Page 1 of 20 **OFFICE OF** CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION **UNITED ST AT**  **ES ENVIRONMENT AL** **PROTECTION A GENCY** 

**WA SHINGTON D.C., 20460** 

**PC Code:** 121027 **DP Barcode:** D 407566 **MEMORANDUM** April 23 , 2013 **SUBJECT:** Drinking Water Assessment for the IR
- 4 New Use Petitions for the Use of

Methoxyf enozide on Herb Subgroup 19A (except chives) , Date s , Sorghum, Fruiting Vegetable Group 8
- 10, Pome Fruit Group 11
- 10, Berry Subgroup s 13
- 07 A, F & G and Tropical Tree Fruits
. **TO:** Elizab eth Holman, Dietary and Risk Assessor

William Drew, Chemist Risk Assessment Branch II Health Effects Division, 7509P **CC:** Laura Nollen, Risk Manager

Risk Integration Minor Use & Emergency Response Branch Mark Suarez, Product Manager Insecticide Branch Registration Division, 7505P **FROM:** Karen Milians, Ph.D
. , Chemist

Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P **) REVIEWED**  **BY:** Jim Carleton , Ph.D. , Senior Scientist

Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) **APPROVED BY:**  Marietta Echeverria, Branch Chief

Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P **)**Page 2 of 20

**1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY**  EFED has reviewed the IR
- 4 request for methoxyfenozide (Intrepid® 2F) registration on herb subgrou p 19A (except chive s) , date s , sorghum , fruiting vegetable group 8
- 10, pome fruit group 11
- 10, berry subgroups 13
- 07 A, F & G, and tropical tree fruit s ( sugar apple, cherimoya, atemoya, custard a pple, i lama, s oursop, and b iriba)
. The maximum proposed single application rates for these crops range from 0.06 to 0. 31 lbs a.i./acre , and the maximum seasonal rate s range from 0.75 to 1 .0 lb s a.i./acre. The last drinking water assessment was completed in August 2011 for new uses on root vegetables subgroup 1 B and citrus (USEPA, 2011). The e stimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) were based on the globe artichoke use represented by the CA lettuce scenario
. **Table 1** lists the EDWCs recommended for use in HED’s dietary risk assessment. These values are b ased on the globe artichoke use represented by the CA lettuce scenario with an application rate of 0.25 lbs. a.i./acre/application and a total of 1.0 lb a.i./acre/season
. The surface water EDWC s are slightly higher than EDWC s reported in previous assessments ( 68.8, 43.4 and 31.8 ppb for acute, chronic , and cancer, respectivel y). The EDWCs are higher because of changes in the input parameters (to reflect current EFED policies) and a new PCA number used for all crops (USEPA, 2012a)
. Similarly, the groundwater EDWC s listed in **Table 1**  are higher than those reported in the most recent assessment s (USEPA 2011) mainly because of the implementation of a new groundwater model; PRZM
- GW , which accounts for pesticide fate in the crop root zone and multiple years of application
. EFED continues to have concerns that the combination of high persistence and moderate mobility

of methoxyfenozide makes it plausible that this compound may pose a greater long
- term risk than what is suggested by the screening
- leve l drinking water assessments. In particular, once introduced into the environment, this compound could migrate to sensitive environmental compartments and persist for extended periods of time. One outstanding data requirement from the conditional registration of this compound is for the monitoring of surface water and sediment in a representative sample of high use areas in proximity to surface water. The main purpose of this study i s to address EPA’s concern that multiple years of IntrepidTM use may result in accumulation of methoxyfenozide resi dues in water and/or sediment. DAS (Dow Agricultural Science) has recentl y submitted an interim report regarding the monitoring study in lotic (flowing) ( e.g. rivers) and lentic water bodies ( e.g. pond s) as well as sediment in each of the following s tates : California , Mississippi, and Michigan
. More details of the report are provided in the following sections
. The final monitoring report is expected to be submitted by

DAS by March 18, 2014 (USEPA 2011)
. **Table 1. Tier II e stimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) resulting from** 

**applications of methoxyfenozi de (PRZM**  **- EXAMS)**  **Drinking water source**  **Use**

**(m odeled rate)**  **1 -**  **in -**  **10 year**

**acute (ppb)**  **1 -**  **in -**  **10 year**

**chronic (ppb)**  **30 -**  **year average**  **(ppb)** Surface water ( aerial application) Globe Artichoke

(0.25 lb a.i./A x 4 applic.; total of 1.0 lb/A/yr) 77.7 51.6 37.4Page 3 of 20

**Table 1. Tier II e stimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) resulting from** 

**applications of methoxyfenozi de (PRZM**  **- EXAMS)**  **Drinking water source**  **Use**

**(m odeled rate)**  **1 -**  **in -**  **10 year**

**acute (ppb)**  **1 -**  **in -**  **10 year**

**chronic (ppb)**  **30 -**  **year average**  **(ppb)** Surface water ( ground application) Globe Artichoke (0.25 lb a.i./A x 4 applic.; total of 1.0 lb/A/yr) 77.4 50.4 35.8 **Tier I EDWCs for**  **Groundw ater (PRZM** **- GW)**  **Crop/Scenario Highest Daily**  **value (μg/L) Post** 

