Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0262-0059
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-11-16T05:00Z

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF PREVENTION,

 PESTICIDES AND

TOXIC SUBSTANCES

      

May 3, 2007

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT:	REVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL AND RESIDENTIAL EXPOSURE/
RISKASSESSMENT FOR THE ENDOSULFAN REREGISTRATION ELIGIBILITY DECISION
DOCUMENT (RED) (Revised)

FROM:	Shanna Recore, Industrial Hygienist

Reregistration Branch 2

Health Effects Division (7509P)

TO:		Tracy Perry, Chemical Review Manager

Reregistration Branch 3

Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508P)

THRU:		Alan Nielsen, Branch Senior Scientist

Reregistration Branch 2

Health Effects Division (7509P)

Please find the review of Endosulfan.

DB Barcode:			D339509

Pesticide Chemical Codes: 	079401

PHED:  			Yes, Version 1.1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  TOC \o "1-4" \h \z \u    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354707"  EXPOSURE AND
RISK ASSESSMENT/CHARACTERIZATION	  PAGEREF _Toc163354707 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354708"  Summary of Toxicity Concerns Relating to
Occupational Exposures	  PAGEREF _Toc163354708 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354709"  Other Endpoints of Concern	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354709 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354710"  Cancer Determination	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354710 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354711"  SUMMARY OF USE PATTERNS AND FORMULATIONS
  PAGEREF _Toc163354711 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354712"  Deletion of Uses	  PAGEREF _Toc163354712
\h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354713"  Occupational- and Non-Occupational-Use
Products	  PAGEREF _Toc163354713 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354714"  Formulation Types and Percent Active
Ingredient	  PAGEREF _Toc163354714 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354715"  Registered Use Sites	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354715 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354716"  Methods and Types of Equipment Used for
Mixing, Loading, and Application	  PAGEREF _Toc163354716 \h  11  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354717"  OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE AND RISK
ASSESSMENT/CHARACTERIZATION	  PAGEREF _Toc163354717 \h  11  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354718"  Occupational Handler Exposures and Risks
  PAGEREF _Toc163354718 \h  11  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354719"  Handler Scenarios	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354719 \h  11  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354720"  Handler Exposure Data - Chemical
Specific Data	  PAGEREF _Toc163354720 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354721"  Handler Study	  PAGEREF _Toc163354721 \h
 12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354722"  Registrant Submitted Risk Assessment	 
PAGEREF _Toc163354722 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354723"  Handler Exposure Data - Surrogate Data	 
PAGEREF _Toc163354723 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354724"  Handler Exposure Assumptions	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354724 \h  19  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354725"  Handler Exposure Calculations	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354725 \h  20  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354726"  Handler Risk Calculations	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354726 \h  21  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354727"  Summary of Risk Concerns for Handlers,
Data Gaps, and Confidence in Exposure    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354728" 
and Risk Estimates	  PAGEREF _Toc163354728 \h  57  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354729"  Quick Reference to Handler Risks	 
PAGEREF _Toc163354729 \h  57  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354730"  Data Gaps	  PAGEREF _Toc163354730 \h  61
 

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354731"  Data Quality and Confidence in
Assessment	  PAGEREF _Toc163354731 \h  62  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354732"  Occupational Postapplication Exposures
and Risks	  PAGEREF _Toc163354732 \h  62  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354733"  Postapplication Exposures and
Assumptions	  PAGEREF _Toc163354733 \h  62  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354734"  Chemical-specific DFR Data	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354734 \h  63  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354735"  Other Postapplication Data	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354735 \h  68  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354736"  Exposure and Risk Calculations	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354736 \h  69  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354737"  Assumptions	  PAGEREF _Toc163354737 \h 
70  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354738"  Short- and Intermediate-term
Postapplication Exposures and Risks	  PAGEREF _Toc163354738 \h  71  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354739"  Non-Occupational Exposures	  PAGEREF
_Toc163354739 \h  88  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354740"  Data Gaps	  PAGEREF _Toc163354740 \h  88
 

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc163354741"  Occupational Postapplication Summary	 
PAGEREF _Toc163354741 \h  88  

 

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE AND RISK ASSESSMENT

EXPOSURE AND RISK ASSESSMENT/CHARACTERIZATION

Purpose

In this document, which is for use in EPA's development of the
Endosulfan Review Reregistration Eligibility Decision Document (RED),
EPA presents the results of its review of the potential human health
effects of occupational exposure to endosulfan. 

Criteria for Conducting Exposure Assessments

An occupational and/or residential exposure assessment is required for
an active ingredient if (1) certain toxicological criteria are triggered
and (2) there is potential exposure to handlers (mixers, loaders,
applicators, etc.) during use or to persons entering treated sites after
application is complete.  For endosulfan, both criteria are met.

