### Environmental

### Fate and EffectsIDivision Review 

### Pirimor 50-DF 

### (Pirimicarb) 100 

### Submission Pumose and Label Informmeon 100.1 

### Submission Pumose and Pesticide Use The State of Washingtonis requesting an emergency exemption (Section 18)for the use of Pirimor to control aphids on vegetable seed crops. No new data were sub this request. 100.2 

### Formulation Information ACTIVE INGREDIENT: Pirimicarb 

## .................. -50% INERT INGREDIENTS 

## ...............-50 % 100.3 

### Avvlication Methods, Directions, Rates
I Application is.tobe made with ground or aerial equipment; according to the ~ubmission package, the majority of applications will be by ground. Rate is 2-6 oz. pf product (0.0625-0.1875lb ai) per acre. Two applications are allowed under this a maximum of 6 oz per acre per year. 100.4 

### Target Organisms Target organisms are bean aphid (Aphisfabea), green peach aphid turnip aphid (Hydaphispseudobrassicae)

### ,lettuce aphid (Acyrthosiph aphid (Aphis gos&ii). *i 100.5 

### Precautionan Labeling Under Environmental Hazards This pesticide is toxic to birds and aquatic invei-tebrates. For apply directly to water, or to areas where surface water is present or to inteqtidal areas below the mean high water mark. Do not contaminate water when di~posing of equipment washwaters. Do not apply PIRIMOR 50-DF where runoff is likelt to occur. Under Directions for Use A maximum of 2 applications of PIRIMOR 50-DF may be made. Dd not apply more than 6 oz. PIFUMOR 50-DF per acre per season. Make aerial applications when the wind velocity favors on target product
.deposition, (approximately 3-10 mph). Do not apply when wind velocity exceeds 10 mph. For aerial applications, the spray boom slhould be mounted on the aircraft so as to minimize drift caused by wingtip or rotor vortices. Boom length must not exceed 

### 75%of wing span or rotor diameter. Do not apply by 

### air within 100 yards olf lakes; reservoirs; rivers;(permanent streams, marshes or natural ponds; estuaries and commercial fish popds. Ultra Low Volume (ULV) applications areprohibited. The largest dioplet size consistent with good pest control is required. Formation of very small droplets may be minimized by appropriate nozzle s lection, by 

# d orienting nozzles away from the 

### air stream as much as possible, and 

### )y avoiding

. excessive spray boom pressure. Spray should be released at the lowest height consistent with p6st control and flight'safety. To avoidrisk of exposureto sensitiveaquatic areasaerial applicators shouldavoid application when wind direction is toward aquatic areas. 0 

### Low humidity and high temperatures increase the evaporation rate of spray droplets and therefore the likelihood of increased 

### spray drift to aquatic areas. Avoid spraying during conditions of low liumidity and/or high temperature, Do not make aerial applications during temperature inversions. lnv'prsions are characterized by stable air and increasing temperatures with height(above the ground. Mist or fog may indicate the presence of 

### an inversion in hqmid areas. The applicator may detect the presence of an inversion by producing ismoke and observing a smoke layer near the ground surface. Applicators and all small seeded.vegetable seed are requird to report EPA Headquarters, the EPA Regional Office and the State dephrtment of agriculture any adverse effects to birds resulting from the use of this @esticide in connection with the exemption and/or amendment to the exemption. Livestock may not be grazed in treated fields. 

### All of the sm& seeded vegetable crops listed are conside&xi non-food and nonfeed sites of pesticide use, and the harvest or forage or use of any poqtion of the crop, seed or seed by-product'as food or feed is prohibited in ~ash4gton State according to Washington Administrative Code 16-228-600. , I

. ~ 101 

### HazardAssessment



### . ' 101.1 

### Discussion The state of Washington is requesting an exemption for the use of Pirimor to control aphidson vegetables grown for seed. Maximum application rate is 0.1875 lb qi per acre, with two applications allowed. Exemption period is May 1 

### - September 15, 1997. This request is for use on 10,228 acres of vegetable seed crops in all counties in Washington.10

