MEMORANDUM 

Subject: 

To: 

From: 

Through: 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON D.C., 20460 

OFFICE OF 

CHEMICAL SAFETY ANO 

POLLUTION PREVENTION 

PC Code: 122305 

July JO, 2015 

Addendum to Section 3 Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk 

Assessment for Benzovindiflupyr New Chemical Registration for 

Proposed Uses on Blueberries, Canola, Cereal Crops (oats, wheat, rye, and 

barley), Corn, Cotton, Cucurbits, Tomatoes, Grapes, Legumes, Peanuts, 

Pome fruit, Soybeans, Potatoes. Turf Grass, and Nursery crops. 

DP Barcode No.: 428095 

Shaunta Hill, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist 

Shaja Joyner, Product Manager 

Cynthia Giles-Parker, Branch Chief 

Fungicide Branch 

Registration Division (7505P) 

Geoffrey 

Gabe 

Environmental 

Rothman

Sinclair

, 

Risk 

Environmental 

, Ph

Branch 

.D., Bio

V 

logi

Scientist 

st ~ 

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) 

Mah Shamim, Ph.D., Branch Chief d 

Environmental Risk Branch V 

Environmental Fate and Effects Division (75 ·) 

This memorandum transmits an addendum to the Section 3 New Chemical ecological risk 

assessment for the nev.r proposed fungicide benzovinditlupyr from the Environmental Fate and 

Effects Division (EFED) (DP Barcode Nos. 408819, 4088221 , 408822, 408824, 408825, 408826, 

408827, and 415318, dated June 30, 2015). The addendum addresses a myriad of mitigation 

measures proposed from the current labels by the registrant to address the risks to non-target 

aq uatic and terrestrial organisms identified in the risk assessment. This document describes each 

of the mitigation measures and addresses their i1n pact on the exposure analysis for non-target 

aquatic and terrestrial organisms and the resulting changes in risk conclusions. This document 

also r e-affirms the need for data r egarding dietary and chronic honeybee toxicity studies to 

address uncertainti es for terrestrial invertebrates. Furthermore, a targeted wa ter body 

monitoring study is recommended to verify the exposure and potential buildup of 
2

benzovindiflupyr in aquatic habitats that is identified in this risk assessment addendum. This 

monitoring study is also critical for addressing the remaining risks identified mainly for freshwater 

fish. EFED recommends that the requested water body monitoring study along with the additional

honeybee toxicity studies be considered to support future registration decisions for this new active 

ingredient. 
3

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

Addendum to Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk 

Assessment for Benzovindiflupyr New Chemical 

Registration for Proposed Uses on blueberries, canola, 

cereal crops (oats, wheat, rye, and barley), corn, 

cotton, cucurbits, tomatoes, grapes, legumes, peanuts, 

pome fruit, soybeans, potatoes, turf grass, and nursery 

crops.

Chemical Formula: C18H15Cl2F2N3O

PC Code: 122305

CAS Number: 1072957-71-1

Prepared by:

Gabe Rothman, Environmental Scientist

Geoffrey Sinclair, Ph.D., Biologist 

Reviewed by:

José L. Meléndez, Chemist

Justin Housenger, Biologist

Mah Shamim, Ph.D., Branch Chief, ERB5

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Pesticide Programs

Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Environmental Risk Branch V

1200 Pennsylvania Ave.

Mail Code 7507P

Washington, D.C. 20460
4

Contents

1. Executive Summary .............................................................................................5

2. Use Characterization (Revised)............................................................................7

3. Exposure Characterization (Revised)...................................................................9

3.1 Aquatic Exposure Estimation (Revised)...................................................9

3.2 Terrestrial Exposure Estimation (Revised)...............................................9

4. Risk Characterization .........................................................................................17

4.1 Risk Estimation (Revised)......................................................................18

4.1.1 Non-Target Aquatic Organisms..............................................................18

4.1.2 Non-Target Terrestrial Organisms..........................................................23

4.2 Risk Description .....................................................................................28

4.2.1 Non-Target Aquatic Organisms..............................................................28

4.2.2 Non-Target Terrestrial Organisms..........................................................29

5. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................30
5

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This document provides an addendum to the previous Section 3 New Chemical ecological risk 

assessment for the new fungicide benzovindiflupyr for proposed uses on a wide variety of crops 

(DP Barcode Nos. 408819+, dated June 30, 2015) to evaluate mitigation measures proposed by 

the registrant addressing the risks identified in aquatic and terrestrial organisms. Refer to 

Section 2 and Attachment 1 of this addendum for further details on the proposed mitigation 

measures. Parts of this addendum document supersedes this previous risk assessment (hereafter 

the pre-mitigation risk assessment) while other sections provide supplemental information. The 

pre-mitigation risk assessment should be referred to for information related the Fate 

Characterization (Section 2.2), Effects Characterization (Section 2.3), Conceptual Model

(Section 2.4), and Analysis Plan (Section 2.5) for benzovindiflupyr as these section still remain 

applicable to the risk assessment. However, revisions and updated information on the Use 

Characterization (Section 2 below), Exposure Characterization (Section 3 below), Risk 

Estimation and Characterization for terrestrial and aquatic organisms (Section 4 below), and 

Conclusions (Section 5 below) are provided in this addendum addressing the mitigation 

measures proposed by the registrant. Revised tables presenting updated results and conclusion 

summaries accounting for the proposed mitigation measures are provided in this addendum, and 

the order of tables are preserved from the pre-mitigation risk assessment. The impact of the risk 

conclusions resulting from the proposed mitigation measures are described below. Refer to 

Section 5 of this document for a comprehensive discussion on the risk conclusions resulting 

from the proposed mitigation. Risk conclusions are broken down by use for aquatic and 

terrestrial tax in Table 26 and Table 27 of this addendum.

For aquatic organisms, the proposed mitigation resolves some of the acute listed, acute nonlisted, and chronic LOC exceedances for some of the uses, or all risks with certain aquatic taxa in 

its entirety for other uses. However, there are still broad risks of concern indicated for 

freshwater fish, estuarine/marine fish, freshwater invertebrates (water column), and 

estuarine/marine invertebrates (water column and pore water) accounting for the proposed 

mitigation measures. As stated in the pre-mitigation risk assessment, both acute and chronic 

exposure in aquatic environments is driven by the buildup of benzovindiflupyr in aquatic water 

bodies occurring predominately due to runoff from treated fields1. While reductions in 

benzovindiflupyr loading in water bodies due to proposed spray drift buffers (see Section 2 of 

this addendum) are considered in this risk assessment addendum, the spray drift mitigation does 

not contribute to substantial reductions in exposure for many of the proposed uses which are 

anticipated to occur in regions where runoff is substantial. Furthermore, while vegetative buffer 

strips are also being proposed by the registrant as a mitigation measure (see Section 2 of this 

addendum), their impacts are not evaluated in the risk assessment addendum given the large 

uncertainties which exist related to current maintenance practices of vegetative buffer strips. 

Potential weathering with poorly maintained vegetative buffer strips may largely diminish the 

 

1 Please refer to Section 6 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment (Aquatic Exposure Assessment subsection) for the 

discussion and uncertainties on the persistence of benzovindiflupyr in mesocosm-type aquatic environments based 

on registrant-submitted studies.
6

effectiveness for vegetative buffer strips to reduce benzovindiflupyr exposure resulting from 

runoff in aquatic environments. 

For terrestrial organisms, the proposed mitigation resolves some of the acute listed and chronic 

LOC exceedances for some of the uses. However, there are also still broad risks of concern 

indicated for mammals and birds accounting for the proposed mitigation measures. As stated in 

the pre-mitigation risk assessment, the acute risks identified to birds via exposure to 

benzovindiflupyr residues in food items are driven by conservative endpoints developed in 

response to uncertainties associated with regurgitation issues in the passerine oral toxicity study. 

Acute and chronic dietary risks to mammals to benzovindiflupyr residues in food items are 

indicated with exposure estimates based on steady dosage of benzovindiflupyr. Such a scenario 

is most representative of foraging mammals which may be susceptible repeat exposure from 

contaminated food items within treated fields. For terrestrial invertebrates and beneficial insects, 

there are still uncertainties which exist with acute oral and chronic exposures mainly due to data 

gaps. Refer to Section 6 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment for a further description.

Given the overall concern expressed for benzovindiflupyr’s tendency to buildup in aquatic 

environments, a targeted monitoring study in water bodies nearby high benzovindiflupyr 

usage areas is recommended to verify the exposure findings in this risk assessment. 

Furthermore, acute oral and chronic honeybee toxicity studies are being requested to address 

uncertainties identified for terrestrial invertebrates (refer to Section 6 of the pre-mitigation risk 

assessment for further information). All of these studies will be used to further evaluate 

benzovindiflupyr in future ecological risk assessments.
7

2. USE CHARACTERIZATION (REVISED)

This section supersedes Section 2.1 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment. The revised use 

information for proposed benzovindiflupyr application methods are shown below in Table 1. 

Table 1 only shows the post-mitigation use information for benzovindiflupyr proposed by the 

registrant. 

Table 1 (Revised). Summary of proposed use information for benzovindiflupyr emulsifiable 

concentrate and water dispersible granules including proposed mitigation measures.