**Breakthrough Average (μg/L)**  **Average Simulation**

**Breakthrough Time (days)**  Fruiting Vegetable/WI corn **251** 214 8684.63 Value in bold show the highest EDWC , which is recommended for use in HED’s dietary risk assessment. **2. USE CHARACTERIZATION**  Methoxyf enozide is currently

registered for use on dried pea s and bean s (except soy bean), pomegranate, popcorn, citrus, corn, cotton, cucurbit vegetables, grapes, pome and stone fruits, root vegetables, spearmint and peppermint, berries (including strawberries and cranberries), tree nuts, leafy v egetables, globe artichokes, legume vegetables, a variety of tropical fruits, black
- eyed and southern peas, bushberries, dry beans, gra ss forage, peanuts, tuberous and corm vegetables, non- gra ss forage, avocado, green onion, ornamentals , and root vegetables
. M ethoxyf enozide is the sole active ingredient in Intrepid® 2F and Intrepid 80WSP, and it is applied aerially or through ground equipment. The maximum single application rates for the proposed IR
- 4 new uses are listed in **Table 2** 
. **Table 2. Summary use information for methoxyfenozide proposed new uses, based on Intrepid**  **® 2F supplemental label (** **EPA Reg. No. 62719 -**  **442 )**  **. Use**  **Max. Single** 

**Applic ation**  **Rate (** **l bs.**  **a .**  **i ./A)**  **Max. N**  **o. o f** 

**App lications**  **Max.**

**Seasonal 1**  **Application Rate (** **l bs.**  **a .**  **i ./A)**  **Min.**

**Application Interval**  **( d**  **ays) App**  **lication**

**Me thod**  **Comments**

H erb subgroup 19A 0.25 Not stated on label. 1.0 10 Ground spray (foliar) /Aerial Date s 0.31 Not stated on label. 1.0 10 Ground spray (foliar)Page 4 of 20 Sorghum 0.16 Not stated on label. 0.75 10 Ground spray (foliar) /Aerial Min

application interval was only specified for beet armyworm and fall armyworm Fruiting vegetable group 8
- 10 0.25 Not stated on label. 1.0 7 Ground spray (foliar) /Aerial

P ome fruit group 11
- 10 0.25 Not stated on label. 1.0 10 Ground spray (foliar) /Aerial Aerial

application is allowed **only** for the last two application s prior to harvest Caneberries subgroups 13
- 07 A 0.25 3 0.75 7 Ground spray (foliar) /Aerial B erry subgroups 13
- 07 G 0.19 Not stated on label. 1.0 10 Ground spray (foliar) /Aerial Small fruit vine subgroup s 13
- 07 F 0.25 Not stated on label. 0.75 10 Ground spray (foliar) /Aerial Tropical tree fruits 0.25 5 1.0 6 Ground spray (foliar) /Aerial 1 For the purposes of this assessment, the maximum annual use rate was assumed to be equal to the reported “per season” rate (i.e., it was assumed only one crop per year would be grow n). Use on more than one crop per year (either the same crop or other crops with registered methoxyfenozide uses) on the same site may require further assessment to determine new estimated drinking water concentrations. **3. ENVIRONMENTAL FATE A** **ND TRANSPORT CHARACT ERIZATION**  Methoxyf enozide is very persistent (t 1/2 = 1 to 3 ye ars in soil and water) and moderatel y mobile (Koc = 219

– 922 L/kg oc in various soils). It is stable to photolysis and hydrol ys is, is not significantly volatile, and degrades only v ery s lowly b y microbial activity
. D egradates are predominantly RH
- 117236 ( 3,5
- Dimethylbenzoic acid N
- tertbutyl
-N ’
- (3
-hydroxy
- 2
- 1nethylbenzoyl)hydrazide) and RH
- 131154 ( 3
- [N
- tert-butyl
-N ’
- (3
-methoxy
- 2
-methylbenzoyl)
-hydrazinocarbonyl]
- 5
-methylbenzoaicci d), but these were only found at low concentrations (less than 10% of the applied radioactivity) in submitted studies
. Because of its resistance to degradation and its mobility,Page 5 of 20

methoxyfenozide has the potential to accumulate and to move off the site of application by l eaching and erosion/runoff. 

### Table **3** summarizes the physic o - chemical properties of methoxyfenozide. For further details on the environmental fate and transport of methoxyfenozide, please refer to DP Barcode D249466
. **Table 3**  **. General Chemical Properties and Environmental Fate Parameters of Methoxyfenozide.**  **Chemical/Fate Parameter Value**  **Source**

Chemical name n- tert-butyl
-N’
- [2
- methyl
- 3
- methoxybenzoyl]
- 3,5
- dimethylbenzohydrazide D249466
Molecular mass 368 g/mol D249466 Vapor pressure (25  C) 2.0 x 10 - 8 torr D249466 Solubility (25  C) 3.3 mg/L D249466 Octanol
- water partition coefficient (Kow) 10 3.72 D249466 Organic carbon partitioning coefficient (Koc , L/kg oc) 267, 922, 678, 219, 365 MRID 44144433 Soil partition coefficient (Kd , L/kg) 4.2, 1.1, 1.2, 6.2, 3.8 MRID 44144433 Hydrolysis half

