute Toxicity to Mysids (Mysidopsis bahia)

Under Static Acute Condi tions: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 98

- 10

-

### Page 40 of 63 7528: 10566.0797.6436.510. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 62 p.

45065801 Machado, M. (2000) RPA 202248

-- Acute Toxicity to Sheepshead Minnow

(Cyprinodon variegatus) Under Static C onditions: Lab Project Number: 10566.6574. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 54 p.

72

- 4 Fish Early Life Stage/Aquatic Invertebrate Life Cycle Study

MRID Citation Reference

43904821 Sousa, J. (1995) Isoxaflutole

-- Chronic Toxicity to Mysids (Mysidopsis bahia)

Under Flow

- Through Conditions: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 95

- 8

- 6017: 10566.1294.6352.530.. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 109 p.

72

- 6 Aquatic Field Study

46081105 Liu, A.; Abbott, P.; Murray, C. (2003) Degradation of [Phenyl

- U

- (Carbon 14)]

- RPA 202248 in an Outdoor Aquatic Microcosm System. Project Number: 605Y7. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer CropScience LP. 94 p.

122

- 1 Seed Germination/ Seedline Emergence and Vegetable Vigor

MRID Citation Reference

44291501 Hoberg, J. (1997) RPA 201772

-- Determination of Effects on Seed

Germination, Seedling Emergence, and Vegetative Vigor of Ten Plant Species: Supplemental Report to MRID 43573242 : Lab Project Number:

94

- 4

- 5234: 10566.0194.6326.610. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 77 p.

44399906 Teixeira, D. (1997) RPA 203328

-- Determination of Effects on Vegetative

Vigor of Ten Plant Species: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 97

- 9

- 7082:

10566.0797.6442.610: 072997/VV/RPA

- 203328. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 139 p.

44399907 Teixeira, D. (1997) RPA 203328

-- Determination of Effects on Seedling

Emergence of Ten Plant Species: Final Report: Lab Project Numb er: 97

- 9

- 7068: 10566.0797.6440.610: 072997/FIFRA/SE/RPA

- 203328. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 137 p.

44896903 Ortego, L. (1999) Balance Terrestrial Plant Testing (Vegetative Vigor) and

Revised Risk Assessment : Lab Project Number: LSO/0899

- VV. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Ag Co. 8 p.

45535401 Teixeira, D. (2000) RPA 202248

-- Determination of Effects on Vegetative

Vigor Screening of Three Plant Species Sprayed at Low Volume: Final Report: Lab Pro

ject Number: 10566.0498.6491.610: 98

- 6

- 7376. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 68 p.

### Page 41 of 63

45535402 Teixeira, D. (2000) RPA 201772

-- Determination of Effects on Vegetative

Vigor Screening of Three Plant Species Sprayed at Low Volume: F inal Report: Lab Project Number: B002879: 98

- 6

- 7368: 10566.0498.6489.610. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 66 p.

45535403 Hoberg, J. (2001) Supplement Report to RPA 201772

-- Determination of

Effects on Seed Germination, Seedling Emergence and Vegetative Vigor of Ten Plant Species: Lab Project Number: 94

- 4

- 5234: 10566.0194.6326.610: 011056. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 137

p.

45535404 Teixeira, D. (1998) RPA 201772

-- Determination of Effects on Vege tative

Vigor of Three Plant Species: Final Report: Lab Project Number: B003489:

98

- 6

- 7370: 10566.0498.6490.610. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 65 p.

45535405 Teixeira, D. (1998) RPA 202248

-- Determination of Effects on Vegetat ive

Vigor of Three Plant Species: Final Report: Lab Project Number: B003490:

98

- 7

- 7385: 10566.0498.6492.610. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 67 p.

850.4100 Terrestrial plant toxicity, Tier 1 (seeding emergence)

MRID Citation Reference

47114013 Bach, F.; Pallett, K. (2007) Higher Tier Non Target Terrestrial Plant Study on

the Seedling Emergence and Growth of 3 Plant Species Under Semi

- Field Conditions: The Phytotoxic Effects of BYH 18636 + Isoxaflutole +(Inert Ingredient) SC 90 + 225 + 150 ( TCM+IFT+CSA SC 90 + 225 + 150 G). Project Number: HT06/055, EBGSP083. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropscience Gmbh. 137 p.

