Acetamiprid DP No.: 372626

Page 1 of 14

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

Jan 14, 2010

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Acetamiprid: Revised Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Food Uses

on Clover Grown for Seed, Small Vine Climbing Fruits, except Fuzzy Kiwifruit, 

Subgroup 13-07F, Greenhouse Grown Tomatoes and Tea. 

PC Code: 099050 DP Barcode: D372626

Decision No.: 408298 Registration Nos.: 8033-23, 8033-36, 8033-94

Petition No.: 9E7544 Regulatory Action: Amended Section 3

Risk Assessment Type: Single Chemical 

Aggregate

Case No.: N/A

TXR No.: N/A CAS No.: 135410-20-7

MRID Nos.: N/A 40 CFR: §180.578

FROM: Dennis McNeilly, Chemist

Registration Action Branch 2

Health Effects Division (7509P)

THROUGH: Christina Swartz, Branch Chief

Richard Loranger, Ph.D., Senior Scientist

Registration Action Branch 2

Health Effects Division (7509P)

TO: Laura Nollen, Risk Manager Reviewer

Barbara Madden, Team Leader (RM Team 5)

RIMUERB/Registration Division (RD) (7505P)
Page 2 of 14

Table of Contents

1.0 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................3

2.0 Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Use in Human Risk Assessments..............5

3.0 Dietary Exposure/Risk Characterization.........................................................................................6

4.0 Residential (Non-Occupational) Exposure/Risk Characterization ...............................................9

4.1 Residential Handler Exposure................................................................................................10

4.2. Residential Postapplication Exposure....................................................................................10

5.0 Aggregate Risk Assessments and Risk Characterization.............................................................12

5.1 Acute Term Aggregate Risk ..................................................................................................12

5.2 Short- and Intermediate-Term Aggregate Risk......................................................................12

5.3 Chronic-Term Aggregate Risk...............................................................................................13

6.0 Data Needs and Label Recommendations .....................................................................................13

References:....................................................................................................................................................13
Page 3 of 14

1.0 Executive Summary

This memorandum serves to revise HED’s human health risk assessment for acetamiprid (D. McNeilly, 

D369474, 12/1/09). RD has requested that HED redo the dietary exposure analyses using 100% percent 

crop treated for amended use patterns, i.e., grapes and other crop subgroup 13-07F commodities, and 

tomatoes. This memorandum revaluates the acute and chronic dietary risk and exposures, and updates the 

aggregate exposure and risk based on the revised chronic dietary exposure assessment.

The dietary assessment is partially refined, using field trial data, percent crop-treated values, and various

empirical processing factors. Estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs), which are based upon the 

highest application values of all registered and proposed uses, have been incorporated directly into the 

dietary exposure model. Acute and chronic dietary risk estimates for all population subgroups do not 

indicate a risk of concern. Acute dietary exposure estimates at the 99.9th percentile are below HED’s level 

of concern for the general U.S. population and all other population subgroups. For the U.S. population, the 

estimated exposure of 0.024 mg/kg/day corresponds to 24% aPAD; for children 1-2 years old, the estimated 

exposure of 0.043 mg/kg/day corresponds to an acute dietary risk of 43% aPAD. Chronic dietary exposure 

to acetamiprid, including existing and proposed uses, is below HED’s level of concern for the U.S.

population and all other population subgroups. For the general US population, an estimated exposure of 

0.0028 mg/kg/day corresponds to 4% of the chronic population adjusted dose (cPAD); children 1-2 years 

old were the highest exposed population subgroup, with an estimate of 0.010 mg/kg/day, or 15% cPAD. 

Risks for all population subgroups are less than 100% cPAD, and are not of concern.

Aggregate risk assessments for acute, short-term, and chronic durations were conducted. Residential 

exposures incorporated into the aggregate assessments are based on currently registered residential uses

(indoor crack and crevice, and outdoor perimeter treatment). All aggregate assessments indicate no risks of 

concern (aggregate MOEs ≥ 270).