- life (pH 5, 7, 9) Stable MRID 44144430 Aqueous photolysis half

- life Stable MRID 44617805 Soil photolysis half

- life Stable MRID 44617806 Aerobic soil metabolism half
- life 573, 1100, 772, 336 d MRIDs 44617808, 44617807, 4414432 Aerobic aqueous metabolism half
- life 387, 962 d MRID 44617809 Anaerobic aqueous metabolism half
- life 654 d MRID 44617810 Terrestrial field dissipation half
- life 237, 139, 151, 92 d MRID 44617812, 44617811 **4. DRINKING WATER MODEL**  **ING** EDWCs were generated using EFED’s standard suite of models. The proposed new IR
- 4 uses on herb subgroup 19A (except chive s) , date, sorghum, pea and bean subgroup 6C (except blackeyed and southern pea) , fruiting vegetable group 8
- 10, pome fruit group 11
- 10, berry

subgroups 13
- 07 A, F & G, and tropical tree fruits (sugar apple, cherimo ya, atemoya, custard a pple, i lama, s oursop, and b iriba) were assessed
. Additionally, the globe artichoke use that was assessed in the last DWA (USEPA 201 1 ) was included in this assessment for characterization purposes. Models The Pesticide Root Zo ne Model (PRZM 3.12.2 dated May 1 2, 2005) and Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS 2.98.04.06 dated April 25, 2005 ) are simulation models coupled with the input shell PE 5.0 (US EPA, 2006 ) to generate EDWCs of methoxyfenozide residues that may o ccur in surface water used as drinking water. The PRZM model simulates transformation on and movement from an agricultural field of a pesticide following its application. The EXAMS model simulatesPage 6 of 20

resulting pesticide concentrations in an adjacent waterbody. For surface water /drinking water, EFED assumes the field to constitute a standard watershed 172.8 ha in area draining into an adjacent drinking water reservoir 5.26 ha in area , with a mean depth of 2.74 m. Amore detailed description of this “Index Reservoir” and its watershed can be found in Jones et al. , 1998. The PRZM and EXAMS model s and their user ’ s manuals may b e downloaded from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Water Models web
-page (US EPA, 2006). Percent Cropped Area (PCA) adjustment factors that account for the maximum percent area within a watershed that may b e planted with the modeled crop are used to adjust concentrations estimated by P RZM and EXAMS (USEPA, 201 2 ). Tier 1 groundwater EDWCs for methoxyfenozide , resulting from the chemical’ s use on fruiting vegetable , were derived with PRZM
- GW (Pesticide Root Zone Model for Groundwater, version 1.0, August 31, 2012 ), using the PRZM
- GW GUI (Graphical User Interface, version 1.0, August 31, 2012 ). PRZM
- GW is a one - dimensional leaching model that estimates potential concentrations of pesticides in groundwater. It accounts for pesticide fate in the crop root zone by s imulating pesticide transport and degradation through the soil profile , after a pesticide is applied to an agricultural field. PRZM
- GW was used to simulate 3 0 years of repeated methoxyfenozide application in six standard scenarios : Delmarva, GA coastal, NC cotton, WIc orn , FLp otato and FLc itrus
. E ach scenario represent s a different location known to be vulnerable to groundwater contamination. The input parameters are found in **Table 6** 
. PRZM
- GW outputs represent pesticide concentrations in a vulnerable groundwater supply l ocated directly beneath an agricultural field ( **Table 9**  ). The results show the greatest single
- day maximum concentration for the WIcorn scenario
. Additionally, tier 1 groundwater EDWCs for methoxyfenozide were developed using the S creening Concentration In GROund Water (SCI
- GROW v2.3, Jul. 29, 2003) model. S CI
- GROW is a regression model used as a screening tool to estimate pesticide concentrations found in ground water used as drinking water. SCI
- GROW was developed by

f itting a linear model to ground water concentrations with the Relative Index of Leaching Potential (RILP) as the independent variable. Ground water concentrations were taken from 90
- day average high concentrations from Prospective Ground Water monitoring studies. The RILP is a function of a pesticide’s aerobic soil metabolism and soil
-water partition c oefficient. The output of SCI
- GROW represents concentrations of methoxyfenozide that might occur in shallow , unconfined aquifers under sandy soils
. S uch locations are representative of groundwater that is likely to be maximally vulnerable to pesticide contamination , and that may ser ve as a drinking water supply
. The SCI
- GROW model and user’s manual may also be downloaded from the EPA Water Models web
-page (US EPA, 2006 ). Input Parameters Input parameters for the PRZM/EXAMS, PRZM
- GW and SCI
- GROW model s are listed in **Table s**  **4 -**  **5 , 6**  and **7,** respectivel y . Explanations of various model input parameters are discussed below.Page 7 of 20 **Table 4. PRZM and**  **EX AMS application** **- specific input parameters for methoxyfenozide**  **Uses PRZM** 

**Scenario Ma** **x App**

**rate (lbs ai** **/A) 1**  **#**

**Apps Interval** 

**(days) % Drift/ Efficiency**  **CAM/IPSCND 2**  **Date of 1 st**  **of application**  Herb Subgroup 19 A OR mint 0.25 4 10 0.16/0.95 2/3 April 15 th