CROP USE

MAX. SINGLE 

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A)

MAX. NUMBER OF APPS. 

and MIN. RETREATMENT 

INTERVAL

SEASONAL 

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A)3

APPLICATION 

METHOD 1

Tomatoes and Fruiting 

Vegetables

0.068

4 apps., 

7 days apart (first interval) 

then 14 days apart

0.272 Foliar Spray

(G) Cucurbits

Grapes

0.068 3 apps.,

14 days apart 0.204

Foliar Spray

(G)

Peanuts Foliar Spray

(G, A)

Cotton

0.068 2 apps., 

14 days apart 0.136

Foliar Spray

(G, A)

Sweet Corn Foliar Spray

(G)

Legumes 0.056 2 apps., 

14 days apart 0.112 Foliar Spray(G, A)

Pome Fruit

0.046

4 apps., 

7 days apart (first interval) 

then 14 days apart

0.184 Foliar Spray

(G, A)

Corn 

(Other than Sweet)

0.046 2 apps., 

14 days apart 0.092 Foliar Spray(G, A) Cereal 

(Oats, Barley, and Wheat)

Soybeans 0.046 2 apps., 

14 days apart 0.092 Foliar Spray(G, A)

Tubers (Potatoes)

0.089 1 app. 0.089

Soil applied/

in furrow

(Pre-Plant)

Nursery Plants, Tomato 

Transplant, Fruit 

Transplant, Cucurbit 

Transplant

0.089 3 apps., 

7 days apart 0.267 Foliar Spray

(G, A)

Turf Grass 0.068 4 apps., 

14 days apart

0.272

Blueberries 0.068 1 app. 0.068 Foliar Spray

(G, A)
8

Table 1 (Revised). Summary of proposed use information for benzovindiflupyr emulsifiable 

concentrate and water dispersible granules including proposed mitigation measures.

CROP USE

MAX. SINGLE 

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A)

MAX. NUMBER OF APPS. 

and MIN. RETREATMENT 

INTERVAL

SEASONAL 

APP. RATE

(lbs. a.i./A)3

APPLICATION 

METHOD 1

Canola 0.046 1 app. 0.068 Foliar Spray

(G, A)

1 Foliar spray method identifiers: G = Ground spray; A = Aerial Spray

2 Seasonal application rate assumed to be equivalent to a yearly application rate. Further label clarification needed 

for all crops. Refer to pre-mitigation risk assessment where this uncertainty was previously identified.

Details on the comparison of changes of the use information for each crop use with the original 

benzovindiflupyr labels provided by the registrant can be referenced in the table provided in 

Attachment 1 in this document. A summary of the proposed changes from the original labels 

submitted by the registrant are described below:

1. Reduced maximum application rates per treatment:

Canola, cereal crops, corn (other than sweet), legumes, and soybeans 

2. Restricted to single application per season:

Potatoes and blueberries 

3. Reduced number of applications per season allowed: 

Sweet corn, grapes, cotton, and peanuts

4. Removed aerial spray applications:

Potatoes, sweet corn, cucurbits, fruiting vegetables, cotton, and grapes

5. Restricted to in-furrow soil application only (removed aerial and ground spray applications): 

Potatoes

6. Increased re-treatment interval by one week for all re-treatments:

Corn (other than sweet), cotton, and grapes

7. Increased re-treatment interval by one week after the second re-treatment :

Sweet corn, cucurbits, fruiting vegetables, and pome fruits

8. Added 150-feet aerial spray buffer:

Corn (other than sweet), ornamentals, peanuts, turf, grape, soybeans, wheat, canola, and pome 

fruits

9. Added 15-feet vegetative buffer strip:

All crops

10. No mitigation proposed for proposed turf and ornamental uses despite risk above the LOCs 

for aquatic and terrestrial organisms.
9

3. EXPOSURE CHARACTERIZATION (REVISED)

3.1 Aquatic Exposure Estimation (Revised)

This section supersedes Section 3.1.1 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment. SWCC inputs 

related to benzovindiflupyr’s physical chemical and fate properties are unchanged in this 

assessment addendum, and therefore Table 7 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment are still 

applicable. However, given the mitigation proposed by the registrant presented in Section 2 of 

this document and Attachment 1 of this document, crop use specific input parameters in the 

SWCC are updated and aquatic estimated exposure concentrations (EECs) are revised in this 

addendum for each crop use. Refer to Table 8 of this addendum for crop use specific inputs for 

the revised SWCC runs. Revised aquatic EECs are shown in Table 9 of this addendum. The 

updated sample SWCC model run from the Florida Tomatoes scenario (surrogate for Fruit and 

Vegetables proposed use) is shown in Appendix C in this document.

3.2 Terrestrial Exposure Estimation (Revised)

This section supersedes Section 3.1.2 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment. Given the scope

of the proposed mitigation presented in Section 2 of this document and Attachment 1 of this 

document, crop use specific input parameters for the TREX model are also updated and EECs 

for dietary exposure are revised. Furthermore, the change in aquatic EECs discussed in Section 

3.1 above and presented in Table 9 below impacts EECs related to dietary exposure for 

piscivorous birds ingesting fish exposed to benzovindiflupyr residues in water. Details of the 

related revisions in this addendum are provided below.

 Wildlife Dietary Exposure Estimation

The TREX model inputs and an example run are shown in Appendix A of the pre-mitigation 

document. The estimated environmental dose-based concentrations (EECs) for the three weight 

classes of birds and mammals, respectively are revised in Table 10 and Table 11 in this 

addendum and reflect the changes in the proposed mitigation documented in Attachment 1 

of this document. Dietary-based concentrations (EECs) for both birds and mammals are revised 

in Table 12 in this addendum. 

 Terrestrial Plant Exposure Estimation

No risks were identified with terrestrial plants in the pre-mitigation risk assessment. Therefore, 

the terrestrial plant exposure estimation analysis is not re-presented in this addendum since 

further reductions in loading associated with the proposed mitigation for benzovindiflupyr would 

result in the same conclusions.
10

Table 8 (Revised). SWCC crop scenario and application methods input parameter values for benzovindiflupyr aquatic 

exposure estimation.

Crop Use

SWCC Application Method and Crop Scenario Input Parameters

Representative 

Vulnerable SWCC 

Scenario and 

Weather Station1

Application 

Rate

(kg a.i./ha)2

Number of Applications 

and Retreatment 

Interval2

First 

Application 

Date3

Application 

Methods

Application 

Efficiency6

Spray Drift 

Fraction7

Tomatoes and Fruiting 

Vegetables

FL Tomato

12844.dvf

(West Palm Beach, FL) 0.076

4 apps., 

7 days apart (first interval) 

then 14 days apart (all 

following intervals)

May 1

Foliar –

Ground4 0.99 0.062 Cucurbits FL Cucumbers

12844.dvf

(West Palm Beach, FL)

Oct. 25

Grapes NY Grape

14860.dvf

(Erie, PA) 0.076 3 apps.,

14 days apart

Sept. 15 Foliar -

Ground4

0.99 0.062 Peanuts NC Peanuts

13722.dvf

(Raleigh, NC)

Aug. 1 Foliar –

Ground5

Cotton MS Cotton

03940.dvf

(Jackson, MS)

0.076 2 apps., 

14 days apart

May 15 Foliar –

Ground5 0.99 0.062

Sweet Corn MS Corn

03940.dvf

(Jackson, MS)

Apr. 10 Foliar -

Ground4 0.99 0.062

Soybeans and 

Legumes

MS Soybean

03940.dvf

(Jackson, MS)

0.063

2 apps., 

14 days apart May 15 Foliar –Ground5 0.99 0.062

Pome Fruit CA Fruit

93193.dvf

(Fresno, CA) 0.050

4 apps., 

7 days apart (first interval) 

then 14 days apart (all 

following intervals)

Feb. 10 Foliar –

Ground5 0.99 0.062

Corn (Other than 

Sweet)

MS Corn

03940.dvf

(Jackson, MS)

0.050 2 apps., 

14 days apart

Apr. 10

Foliar –

Ground5 0.99 0.062
11

Table 8 (Revised). SWCC crop scenario and application methods input parameter values for benzovindiflupyr aquatic 

exposure estimation.

Crop Use

SWCC Application Method and Crop Scenario Input Parameters

Representative 

Vulnerable SWCC 

Scenario and 

Weather Station1

Application 

Rate

(kg a.i./ha)2

Number of Applications 

and Retreatment 

Interval2

First 

Application 

Date3

Application 

Methods

Application 

Efficiency6

Spray Drift 

Fraction7

Cereal (Oats, Barley, 

and Wheat)

ND Wheat

14914.dvf

(Fargo, ND)

0.050

2 apps., 

14 days apart Jun. 20

Foliar –

Ground5 0.99 0.062

Tubers (Potatoes) ME Potato

14607.dvf 

(Caribou, ME)

0.1 1 app. Aug. 15 Soil applied/

in furrow4 1.0 0

Nursery Plants, 

Tomato Transplant, 

Fruit Transplant, 

Cucurbit Transplant

NJ Nursery

93730.dvf

(Atlantic City, NJ) 

0.1

3 apps., 

7 days apart Aug. 5

Foliar -

Ground4 0.99 0.062

Turf Grass FL Turf

12834.dvf

(Daytona Beach, FL)

4 apps., 

14 days apart Oct. 5

Blueberries NY Grape

14860.dvf

(Erie, PA)

0.076 1 app. Sept. 15 Foliar –

Ground5 0.99 0.062

Canola ND Canola

24013.dvf

(Minot, ND)

0.050 1 app. Aug. 15 Foliar –

Ground5 0.99 0.062

1 Selected crop scenarios possessing most vulnerable environmental conditions for all benzovindiflupyr uses. Refer to Table 1 for information on 

maximum application rates specified on the label for proposed uses which was partially considered to select crop scenarios.

2 Maximum single application rate specified on product labels (Table 1).

3 Selected based on maximum rainfall climatological date at meteorological station after crop emergence date specified in PRZM crop scenario based on 

expected pest pressure.