Environmental Justice Considerations

Potential areas of environmental justice concerns, to the extent possible, were considered for this human 

health risk assessment, in accordance with US Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, 

http://www.eh.doe.gov/oepa/guidance/justice/eo12898.pdf.

As a part of every pesticide risk assessment, OPP considers a large variety of consumer subgroups 

according to well-established procedures. In line with OPP policy, HED estimates risks to population 

subgroups from pesticide exposures that are based on patterns of that subgroup’s food and water 

consumption, and activities in and around the home that involve pesticide use in a residential setting. 

Extensive data on food consumption patterns are compiled by USDA under the CSFII, and are used in 

pesticide risk assessments for all registered food uses of a pesticide. These data are analyzed and 

categorized by subgroups based on age, season of the year, ethnic group, and region of the country. 

Whenever appropriate, non-dietary exposures based on home use of pesticide products, associated risks for 

adult applicators and for toddlers, youths, and adults entering or playing on treated areas post-application 

are evaluated. Further considerations are currently in development as OPP has committed resources and 
Page 4 of 14

expertise to the development of specialized software and models that consider exposure to bystanders and 

farm workers as well as lifestyle and traditional dietary patterns among specific subgroups.

Review of Human Research

This risk assessment relies in part on data from studies in which adult human subjects were intentionally

exposed to a pesticide or other chemical. These studies, which comprise the Pesticide Handlers Exposure 

Database (PHED), have been determined to require a review of their ethical conduct, and have received 

that review. The studies in PHED were considered appropriate (or ethically conducted) for use in risk 

assessments.
Page 5 of 14

2.0 Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints for Use in Human Risk Assessments

The following table was labeled as table 3.5.11 in HED’s Dec 1, 2009 review (D369474, D. McNeilly). It is included here to confirm 

that end-points have not changed since that recent review and also for easy reference.

Table 3.5.11a. Summary of Toxicological Doses and Endpoints of Acetamiprid for Use in Dietary and Non-Occupational Human Health Risk 

Assessment

Exposure Scenario Dose Used in 

Risk Assessment

Uncertainty 

Factors/FQPA 

Safety Factors

RfD, PAD Level 

of Concern for 

Risk Assessment

Study and Toxicological Effect

Acute Dietary (All 

populations)

NOAEL = 10 

mg/kg/day

UFA = 10x

UFH = 10x

FQPA SF = 1x

aPAD = 0.10 

mg/kg/day

Developmental Neurotoxicity in rat

LOAEL = 45 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight and body 

weight gains in offspring, decreased early pup survival on PND 0-1, 

and decreased startle response on PND 20/60 in males.

Acute Neurotoxicity Study in rat

LOAEL = 30 mg/kg/day based on decreased locomotor activity

Chronic Dietary

all populations

NOAEL = 7.1 

mg/kg/day

UFA = 10x

UFH = 10x

FQPA SF = 1x

cPAD = 0.071 

mg/kg/day

Chronic Toxicity/Oncogenicity Study in rats

LOAEL = 17.5 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight and body 

weight gains in females and hepatocellular vacuolation in males.

Short- and IntermediateTerm Incidental Oral 

(1-30 days and 1-6 mo.)

NOAEL = 10 

mg/kg/day

UFA = 10x

UFH = 10x

FQPA SF = 1x

LOC for MOE = 100 Developmental Neurotoxicity in rat

LOAEL = 45 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight and body 

weight gains in offspring, decreased early pup survival on PND 0-1, 

and decreased startle response on PND 20/60 in males.

Short- and Intermediate-term 

Dermal

(1-30 days, 1–6 mo.)

NOAEL = 10 

mg/kg/day

DAF = 10%

UFA = 10x

UFH = 10x

FQPA SF = 1x

LOC for MOE = 100 Developmental Neurotoxicity in rat

LOAEL = 45 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight and body 

weight gains in offspring, decreased early pup survival on PND 0-1, 

and decreased startle response on PND 20/60 in males.