123

- 1, 850.4225 , 850.4250 Tier II

Seed germin ation/seedling emergence and vegetative vigor

MRID Citation Reference

43573242 Hoberg , J. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Determination of Effects on Seed

Germination, Seedling Emergence, and Vegetative Vigor of Ten Plant Species: Lab Project Number: 94

- 4

- 5234: 10566.0194.6326.610. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 347 p.

44291501 Hoberg, J. (1997) RPA 201772

-- Determination of Effects on Seed

Germination, Seedling Emergence, and Vegetative Vigor of Ten Plant Species: Supplemental Report to MRID 43573242 : Lab Project Number:

94

- 4

- 5234: 10566.0194.6326.610. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 77 p.

44399905 Teixeira, D. (1997) RPA 201772

-- Determination of Effects on Vegetative

Vigor of Three Plant Species: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 97

- 9

- 7076: 10566.0797.6432.610: 072397/EPA/610/SAND/RP/RPA 201772.

### Page 42 of 63 Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 125 p.

44839702 Teixeira, D. (1998) Balance

-- Determination of Effects on Seedling

Emergence of Nine Plant Species: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 98

- 11

- 7540: 10566.0898.6515.610. Unpublished study prepared by S pringborn Laboratories, Inc. 155 p.

44896901 Ortego, L. (1999) Balance Terrestrial Plant Testing

- Seedling Emergence

Summary: Lab Project Number: LSO/0899

- LE. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc Ag Co. 6 p.

44896902 Chetram, R. (1999) Tier 2 Def initive Seedling Emergence Nontarget Phytotoxicity Study Using Balance: Lab Project Number: 99816. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs. 71 p.

44896904 Teixeira, D. (1999) Balance

-- Determination of Effects on Vegetative Vigor

of Three Plant Species: La b Project Number: 15931: 10566.0698.6504.610. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs. 109 p.

44896905 Teixeira, D. (1998) RPA 201772

-- Determination of Effects on Vegetative

Vigor of Three Plant Species Conducted in Sandy Loam: Final Report: Lab

Pr oject Number: 97

- 11

- 7139: 10566. 0797.6443.610. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs. 125 p.

44906501 Chetram, R. (1999) Tier 2 Definitive Vegetative Vigor Nontarget

Phytotoxicity Study Using Balance: Lab Project Number: 99815: 45423. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Laboratories California. 167 p.

45535403 Hoberg, J. (2001) Supplement Report to RPA 201772

-- Determination of

Effects on Seed Germination, Seedling Emergence and Veg etative Vigor of Ten Plant Species: Lab Project Number: 94

- 4

- 5234: 10566.0194.6326.610: 011056. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 137

p.

45658802 Christ, M.; Abedi, J. (2002) Effect on Vegetative Vigor of Non

- Target

Terrestrial Plants (Tier II) Isoxaflutole (Balance) Wettable Granule 75% w/w: Lab Project Number: 01Y732741: B003805. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience, USA. 125 p.

47114002 Pallett, K.; Nguyen, D.; Gosch, H. (2006) BYH 18636 + AE 0001789 + IFT

SC 46 5: Effects on Eleven Species of Non

- Target Terrestrial Plants: Vegetative Vigour Test (Tier 2). Project Number: VV/05/064, EBGSP025. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropscience Gmbh. 211 p.

47114003 Pallett, K.; Gosch, H.; Nguyen, D.; et al. (2006) BY H 18636 + (Inert

Ingredient) + IFT SC 465: Effects on Eleven Species of Non

- Target Terrestrial Plants: Seedling Emergence and Seedling Growth Test (Tier 2). Project Number: SE/05/063, EBGSP026. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropscience Gmbh. 281 p.