OR mint 0.25 4 10 0.064/0.99 2/3 April 15 th Date s 3 CA citrus with

irrigation 0.31 3 10 0.064/0.99 2/3 Aug 1 st Sorghum

4 KS sorghum 0.16 4 10 0.16/0.95 2/3 June 1 st KS sorghum 0.16 4 10 0.064/0.99 2/3 June 1 st

Fruiting vegetable group 8
- 10 PA

tomato 0.25 4 7 0.16/0.95 2/3 June 30 th PA tomato 0.25 4 7 0.064/0.99 2/3 June 30 th FL tomato 0.25 4 7 0.16/0.95 2/3 Sep 10 th FL tomato 0.25 4 7 0.064/0.99 2/3 Sep 10 th FL pepper 0.25 4 7 0.16/0.95 2/3 Nov 1 st FL pepper 0.25 4 7 0.064/0.99 2/3 Nov 1 st Pome fruit 5 group 11
- 10 PA

apple 0.25 4 10 0.16/0.95 2/3 May 16 th PA apple 0.25 4 10 0.064/0.99 2/3 May 16 th Caneberries subgroups 6 13
- 07 A OR berries 0.25 3 7 0.16/0.95 2/3 May 1 st

OR berries 0.25 3 7 0.064/0.99 2/3 May 1 st Berry subgroups 10
- 07 G FL strawberries 0.19 5 10 0.16/0.95 2/3 Nov 10 th

FL strawberries 0.19 5 10 0.064/0.99 2/3 Nov 10 th Small fruit vine groups 6 13
- 07 F OR berries 0.25 3 10 0.16/0.95 2/3 May 1 st

OR berries 0.25 3 10 0.064/0.99 2/3 May 1 st Tropical tree fruits FL avocado 0.25 4 6 0.16/0.95 2/3 Mar 1 st

FL avocado 0.25 4 6 0.064/0.99 2/3 Mar 1 st 1. Maximum a

pp lication rates were multiplied by 1.12 to convert to kg a . i
. /ha for use in modeling. 2. Chemical application method (CAM) and p ost-harvest foliar pesticide disposition (ISPCND). CAM 2 = foliar application; ISPCND 3= the pesticide is left as - is on foliage. 3. Three applications were modeled using 0.31 lb a.i./A , and a fourth application using 0.07 lb a.i./A 4. Four applications were modeled using 0. 16 lb a.i./A , and a f ifth application using 0. 11 lb a.i./A 5. Previous asses sments used 6 applications/yr and a higher application rate
. Current label reflects a slightly lower single application rate of 0. 25 lb a
. i
. /A and a maxi mum o f 1.0 lb a.i./acre/season. 6. There is not a standard scenario available for either the caneberr y or small fruit vine groups
. The OR berries OP scenario was use d because this scenario provide s the best representation of agricultural practices for these crops from among the available EFED
- approve d PRZM scenarios. **Table 5**  **. PRZM/EXAMS chemical -**  **specific input parameters for methoxyfenozide. Input Parameter**  **Value Comment**  **Source** Molecular Mass (g/mol) 368 Product chemistry data D249466Page 8 of 20

**Table 5**  **. PRZM/EXAMS chemical -**  **specific input parameters for methoxyfenozide. Input Parameter**  **Value Comment**  **Source** Vapor Pressure at 25°C (torr) 2.0 x 10 - 8 Product chemistry data D249466 Solubility in Water at 25 o C (mg/L) 3.3 D249466 Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KOC) (L/kg OC) 490 Represents the average KOC . MRID 44144433 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half
life (days) 960 Represents the 90 th %
- ile confidence bound on the mean half

- life. MRIDs 44617808, 44617807, 4414432 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half
- life (days) 1559 Represents the 90 th %
- ile confidence bound on the mean half

- life. MRID 44617809 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half
- life (days) 1962 3x one data point MRID 44617810 Hydrolysis Half

- lives (days) 0 Stable MRID 44144430 Aqueous Photolysis Half
- life (days) 0 Stable MRID 44617805 Foliar Degradation Half

- life (days) 0 Stable, no data Default Foliar Washoff Extraction Coefficient (cm- 1 ) 0.5 Default **T able 6**  **. PRZM** **- GW Input**  **Parameters Parameter (units)**  **Input Value Data Source**  Application Rate 0.25 lbs a
. i
. /A Label Number of Applications 4 Label Application Dates (month/day) 06/30; 07/07; 07/14; 07/21 IPM center Annual Application Retreatment Once every year Hydrolysis Half

- life (days) Stable (0) MRID 44144430 Soil Metabolism Half

- life (days) 960 (90 th percentile

confidence bound on the mean) MRIDs 44617808, 44617807, 4414432 average of Koc (mL/g oc ) 490 MRID 44144433 **Table 7**  **. SCI -**  **GROW input parameters for methoxyfenozide. Input Parameter**  **Value Comment**  **Source** Application Rate (lbs a.i./A) See Table 4 Label directions Proposed and current labels Applications per Year See Table 4 Label directions Proposed and current labels Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (kOC) (L/kg OC) 219 Lo west KOC value; > 3x variation in data MRID 44144433Page 9 of 20