Short- and Intermediate-term 

Inhalation

(1-30 days, 1–6 mo.)

NOAEL = 10 

mg/kg/day

IAF = 100%

UFA = 10x

UFH = 10x

FQPA SF = 1x

LOC for MOE = 100 Developmental Neurotoxicity in rat

LOAEL = 45 mg/kg/day based on decreased body weight and body 

weight gains in offspring, decreased early pup survival on PND 0-1, 

and decreased startle response on PND 20/60 in males.

Cancer (oral, dermal, inhalation) - not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.

DAF = dermal absorption factor. Point of Departure (POD) = A data point or an estimated point that is derived from observed dose-response data and used to mark the beginning of extrapolation to 

determine risk associated with lower environmentally relevant human exposures. NOAEL = no observed adverse effect level. LOAEL = lowest observed adverse effect level. UF = uncertainty factor. 

UFA = extrapolation from animal to human (interspecies). UFH = potential variation in sensitivity among members of the human population (intraspecies). FQPA SF = FQPA Safety Factor. PAD = 

population adjusted dose (a = acute, c = chronic). RfD = reference dose. MOE = margin of exposure. LOC = level of concern. N/A = not applicable.
Page 6 of 14

3.0 Dietary Exposure/Risk Characterization

Acute and chronic dietary risk assessments were conducted for acetamiprid using the Dietary

Exposure Evaluation Model (DEEM-FCID, Version 2.03) which uses food consumption data 

from the USDA’s Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII, 1994-1996 and 

1998). The acute and chronic dietary analyses are considered partially refined by the inclusion 

of percent crop treated values and processing data. The full dietary analysis for the subject 

petition can be found in the HED memorandum: Acetamiprid. Revised Acute and Chronic 

Dietary Exposure Assessments to Support Section 3 Registration of Uses on Clover, Small Vine 

Climbing Fruits, except Kiwifruit, Subgroup 13-07F, Greenhouse Grown Tomatoes and Tea. 

D372890, 1/14/10, D. McNeilly.

The current acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments include existing uses and the 

tolerances proposed by the Interregional Research Project Number 4 (IR-4) for new uses of 

acetamiprid on clover grown for seed, small vine climbing fruits, except kiwifruit, subgroup 13-

07F (amending established grape uses), greenhouse-grown tomatoes, and tea.

For the acute dietary assessment, field trial residues were refined when possible. If field trial 

residues were reported below the limit of quantification (LOQ), HED assumed 1⁄2 LOQ (i.e., 

0.005 ppm). In certain cases where it was appropriate, HED translated field trial data from one 

commodity to another (e.g., peaches to nectarines, or plum to apricots). Percent crop treated 

estimates, which exist for only several of the subject crops (apples, broccoli, celery, lettuce, 

pears, grapefruit, oranges, peppers, and spinach), were incorporated into the dietary assessments

as a refinement. 100% crop treated was assumed for both grapes and tomatoes, since these 

commodities are involved in the label use amendments. Average percent crop treated values for 

commodities were applied to the chronic dietary assessment, and maximum percent crop treated 

values were applied to the acute dietary assessment. Processing factors based on submitted

studies were incorporated into the acute dietary analyses for the following commodities: apple 

juice, orange juice, grapefruit juice, raisins, dried prunes, and tomato puree. For all other 

commodities included in the acute assessment, the DEEMTM Version 7.87 default processing 

factors were used. Those default factors were used for all processed commodities in the chronic 

assessment except for grape juice, and raisins (dried prunes and tomato paste have separate 

tolerances). Finally, tolerance level residues were also used for livestock commodities.