47114032 Gosch, H.; Bach, F.; Nguyen, D. (2007) Isoxaflutole + Cyprosulfamide SC

240 + 240 g/L Effects on Eleven Species of Non

- Target Terrestrial Plants: Seedling Emergence and Seedling Growth Test (Tier 2). Project Number: SE/06/033, EBUBP062, M/283723/0 1/1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag, Institute of Product Info. & Residue Anal. 247 p.

47114033 Sowig, P.; Gosch, H.; Bach, F.; et al. (2007) Isoxaflutole & Cyprosulfamide

SC 240 + 240 g/L Effects on Eleven Species of Non

- Target Terrestrial

Plants : Vegetative Vigour Test (Tier 2). Project Number: VV/06/034,

### Page 43 of 63 EBUBP061, M/283816/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag, Institute of Product Info. & Residue Anal. 234 p.

122

- 2 Aquatic plant growth Tier I

MRID Citation Reference

43573243 Hoberg, J. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Toxicity to the Freshwater Green Alga,

Selenastrum capricornutum: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 93

- 7

- 4877: 10566.0493.6286.430. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 67 p.

44399908 Hoberg, J. (1997 ) RPA 202248 Technical

-- Toxicity to the Freshwater Green

Alga, Selenastrum capricornutum: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 97

- 9

- 7073: 10566.0797.6435.430: 012897/FIFRA/430. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 69 p.

44399909 Hoberg, J. ( 1997) RPA 202248 Technical

-- Toxicity to Duckweed, Lemna

gibba: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 97

- 9

- 7066: 10566.0797.6434.410: 060297/FIFRA/410. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 71

p.

44399910 Hoberg , J. (1997) RPA 203328 Technical

-- Toxicity to Duckweed, Lemna

gibba: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 97

- 9

- 7067: 10566.0797.6441.410: 060297/FIFRA/410. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 67

p.

44839703 Giddings, J. (1999) Balance 75 WD G and RPA 202248

-- Aquatic Plant Pool

Study: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 98

- 11

- 7538: 10566.0798.6507.310:

AN99

- 718. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Laboratories, Inc. 167

p.

123

- 2 Aquatic plant growth

MRID Citation Reference

43573243 Hoberg, J. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Toxicity to the Freshwater Green Alga,

Selenastrum capricornutum: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 93

- 7

- 4877: 10566.0493.6286.430. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 67 p.

43573244 Hoberg , J. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Toxicity to the Freshwater Diatom, Navicula

pelliculosa: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 94

- 4

- 5243: 10566.0194.6323.440. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 83 p.

43573245 Hoberg, J. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Acute Toxi city to the Freshwater Blue

- Green

Alga, Anabaena flos

- aquae: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 94

- 3

- 5207: 10566.0194.6324.420. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 81 p.

43573246 Hoberg, J. (1994) RPA 201772

-- Toxicity to Duckweed, Lemna gi bba: Final

Report: Lab Project Number: 94

- 6

- 5319: 10566.0194.6325.410. Unpublished

### Page 44 of 63 study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 85 p.

43573247 Hoberg, J. (1994) RPA 201772 Technical

-- Acute Toxicity to the Marine

Diatom, Skeletonema costatum: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 94

- 6

- 5302: 10566.0194.6322.450. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 77 p.

43904826 Hoberg, J. (1995) RPA 203328

-- 5

- Day Toxicity to the Freshwater Green

Alga, Selenastrum capricornutum: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 95

- 11

- 6172: 10566.0595.6367.430. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs, Inc. 61 p.

44399908 Hoberg, J. (1997) RPA 202248 Technical

-- Toxicity to the Freshwater Green

Alga, Selenastrum capricornutum: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 97

- 9

- 7073: 10566 .0797.6435.430: 012897/FIFRA/430. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 69 p.

44399909 Hoberg, J. (1997) RPA 202248 Technical

-- Toxicity to Duckweed, Lemna

gibba: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 97

- 9

- 7066: 10566.0797.6434.410:

060297/FIFR A/410. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 71

p.