4 Only application method specified on product labels.

5 The most conservative application method evaluated based on crop uses specified on product labels. This determination accounts for consideration of 

proposed 150 feet spray buffer zone for aerial applications which reduces the spray drift deposition fraction to 0.0385 according to Tier I AgDrift estimate. 

Therefore, ground applications without spray buffer zone is the most conservative application method.

6 EFED input parameter guidance for ground spray applications.

7 Spray drift fraction for ground spray applications from Table 2 of EPA, 2013, “Guidance on Modeling Offsite Deposition of Pesticides via Spray Drift”. 
12

Table 9 (Revised). SWCC estimated upper bound concentrations in the surface 

water column, pore water, and sediment (ppb) for benzovindiflupyr applications1, 2 

at the highest application rate for proposed crop uses.

Crop Use

(SWCC Scenario, App. 

Rate, Number of Apps., 

App. Interval)

Pore Water EECs 

(μg/L)3

Sediment EECs 

(μg/Kg dry wt.)3

Surface Water Column EECs 

(μg/L)3

Peak 21-day 60-day Peak 21-day Peak 21-day

Sweet Corn

(MS Corn, 

0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 2 apps. 

14 days apart) 

4.12 3.37 3.23 3.07 3.06 550 548

Corn

(Other than Sweet)

(MS Corn, 

0.046 lbs. a.i./A, 2 apps. 

14 days apart) 

2.71 2.22 2.12 2.02 2.02 362 362

Cucurbits

(FL Cucumber, 0.068 

lbs. a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days 

apart first interval then 

14 days apart next 

intervals) 

4.78 4.07 3.87 3.47 3.47 623 623

Grapes

(NY Grape, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

4.08 3.64 3.45 3.32 3.32 594 594

Nursery Crops

(NJ Nursery , 0.089 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 7 days 

apart) 

3.83 3.24 3.01 2.85 2.85 510 510

Peanuts

(NC Peanuts, , 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

2.88 2.42 2.29 2.17 2.16 388 387

Tubers (Potatoes)

(ME Potatoes, 0.089 lbs. 

a.i./A, 1 app.) 

3.06 2.70 2.58 2.51 2.50 449 447

Tomatoes and Fruiting 

Vegetables

(FL Tomatoes, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days 

apart first interval then 

14 days apart next 

intervals) 

5.35 4.38 4.02 3.64 3.63 652 650

Turf Grass

(FL Turf, 0.089 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

 

1.51 1.16 1.10 0.96 0.96 172 171
13

Table 9 (Revised). SWCC estimated upper bound concentrations in the surface 

water column, pore water, and sediment (ppb) for benzovindiflupyr applications1, 2 

at the highest application rate for proposed crop uses.

Crop Use

(SWCC Scenario, App. 

Rate, Number of Apps., 

App. Interval)

Pore Water EECs 

(μg/L)3

Sediment EECs 

(μg/Kg dry wt.)3

Surface Water Column EECs 

(μg/L)3

Peak 21-day 60-day Peak 21-day Peak 21-day

Cotton

(MS Cotton, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

3.36 2.83 2.69 2.47 2.47 442 442

Blueberries

(NY Grape, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 1 app.)

1.55 1.33 1.26 1.22 1.22 218 218

Soybeans and Legumes

(MS Soybeans, 0.056

lbs. a.i./A, 2 apps. 14

days apart) 

2.06 1.74 1.61 1.50 1.50 269 269

Cereal Crops

(ND Wheat, 0.046 lbs. 

a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

1.47 1.32 1.27 1.20 1.20 215 215

Canola

(ND Canola, 0.046 lbs. 

a.i./A, 1 app.) 

0.63 0.52 0.48 0.44 0.44 79 79

Pome fruit

(CA Fruit, 0.046 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days 

apart first interval then 

14 days apart next 

intervals) 

0.699 0.597 0.56 0.493 0.492 88 88

*Bold text indicate maximum values.

1 For all uses except for potatoes, ground spray application method evaluated as the most conservative application 

method evaluated based on crop uses specified on product labels. This determination accounts for consideration of 

proposed 150 feet spray buffer zone for aerial applications which reduces the spray drift deposition fraction to 

0.0385 according to Tier I AgDrift estimate.

2 For potato use, soil application method evaluated as specified on product labels.

3 EECs are one-in-ten year return frequency values.
14

Table 10 (Revised). Terrestrial food item residue estimates for birds with proposed crop uses of benzovindiflupyr 

(environmental dose mg/kg-bw).

Crop Use

20 gram "Small" Bird 100 gram "Medium" Bird 1000 gram "Large" Bird

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Blueberries 18.6 8.5 10.5 1.2 7.3 0.3 10.6 4.9 6.0 0.7 4.2 0.1 4.7 2.2 2.7 0.3 1.9 0.1

Canola 12.6 5.8 7.1 0.8 4.9 0.2 7.2 3.3 4.0 0.4 2.8 0.1 3.2 1.5 1.8 0.2 1.3 0.0

Cereal 17.7 8.1 10.0 1.1 6.9 0.2 10.1 4.6 5.7 0.6 4.0 0.1 4.5 2.1 2.5 0.3 1.8 0.1

Corn, Other 17.7 8.1 10.0 1.1 6.9 0.2 10.1 4.6 5.7 0.6 4.0 0.1 4.5 2.1 2.5 0.3 1.8 0.1

Corn, sweet 26.2 12.0 14.7 1.6 10.3 0.4 15.0 6.9 8.4 0.9 5.9 0.2 6.7 3.1 3.8 0.4 2.6 0.1

Cotton 26.2 12.0 14.7 1.6 10.3 0.4 15.0 6.9 8.4 0.9 5.9 0.2 6.7 3.1 3.8 0.4 2.6 0.1

Cucurbits 31.4 14.4 17.6 2.0 12.3 0.4 17.9 8.2 10.1 1.1 7.0 0.2 8.0 3.7 4.5 0.5 3.1 0.1

Fruiting Vegetables 31.4 14.4 17.6 2.0 12.3 0.4 17.9 8.2 10.1 1.1 7.0 0.2 8.0 3.7 4.5 0.5 3.1 0.1

Grapes, Peanuts 29.4 13.5 16.5 1.8 11.5 0.4 16.7 7.7 9.4 1.0 6.6 0.2 7.5 3.4 4.2 0.5 2.9 0.1

Soybeans and 

Legumes

21.6 9.9 12.1 1.3 8.5 0.3 12.3 5.6 6.9 0.8 4.8 0.2 5.5 2.5 3.1 0.3 2.2 0.1

Peanuts 30.7 14.1 17.3 1.9 12.0 0.4 17.5 8.0 9.9 1.1 6.9 0.2 7.8 3.6 4.4 0.5 3.1 0.1

Pome 21.2 9.7 11.9 1.3 8.3 0.3 12.1 5.5 6.8 0.8 4.7 0.2 5.4 2.5 3.0 0.3 2.1 0.1

Nursery Plants, 

Tomato Transplant, 

Fruit Transplant, 

Cucurbit Transplant

49.3 22.6 27.8 3.1 19.3 0.7 28.1 12.9 15.8 1.8 11 0.4 12.6 5.8 7.1 0.8 4.9 0.2

Turf grasses 38 17.4 21.4 2.4 14.9 0.5 21.7 9.9 12.2 1.4 8.5 0.3 9.7 4.4 5.5 0.6 3.8 0.1

Potatoes10.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

1

 Calculation on LD50 per square foot basis with pre-plant soil application.

Table 11 (Revised). Terrestrial food item residue estimates for mammals with proposed crop uses of benzovindiflupyr 

(environmental dose mg/kg-bw).

Crop Use

15 gram "Small" Mammal 35 gram "Medium" Mammal 1000 gram "Large" Mammal

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Blueberries 15.6 7.1 8.8 1.0 6.1 0.2 10.8 4.9 6.0 0.7 4.2 0.1 2.5 1.1 1.4 0.2 1.0 0.0

Canola 10.5 4.8 5.9 0.7 4.1 0.1 7.3 3.3 4.1 0.5 2.8 0.1 1.7 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.7 0.0

Cereal 14.8 6.8 8.4 0.9 5.8 0.2 10.3 4.7 5.8 0.6 4.0 0.1 2.4 1.1 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.0

Corn 14.8 6.8 8.4 0.9 5.8 0.2 10.3 4.7 5.8 0.6 4.0 0.1 2.4 1.1 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.0

Corn, sweet 21.9 10.1 12.3 1.4 8.6 0.3 15.2 7.0 8.5 0.9 5.9 0.2 3.5 1.6 2.0 0.2 1.4 0.0

Cotton 21.9 10.1 12.3 1.4 8.6 0.3 15.2 7.0 8.5 0.9 5.9 0.2 3.5 1.6 2.0 0.2 1.4 0.0
15

Table 11 (Revised). Terrestrial food item residue estimates for mammals with proposed crop uses of benzovindiflupyr 

(environmental dose mg/kg-bw).