Usage Data

In order to refine the dietary exposure estimates for acetamiprid, HED requested a Screening 

Level Usage Analysis (SLUA), which was conducted by the Biological and Economic Analysis 

Division (BEAD), 6/11/09. The SLUA includes estimates of maximum %CT for the acute 

assessment and average %CT for determining chronic exposure (Table 3.0). Commodities with 

the most significant acetamiprid usage in terms of maximum %CT include pears (60%), apples 

(30%), celery (45%), and lettuce (20%). Commodities with the most significant usage in terms 

of lbs ai applied include apples (10,000), cotton (20,000), and pears (5,000).
Page 7 of 14

Table 3.0. Percent Crop Treated Data Used in DEEM

Commodity Avg Max

Apples 20 30

Broccoli 5 15

Cabbage 5 10

Cauliflower 10 15

Celery 25 45

Cotton 5 5

Grapefruit 2.5 5

1

Lemons 5 100

Lettuce 10 20

Oranges 2.5 5

Peaches 1 2.5

Pears 35 60

Peppers 2.5 5

Potatoes 2.5 2.5

Pumpkins 1 2.5

Spinach 5 15

Squash 2.5 2.5

1 - The residue distribution file for oranges which used 5% CT was also used for grapefruit. This was 

higher than the 2.5% CT for grapefruit estimated by BEAD and is more conservative.

For the acute analysis, %CT was incorporated into RDFs. For the chronic analysis, average 

%CT was included for the commodities listed in the table above. 

3.1 Exposure and Risk Characterization

The dietary analyses reflect all currently registered and proposed acetamiprid uses and indicate 

that both the acute and chronic dietary exposure do not present a risk concern for HED for the 

general U.S. population or any of population subgroup (Table 3.1).

HED incorporated EDWCs directly into the DEEMTM FCID model for “water, direct, all 

sources” and “water, indirect, all sources.” For the acute assessment, an EDWC of 20.1 ppb was 

entered into the model, and for the chronic assessment, the value of 4.9 ppb was used.

Acute Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Results and Characterization

The probabilistic acute dietary exposure assessment included anticipated residues from field 

residue trials, processing factors, maximum %CT estimates (for existing uses only) generated by

the Biological and Economic Analysis Division (BEAD), and the modeled peak concentration of

acetamiprid residues in surface water sources of drinking water. 100 %CT was assumed for 

grapes, tomatoes, and crops where % crop treated information was not available. Although the 

acute assessment has been refined, the resulting exposure estimates are still considered 
Page 8 of 14

conservative since field trial data were the basis for the anticipated residues, and because a lower 

tier drinking water model (FIRST) was used to estimate residues in drinking water.

Acute dietary exposure estimates at the 99.9th percentile are below HED’s level of concern for 

the general US population and all other population subgroups. For the US population, the 

estimated exposure of 0.024 mg/kg/day corresponds to 24% aPAD; for children 1-2 years old, 

the estimated exposure of 0.043 mg/kg/day corresponds to an acute dietary risk of 43% aPAD.

Chronic Dietary (Food and Drinking Water) Exposure Results and Characterization

For the chronic analysis, tolerance-level residues were assumed for all food commodities with 

existing and proposed acetamiprid tolerances. Percent crop treated was used for many 

commodities as detailed in Table 3.0. The chronic analysis also included the modeled surface 

water annual average residue in drinking water. Even though %CT information was used in the 

chronic analysis, the exposure and risk estimates are still conservative since tolerance level 

residues were used, because 100 %CT was assumed for crops where % crop treated information 

was not available, and because a lower tier drinking water model (FIRST) was used.