**Table 7**  **. SCI -**  **GROW input parameters for methoxyfenozide. Input Parameter**  **Value Comment**  **Source** Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half
- life (days) 695 Average of 4 values MRIDs 44617808, 44617807, 4414432 T en currentl y approved PRZM scenarios were used in the modeling for new uses : OR mint, CA citrus, KS sorghum, MIb eans, PA tomato, FL pepper, PA apple, OR berries, FL strawberries and FLavocado
. The chemical application method (CAM) parameter was deriv ed from information on the supplemental label (Intrepid 2F ) , as were the application rate and retreatment interval
. The retreatment interval represents the minimum amount of time required between applications of the pesticide. Most crops were modeled using aerial and ground application except dates , for which only ground application was modeled. **Table 4**  lists the specific PRZM/EXAMS scenario s modeled to represent the new uses . The highest simulated single application rate wa s 0. 31 lb a.i./acre on dates , whi ch was represented using the CA citrus scenario because no approved date scenario exists, and 100% of dates in the U
. S
. are cultivated in California
. Similarly, there are no approved standard scenario s for caneberries or small fruit vine group 10
- 07 F , therefore the Oregon berry OP (organophosphate) scenario was used because this scenario provide s the best representation of agricultural practices for these crops from among the available approved PRZM scenarios. The application dates for the scenarios were chosen according to the crop s’ profiles, lifecycle , and/or time when heavy p est pressure i s likely to appear (USDA Crop Profiles). Chemical property model input values were chosen in accordance with EFED’s current input parameter guidance (US EPA 2009 and US EPA 2012b ). The upper 90% confidence limit on the mean half
- life (960 d) was selected to represent aerobic soil metabolism in surface water modeling and PRZM
- GW , and the median half
- life (695 d) was used in SCI
- GROW modeling , in accordance with the input parameter guidance. Both hydrol ys is and photolysis were modeled as stable
. The upper 90% confidence limit on the mean half

- life (1559 d) was selected to represent aerobic aquatic metabolism , and 3 times the anaerobic aquatic metabolism half
- life was used to represent anaerobic aquatic metabolism since only one measured value (1962 d) was available
. The default all
- agriculture PCA of 0. 91 was used for all simulations (USEPA 2012 a). The mean Koc (490 L/kg oc ) was used for PRZM
- GW and PRZM/EXAMS modeling , whereas the lowest Koc value (219 L/kg oc ) w as used in the SCI
- GROW modeling
. Modeling Results The EDWCs for application of methoxyfenozide on the new uses and the previous ly evaluated globe artichoke use are listed in **Table 8** 
. The EDWCs obtained for the globe artichoke use pattern as represented by the CA lettuce scenario, generated the highest EDWCs for both surface water and groundwater, followed by the fruiting vegetable group uses as represented by the FL tomato scenario
. EDWC s for Tier I PRZM
- GW are shown in **Table 9** 
. The highest EDWCs are associated with the WIc orn scenario , and are recommended for use in HED’s dietary a ssessment. Refer toPage 10 of 20

**Attachment 1**  for more details on the PRZM/EXAMS, PRZM
- GW and SCI
- GROW modeling output s. **Table 8**  **. Maximum**  **Concentrations of**  **m ethoxyfenozide**  **: Tier**  **II EDWCs**  **for surface**  **wa ter.**  **Bolded values are the maximum values found for**  **the crops 1**  **,2**
**Use Application** 

**M e** **thod PRZ** **M**

**Scenario Maximum** 

**Applicatio n Rate**  **[lb. a.i./A; kg/ha]**  **No.**

**of Apps**  **1 -**  **in -**  **10**

**Year A**  **cute (**  **μg/L )**  **1 -**  **in -**  **10**

**Year C**  **hronic (**  **μg/L )**  **30 -**  **Year**

**A verage**  **( μg/L** **)** Herb Subgroup 19 aerial OR mint 0.25/0.28 4 12.6 7.2 6.2

ground OR mint 0.25/0.28 4 8.3 4.7 3.7 Dates ground CA citrus with irrigation 0.31/0.35 3 16.5 14.6 11.7 Sorghum aerial KS sorghum 0.16/0.18 5 28.5 13.1 9.9

ground KS sorghum 0.16/0.18 5 27.7 12.5 9.1
Fruiting vegetable group 8
- 10 aerial PA tomato 0.25/0.28 4 34.3 17.2 11.7 ground PA

tomato 0.25/0.28 4 32.9 16.1 10.3 aerial FL tomato 0.25/0.28 4 75.6 13.3 9.0 ground FL tomato 0.25/0.28 4 75.9 13.3 8.8 aerial FL pepper 0.25/0.28 4 51.6 11.7 6.5 ground FL pepper 0.25/0.28 4 51.0 11.6 6.2 Pome fruit group 11
- 10 aerial PA apple 0.25/0.28 4 39.5 20.1 14.1 ground PA

apple 0.25/0.28 4 38.9 18.4 12.2 Caneberries subgroups 13
- 07 A aerial OR berries 3 0.25/0.28 3 9.2 6.0 5.3

ground OR berries 3 0.25/0.28 3 6.8 4.2 3.5 Berry subgroups 10
- 07 G aerial FL strawberries 0.19 /0.21 5 26.1 6.5 36.8

ground FL strawberries 0.19 /0.21 5 24.9 6.0 4.1 Small fruit vine groups 13
- 07 F aerial OR berries 3 0.25/0.28 3 9.1 6.2 5.4

ground OR berries 3 0.25/0.28 3 7.0 4.4 3.6 Tropical tree fruits aerial FL avocado 0.25/0.28 4 22.3 17.8 12.3

ground FL avocado 0.25/0.28 4 15.8 13.2 7.7 **Globe Artichoke**  **aerial CA lettuce**  **0.25/0.28 4**  **77.7 51.6**  **37.4**

**ground CA lettuce**  **0.25/0.28 4**  **77.4 50.4**  **35.8** 1. The annual rate for these crops do not exceed 1.0 lb a.i./acre/season. 2. PCA values are 0. 91 for all the crops
. Bolded values represent the highest EDWCs for methoxyfenozide
.Page 11 of 20

**Table 9** 
. PRZM
- GW (30 years simulation) and SCI
- GROW EDWCs (1 year) in Groundwater Resulting from the Use of Methoxyfenozide
.