Crop Use

15 gram "Small" Mammal 35 gram "Medium" Mammal 1000 gram "Large" Mammal

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Cucurbits 26.3 12.0 14.8 1.6 10.3 0.4 18.1 8.3 10.2 1.1 7.1 0.3 4.2 1.9 2.4 0.3 1.6 0.1

Fruiting Vegetables 26.3 12.0 14.8 1.6 10.3 0.4 18.1 8.3 10.2 1.1 7.1 0.3 4.2 1.9 2.4 0.3 1.6 0.1

Grapes, Peanuts 24.6 11.3 13.8 1.5 9.6 0.3 17.0 7.8 9.6 1.1 6.7 0.2 3.9 1.8 2.2 0.2 1.5 0.1

Soybeans and 

Legumes

18.1 8.3 10.2 1.1 7.1 0.3 12.5 5.7 7.0 0.8 4.9 0.2 2.9 1.3 1.6 0.2 1.1 0.0

Peanuts 25.7 11.8 14.5 1.6 10.1 0.4 17.8 8.1 10.0 1.1 7.0 0.2 4.1 1.9 2.3 0.3 1.6 0.1

Pome 17.8 8.1 10.0 1.1 7.0 0.2 12.3 5.6 6.9 0.8 4.8 0.2 2.8 1.3 1.6 0.2 1.1 0.0

Nursery Plants, 

Tomato Transplant, 

Fruit Transplant, 

Cucurbit Transplant

41.3 18.9 23.2 2.6 16.2 0.6 28.5 13.1 16.1 1.8 11.2 0.4 6.6 3 3.7 0.4 2.6 0.1

Turf grasses 31.8 14.6 17.9 2 12.5 0.4 22 10.1 12.4 1.4 8.6 0.3 5.1 2.3 2.9 0.3 2 0.1

Potatoes10.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

1 Calculation on LD50 per square foot basis for pre-plant soil application.

Table 12 (Revised). Terrestrial food item residue estimates for birds and mammals with 

proposed crop uses of benzovindiflupyr (dietary concentration ppm).

Crop Use

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Blueberries 16.3 7.5 9.2 1.0 6.4

Canola 11.0 5.1 6.2 0.7 4.3

Cereal 15.6 7.1 8.8 1.0 6.1

Corn 15.6 7.1 8.8 1.0 6.1

Corn, sweet 23.0 10.6 12.9 1.4 9.0

Cotton 23.0 10.6 12.9 1.4 9.0

Cucurbits 27.5 12.6 15.5 1.7 10.8

Fruiting Vegetables 27.5 12.6 15.5 1.7 10.8

Grapes, Peanuts 25.8 11.8 14.5 1.6 10.1
16

Table 12 (Revised). Terrestrial food item residue estimates for birds and mammals with 

proposed crop uses of benzovindiflupyr (dietary concentration ppm).

Crop Use

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Soybeans and Legumes 19.0 8.7 10.7 1.2 7.4

Peanuts 27.0 12.4 15.2 1.7 10.6

Pome 18.6 8.5 10.5 1.2 7.3

Nursery Plants, Tomato Transplant, Fruit Transplant, 

Curcubit Transplant

43.3 19.9 24.4 2.7 17.0

Turf grasses 33.4 15.3 18.8 2.1 13.1

Potatoes1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

1 Calculation on LD50 per square foot basis for pre-plant soil application.

 Terrestrial Organism Exposure to Residues in Aquatic Food Items

The revised input parameters and EECs for various food sources with KABAM modeling are 

presented in Table 14 and Table 15 below, respectively. The example output from KABAM is 

provided in Appendix B of the pre-mitigation assessment. 

Table 14 (Revised). Benzovindiflupyr input parameter values for KABAM.

Parameter Input Value Source

Pesticide Name Benzovindiflupyr

Log KOW 4.3 MRID 48604402

KOC 4,478 L/kgOC MRIDs 48604505

Crop Uses

(SWCC Scenario1)

Acute Concentration 

in sediment pore 

water 

(ppb)1

Acute Concentration 

in water column 

(ppb)1

Sweet Corn (MS Corn) 3.37 3.06

Other Corn (MS Corn) 2.22 2.02

Curcurbits (FL Cucumber) 4.07 3.47

Grape (NY Grape) 3.64 3.32

Ornamental (NJ Nursery) 3.24 2.85

Peanuts (NC Peanuts) 2.42 2.16

Potatoes (ME Potatoes) 2.70 2.50

Fruit (FL Tomatoes) 4.38 3.63

Turf (FL Turf) 1.16 0.96

Cotton (MS Cotton) 2.83 2.47
17

Table 14 (Revised). Benzovindiflupyr input parameter values for KABAM.

Parameter Input Value Source

Blueberries (NY Grape) 1.33 1.22

Soybeans and Legumes (MS Soybeans) 1.74 1.50

Cereal Crops (ND Wheat) 1.32 1.20

Canola (ND Canola) 0.52 0.44

Pome Fruit (CA Fruit) 0.597 0.492

1

 Initial water concentration from SWCC peak EECs also shown in Table 9.

Table 15 (Revised). Predicted Acute Concentrations of Benzovindiflupyr in Aquatic Organism Tissues at 

Different Trophic Levels (g/kg).

Crop Uses Phytoplankton Zooplankton Benthic 

Invertebrates

Filter 

Feeders

Small 

Fish

Medium 

Fish

Large 

Fish

Sweet Corn 2842 2102 2325 1529 3076 3194 3395

Other Corn 1876 1388 1535 1009 2031 2108 2241

Curcurbits 3223 2384 2646 1740 3501 3635 3852

Grape 3083 2281 2522 1659 3337 3464 3684

Ornamental 2647 1958 2170 1427 2870 2980 3163

Peanuts 2006 1484 1643 1080 2174 2257 2397

Potatoes 2322 1717 1898 1248 2511 2606 2774

Fruit 3371 2494 2773 1824 3668 3808 4031

Turf 892 660 733 482 970 1007 1066

Cotton 2294 1697 1881 1237 2489 2584 2742

Blueberries 1133 838 927 609 1226 1273 1354

Soybeans and 

Legumes 

1393 1030 1143 752 1512 1570 1665

Cereal Crops 1114 824 912 600 1206 1252 1332

Canola 409 302 336 221 444 461 489

Pome Fruit 457 338 376 247 497 516 546

4. RISK CHARACTERIZATION

This addendum document provides revised risk estimates and risk quotients (RQs) for aquatic 

and terrestrial organisms associated with mitigation measures proposed by the registrant since 

the pre-mitigation risk assessment. Furthermore, a risk description discussing changes in risk 

conclusions and related impacts on aquatic and terrestrial organisms is also provided below. An 

overview of the risk quotient results and risk conclusions and changes due to revisions in the risk 

estimation for each aquatic and terrestrial taxa are provided in Section 5 of this document.
18

4.1 Risk Estimation (Revised)

4.1.1 Non-Target Aquatic Organisms

This section supersedes Section 3.2.1 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment.

 Fish (Acute and Chronic)

Table 16 below provides the revised acute and chronic RQs for freshwater and estuarine/marine 

fish in the water column. 

Table 16 (Revised). RQs for freshwater and estuarine/marine fish for the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.

1,2

Freshwater Fish Estuarine / Marine Fish

Crop Use

(SWCC Scenario, App. 

Rate, Number of Apps., 

App. Interval)

Acute RQ Chronic RQ Acute RQ Chronic RQ

Sweet Corn

(MS Corn, 

0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 2 apps. 14

days apart) 

1.14 4.4 0.15 0.6

Corn

(Other than Sweet)

(MS Corn, 

0.046 lbs. a.i./A, 2 apps. 14

days apart) 

0.75 2.9 0.10 0.4

Cucurbits

(FL Cucumber, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days apart

first interval then 14 days 

apart next intervals) 

1.33 5.3 0.17 0.7

Grapes

(NY Grape, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

1.13 4.7 0.15 0.6

Nursery Crops

(NJ Nursery , 0.089 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 7 days apart)

 

1.06 4.1 0.14 0.5

Peanuts

(NC Peanuts, , 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

0.80 3.1 0.10 0.4

Tubers (Potatoes)

(ME Potatoes, 0.089 lbs. 

a.i./A, 1 app.)

 

0.85 3.5 0.11 0.5
19

Table 16 (Revised). RQs for freshwater and estuarine/marine fish for the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.

1,2

Freshwater Fish Estuarine / Marine Fish

Crop Use

(SWCC Scenario, App. 

Rate, Number of Apps., 

App. Interval)

Acute RQ Chronic RQ Acute RQ Chronic RQ

Tomatoes and Fruiting 

Vegetables

(FL Tomatoes, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days apart

first interval then 14 days 

apart next intervals)

1.49 5.5 0.19 0.7

Turf Grass

(FL Turf, 0.089 lbs. a.i./A, 

4 apps. 14 days apart)

 

0.42 1.5 0.05 0.2

Cotton

(MS Cotton, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

0.93 3.7 0.12 0.5

Blueberries

(NY Grape, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 1 app.)

0.43 1.7 0.06 0.2

Soybeans and Legumes

(MS Soybeans, 0.056 lbs. 

a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

0.57 2.2 0.07 0.3

Cereal Crops

(ND Wheat, 0.046 lbs. 

a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 days 

apart) 

0.41 1.7 0.05 0.2

Canola

(ND Canola, 0.046 lbs. 

a.i./A, 1 app.) 

0.18 0.7 0.02 0.1

Pome fruit

(CA Fruit, 0.046 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days apart

first interval then 14 days 

apart next intervals) 

0.19 0.8 0.02 0.1

*Acute Listed Species LOC = 0.05; Non-listed species LOC 0.5; Chronic LOC = 1.0.

**Bolded values indicate LOC exceedance.

1 Please refer to Table 9 for the acute (peak) and chronic (60-day average) SWCC water column EECs for 

each crop use utilized in RQs.

2 Most sensitive endpoints for benzovindiflupyr utilized in RQs:

Acute Freshwater Fish: Carp LC50 = 3.6 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604562)

Chronic Freshwater Fish: Carp ACR NOAEC = 0.73 g a.i./L based on Fathead minnow data. 