### 1.2 Environmental Fate and GroundwaterAssessme@

, Executive 

### Summary and Conclusions (see Assessment below) The environmental fate database for the unregistered chemical pirimicarb is incomplete and inconclusive (see tentative fate characteristics below). However, ylnless this compound or its degradates exhibit very high toxicities, this specific us@will not significantly impact local ecology or groundwater limited acreage, and l~w use rates imply that it in ground or surface water or actual will be significant

### in the shortterm. Assessment, below). any otheruse. However, we are likely to remain intact on the vegetation until time of harvest (reasons &en in Pate I 

## ~ At the maximum application rate of 0.188 lb a.i.lacre and for a uniform Cj-inch soil dispersaldepth, corresponding soil concentration would be approximately 0.1 pm (parts per million). For the purpose of 

### an extremely coarse screen, hypothetical maximum 

# P estimates of concentrationsin surface water and groundwater are as follows:

# ~

I Surface water: Concentration as estimated from the EFED GEFEC simula(ion model without allowance for any degradation or sorption to soil: 10-11ppb (parts der billion) Y

I Groundwater: Hypothetical maximum concentration after years of widespreapuse with no allowance for degradation or other routes of dlissipation, no sorption to soil, and a groundwater recharge rate of 30 inches per year: 28 ppb. To our knowledge, this relative (not absolute) concentration, (based on relativeuse &e) in groundkate4has never been exceeded by non-point source contamination caused by any pesticide ~askd on this specific, limited use, it is unreasonable to expect that this co 'would ever be approached in the field.
I \ ENVIRONMENTAL FATE ASSESSMENT. ' 

## __-- I The environmental fate database for the 

### Pnregistered chemicalpirimi&b is +complete and inconclusive at this time, and, therefore, inadequate to support rtgistration (comprehensive review by D. Edelsteiq, 

### 7 Jan 1994). 

### Very tentatively, irimicarb 

# P appears to exhibit a degree of persistence characterized by an aerobic soil etabolism 

# "t half-life as long as 10 months (1 to +months may be more typical). Underanaerobic conditions the compound appears even more resistant to degradation. The+ is some evidence that some of the degradates also exhibit similar persistence. Pqicarb also appears to be mobile. The leaching potential of degradates is unknown, Based on persistence and mobility, there is potential for pirimicarb movement to grou surface water, especially in coarse, acid soils of low biological activity.



## . J summary and conclusions above)?



## 7 octanol/water ratio* and aqueous solubility, bioaccumulation is not 

### \ i.,

, J A 29 Mar 1994memo from D. Edelstein of EFGWB makes clear that sincetqe weatherduring the period of pirimicarb application will typically be very dry, little degradation of pirimicarb is probable. (Drought stress 

### is the major force which spurs seed production rather than vegetative growth. For this reason, irrigation is alfo typically withheld during the summer, especially during the time of Pirimor application). For these reasons, Edelstein concluded it is likely that the compound will 

### re$ain on the foliage, and, therefore, that HED 

### should be informedthat

### pirimicarb residuds are likely 

### to remain intact on the vegetation until time ofharvest. Background. "SmalLseeded"vegetable seed crops (see attached list of

### 27 crops) grown for seed in Washington State.arebeing seriously affected by aphids. 

### All couhties would be included in this exemption. We are told that there 

### are presently nd permitted satisfactory alternatives to pirimicarb. 

### In addition, the selective pirimicarb qectsonly aphids, leaving pollinating bees and other beneficial predators and parasites !unharmed. It is important to note that since no part of the treated crops wjU be used tor food or feed, HED 

### has classijied this use @ 

### "non-foodand non-fedfl. We note th4the States 

# + of Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, and Washington have requested Section 18s for use of pirimicarb on seed alfalfa in previous years.
101.3 Likelihood of Adverse Effects

### on Nontarpet Or~unisms Terrestrial

Data from previous EEB reviews indicatethatpirimicarb is slightly toxic'to upland game birds (bobwhiteLC50= 3415ppm) and moderately to highly totric to ~aterfowl (mallard, LC50= 740 ppm; mallard LD50= 17.2 mglkg). 'I'he available