Chronic dietary exposure to acetamiprid, including existing and proposed uses, is below HED’s 

level of concern for the U.S. population and all other population subgroups. For the general U.S.

population, and estimated exposure of 0.0028 mg/kg/day corresponds to 4% of the chronic 

population adjusted dose (cPAD); children 1-2 years old were the highest exposed population 

subgroup, with an estimate of 0.010 mg/kg/day, or 15 % cPAD. Risks for all population 

subgroups are less than 100 % cPAD, and are not of concern.
Page 9 of 14

Table 3.1. Summary of Dietary (Food + Water) Exposure and Risk for Acetamiprid

Population Subgroup

Acute Dietary

(99.9th Percentile) Chronic Dietary

Dietary Exposure 

(mg/kg/day) % aPAD Dietary Exposure (mg/kg/day) % cPAD

General U.S. Population 0.023768 24 0.002835 4.0

All Infants (< 1 year old) 0.031227 31 0.005206 7.3

Children 1-2 years old 0.042928 43 0.010358 15

Children 3-5 years old 0.034282 34 0.007296 10

Children 6-12 years old 0.024123 24 0.004055 5.7

Youth 13-19 years old 0.017682 18 0.002170 3.1

Adults 20-49 years old 0.015543 16 0.002031 2.9

Adults 50+ years old 0.013291 13 0.002130 3.0

Females 13-49 years old 0.013133 13 0.002057 2.9

3.2 Cancer Dietary Risk

HED has classified acetamiprid as “not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.” Based upon this 

classification, HED has determined there is no cancer risk associated with the existing and 

proposed uses.

4.0 Residential (Non-Occupational) Exposure/Risk Characterization

The registrant has not proposed new or revised residential uses. Therefore, new residential 

handler and postapplication exposure assessments were not conducted. Acetamiprid is 

registered for controlling a wide variety of indoor and outdoor insect pests in residential settings. 

The MOEs for residents applying bait and gel products were 1500-3500 (D303171, T. Moriarty, 

10/25/07). In a more recent assessment of exposures to residential handlers from products used 

on indoor and outdoor residential settings, the risks were found to be not of concern for all 

scenarios identified (D353040, Z. Figueroa, 12/1/08). An analysis of the postapplication risks to 

adults and children from contacting treated areas has also been performed recently (D353012, C. 

Swartz, 12/12/08). In the tables below, only the risk to children are shown since as noted in the 

12/12/08 memo they are the worse case versus those for adults.
Page 10 of 14

Table 4a. Acetamiprid: Short- and Intermediate-Term Postapplication Exposures and Risks to Toddlers Following

 Turf Treatments in Residential Settings.1

Exposure Scenario

Application 

Rate

(lb AI/acre)

Exposure (mg/kg/day) MOE 2

Short-term Interm. term Short-term Interm. term

Residential turf (dermal) 

0.187

0.0072 0.0036 1,400 2,800

Hand to mouth (oral) 0.0028 0.0013 3,600 7,600

Object to mouth (oral) 0.00069 NA 14,500 NA

Incidental soil ingestion (oral) 0.0000093 NA 1,100,000 NA

Total exposure (dermal & oral) N/A 0.0107 0.0049 900 2,000

1. From C. Swartz, D353012, 12/12/08.

2. Short- & intermediate-term dermal or oral NOAEL (10 mg/kg/day)/exposure (mg/kg/day).

TABLE 4b: Acetamiprid: Short-term Postapplication Exposure and Risk to Toddlers Following Indoor Crack 

 and Crevice Treatments 1

Exposure Scenario Descriptor Exposure (mg/kg/day) MOE 2

Dermal exposure

Carpet and hard surfaces

0.0195 510

Incidental oral exposure 0.0065 1500

Total dermal & oral exposures 0.026 380

1. From C. Swartz, D353012, 12/12/08.

2. Short- & intermediate-term dermal or oral NOAEL (10 mg/kg/day)/exposure (mg/kg/day).

Aggregate exposures of acetamiprid include the short- and intermediate-term postapplication 

exposures following turf treatment and the short-term postapplication exposure following indoor 

crack and crevice treatment.

4.1 Residential Handler Exposure

The MOEs for residents applying bait and gel products were 1500-3500 (D303171, T. Moriarty, 

10/25/07). In a recent assessment of exposures to residential handlers from products used on 

indoor and outdoor residential settings, the risks are not of concern for all applicable scenarios 

identified (D353040, Z. Figueroa, 12/1/08).