Utilizing the Carp ACR rather than the fathead minnow chronic data of 0.95 g a.i./L (MRID No. 

48604520) increased the freshwater chronic RQs by 33 percent.

Acute Estuarine/Marine Fish: Sheepshead Minnow EC50 = 28 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604534)

Chronic Estuarine/Marine Fish: Sheepshead Minnow NOAEC = 5.66 g a.i./L (Acute to Chronic 

Ratio using values from Fathead minnow)
20

 

 Aquatic Invertebrates - Water Column (Acute and Chronic)

Table 17 below provides the revised acute and chronic RQs for freshwater and estuarine/marine 

invertebrates in the water column. 

Table 17 (Revised). RQs for freshwater and estuarine/marine aquatic invertebrates

in the water column for the proposed uses of benzovindiflupyr.1,2

Freshwater Invertebrates Estuarine / Marine Invertebrates

Crop Use

(SWCC Scenario, App. Rate, 

Number of Apps., App. 

Interval)

Acute RQ Chronic RQ Acute RQ Chronic RQ

Sweet Corn

(MS Corn, 

0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 

days apart) 

0.05 0.6 0.09 0.4

Corn

(MS Corn, 

0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 

days apart) 

0.03 0.4 0.06 0.3

Cucurbits

(FL Cucumber, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days apart) 

0.06 0.7 0.10 0.5

Grapes

(NY Grape, 0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 

4 apps. 7 days apart) 

0.05 0.6 0.09 0.5

Nursery Crops

(NJ Nursery , 0.088 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 7 days apart) 

0.05 0.5 0.08 0.4

Peanuts

(NC Peanuts, , 0.089 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 7 days apart) 

0.03 0.4 0.06 0.3

Tubers (Potatoes)

(ME Potatoes, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days apart) 

0.04 0.5 0.07 0.3

Tomatoes and Fruiting

Vegetables

(FL Tomatoes, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days apart) 

0.06 0.7 0.11 0.5

Turf Grass

(FL Turf, 0.088 lbs. a.i./A, 3 

apps. 14 days apart) 

0.02 0.2 0.03 0.1

Cotton

(MS Cotton, 0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 

3 apps. 7 days apart) 

0.04 0.5 0.07 0.4

Blueberries

(NY Grape, 0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 

2 apps. 10 days apart) 

 

0.02 0.2 0.03 0.2
21

Table 17 (Revised). RQs for freshwater and estuarine/marine aquatic invertebrates

in the water column for the proposed uses of benzovindiflupyr.1,2

Freshwater Invertebrates Estuarine / Marine Invertebrates

Crop Use

(SWCC Scenario, App. Rate, 

Number of Apps., App. 

Interval)

Acute RQ Chronic RQ Acute RQ Chronic RQ

Soybeans and Legumes

(MS Soybeans, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 2 apps. 7 days apart) 

0.02 0.3 0.04 0.2

Cereal Crops

(ND Wheat, 0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 

2 apps. 14 days apart) 

0.02 0.2 0.03 0.2

Canola

(ND Canola, 0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 

1 app.) 

0.01 0.1 0.01 0.1

Pome fruit

(CA Fruit, 0.046 lbs. a.i./A, 4 

apps. 7 days apart) 

0.01 0.1 0.01 0.1

*Acute Listed Species LOC = 0.05; Non-listed species LOC 0.5; Chronic LOC = 1.0.

**Bolded values indicate LOC exceedance.

1Please refer to Table 9 for the acute (peak) and chronic (60-day average) SWCC water column EECs for each crop 

use utilized in RQs.

2Most sensitive endpoints for benzovindiflupyr utilized in RQs:

Acute Freshwater Invertebrates: Water Flea LC50 = 85 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604522)

Chronic Freshwater Invertebrates: Water Flea NOAEC = 5.6 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604523)

Acute Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates: Eastern Oyster EC50 = 47 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604535)

Chronic Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates: Saltwater Mysid NOAEC = 7.4 g a.i./L (MRID No. 

48604536)

 Benthic Invertebrates (Acute and Chronic)

Table 18 below provides the revised acute and chronic RQs for freshwater and estuarine/marine 

fish in the water column. 

Table 18 (Revised). RQs for benthic invertebrates for the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.1,2

Crop Use

Chronic Pore Water Chronic Sediment Acute Porewater

Freshwater Estuarine/

Marine Freshwater Estuarine/Marine Freshwater Estuarine/Marine

(SWCC Scenario, App. Rate, 

Number of Apps., App. 

Interval)

Sweet Corn

(MS Corn, 

0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 

days apart) 

<0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.04 0.07
22

Table 18 (Revised). RQs for benthic invertebrates for the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.1,2

Crop Use

Chronic Pore Water Chronic Sediment Acute Porewater

Freshwater Estuarine/

Marine Freshwater Estuarine/Marine Freshwater Estuarine/Marine

(SWCC Scenario, App. Rate, 

Number of Apps., App. 

Interval)

Corn 

(Other than Sweet)

(MS Corn, 

0.046 lbs. a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 

days apart)

 

<0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.02 0.04

Cucurbits 0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.2 0.04 0.07

(FL Cucumber, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days apart 

first interval then 14 days apart 

next intervals) 

Grapes <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.04 0.07

(NY Grape, 0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 3 

apps. 14 days apart) 

Nursery Crops <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.03 0.06

(NJ Nursery , 0.089 lbs. a.i./A, 

3 apps. 7 days apart) 

Peanuts <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.03 0.05

(NC Peanuts, , 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 3 apps. 14 days apart) 

Tubers (Potatoes) <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.03 0.05

(ME Potatoes, 0.089 lbs. 

a.i./A, 1 app.) 

Tomatoes and Fruiting 

Vegetables

0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.1 0.04 0.08

(FL Tomatoes, 0.068 lbs. 

a.i./A, 4 apps. 7 days apart 

first interval then 14 days apart 

next intervals) 

Turf Grass <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.2 0.01 0.02

(FL Turf, 0.089 lbs. a.i./A, 4 

apps. 14 days apart) 

Cotton <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.03 0.03

(MS Cotton, 0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 

2 apps. 14 days apart) 

Blueberries

(NY Grape, 0.068 lbs. a.i./A, 1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.03

app.) 

Soybeans and Legumes

<0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.02 0.03 (MS Soybeans, 0.056 lbs. 

a.i./A, 2 apps. 14 days apart)

 
23

Table 18 (Revised). RQs for benthic invertebrates for the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.1,2

Crop Use

Chronic Pore Water Chronic Sediment Acute Porewater

Freshwater Estuarine/

Marine Freshwater Estuarine/Marine Freshwater Estuarine/Marine

(SWCC Scenario, App. Rate, 

Number of Apps., App. 

Interval)

Cereal Crops

(ND Wheat, 0.046 lbs. a.i./A, <0.1 <0.1 0.1 0.1 0.01 0.01

2 apps. 14 days apart) 

Canola

(ND Canola, 0.046 lbs. a.i./A, 

1 app.) 

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.01 0.01

Pome fruit

(CA Fruit, 0.046 lbs. a.i./A, 4 

apps. 7 days apart first interval 

then 14 days apart next 

intervals) 

<0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.01 0.01

Chronic LOC = 1.0; Acute risk listed species = 0.05;Acute non-listed species LOC = 0.5.

Bolded values indicate LOC exceedance

**Bolded values indicate LOC exceedance.

1Please refer to Table 9 for acute (peak) and chronic (21-day average) SWCC pore water and sediment EECs for 

each crop use utilized in RQs.

2Most sensitive endpoints for benzovindiflupyr utilized in RQs:

Acute Freshwater Invertebrates (Pore Water): 

Water Flea LC50 = 85 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604522))

Acute Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates (Pore Water): 

Eastern Oyster EC50 = 47 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604535)

Chronic Freshwater Invertebrates (Pore Water): 

Freshwater Midge NOAEC = 69 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604525)

Chronic Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates (Pore Water): 

Estuarine Amphipod NOAEC = 98 g a.i./L (MRID No. 48604583)

Chronic Freshwater Invertebrates (Sediment): 

Freshwater Midge NOAEC = 2.8 mg/kg dry wt. (MRID No. 48604525)

Chronic Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates (Sediment): 

Freshwater Midge NOAEC = 4.1 mg/kg dry wt. (MRID No. 48604583)

 Aquatic Plants 

No exceedances with the levels of concern (LOCs) were identified with aquatic plants in the prmitigation risk assessment. Therefore, RQs for the terrestrial plant exposure with 

benzovindiflupyr is not re-presented in this addendum since further reductions in loading 

associated with the proposed mitigation would result in the same conclusions.

4.1.2 Non-Target Terrestrial Organisms

This section supersedes Section 3.2.2 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment.
24

 Acute and Chronic Risk to Birds 

Table 19 below provides the revised acute dose-based RQs for birds for proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr. The chronic dietary-based RQs for birds presented in Table 20 of the premitigation risk assessment indicates no exceedances in the LOCs. Therefore, Table 20 is not 

re-presented in this addendum since further reductions in loading associated with the proposed 

mitigation would result in the same conclusions.

Table 19 (Revised). Acute dose-based RQs for birds due to exposure to proposed uses of benzovindiflupyr.