Crop/Scenario Highest Daily value (μg/L) Post

Breakthrough Average (μg/L) Average

Simulation Breakthrough Time (days) Fruiting Vegetable/FL potato 30.4 30.3 10568.95 Fruiting Vegetable/ FL citrus 154 139 4243.13 Fruiting Vegetable/Delmarva 147 133 4264.59 Fruiting Vegetable/ NC cotton 180 157 5020.61 Fruiting Vegetable/GA coastal 62.7 52.9 8983.6 1 **Fruiting Vegetable/WI corn**  **251 214**  **8684.63 SCI**  **- GROW EDWCs**  Globe Artichoke (1.0 lb/A/yr) 4.13 μg/L Bo lded value represent s the highest EDWC for methoxyfenozide **5. MONITORING DATA**  Methoxyf enozide is not identified as a cause of impairment for any water bodies listed as impaired under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. 1 The following databases and sources were searched on February 8 , 2013 for monitoring information on methoxyfenozide :  The United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Water
- Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program Data Warehouse (http://infotrek.er.usgs.gov/traverse/f?p=NAWQA:HOME:1405517206944567 ) 2
 The USGS National Stream Quality A ccounting Network (NASQAN) program (http://water.usgs.gov/nasqan/) 3 No monitoring data for methoxyfenozide were found, as these programs did not include this compound in their lists of analy tes . EFED is not aware of water or sediment monitoring data on methoxyfenozide from any other sources. Due to uncertainties identified during the Section 3 Registration process, methoxyfenozide is conditionally registered. One of the outstanding conditional registration requirements is: Three ye ars after use, obtaining approval for and conducting monitoring of surface water and sediment in a representative sample of high use areas in proximity to surface water. DAS (Dow Agricultural Science) has agreed to sample for methoxyfenozide over a two - year period in lotic (flowing) water bodies ( e.g. rivers) and lentic water bodies ( e.g. ponds) and sediment in each of the following s tates : California , Mississippi, and Michigan with the Agency ’s guidance (USEPA 2011)
. A summary o f interim sampling results is provided below in **Table 10**
. For more information refer to USEPA, 2013. The

1 http://iaspub.epa.gov/tmdl_waters10/attains_nation_cy.cause_detail_303d?p_cause_group_id=885 2 http://infotrek.er.usgs.gov/traverse/f?p=NAWQA:HOME:1405517206944567 3 http://water.usgs.gov/nasqan /)Page 12 of 20

final monitoring report is expected to be submitted by DAS by M arch 18, 2014 (USEPA 2011)
. **Table 1**  **0 . Summary of Interim**  **Sampling Results State**  **Parameters Lotic**  **Lentic Water (**  **μ g/L)**  **Sediment**

**( μ**  **g/kg) Water** 

**( μ**  **g/L) Sediment** 

**( μ**  **g/kg)** CA Detects/Samples

Range Mean/Median 72/72

0.018

– 1.0 0.14/0.061 0/4 1/10 0.017 0/10

MI Detects/Samples

Range Mean/Median 0/14 0/2 8/11 0.025

– 0.85 0.19/0.06 1/11

3.4 MS Detects/Samples

Range Mean/Median 38/48

0.016

– 0.181 0.036/0.025 0/4 8/10 0.019

– 0.233 0.056/0.024 0/10
For water, the limit of detection (LOD) was 0.015 μg/L and the limit of quantitation (LOQ) was 0.05 μg/L. For sediment, the LOD was 3 μ g/kg and the LOQ was 10 μ g/kg. **6. CONCLUSIONS**  The EDWCs reported here are based on currently registered uses, and the following new uses: herb subgroup 19A (except chive s) date, sorghum, fruiting vegetable group 8
- 10, pome fruit group 11
- 10, berry subgroups 13
- 07 A, F & G, and tropical tree fruits (sugar apple, cherimoya, atemoya, custard a pple, i lama, s oursop, and b iriba)
. The fruiting vegetable group 8
- 10 use yi elded the highest value for surface water EDWCs from the new uses
. However, the globe artichoke use generated the highest EDWCs from all currently registered uses of methoxyfenozide for surface water . **Table 1**  reflects the most conservative (highest) EDWCs, which are recommended for use in HED’s dietary assessment . There remains an outstanding data requirement for monitoring of surface water and sediment in a representative sample of high use areas in close proximity to surface water. Additionally, EFED continues to have concerns that the persistence of methoxyfenozide makes it plausible that this compound may p ose a greater long
- term drinking water exposure concern than what is suggested by this screening
- level assessment. Given its persistence and mobility, once introduced into the environment, this compound may

enter sensitive environmental compartments such as aquatic sediment, and persist for extended periods of time. As such, EFED has concerns regarding the potential for long
- term drinking water exposure associated with the use of this chemical
. There is also a continuing concern regarding label language. The proposed label currentl y specifies a maximum application rate on a seasonal basis rather than an annual basis. Given the persistence of methoxyfenozide, repeated applications on crops for which there is more than one growing season per ye ar could result in greater accumulation and higher aquatic concentrations than reported in this assessment
.Page 13 of 20