4.2. Residential Postapplication Exposure

An evaluation of postapplication exposure resulting from the proposed use and label change was 

completed (D353040, Z. Figueroa, 12/1/08 and D366701, S. Oonnithan, 10/9/09); risks were not 

of concern for any of the scenarios identified and assessed. Detailed discussions of the 

assumptions and methods used for assessing residential exposure from the proposed use are 

provided in the 12/1/08 memorandum.

The postapplication scenarios assessed for toddlers’ exposure following perimeter treatment 

include:
Page 11 of 14

 Dermal exposure from treated lawns due to high contact lawn activities; 

 Hand-to-mouth transfer of pesticide residues on lawns; 

 Object-to-mouth transfer of pesticide residues on lawns; and 

 Incidental ingestion of soil from pesticide-treated residential areas.

Risks for these scenarios are provided in Table 4.2a.

Table 4.2a. Short- and Intermediate-Term Dermal & Indirect Ingestion - Toddler Residential Risk Estimates 

for Postapplication Exposure on Turf

Exposure Scenario Route of 

Exposure

Application 

Rate

(lb ai/acre)

Dermal Transfer 

Coefficient (μg/cm2)

Absorbed Dose 

(mg/kg/day) MOE

Residential Turf Dermal

0.187

5,200

(Short-term)

0.0072

(Short-term) 1,400

2,600

(Intermediate-term)

0.0036

(Intermediate-term) 2,800

Hand to Mouth Oral NA

0.0028

(Short-term) 3,600

0.0013

(Intermediate-term) 7,600

Object to Mouth Oral NA 0.00069 14,500

Incidental Soil 

Ingestion Oral NA 0.0000093 1,100,000

Combined Exposure1 N/A N/A N/A

0.01071

(Short-term) 9001

0.00491

(Intermediate-term) 2,000

1

1- Combined exposure is the sum of dermal and oral exposures.

Table 4.2b summarizes the postapplication exposure and risk for toddlers resulting from contact 

with carpet and hard surfaces following crack and crevice application of F4688 50 WP 

Insecticide/Termiticide on indoor surfaces. The bolded values represent the exposure to be 

aggregated with exposure from food and drinking water.

TABLE 4.2b: Postapplication Exposure and Risk Following Indoor Crack/Crevice 

Treatment.

Scenario Descriptor Daily Dose

(mg/kg/day) MOE

Dermal Exposure Carpet and

Hard Surfaces 0.0195 510

Incidental Oral 

Exposure

Carpet and Hard 

Surfaces 0.0065 1500

Combined Dermal 

Incidental Oral 

Exposure

Carpet and Hard 

Surfaces 0.0260 380
Page 12 of 14

5.0 Aggregate Risk Assessments and Risk Characterization

Consistent with FQPA, HED considers aggregate risk to a pesticide from the three major routes 

(dermal, oral, and inhalation) when potential residential exposures exist. In its acetamiprid

aggregate assessment, HED combined dietary (food + water) and non-dietary (residential) 

exposure sources to obtain an estimated aggregate exposure. When aggregating exposures and 

risks from various sources, HED considers both the route and duration of exposure. Based upon 

the residential use pattern of acetamiprid products, HED has determined that acute, short-term, 

intermediate-term and chronic aggregate risk assessments are appropriate. 

5.1 Acute Term Aggregate Risk

The acute aggregate risk is equal to the acute dietary exposure via food and drinking water, and 

therefore is identical to the exposure and risk characterization found in Section 3.1. The acute 

aggregate risks for acetamiprid are less than 100% of the aPAD for all population subgroups and,

therefore, do not pose a risk concern for HED.