44399910 Hoberg, J. (1997) RPA 203328 Technical

-- Toxicity to Duckweed, Lemna

gibba : Final Report: Lab Project Number: 97

- 9

- 7067: 10566.0797.6441.410: 060297/FIFRA/410. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 67

p.

850.4400 Aquatic plant toxicity test using Lemna spp. Tiers I and II

MRID Citation Reference

47114009 Grade, R. (2006) Toxicity of Thiencarbozone

- Methyl + Isoxaflutole + (Inert

Ingredient) SC (90 + 225 + 150 g/L) Formulation to the Aquatic Plant Lemna gibba in a Growth Inhibition Test: Final Report. Project Number: 30174240, M/281518/01/1. Unpubli shed study prepared by Institut fuer Biologische Analytik und Consulting IBACON. 70 p.

47114027 Dorgerloh, M. (2007) Lemna gibba G3 Growth Inhibition Test with (Inert

Ingredient) & Isoxaflutole SC 240 + 240 Under Static Conditions (spec No.: 102000014305). Project Number: EBUBP101, E/412/3168/5, M/284141/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag, Institute of Product Info. & Residue Anal. 77 p.

47114028 Dorgerloh, M. (2007) Pseu dokirchneriella subcapitata Growth Inhibition Test

with Cyprosulfamide & Isoxaflutole SC 480 (240 + 240) G: CSA & IFT SC 480 (240 + 240) G. Project Number: EBUBP104, E/323/3157/4, M/284638/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag, Institute of

Product Info. & Residue Anal. 70 p.

850.5400 Algal toxicity, Tiers 1 and II

MRID Citation Reference

### Page 45 of 63

47114010 Grade, R.; Wydra, V. (2006) Toxicity of Thiencarbazone

- Methyl + Isoxaflute

+ (Inert Ingredient) SC (90 + 225 + 150 g/L) Formulation to Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata in an Algal Growth Inhibition Test: Final Report. Project Number: 30171210, M/278975/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Institut fuer Biologische Analytik und Consulting IBACON. 67 p.

124

- 1 Terrestrial field study with Plants

MRID Citation Reference

44931401 Tank, S. (1999) Monitoring Terrestrial Drift and Run

- Off Zones for Non

- Target Plant

Response to a Label

- Rate, Pre

- Emergence Application of Balance WDG Herbicide to

Cornfields: Lab Project Number: 079811 . Unpublished study prepared by Ecotoxicology and Biosystems Associates, Inc. 49 p.

44839705 Parsons, R.G. (1999) Nontarget Plant Field Study: RPA02248: Effect of Irrigation

Contamination on a Range of Crops. Rhone Poulenc Research Farm, Essex, England.

45022401 Tank, S. (2000) Monitoring Terrestrial Drift and Run

- Off Zones for Non

- Target Plant

Response to a Label

- Rate, Pre

- Emergence Application of Balance WDG Herbicide to Cornfields: Field Study Interim Report: Lab Project Number: 079811 . Unpublished

st udy prepared by Ecotoxicology and Biosystems Associates, Inc. 55 p.

45129001 Tank, S.; Brewer, L.; Cook, S. et al. (2000) Monitoring Terrestrial Drift and Run

- Off

Zones for Non

- Target Plant Response to a Label

- Rate, Pre

- Emergence Application of

Balance W DG Herbicide to Cornfields: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 079811 : EBA079811: 103

- 001. Unpublished study prepared by Ecotoxicology and Biosystems Associates, Inc. 594 p.

45244501 Cappy , J. (2000) Cotton Irrigated with Water Containing RPA202248: Lab Project

Number: 99716969: B003000: 46037. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience and South Texas Ag Research. 163 p.

45244503 Cappy, J. (2000) Established Sunflower Irrigated wi th Water Containing RPA202248:

Final Study Report: Lab Project Number: B003003: 99717755: 13726.6124. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience and Midwest Research Inc. 200

p.

45244504 Cappy, J. (2000) Effect of Simulated Isoxaflutole Drift on C anola: Final Study Report:

Lab Project Number: 99717762: B003007: 13726.6124. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience and Midwest Research Inc. 84 p.