20 gram "Small" Bird 100 gram "Medium" Bird 1000 gram "Large" Bird

Crop Use

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Blueberries 1.7 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.7 <0.1 0.8 0.4 0.4 <0.1 0.3

<0.1

0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

<0.1

Canola 1.2 0.5 0.7 0.1 0.5 <0.1 0.5 0.2 0.3 <0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Cereal 1.7 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.7 <0.1 0.7 0.3 0.4 <0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Corn, Other 1.7 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.7 <0.1 0.7 0.3 0.4 <0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Corn, sweet 2.5 1.1 1.4 0.2 1.0 <0.1 1.1 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1

Cotton 2.5 1.1 1.4 0.2 1.0 <0.1 1.1 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1

Cucurbits 2.9 1.3 1.7 0.2 1.2 <0.1 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2

Fruiting Vegetables 2.9 1.3 1.7 0.2 1.2 <0.1 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2

Grapes, Peanuts 2.8 1.3 1.5 0.2 1.1 <0.1 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2

Soybeans and 

Legumes

2.0 0.9 1.1 0.1 0.8 <0.1 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1

Peanuts 2.9 1.3 1.6 0.2 1.1 <0.1 1.3 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2

Pome 2.0 0.9 1.1 0.1 0.8 <0.1 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1

Nursery Plants, 

Tomato Transplant, 

Fruit Transplant, 

Cucurbit Transplant

4.6 2.1 2.6 0.3 1.8 0.1 2.1 0.9 1.2 0.1 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1

Turf grasses 3.6 1.6 2.0 0.2 1.4 1.6 0.7 0.9 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1

Potatoes10.7 0.1 <0.1

**Bolded values indicate LOC exceedance greater than 1. As described in the pre-mitigation assessment, the 

LOC for birds was set at 1.0 due to usage of an endpoint that was not the LD50 per EFED guidance.

1Calculation on LD50 per square foot basis for pre-plant soil application.

 Acute and Chronic Risk to Mammals

Table 21 and Table 22 below provide the revised acute and chronic dose-based RQs, 

respectively, to mammals for all proposed uses of benzovindiflupyr. The RQs presented in 

Table 23 in the pre-mitigation assessment for the chronic dietary-based RQs from the premitigation assessment indicates no LOC exceedances. Therefore, Table 20 is not re-presented in 
25

this addendum since further reductions in loading associated with the proposed mitigation would 

result in the same conclusions.

Table 21 (Revised). Acute dose-based RQs for mammals due to exposure to proposed uses of benzovindiflupyr.

15 gram "Small" Mammals 35 gram "Medium" Mammals 1000 gram "Large"Mammals

Crop Use

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Blueberries 0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1

<0.1

<0.1

<0.1

Canola 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Cereal 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Corn, Other 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Corn, sweet 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Cotton 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Cucurbits 0.2 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Fruiting Vegetables 0.2 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Grapes, Peanuts 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Soybeans and 

Legumes

0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1

<0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Peanuts 0.2 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Pome 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.0 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Nursery Plants, 

Tomato Transplant, 

Fruit Transplant, 

Cucurbit Transplant

0.3 0.1 0.2 0.1

0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1

Turf grasses 0.2 0.1 0.1 <0.1 0.2 <0.1 0.1 0.1

Potatoes1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1

Acute listed species LOC = 0.1;; Non-listed animals acute LOC = 0.5

**Bolded values indicate LOC exceedance.

1Calculation on LD50 per square foot basis for pre-plant soil application.
26

Table 22 (Revised). Chronic dose based RQs for mammals due to exposed to proposed uses of benzovindiflupyr.

15 gram "Small" Mammals 35 gram "Medium" Mammals 1000 gram "Large"Mammals

Crop Use

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Short Grass

Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants

Fruits/pods

Arthropods

Seeds

Blueberries 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3

<0.1

0.7 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.3

<0.1

0.4 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.2

<0.1

Canola 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1

Cereal 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1

Corn, Other 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1

Corn, sweet 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2

Cotton 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.2

Cucurbits 1.5 0.7 0.8 0.1 0.6 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.3

Fruiting Vegetables 1.5 0.7 0.8 0.1 0.6 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.3

Grapes, Peanuts 1.4 0.6 0.8 0.1 0.5 1.2 0.5 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.2

Soybeans and 

Legumes 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.2

Peanuts 1.4 0.7 0.8 0.1 0.6 1.2 0.6 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.0 0.3

Pome 1.0 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.2

Nursery Plants, 

Tomato Transplant, 

Fruit Transplant, 

Cucurbit Transplant

2.3 1.1 1.3 0.1 0.9 2.0 0.9 1.1 0.1 0.8 1.1 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.4

Turf grasses 1.8 0.8 1.0 0.1 0.7 1.5 0.7 0.9 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.3

Potatoes1

N/A N/A N/A

Acute listed species LOC = 0.1;; Non-listed animals acute LOC = 0.5

**Bolded values indicate LOC exceedance.

1Calculation on LD50 per square foot basis for pre-plant soil application is only compared to acute exposure LOCs since 

it is not computed with a chronic endpoint.
27

 Terrestrial Invertebrates and Beneficial Insects

Refer to the pre-mitigation risk assessment as risk findings and uncertainties for terrestrial 

invertebrates have not changed.

 Terrestrial Plants

The pre-mitigation risk assessment identified no exceedances in the LOCs for terrestrial plants 

associated with the benzovindiflupyr proposed uses based on the original labels. No changes in 

risk conclusions are expected given further reductions in loading associated with the proposed 

mitigation.

 Risks Resulting from Bioaccumulation in the Food Web

Revised risk quotients estimated from KABAM evaluating the bioaccumulation pathway for 

aquatic food items that may be consumed by birds are shown in Table 24 below. As stated in 

the pre-mitigation risk assessment, there are no exceedances for piscivorous mammals. 

Therefore, the KABAM analysis for piscivorous mammals is not presented in this addendum 

since further reductions in loading associated with the proposed mitigation would result in the 

same conclusions.

Table 24 (Revised). Calculation of RQ values for birds consuming fish contaminated by benzovindiflupyr.

Crop Use

Dose Based Acute Avian RQs

sandpipers cranes rails herons small 

osprey

white 

pelican

Sweet Corn 0.16 0.01 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.01

Other Corn 0.11 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.01

Curcurbits 0.18 0.01 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.01

Grape 0.17 0.01 0.09 0.01 0.02 0.01

Ornamental 0.15 0.01 0.08 0.01 0.02 0.01

Peanuts 0.11 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.01

Potatoes 0.13 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.01

Fruiting Veg. 0.19 0.01 0.10 0.02 0.03 0.01

Turf 0.05 <0.01 0.03 0.00 0.01 <0.01

Cotton 0.13 0.01 0.07 0.01 0.02 0.01

Blueberries 0.06 <0.01 0.03 0.01 0.01 <0.01

Soybeans and 

Legumes 

0.08 <0.01 0.04 0.01 0.01 <0.01

Cereal Crops 0.06 <0.01 0.03 0.01 0.01 <0.01
28

Table 24 (Revised). Calculation of RQ values for birds consuming fish contaminated by benzovindiflupyr.

Crop Use

Dose Based Acute Avian RQs

sandpipers cranes rails herons small 

osprey

white 

pelican

Canola 0.02 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

Pome Fruit 0.03 <0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01

*Acute listed species LOC = 0.1;; Non-listed animals acute LOC = 0.5

Chronic LOC = 1.0

**Bolded Red Values Indicate LOC exceedance

4.2 Risk Description

4.2.1 Non-Target Aquatic Organisms

This section supplements Section 3.3.1 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment. In general, the 

proposed mitigation resolves some of the acute listed, acute non-listed, and chronic LOC 

exceedances for some of the uses, or all risks with certain aquatic taxa in its entirety for other 

uses. However, there are still broad risks of concern indicated for freshwater fish, 

estuarine/marine fish, freshwater invertebrates (water column), and estuarine/marine 

invertebrates (water column and pore water) accounting for the proposed mitigation measures. 

Refer to Section 5 of this document for a comprehensive discussion on the risk conclusions 

resulting from the proposed mitigation. Given the scope of LOC exceedances remaining after 

the proposed mitigation, the characterization description provided Section 3.3.1 of the premitigation risk assessment still applies. 

It should be emphasized that both acute and chronic exposure in aquatic environments is driven 

by the buildup of benzovindiflupyr in aquatic water bodies occurring predominately due to

runoff from treated fields2. While reductions in benzovindiflupyr loading in water bodies due to 

spray drift buffers are considered in this risk assessment addendum, the spray drift mitigation 

does not contribute to substantial reductions in exposure for many of the proposed uses which 

are anticipated to occur in regions where runoff is substantial. Furthermore, while vegetative 

buffer strips are also being proposed by the registrant as a mitigation measure, their impacts are 

not evaluated in the risk assessment addendum given the large uncertainties which exist related 

to current maintenance practices of vegetative buffer strips. Potential weathering with poorly 

maintained vegetative buffer strips may largely diminish the effectiveness for vegetative buffer 

strips to reduce benzovindiflupyr exposure resulting from runoff in aquatic environments. In 

summary, given the overall concern expressed for benzovindiflupyr’s tendency to buildup in 

aquatic environments, a targeted monitoring study in water bodies nearby high benzovindiflupyr 

usage areas is recommended to verify the exposure findings in this risk assessment.

 

2 Please refer to Section 6 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment (Aquatic Exposure Assessment subsection) for the 

discussion and uncertainties on the persistence of benzovindiflupyr in mesocosm-type aquatic environments based 

on registrant-submitted studies.
29

4.2.2 Non-Target Terrestrial Organisms

This section supplements Section 3.3.2 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment. In general, the 

proposed mitigation resolves some of the acute listed and chronic LOC exceedances for some of 

the uses. However, there are still broad risks of concern indicated for mammals and birds 

accounting for the proposed mitigation measures. Refer to Section 5 of this document for a 

comprehensive discussion on the risk conclusions resulting from the proposed mitigation. 