### data on rats suggestthat the chemical is moderately toxic to mammals (lLD50 is in the range of 100 to 200 

# - mglkg)?~ta ateof0.1875 lb ailacre, the maximum estimatedresiduelonternstrial food items (short grass) would be 45 ppm. This is well below 112 the LC50 of the most sensitive species (mallard), indicating We potential for acute hazard 

## tb bGd$. In the absence of avian reproduction studies, 

### EB cannot assess potedtid 

### fbr chronic avian hazard. However, the following'points should be noted: I I' I ," ' I 

### - vegetable crops are utilized by upland game birds, waterfowl, shorkbirds and songbirds for feeding, cover, nesting, and brood-rearing;



### - a memo from D. Edelstein to R. Forrest (D200865) concludes that little degradation of pirimicarb residues on foliage will occur during a typical seed alfalfa growing season;

- thus, the use of pirimicarb on. seed alfalfa represents a "repeated or dontinuous exposure" situation for birds. Pirimicarb is practically nontoxic to bees and other nontarget insects.Aauatic Data from previous 

### Em reviews-indicate that pirimicarb is slightly toxic to freshwater fish, with reported LC5O's ranging from 29 to 129ppm. Daphnid studies adicate that pirimicarb is highly toxic to aquatic invertebrates (LC50 = 19ppb [technical], 14ppb [50% WP]). No chronic data were available. Calculation of freshwater El3C (from GENFZC--see Environmental Fate and Groundwater section) provides a value of 10.51ppb following application. This value is above the level of concern (112 of the LC50 of 14 ppb = 

### 7 ppb) for aquatic invertebrates, indicating potential for acute hazard, Chronic hazard to aquatic(organisms cannot be evaluated, as no chronic data are availalble. 101.3 

### Endangered Species Considerations Of the several listed species found in the subjectcounties, none are likely to be exposed to pirimicarb through its use on vegetable seed crops. Hazard to endangered species is not anticipated from use under the proposed exemption. 101.4 

### Adeauacv ofToxicitvData Available data are sufficient to assess acute hazard under the proposed S&tion 18; chronic data are lacking. I \ 101.5

### Adequacv ofLabeling Environmental precautions labeling is adequate for this exemption. 103 

### Conclusions

,, EFED has reviewedtheproposed emergency exemptionforpirimicarb use onvegetable seed crops in Washington. While the environmental fate database is incompljzte at this time, the specialized use, limited acreage, and low userate makeit unlikely thatpotential concentrations

### in ground or surface water or actual concentrations in the imm&ate area of application will be significant in the short term. b Based on the ecological effects data submitted by the registrant, we concludiz that the proposed use does not represent acute hazard 

### to birds. However, residues on vegetation are likely to remain intact until the time of harvest, making long-term and repeated exposure possible for birds and mammals. Since no chronic avian or 

### ma-- data were available at the time of this assessment, the risk from long-term and repeated exposure to terrestrial wildlife cannot be evaluated. Aquatic toxicity values and exposure estimations do not indicate an acute hazard to freshwater fish. This use does exceed the LOC for aquatic invertebrates, indicating possible acute risk to these species; however, due to the 

### limited acreage involved withthis use, we do not expect it to result 

### in significant adverse effectsto freshwater aquatic invertebrates. Chronic risk to aquatic organisms cannotbe evaluated, as chrqnic data 

### are lacking.


### - There are no endangered species in Washington that would be adversely affwted by the proposed use on vegetable seed crops.
Alex T. Clem, Environmenw Scientist ERB I EFED (75Q7C) , 

# - Kathryn V. Montague, M.S., ERB III EFED (7507C) Daniel Rieder, Chief ERB

## m 

# /
EFED (7507C)A maximum oftwo applicationsper growing season isrequested. No more than 

### 6 ounces ofPirimor 

### 50-DF shall

### be appliedpe:r acreper season. - e) TotalNumber ofAcres to be treated: All uses listed below are vegetable cropsbeing grownfor seed in Washingtonad the acreage isbased primarily on 1993data for the listed cropfromthe publicatioi Washington Minor Crops authored

### by Alan Schreiberand Laura Ritchie of StateUniversity. 'I'here will be variations fromyear to year and the divulg acreageof some cropswould 