45244505 Cappy, J. (2000) Effect of Simulated Isoxaflutole Drift on Cotton: Final Study Report :

Lab Project Number: 99717757: B003043: 17757

- 01. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience and G&H Associates. 40 p.

45244506 Cappy, J. (2000) Effect of Simulated Isoxaflutole Drift on Rice: Final Study Report:

Lab Project Number: 99716970: B00 3001: 13726.6124. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience and G&H Associates. 87 p.

45244507 Cappy, J. (2000) Effect of Simulated Isoxaflutole Drift on Spring Oats: Final Study

Report: Lab Project Number: 99717759: B003008: 13726.6124. Unpublis hed study prepared by Aventis CropScience and Midwest Research Inc. 87 p.

45244508 Cappy, J. (2000) Effect of Simulated Isoxaflutole Drift on Soybean: Final Study

Report: Lab Project Number: 99717761: B003006: 13726.6124. Unpublished study

### Page 46 of 63 prepared by Av entis CropScience and Midwest Research Inc. 90 p.

45244509 Cappy, J. (2000) Effect of Simulated Isoxaflutole Drift on Sunflower: Final Study

Report: Lab Project Number: 99717760: B003005: 13726.6124. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience and Prairie Ag Research, Inc. 87 p.

45244510 Parsons, R. (2000) RPA202248: Effect of Irrigation Contamination on a Range of

Crops: Lab Project Number: FRE 99/01 GOOD 17949: 202594: FRE99/01. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience UK Limited. 74 p.

45244502 Cappy, J.J. (2000?) Established Soybean Irrigated with Water Containing

RPA202248.Laboratory: Aventis CropScience, 2T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 (Water Sample Analysis). Midwest Research, Inc. RR 1 Box 107A, York, NE 68467 (Field Component). Springborn, Laboratories 790 Main Street, Wareham, MA 02571 (Seed Germination Testing). Agvise Laboratories, Highway 15 PO Box 510, Northwood, ND 58267 (Soil Sample Analysis). Sponsor: Aventis CropScience, 2T.W. Alexander Drive , Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Laboratory Report ID: 9917752.

45496901 Cappy, J.; Kelly, I.; Theissen, R. (2001) Balance Herbicide: Summary of Non

- Targeted

Crop Irrigated with Water Containing RPA 202248: Lab Project Number: B003467:

99716969: 997177 52. Unpublished study prepared by Aventis CropScience. 73 p.

44896906 Ortego, L. (1999) Balance

-- The Use of Vegetative Vigor Testing to Estimate Irrigation

Effect Levels: Lab Project Number: LSO/0899

- IEL. Unpublished study prepared by

Rhone

- Poulenc Ag Co . 6 p.

47114006 Bach, F.; Pallett, K. (2006) Higher Tier Non Target Terrestrial Plant Study on the

Vegetative Vigour Test of 3 Plant Species Determined Under Semi

- Field Conditions: The Phytotoxic Effects of IFT + TCM + CSA SC 225 + 90 + 225 + 150 G/L. Pr oject Number: HT06/056, EBGSP057, M/281486/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropscience Gmbh. 114 p.

141

- 1 850.3020 Honey bee acute contact

MRID Citation Reference

43573248 Petto, R. (1994) Laboratory Testing for Toxicity (Acute Contact and Oral

LD50) of RPA 201772 to Honey Bees (Apis mellifera L.) (Hymenoptera, Apidae): Lab Project Number: 463500. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Umweltchemie GmbH & Co. KG. 23 p.

47114014 Barth, M. (2004) Acute Toxicity of BYH 18636 and Isoxaflutole and (Inert

Ingredient) SC 90 + 225 + 150 to the Honeybee Apis mellifera L. Under Laboratory Conditions. Project Number: 06/10/48/049. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Lab fuer Biologische und Chemische. 30 p.