Given the scope of LOC exceedances remaining after the proposed mitigation, the 

characterization description provided Section 3.3.2 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment still 

applies. 

The acute risks identified to birds via exposure to benzovindiflupyr residues in food items are 

driven by conservative endpoints developed in response to uncertainties associated with 

regurgitation issues in the passerine oral toxicity study. Refer to Section 3.3.2 and Section 6 

(Terrestrial Exposure Assessment subsection) of the pre-mitigation risk assessment for 

further discussion. 

Furthermore, acute and chronic dietary risks to mammals to benzovindiflupyr residues in food 

items are indicated with exposure estimates based on steady dosage of benzovindiflupyr. Such a 

scenario is most representative of foraging mammals which may be susceptible repeat exposure 

from contaminated food items within treated fields. 

For terrestrial invertebrates and beneficial insects, there are no LOCs were exceeded on the basis 

of acute contact exposure. However, there are still uncertainties which exist with acute oral and 

chronic exposures mainly due to data gaps. Refer to Section 6 of the pre-mitigation risk 

assessment for a further description.
30

5. CONCLUSIONS

This section supersedes Section 6 of the pre-mitigation risk assessment. The overall revised 

risk conclusions for each aquatic and terrestrial taxa, broken down by each proposed use of 

benzovindiflupyr, are presented below in Table 26 and Table 27, respectively. A summary of 

the risk conclusions including mitigation measures proposed by the registrant as well as changes 

to risk conclusions from the pre-mitigation risk assessment are discussed below for aquatic and 

terrestrial taxa:

Aquatic Organisms

 Freshwater Fish

Acute listed species LOCs exceed for all uses even after the proposed mitigation. All but five 

uses exceed the non-listed acute species LOCs even after the proposed mitigation. The 

exceptions include cereal crops, canola, pome fruit, blueberries, and turf uses. Exceedances with 

the non-listed acute LOCs were resolved mitigation with cereal crops and blueberries uses. 

Chronic LOCs exceed for all but two uses still after the proposed mitigation. The exceptions 

include canola and pome fruit, and both of these exceptions occurred as a result of resolution of 

chronic LOC exceedances due to the mitigation.

The revised acute RQs for freshwater fish range between 0.18 – 1.49. Revised chronic RQs 

range between 0.7 – 5.3.

 Estuarine/Marine Fish

Acute listed species LOCs exceeds for all but two uses even after the proposed mitigation. The 

exceptions include canola and pome fruit, and both of these exceptions occurred as a result of 

resolution of acute listed species LOC exceedances due to the mitigation. Acute non-listed 

LOCs are not exceeded with any use in the pre-mitigation risk assessment or this addendum. 

Chronic LOCs are not exceeded with any use after the proposed mitigation. Chronic LOC 

exceedances were resolved with three uses including sweet corn, grapes, and potatoes due to the 

proposed mitigation.

The revised acute RQs for estuarine/marine fish range between 0.02 – 0.19. Revised chronic 

RQs ranged between 0.1 – 0.7.

 Freshwater Invertebrates (Water Column)

Acute listed species LOCs are exceeded with only five uses (fruiting vegetables, sweet corn, 

cucurbits, grapes, and nursery crops) after the proposed mitigation. Acute listed species LOC 

exceedances were resolved with peanuts, potatoes, and cotton uses after mitigation. Acute nonlisted LOCs are not exceeded with any uses in the pre-mitigation risk assessment or this 

addendum. Chronic LOCs are not exceeded with any use after the proposed mitigation. The 
31

three uses (sweet corn, grapes, and potatoes) that had RQs that exceeded the chronic LOC prior 

to mitigation did not exceed the chronic LOC after mitigation.

The revised acute RQs for freshwater invertebrates (water column) range between 0.01 – 0.06. 

Revised chronic RQs ranged between 0.1 – 0.7.

 Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates (Water Column)

Acute listed species LOCs are exceeded for all but six uses even after the proposed mitigation. 

The exceptions include turf, blueberries, soybeans and legumes, cereal crops, canola, and pome 

fruit. The proposed mitigation resolved acute listed species LOC exceedances with blueberries, 

soybeans and legumes, and the cereal crop uses. Acute non-listed LOCs are not exceeded with 

any use in pre-mitigation risk assessment or this addendum. Chronic LOCs are not exceeded 

with any use after the proposed mitigation. Chronic LOC exceedances were resolved with the

potato use due to the proposed mitigation.

The revised acute RQs for estuarine/marine fish range between 0.01 – 0.06. Revised chronic 

RQs ranged between 0.1 – 0.7.

 Benthic Invertebrates 

Acute listed species LOCs for estuarine/marine benthic invertebrates in porewater are

exceeded in seven uses after the proposed mitigation which include the sweet corn, cucurbits, 

grapes, fruiting vegetables, nursery crops, peanuts, and potato uses. Acute listed species LOC 

exceedances for estuarine/marine benthic invertebrates were resolved with cotton and blueberries 

after mitigation. However, acute non-listed LOCs for freshwater benthic invertebrates in 

pore water are not exceeded in any uses after the proposed mitigation. Acute non-listed LOC 

exceedances for freshwater benthic invertebrates were resolved with five uses including sweet 

corn, cucurbits, grapes, potatoes, and nursery crop uses. 

No chronic LOC exceedances were identified for both freshwater and estuarine/marine benthic 

invertebrates in pore water and sediment in the pre-mitigation assessment or this addendum.

The revised acute RQs for freshwater and estuarine marine benthic invertebrates in pore water 

range between 0.01 – 0.08. Revised chronic RQs for freshwater and estuarine marine benthic 

invertebrates in pore water and sediment ranged between <0.1 – 0.2.

 Aquatic Plants

No chronic LOC exceedances were identified in the pre-mitigation assessment or this addendum.
32

Terrestrial Organisms

 Birds

Acute listed and non-listed species LOCs with a combination of all possible food items still 

exceed for all uses even after the proposed mitigation. Revised acute RQs range between <0.1 –

2.9 for all food items. However, no chronic LOC exceedances were identified for any food items 

in the pre-mitigation assessment or this addendum. 

 Mammals

Acute listed species LOCs with a combination of all possible food items still exceed for all uses 

even after the proposed mitigation. Chronic LOCs considering a combination of all possible 

food items are exceeded in all but seven uses even after the proposed mitigation. The exceptions 

include blueberries, canola, corn (other than sweet), cereal crops, soybeans and legumes, and 

pome fruit. Chronic LOC exceedances for estuarine/marine benthic invertebrates were resolved 

with the blueberries, cereal crops, soybeans and legumes, and pome fruit uses due to the 

proposed mitigation.

Revised acute and chronic RQs range between <0.1 – 0.2 and <0.1 – 1.5, respectively for all 

food items.

 Piscivorous Birds

No LOC exceedances were identified in the pre-mitigation assessment or this addendum.

 Piscivorous Mammals

Acute listed species LOCs considering a combination of all possible food items are exceeded in 

all but five uses after the mitigation. The exceptions include the blueberries, cereal crops, 

soybeans and legumes, and pome fruit uses. Acute listed species LOC exceedances were 

resolved with three uses including blueberries, soybeans and legumes, and cereal crop uses due 

to the proposed mitigation. Revised RQs range between <0.01 – 0.19 for all species considering 

the full combination of possible food items.

 Terrestrial Invertebrates

While no LOCs were exceeded for terrestrial invertebrates on the basis of acute contact 

exposure, there are still uncertainties with acute oral and chronic exposures. Refer to the premitigation risk assessment for a further description.
33

Table 26 (Revised). Summary of adverse impacts for aquatic organisms expected from the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.

Proposed Use

Adverse Impacts Expected for Aquatic Organisms? 

(No/Yes: A(L) = Acute Listed Species, A(NL) -= Acute Non-Listed Species, C=Chronic)

Freshwater 

Fish

Estuarine/Marine 

Fish

Freshwater 

Invertebrates

(Water 

Column)

Estuarine/

Marine 

Invertebrates

(Water 

Column)

Freshwater 

and 

Saltwater 

Benthic 

Invertebrates 

(Sediment)

Freshwater 

Benthic 

Invertebrates 

(Pore water)

Saltwater 

Benthic 

Invertebrates 

(Pore water)

Aquatic 

Plants

Sweet Corn

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L) No

Corn, Other than 

Sweet

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L) No YesA(L) No No No No

Cucurbits

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L) No

Tomatoes and 

Fruiting Vegetables

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L) No

Grapes

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L) No

Tubers (Potatoes)

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L) No YesA(L) No No YesA(L) No

Peanuts

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L) No YesA(L) No No YesA(L) No

Nursery Plants, 

Tomato Transplant, 

Fruit Transplant, 

Cucurbit Transplant

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L) No
34

Table 26 (Revised). Summary of adverse impacts for aquatic organisms expected from the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.

Proposed Use

Adverse Impacts Expected for Aquatic Organisms? 

(No/Yes: A(L) = Acute Listed Species, A(NL) -= Acute Non-Listed Species, C=Chronic)

Freshwater 

Fish

Estuarine/Marine 

Fish

Freshwater 

Invertebrates

(Water 

Column)

Estuarine/

Marine 

Invertebrates

(Water 

Column)

Freshwater 

and 

Saltwater 

Benthic 

Invertebrates 

(Sediment)

Freshwater 

Benthic 

Invertebrates 

(Pore water)

Saltwater 

Benthic 

Invertebrates 

(Pore water)

Aquatic 

Plants

Turf Grass Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No No No No No No

Cotton

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L) No YesA(L) No No No No

Blueberries Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No No No No No No

Soybeans & Legumes

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL), C

Yes

A(L) No No No No No No

Cereal (Oats, Barley, 

and Wheat)

Yes

A(L), C Yes

A(L) No No No No No No

Canola Yes

A(L) No No No No No No No

Pome fruit Yes

A(L) No No No No No No No

Mitigation Improvement Color Codes: Resolution of Acute Listed LOC exceedances Resolution of Acute Non-Listed LOC exceedances

 Resolution of Chronic LOC exceedances Resolution of Acute Listed and Chronic LOC 

exceedances 
35

Table 27 (Revised). Summary of adverse impacts for terrestrial organisms expected from the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.