**References** US EPA. 2002. SCIGROW: Users Manual. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/#scigrow USEPA. 2005. PRZM 3.12.2: Users Manual. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/#przm US EPA. 2005. EXAMS 2.98.04.06: Users Manual. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/#exams US EPA. 2006. Water models PE Version 5: User Manual. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/pe5_user_manual.htm US EPA. 2009. Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Offic e of chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Oct. 22, 2009. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/input_parameter_guidance.htm US EPA. 2011. DP Barcode: D 394308. Review of Addendum to Site Selection Report with Recommended Alternate Sampling Sites for Lentic Water Bodies in California (MRID 47809904) from Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) to Pesticide Re
- evaluation Division (PRD) from Chuck Peck to Clay ton Myers. October 12, 2011. US EPA. 201 2 a . Development and Use of Percent Cropped Area Adjustment Factors in Drinking Water Exposure Assessments . U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, September 9, 2010. Online at: http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/pca_adjustment_dwa.html US EPA. 2012b. Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters for Modeling Pesticide Concentrations in Groundwater Using the Pesticide Root Zone Model. Office of chemical Safety

and Pollution Prevention, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, and Health Canada Pesticide Management Regulatory

Agency, Oct. 15 , 2 012
. USEPA. 2013. Methoxyfenozide: Review of Interim Report on Surface Water and Sediment Monitoring (MRID 49050001)
. Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, Office of Pesticide Programs, From Environmental Fate and Effects Division (EFED) to Registration Division (RD); from Chuck Peck to Mark Suarez. March 26, 2013. US EPA MEMORANDUM. DP Barcode: D249466. Methoxyf enozide: Tier II Drinking Water EECs for Use in the Human Health Risk Assessment from environmentalPage 14 of 20 fate and effects division (EFED) to Registration Division (RD), from Dirk F. Young to Joseph Tavano and Arnold Lay ne, July 21, 1999. US EPA MEMORANDUM. DP Barcode: 331949, 340542. Drinking Water Assessment for the Section 3 New Use Petitions for the Use of Methoxyfenozide on vegetable (tuberous and corm subgroup 1 D), bushberry (subgroup 13B), dry

beans, grass, forage, fodder and hay

(group 17), peanut, green onion (subgroup 3B), avocado, guava and related tropical fruits, from environmental fate and effects division (EFED) to Registration Division (RD), from Marietta Echeverria to John Redden, October 18, 2007. US EPA MEMORANDUM. DP Barcode: D 388876 . Drinking Water Assessment for the IR
- 4 New Use Petitions for the Use of Methoxyfenozide on Root Vegetables for Crop Subgroup 1B (Except Sugar Beets) and Citrus Crop Group 10 from environmental fate and effects division (EFED) to Registration Division (RD), from Karen Milians to Richard Gebken August 17, 2011. USDA Crop Profiles. Available online at: http://www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofi les/CP_form.cfm Jones, R. David, Abel, Sidney, Effland, William, Matzner, Robert, and Parker, Ronald. 1998. An Index Reservoir for Use in Assessing Drinking Water Exposure. Chapter IV in Proposed Methods for Basin

-Scale Estimation of Pesticide Concentrations in Flowing W ater and Reservoirs for Tolerance Reassessment. , presented to the FIFRA Science Advisory Panel, July