47114026 Muther

- Paul, J. (2006) Assessment of Side Effects of Isoxaflutole &

Cyprosulfamide SC 240+240 g/L to the Honey Bee, Apis mellifera L., in the Laboratory: Final Report. Project Number: 20061213/01/BLEU, M/278327/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by GAB Biotechnolo gie Gmbh. 30 p.

141

- 3 Toxicity to Non

- Target Beneficial Insects

### Page 47 of 63

47114004 Waltersdorfer, A. (2006) Toxicity to the Parasitoid Wasp Aphidius

Rhopalosiphi (DeStaphani

- Perez) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae ) in the Laboratory BYH 18636 and Isoxaflutole and (Inert Ingredient) SC 90 + 225 + 150g/l. Project Number: CW05/090. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropscience Gmbh. 28 p.

47114005 Waltersdorfer, A. (2006) Toxicity to the Predatory Mite Typhlodromus pryi

Scheuten (Acari, Phytoseiidae) in the Laboratory BYH 18636 and Isoxaflutole and (Inert Ingredient) SC 90 + 225 + 150 g/l. Project Number: CW06/008. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropscience Gmbh. 39 p.

47114024 Waltersdorfer, A (2006) Toxicity to the Parasitoid Wasp Aphidius rhopalosiphi

(Destephani

- Perez) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) Using an Extended Laboratory Test Isoxaflutole & Cyprosulfamide SC 240 + 240 g/l. Project Number: CW06/064, M/279708/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropsc ience Gmbh. 32 p.

47114025 Waltersdorfer, A. (2006) Toxicity to the Green Lacewig Chysoperla carnea

Steph. (Neuroptera, Chrysopidae) Using an Extended Laboratory Test Isoxaflutole & Cyprosulfamide SC 240 + 240 g/l. Project Number: CW06/065,

M/279861/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropscience Gmbh. 27

p.

47114023 Waltersdorfer, A. (2006) Toxicity to the Predatory Mite Typhlodromus pyri

Scheuten (Acari, Phytoseiidae) in the Laboratory Isoxaflutole & Cyprosulfamide SC 240 + 240 g/l. Project Number : CW06/049, M/279415/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Cropscience Gmbh. 33

p.

Non Guideline Selections

43988201 Cheplick , J.; O'Flaherty, C.; Ritter, A. et al. (1995) Probabilistic Modeling of

RPA 201772, Isoxaflutole (and Major Metabolites), Exposure to Aquatic Nontarget Organisms Associated with RPA 201772 WDG Herbicide (Isoxaflutole) Use on Corn: Lab Project Number: WEI 746.03: P.O. 30002803

- ISOXAFLUTOLE. Unpublished study prepared by Waterborne Environmental, Inc. (WEI). 144 p.

46801742 Odin

- Feurtet, M. (1997) RPA 203328 Acute Toxicity (14

- Day) To Earthworm

(Eisenia Foetida) Artificial Soil Method. Project Number: SA/9 7408. Unpublished study prepared by Rhone

- Poulenc

- Secteur Agro. 39 p.

46801743 Moser, T.; Scheffczyk, A. (2004) Isoxaflutole

- RPA 203328 (AE B197555):

Reproduction Toxicity to the Earthworm Eisenia Fetida in Artificial Soil. Project Number: C/041342, P15 RR. Unpublished study prepared by ECT Oekotoxikologie Gmbh. 30 p.

46801745 McMurray, A. (1997) A Laboratory Assessment of the Effects of RPA 203328

on Soil Microflora Respiration and Nitrogen Transformations According to EPPO Bulletin 24, 1

- 16 (1994). Pro ject Number: R000482, ENV3016, GOOD/14070. Unpublished study prepared by Chemex International. 43 p.

47114007 Friedrich, S. (2006) BYH 18636 and (Inert Ingredient) and Isoxaflutole SC

465: Sublethal Toxicity to the Earthworm Eisenia fetida in Artificial S oil with 5% Peat: Final Report. Project Number: 06/10/48/100, M/279980/01/1. Unpublished study prepared by Biochem Agrar, Lab fuer Biologische und Chemische. 34 p.