5.2 Short- and Intermediate-Term Aggregate Risk

Short-term aggregate risk is based on the chronic (average) dietary exposure (food + water) 

combined with short-term residential exposure. Intermediate-term aggregate risk is based on the 

chronic (average) dietary exposure combined with intermediate-term residential exposure.

Short- and intermediate-term aggregate risks for residential handlers were assessed previously by

T. Moriarty (see Table 15, D303171, 10/25/07). The aggregate MOEs for two adult populations 

(20-49 years; 50+ years) were 900 to 930. Since the dietary exposure estimates are now more 

refined due to the greater use of percent crop treated, these aggregate risks would be even lower 

and are not of concern.

For short-term and intermediate-term aggregate risks, the combined chronic dietary (food + 

water) exposure is combined with short- and intermediate-term residential postapplication 

exposures for toddlers. The combined food, water and residential exposures are then compared 

to the dose for risk assessment to determine the resulting margin of exposure (MOE). HED has 

updated the dietary component (food and water) in this assessment. In the case of acetamiprid, 

all short- and intermediate-term risk assessments are based on the effects observed in the DNT 

study, and therefore exposures from dermal and oral routes have been combined. See Table 5.2 

for a summary of short- and intermediate-term aggregate risks for toddlers.
Page 13 of 14

TABLE 5.2: Acetamiprid Short- and Intermediate-Term Aggregate Exposure

 and Risk for Toddlers.

Scenario

Combined 

Dermal/Oral 

Exposure

(mg/kg/day)1

Chronic Food Exposure 

Food

(mg/kg/day)2

Aggregate 

Exposure

(mg/kg/day)3

MOE4

Indoor Exposure 

Crack and Crevice 

Treatment

(short-term)

0.0260 0.010358 0.0364 270

Turf Exposure

(short-term) 0.0107 0.010358 0.0211 470

Turf Exposure 

(intermediate-term) 0.0049 0.010358 0.0153 650

1. Combined dermal and oral exposures were taken from D366701, S. Oonnithan, 10/9/09.

2. Chronic food exposure does not change with each scenario; see Table 5.2.2.

3. Aggregate exposure = Combined dermal/oral exposure + chronic food exposure.

4. MOE = NOAEL/Aggregate Exposure = 10 (mg/kg/day)/aggregate exposure (mg/kg/day).

Short- and intermediate-term aggregate risks (MOEs) are not of concern. HED notes that the 

lowest aggregate MOE of 270 is based on the indoor use. The MOEs calculated for exposure 

from turf are higher, but are considered to be more conservative, because the intended use 

pattern does not include broadcast treatment of lawns, but has been assessed as such in order to 

be protective. Adult aggregate risks due to postapplication exposure have not been assessed 

since the toddler risks are the worst case.

5.3 Chronic-Term Aggregate Risk

The dietary exposure pathway (food and drinking water) is the only source of chronic exposure 

to acetamiprid (i.e., 180 consecutive days or more). Therefore, the chronic aggregate exposure 

and risk estimates are equivalent to the chronic dietary exposure and risk estimates discussed in 

Section 3.1 above. The chronic aggregate risks for acetamiprid are less than 100% of the cPAD 

for all population subgroups and, do not pose a risk concern for HED.

6.0 Data Needs and Label Recommendations

The data needs and labels recommendations remain unchanged since the Dec 1, 2009 

memorandum (D369474, D. McNeilly).

References:

Acetamiprid. Revised Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessments (Food and Drinking 

Water) to Support Section 3 Registration of Uses on Clover, Small Vine Climbing Fruits, except 
Page 14 of 14

Kiwifruit, Subgroup 13-07F, Greenhouse Grown Tomatoes and Tea. D372890, 01/14/10, D. 

McNeilly.

Acetamiprid: Human Health Risk Assessment for Proposed Food Uses on Clover Grown for 

Seed, Small Vine Climbing Fruits, except Kiwifruit, Subgroup 13-07F, Greenhouse Grown 

Tomatoes and Tea. . D369474, 12/01/09, D. McNeilly.