### be releasing proprietaryinformation. ChineseMustard 

### Brassica campestri (Chinesis Group) ChineseCabbage 

### Brassica campestri (PekinensisGroup) - BroccoliRaab 

### Brassica campestri (Ruvo Group) 

### Mustard 

### Brassica hirta,Brassica juncea Rutabaga 

### Brassica napus (NapobrassicaGroup) Rape Greens 

### Brassica napus Collard 

### Brassica oleracea (AcephalaGroup) Kale 

### Brassica oleracea (AcephalaGroup) Chinese Kale 

### Brassica oleracea (AlboglabraGroup) Cauliflower 

### Brassica oleracea (Botrytis Group) Cabbage 

### Brassica oleracea (Capitata Group) Brussels Sprouts 

### ~rassica oleracea (GemmiferaGroup) Kohrabi 

### Brassica oleracea (Gongylodies Group) Spinach Mustard 

### Brassica rapa (Pervirdis Group) Turnip 

### Brassica rapa (Rapifera Group) Turnip,Fodder 

### Brassica campestri (RapiferaGroup) included above Turnip, Fodder 

### Brassica septiceps Arugula 

### Eruca sativa Radish* 

### Rhaphanu sativus Swiss Chard 

### Beta vulgaris(CiclaGroup) Beet, Table 

### Beta vulgaris Spinach 

### Spinacia oleracea Endive 

### Cichoriumendiva Lettuce 

### Lactuca sativa Coriander 

### Coriandrusativum Parsnip 

### Pastinaca sativa Parsley 

### Petroselin crispum *Excludingdaikonradish When a rangewas given for a crop the higher figure was used to more closely e7timate the maximum exposure relative to that crop. Total estimated 1997acreage ofnained seed crops in Washington is lessthan 80per cent ofthe 10,228acres listed above or hot moreRUN No. 1 FOR pirimicarb INPUT VALUES



### ....................................................................

RATE (#/AC) APPLICATIONS SOIL SOLUBILITY % SPRAY INCORP

ONE (MULT ) NO.-INTERVAL KOC (PPM)I DRIFT DEPTH (IN)



### ..................................................................... .I88( ,188) 1 1 .O 3000.0 5.0 

## .10
FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES (DAYS) --------------------------------------------------------------.------- METABOLIC 

### DAYS UNT~L 

# HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSI[S 

### METABOLIC COMBINED (FIELD) 

### RAIN/RUNOFF (POND). (POND-EFF) (POND) (PPND)

GENERIC EECs (IN PPB) ---------------------------------------------.----------- PEAK AVERAGE 4 AVERAGE 21 AVERAGE 56 GEEC DAY GEEC DAY GEEC DAY GEEC



### ........................................................ 10.56 10.55 10.54 10.51
DO YOU WANT ANOTHER RUM (Y OR N) 

### --->
RUN No. 1 FOR pirimicarb * INPUT VALUES



### ..............................................................

RATE (#/AC) APPLICATIONS SOIL SOLUBILtITY % SPRAY INC



### ONE (MULT) NO.

### - INTERVAL KOC (PPM) 

### DRIFT 

### DEPT~I (IN)



### .................................................................... .188( -188) 1 1 .O 3000.0 5.0 

### .O

,- FIELD AND STANDARD POND HALFLIFE VALUES (DAYS)



### .............................................................. METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC CO (FIELD) RAIN/RUNOFF (POND) (POND-EFF) (POND) (POND)



### .................................................................... .oo 2 N/A -00- 

### .oo .oo 

## *******

I I GENERIC EECs (IN PPB)



### ........................................................ PEAK AVERAGE 4 AVERAGE 21 AVERAGE 56 GEEC DAY GEEC DAY GEEC DAY GEEC



# ~ I DO YOU WANT ANOTHER RUN (Y OR N) ---> I I 

### I' / 

# )??)

, , I LL4 

### "
A DP BARCODE: D235364 -7 ;GO
&a 

# SI i?
i CASE: 288614 DATA PACKAGE RECORD DATE: 04/18/9 SUBMISSION: S521151 BEAN SHEE:T Page 1 of 1

CASE TYPE: EMERGENCY 'XEMP ACTION: 515 SECl8 OC N-F/F USE FLANKING : 0

# poINfi

, CHEMICALS: 106101 P rimicarb (ANSI) ID#: 97WA0022 COMPANY 

# / PRODUCT 41 ROB FORREST 703-308-8417 ROOM: CSl 6G : STEPHENSCHAIBLE 703-308-8337 ~OOM: CS1 6-W32 DUE OUT DATE: 05/22/97 