### Page 48 of 63

47114031 Leicher, T. (2006) Isoxaflutole & Cyprosulfamide SC 240 & 240 g/l: Acute

Toxicity to Earthworms (Eisenia fetida) Tested in Artificial Soil with 5% Peat. Project Number: RG/20/06, E/310/3187/3, LRT/RG/A/74/06. Unpublished study prepared by Bayer Ag, Institute of Product Info. & Residue Analysis. 23

p.

### Page 49 of 63



### Appendix A

– Summary of Isoxaflutole Uses as Described on Product Labels

Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 3 oz/ 1 a .140625 lb / a

BALANCE HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 3 oz/ 1 a .140625 lb / a

BALANCE HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Postemergence. 3 oz/ 1 a .140625 lb / a

BALANCE HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 3 oz/ 1 a .140625 lb / a

BALANCE HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 3 oz/ 1 a .140625 lb / a

BALANCE HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Early preplant. 3 oz/ 1 a .140625 lb / a

BALANCE HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 3 oz/ 1 a .140625 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

### Page 50 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Early preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

FLUFENACET &

ISOXAFLUTOLE SC

HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

FLUFENACET &

ISOXAFLUTOLE SC

HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

FLUFENACET &

ISOXAFLUTOLE SC

HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

DUPONT PREQUEL

HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 2.5 oz/ 1 a .046875 lb / a

DUPONT PREQUEL

HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 2.5 oz/ 1 a .046875 lb / a

DUPONT PREQUEL

HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 2.5 oz/ 1 a .046875 lb / a

DUPONT PREQUEL

HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 2.5 oz/ 1 a .046875 lb / a

DUPONT PREQUEL

HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 2.5 oz/ 1 a .046875 lb / a

DUPONT PREQUEL

HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 2.5 oz/ 1 a .046875 lb / a

DUPONT PREQUEL

HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 2.5 oz/ 1 a .046875 lb / a

BALANCE 4SC HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 1.8 fl oz/ 1 a .05638359 lb / a

### Page 51 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE 4SC HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 1.8 fl oz/ 1 a .05638359 lb / a

BALANCE 4SC HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 1.8 fl oz/ 1 a .05638359 lb / a

BALANCE 4SC HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 1.8 fl oz/ 1 a .05638359 lb / a

BALANCE 4SC HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 1.8 fl oz/ 1 a .05638359 lb / a

BALANCE 4SC HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preplant. 1.8 fl oz/ 1 a .05638359 lb / a

BALANCE 4SC HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Early preplant. 1.8 fl oz/ 1 a .05638359 lb / a

BALANCE 4SC HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 1.8 fl oz/ 1 a .05638359 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

### Page 52 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

BALANCE PRO EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Early preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

### Page 53 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 54 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 55 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN, FIELD Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 56 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

FLUFENACET &

ISOXAFLUTOLE SC

HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

FLUFENACET &

ISOXAFLUTOLE SC

HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

FLUFENACET &

ISOXAFLUTOLE SC

HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

### Page 57 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 58 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Postemergence. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

RADIUS HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 28 fl oz/ 1 a .09440681 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 59 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 15 oz/ 1 a .09375 lb / a

EPIC DF HERBICIDE DF CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 17 oz/ 1 a .10625 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (SILAGE) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 60 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate (UNSPECIFIED)

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

CORVUS EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 5.6 fl oz/ 1 a .08137938 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 61 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 62 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate (UNSPECIFIED)

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Early preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE PRO HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 3 fl oz/ 1 a .09397266 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Burndown treatment. Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil band treatment. Band sprayer. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Early postemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil broadcast treatment. Ground. Preemergence. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

### Page 63 of 63 Product Name Form

Desc Use Site Application Method Type Application Method

Equipment Application Method Timing Product Max

App Rate A. I. Max App

Rate

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil incorporated

treatment. Soil incorporation equipment. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a

BALANCE FLEXX HERBICIDE EC CORN (UNSPECIFIED) Soil treatment (surface). Ground. Preplant. 6 fl oz/ 1 a .09403125 lb / a