29, 1998
.Page 15 of 20

**Attachment 1. Modeling Input and Output:**  **Sc enario/application rate:**  **Globe Artichoke /** **0.25 lb ai/A** stored as caartnewae.out Chemical: methox PRZM environment: CAlettuceSTD.txt modified Tueday, 8 January 2013 at 16:16:28 EXAMS environment: ir298.exv modified Tueday, 26 August 2008 at 05:14:07 Metfile: w23273.dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 08:04:22 Water segment concentrations (ppb) Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 46.36 45.71 43.36 27.23 19.11 6.558 1962 53.99 53.41 51.58 47.41 45.66 36.11 1963 57.25 56.63 54.66 52.15 51.3 40.88 1 964 63.73 63.03 60.56 55.6 46.36 34.45 1965 74.16 73.68 70.72 55.82 46.57 40.31 1966 70.48 69.79 67.07 59.87 57.13 47.92 1967 71.34 70.71 68.53 64.07 62.4 50.46 1968 47.98 47.55 46.35 44.96 42.16 37.33 1969 49.61 49.33 48.32 45.61 43.73 36.54 1970 73.67 72.9 67.06 50.13 42.4 37.21 1971 69.62 68.95 66.3 61.3 58.22 48.13 1972 65.75 65.02 62.31 54.13 45.24 36.15 1973 57.86 57.35 55.38 53.54 51.58 43.3 1974 98.48 97.74 93.38 65.17 54.86 47.75 1975 94.59 93.63 89.9 87.9 85.12 64.88 1976 86.34 85.8 82.86 76.74 72.94 60.33 1977 77.07 76.65 74.39 69.61 66.53 57.03 1978 72.87 72.19 69.49 64.4 62.47 54.21 1979 58.86 58.5 57.57 55.75 54.1 44.28 1980 65.12 64.59 62.65 60.68 58.62 46.84 1981 65.9 65.5 63.26 61.26 59.22 47.7 1982 46.03 45.64 44.16 42.18 40.49 36.48 1983 45.57 45.25 44.31 42.45 41.29 36.91 1984 48.94 48.46 44.03 36.03 34.64 30.79 1985 52.59 52.07 50.11 41.56 39.52 34.55 1986 49.29 48.89 47.38 44.75 44.18 39.05 1987 51.42 50.99 47.71 45.15 42.53 38.99 1988 52.45 51.96 49.8 47.08 45.33 39.16 1989 50.58 50.1 4 48.42 45.29 43.27 34.47 1990 32.88 32.65 31.95 31.31 30.29 25.83 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032258064516129 98.48 97.74 93.38 87.9 85.12 64.88 0.0645161290322581 94.59 93.63 89.9 76.74 72.94 60.33 0.0967741935483871 86.34 85.8 82.86 69.61 66.53 57.03 0.129032258064516 77.07 76.65 74.39 65.17 62.47 54.21 0.161290322580645 74.16 73.68 70.72 64.4 62.4 50.46 0.193548387096774 73.67 72.9 69.49 64.07 59.22 48.13 0.225806451612903 72.87 72.19 68.53 61.3 58.62 47.92 0.2580645 16129032 71.34 70.71 67.07 61.26 58.22 47.75 0.290322580645161 70.48 69.79 67.06 60.68 57.13 47.7 0.32258064516129 69.62 68.95 66.3 59.87 54.86 46.84 0.354838709677419 65.9 65.5 63.26 55.82 54.1 44.28 0.387096774193548 65.75 65.02 62.65 55.75 51.58 43.3 0.419354838709677 65.12 64.59 62.31 55.6 51.3 40.88 0.451612903225806 63.73 63.03 60.56 54.13 46.57 40.31 0.483870967741936 58.86 58.5 57.57 53.54 46.36 39.16 0.516129032258065 57.86 57.35 55.38 52.15 45.66 39.05 0.548387096774194 57.25 56.63 54.66 50.13 4 5.33 38.99 0.580645161290323 53.99 53.41 51.58 47.41 45.24 37.33Page 16 of 20 0.612903225806452 52.59 52.07 50.11 47.08 44.18 37.21 0.645161290322581 52.45 51.96 49.8 45.61 43.73 36.91 0.67741935483871 51.42 50.99 48.42 45.29 43.27 36.54 0.709677419354839 50.58 50.14 4 8.32 45.15 42.53 36.48 0.741935483870968 49.61 49.33 47.71 44.96 42.4 36.15 0.774193548387097 49.29 48.89 47.38 44.75 42.16 36.11 0.806451612903226 48.94 48.46 46.35 42.45 41.29 34.55 0.838709677419355 47.98 47.55 44.31 42.18 40.49 34.47 0.870967741935484 46.36 45.71 44.16 41.56 39.52 34.45 0.903225806451613 46.03 45.64 44.03 36.03 34.64 30.79 0.935483870967742 45.57 45.25 43.36 31.31 30.29 25.83 0.967741935483871 32.88 32.65 31.95 27.23 19.11 6.558 0.1 85.413 84.885 82.013 69.166 66.124 56.748 Average of yearly averages: 41.1532666666667 Inputs generated by pe5.pl
- Novemeber 2006 Data used for this run: Output File: caartnewae Metfile: w23273.dvf PRZM scenario: CAlettuceSTD.txt EXAMS environment file: ir298.exv Chemical Name: methox Descripti on Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 368 g/mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm- m^3/mol Vapor Pressure vapr 2e
- 8 torr Solubility sol 3.3 mg/L Kd Kd mg/L Koc Koc 490 mg/L Photolysis half

- life kdp 0 days Half
- life Aerobic Aquatic Metaboli sm kbacw 1559 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 1962 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 960 days Halfife Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half
- life Method: CAM 2 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm Application Rate: TAPP 0.28 kg/ha Application Efficiency: AP PEFF 0.95 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.16 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 16
-4 dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd
- mm or dd
- mmm Interval 1 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. app. rate 1 apprate 0.28 kg/ha Interval 2 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. app. rate 2 apprate 0.28 kg/ha Interval 3 interval 7 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. app. rate 3 apprate 0.28 kg/ha Record 17: FILTRA

IPSCND 3 UPTKF Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR Reservoir Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF total none, monthly or total(average of entire run) SCIGROW VERSION 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECT S DIVISION OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMSPage 17 of 20 U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY SCREENING MODEL FOR AQUATIC PESTICIDE EXPOSURE SciGrow version 2.3 chemical:Methoxyfenozide time is 1/ 3/2013 16:23:59

------------------------------------------------------------------------ Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate (lb/acre) applications (lb/acre/yr) (ml/g) metabolism (days)

------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ 0.250 4.0 1.000 2.19E+02 695.0

------------------------------------------------------------------------ groundwater screening cond (ppb) = 4.13E+00 ***** ******************************************************************* **Note: The outputs for the scenarios mentioned here are attached on a separate file name: 121027** 

**_ 407566** **_DWA scenarios** **_041613 .** 
121027_407566_D

W Ascenarios_041613 Fruiting Vegetable/FL potato (30 years simulation)

Fruiting Vegetable/FL citrus (30 years simulation)Page 18 of 20

Fruiting Vegetable/Delmarva (30 ye ars simulation)

Fruiting Vegetable/ NC cotton (30 years simulation)

Fruiting Vegetable/GA coastal (30 years simulation)Page 19 of 20Page 20 of 20

Fruiting Vegetable/WIcorn (30 years simulation)