## * * * DATA PACKAGE INFORMATION 

## * * * EXPEDITE: N DATE SEiNT irimicarb (ANSI) ssion Related Data Package LABEL: 

### Y DATE OUT 

### / / / / / / ADMIN DUE NEGOT

PROJ


## * * 

## * DATA REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS 

## * * 

## * Please review this section 18 request from Washingtod to use pirimicarb on vegetable seed crops to control aphids. This is the third year this use has been requested. EFGWB waived data requirements for a conditional registration of this chemical on alfalfa seed crop. Are the conditions unQer which these data were waived also applicable to vegethble seed crops? Previous 18s have stated that given the low volume of product applied (maximum of 6 oz. product/acre/season applied to a maximum of 8,000 acrhs) 

### , there is minimal risk of groundwater contamination 

# If either of these claims are.found to be true, an abbreylated review would be sufficient for our purposes. If I calp be of help, please call. Steve Schaible (308-8337) 

## * * * DATA PACKAGE EVALUATION 

## * 

## * * No evaluation is written for this data package



## * * * ADDITIONAL DATA PACKAGES FOR THIS SUBMISSION DP BC BRANCH/SECTION DATE OUT DUE BACK

. INS 235362 RCAB/PIRAT 04/18/97 05/08/97 

### Y

# ZENECA
HandDelivered May 10, 1995 ZENECA Ag Products 1800 Concord Pike Wilmington Delaware 19897 Telephone (307) 886-1000 Telex 62032 112 Fax (302) 886-11553 Mr. RobertForrest ProductManager (14) Insecticide-RodenticideBranch Registration Division (7505C) U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency CrystalMall 2 192 1 Jefferson DavisParkway Arlington, VA 22202
Dear Mr. Forrest: RE: Pirimor 50DF EPAfile symbol 10182-GTN (containing the active ingredient pirimicarb) ConfirmationofMeetingMay 17,1995to Discuss the Degradation and Mobility ofPirimicarbin Soil and Zeneca's plans to initiate the Terrestrial Field Dissipation

Thisletter is to confirm our meeting withyou and representatives oftheEnvironmental Fate &E ects Division. Our meetingis scheduledtobe held onWednesday May 17, 1995at 3:00pm in CrystalMall 2, Room 709. Zenecawill have four (4) attendees: 

# K

-- Sandy O'Bryan 

### -Regulatory ProductManager $pirimicarbyj Jim Wagner

### - Regulatory ProductManager '----- A "" Colleen Spurgeon

### -Field StudyManager IanHill 

### -Research Associate & SeniorTeam Leader in Soil Metabolism (Jealott's Hill Research Station)
We expectthe meeting to be no longerthan one (1) hour. I attachedan agenda foryour convenieqce. If you require additional information,please call me at (302) 886-8789.

Sincerely,

i 

### , SaundraM. O'Bryan Regulatory ProductManager uMeeting: May 17,1995 PIRIMICARB Degradation &Mobility in Soil Request the Agency Guidance

## - Regarding Plans forTerrestrialField Dissipation Crystal Mall 2 Room 709 AGENDA: Meetingto beGn 3:00 pm
S. 0'Brvan (5minutes) Introductions Review of Current Regulatory Status &Intended Uses of Pirinnor 50DF
I.Hill (30minutes)
a. Prediction ofPirimicarbDegradation in Soil 

### + potential routes 

## + likely products b. Laboratory Data 

### + rate ofdegradation 

### + route ofdegradation 

## + bound residues 

## + mobility in soil

d. ZenecaProposal forFurther Work

### -field dissipation
All (25minutes)
e. Discussion 3 Agency Guidanceon Soil dissipation 3 LaboratoryData in SupportofRegistration Adjourn: 4:00 pm