Proposed Use

Adverse Impacts Expected for Terrestrial Organisms? 

(No/Yes: A(L) = Acute Listed Species, A(NL) -= Acute Non-Listed Species, C=Chronic)

Birds Mammals Piscivorous Birds

Piscivorous 

Mammals Terrestrial Plants

Terretrial 

Invertebrates1

Sweet Corn

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L), A(NL), C

Corn, Other than Sweet Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L)

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L), A(NL), C

Cucurbits Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Tomatoes and Fruiting 

Vegetables

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Grapes Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Tubers (Potatoes) Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Peanuts Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Nursery Plants, Tomato 

Transplant, Fruit Transplant, 

Cucurbit Transplant

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L), A(NL), C

Turf Grass Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No No YesA(L), A(NL), C

Cotton Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L), C

Yes

A(L) No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C
36

Table 27 (Revised). Summary of adverse impacts for terrestrial organisms expected from the proposed uses of 

benzovindiflupyr.

Proposed Use

Adverse Impacts Expected for Terrestrial Organisms? 

(No/Yes: A(L) = Acute Listed Species, A(NL) -= Acute Non-Listed Species, C=Chronic)

Birds Mammals Piscivorous Birds

Piscivorous 

Mammals Terrestrial Plants

Terretrial 

Invertebrates1

Blueberries Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L) No No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Soybeans & Legumes Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L) No No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Cereal (Oats, Barley, and 

Wheat)

Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L) No No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Canola Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L) No No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

Pome fruit Yes

A(L), 

A(NL)

Yes

A(L) No No

No Yes

A(L), A(NL), C

1

 Risk presumed in the absence of acute and chronic oral laraval-stage bee toxicity studies and chronic contact adult bee toxicity study.

Mitigation Improvement Color Codes: Resolution of Acute Listed LOC exceedances 

 Resolution of Chronic LOC exceedances 
37

Attachment 1. Detailed Table of Proposed Mitigation for Each Crop Use

Provided by the Registrant

This table reflects the compilation of mitigation proposals presented by the registrant. The label “C” for current uses

reflected the rates that were used in the pre-mitigation assessment. The labels “P” reflected the first iteration of 

proposed mitigation measures. The label “NP” for new proposed rates reflected the second iteration of mitigation 

measures. The label “FP” for final proposed was the last round of mitigation measures that was submitted. For uses 

that have only C (turf and ornamentals) or only C and P (Blueberries for example) that indicates that no further 

mitigation options were proposed. This addendum incorporated only the last round of mitigation for each use that 

was proposed by the registrant. For example, for blueberries the last and final mitigation would fall under the “P”

label. For cucurbits the last and final mitigation would fall under the NP label and for sweet corn the last and final 

mitigation would fall under the FP label.

Current 

Proposed

New 

Proposed

Final 

Proposed

g ai/ha x 

number of 

applications

lb ai/A X 

number of 

applications

Total load 

lb ai/A/yr

 

re-treatment 

interval*

REDUCTION 

in lb ai/A and 

percent 

reduction

Blueberries C 76 X 2 0.068 X 2 0.136 10

P 76 X 1 0.068 X 1 0.068 na 0.068 (-50%)

Canola C 76 X 1 0.068 X 1 0.068 na

P 50 X 1 0.046 X 1 0.046 na 0.022 (-32%)

Cereal C 76 X 2 0.068 X 2 0.136 14

P 50 X 2 0.046 X 2 0.092 14 0.044 (-32%)

Corn

C 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7

P 50 X 2 0.046 X 2 0.092 14 0.18 (-66%)

Corn, sweet

C 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7

P 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7 fb* 14

NP 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7 fb* 14 removed 

aerial

FP 76 x 2 0.068 x 2 0.136 14 0.136 (50%)

Cotton

C 76 X 3 0.068 X 3 0.204 10

P 76 X 3 0.068 X 3 0.204 14

FP 76 x 2 0.068 x 2 0.136 14 0.068 (33%)

Cucurbits

C 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7

P 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7 fb 14

NP 76 x 4 0.068 x4 0.272 7 fb 14 removed 

aerial

Fruiting 

Vegetables

C 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7

P 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7 fb 14

NP 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7 fb 14 removed 

aerial
38
39

Current,

Proposed,

New 

Proposed,

Final 

Proposed

g ai/ha x 

number of 

applications

lb ai/A X 

number of 

applications

Total load 

lb ai/A/yr

re-treatment 

interval*

REDUCTION 

in lb ai/A and 

percent 

reduction

Grapes

C 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 7

P 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 14

NP 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272 14 removed 

aerial

FP 76 x 3 0.068 x 3 0.204 14 0.068 (25%)

Legumes C 76 X 2 0.068 X 2 0.136 14

P 62.5 X 2 0.056 X 2 0.112 14 0.024 (-18%)

Peanuts

C 100 X 3/76 X 4 0.089 X 3/

0.068 X 4

0.267 –

0.272

14

P 100 X 3 (and/or 

76 X 3)

0.089 X 2 or 

0.068 X 3

0.204 @ 0.089 lb, 21 

day ; @ 0.068, 

14 day

0.06 (-24%)

Pome C 50 X 4 0.046 X 4 0.184 7

P 50 X 4 0.046 X 4 0.184 7 fb 14

Soybeans

C 76 X 2 0.068 X 2 0.136 7

P 50 X 2 0.046 X 2 0.092 14 0.044 (-32%)

Tuberous & 

potato

C 76 X 4 foliar 

100 X 1 infurrow

0.068 X 4 0.272 foliar 

+ 0.089 soil 

0.361

7 foliar 0

P 76 X 4 foliar 

100 X 1 infurrow

0.068 X 4 0.272 foliar 

+ 0.089 soil 

0.361

14 foliar 0

NP (potato) 100 X 1 infurrow0.089 soil 14 foliar 0.272 (75%)

Removed 

foliar spray

Turf C 76 X 4 0.068 X 4 0.272

P No changes due to low acreage

Ornamentals

P 76/100 gal @ 

135 GPA

0.089 X 3 0.267 7

C No changes due to low exposure 

* “7 fb 14” means seven day retereatment interval after the first application followed by 14 day retreatment 

interval for all subsequent applications.

Abbreviations:

C = Use information on original labels

P = Post-mitigation proposed use information (first iteration for selected crops)

NP = Further post-mitigation proposed use information (second iteration for selected crops)

FP = Final proposed rates for that particular use.
40

Appendix C (Revised). Sample SWCC Output File

Summary of Water Modeling of Solatenol and the USEPA Standard 

Pond

Estimated Environmental Concentrations for Solatenol are presented in Table 1 for the USEPA standard pond with 

the FLtomatoSTD_V2 field scenario. A graphical presentation of the year-to-year peaks is presented in Figure 1. 

These values were generated with the Surface Water Concentration Calculator (SWCC Version 1.106). Critical 

input values for the model are summarized in Tables 2 and 3.

This model estimates that about 4.8% of Solatenol applied to the field eventually reaches the water body. The main 

mechanism of transport from the field to the water body is by runoff (82.2% of the total transport), followed by 

spray drift (12.9%) and erosion (4.97%).

In the water body, pesticide dissipates with an effective water column half-life of 1688.5 days. (This value does not 

include dissipation by transport to the benthic region; it includes only processes that result in removal of pesticide 

from the complete system.) The main source of dissipation in the water column is metabolism (effective average 

half-life = 2221 days) followed by photolysis (7045.7 days) and volatilization (1.84406E+07 days).

In the benthic region, pesticide dissipates very slowly (689.9 days). The main source of dissipation in the benthic 

region is metabolism (effective average half-life = 689.9 days). The vast majority of the pesticide in the benthic 

region (99.79%) is sorbed to sediment rather than in the pore water.

Table 1. Estimated Environmental Concentrations (ppb) for Solatenol.

Peak (1-in-10 yr) 5.35

4-day Avg (1-in-10 yr) 4.98

21-day Avg (1-in-10 yr) 4.38

60-day Avg (1-in-10 yr) 4.02

365-day Avg (1-in-10 yr) 3.55

Entire Simulation Mean 2.95

Table 2. Summary of Model Inputs for Solatenol.

Scenario FLtomatoSTD_V2

Cropped Area Fraction 1

Koc (ml/g) 4478

Water Half-Life (days) @ 20 °C 2920

Benthic Half-Life (days) @ 20 °C 907

Photolysis Half-Life (days) @ 45 °Lat 88.4

Hydrolysis Half-Life (days) 0

Soil Half-Life (days) @ 20 °C 1460

Foliar Half-Life (days) 0

Molecular Wt 398.2

Vapor Pressure (torr) 2.4e-11
41

Solubility (mg/l) 0.98

Table 3. Application Schedule for Solatenol.

Date (Mon/Day) Type Amount (kg/ha) Eff. Drift

5/1 Foliar 0.076 0.99 0.062

5/8 Foliar 0.076 0.99 0.062

5/22 Foliar 0.076 0.99 0.062

6/5 Foliar 0.076 0.99 0.062

Figure 1. Yearly Peak Concentrations