Summary of Toxicity Concerns Relating to Occupational Exposures

Acute Toxicology Categories

Table 1 below presents the acute toxicity categories as outlined in the
Report of the Hazard Identification Assessment Review Committee
(February 25, 2002).

Table 1:  Acute Toxicity Categories for Endosulfan Technical

Guidelines	

Test	

MRID	

Results	

Toxicity Category

81-1	

Acute Oral Toxicity	

00038307	

♂

LD50 =9.58 mg/kg in ♀	

I

81-2	

Acute Dermal Toxicity	

41183503	

LD50 = 2000 mg/kg	

III

81-3	

Acute Inhalation Toxicity	

41183504	

LC50 = 0.16- 0.5 mg/L	

I

81-4	

Primary Eye Irritation	

255157	

Eye irritant

(Residual opacity at day 13)	

I

81-5	

Primary Dermal Irritation	

00038309

00128649	

Non-Irritant

Slightly Irritant	

IV

IV

81-6	

Dermal Sensitization	

00136994	

Not a dermal sensitizer	



Other Endpoints of Concern

The April 2, 2007, endosulfan memo (D338576, TXR 0054554) Endosulfan. 
Hazard Characterization and Endpoint Selection Reflecting Receipt of a
Developmental Neurotoxicity Study and Subchronic Neurotoxicity Study (E.
Reaves) indicates that there are toxicological endpoints of concern for
endosulfan.  The endpoints used in assessing the risks for endosulfan
are presented in the Table 2.

Table 2:  Endpoints for Assessing Occupational and Residential Risks for
Endosulfan

Exposure

Scenario	Dose Used in Risk Assessment, UF	Endpoint & Level of Concern
for Risk Assessment	Study and Toxicological Effects

Acute Dietary

(general population including infants and children)

	NOAEL = 1.5 mg/kg/day

UF = 100

FQPA=1x

	

aRfD = 0.015

mg/kg/day

aPAD = 0.015

mg/kg/day

	Acute neurotoxicity study in rats;

MRID 44403101

Oral LOAEL= 3 mg/kg/day; based on increased incidence of convulsions
seen in female rats within 8 hours after dosing.

Chronic Dietary

(all populations)	NOAEL = 0.6 mg/kg/day

UF = 100

FQPA=1x

	cRfD = 0.006

mg/kg/day

cPAD = 0.006

mg/kg/day

	Combined chronic/carcinogenicity study in rats; MRID 41099502

LOAEL = 2.9 mg/kg/day, based on reduced body weight gain, increased
incidences of marked progressive glomerulonephorsis & blood vessel
aneurysms in male rats.

Dermal, Short (1-30 days)- & Intermediate

(1-6 mos)-Term	LOAEL = 3.7 mg/kg/day

45% dermal absorption factor	Occupational LOC

MOE = 300	Developmental Neurotixity- rats: MRID 46968301

LOAEL = 3.74, based on decreased pup weight; NOAEL not established.

Dermal

Long-term

(> 6 months)	Long-term dermal exposure is not expected for endosulfan.

Inhalation

Short- and Intermediate-term

(1 - 30 days)	NOAEL = 0.2 mg/kg/day

 (0.001 mg/L)	LOC for Occupational MOE = 100	21-Day inhalation toxicity
study in male & female rats

MRID 00147183, 41667501

LOAEL = 0.002 mg/L, based on decreased body weight gain and alterations
in hematology and clinical chemistry parameters 

Inhalation

Long-term

(> 6 months)	Long-term inhalation exposure is not expected for
endosulfan.

Cancer	Group E- Evidence of non-carcinogenicity for humans	Q1* not
calculated	Chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study in rats (MRID
41099502) & carcinogenicity study in mice (MRID 40792401)

No increased in the frequency of tumors in either the rat or mouse.

FQPA Safety Factor

The FQPA factor for endosulfan has changed over the past few years
mainly due to database uncertainties.  In November 1998, the FQPA
Committee recommended a 3X factor due to the lack of a developmental
neurotoxicity study.  The risk assessment on 5/30/2003, however,
retained the 10x FQPA factor due to database uncertainties.  These
database uncertainties included: 1) lack of subchronic and developmental
neurotoxicity studies; 2) concerns for effects on sperm parameters
reported in the literature; 3) the lack of evaluation of sperm
parameters in guideline studies; 4) testicular lesions observed in the
chronic rat study; and 5) increased pituitary and uterine weight in the
two-generation reproduction study.  Since the 5/30/2003 evaluation, a
subchronic neurotoxicity study and a developmental neurotoxicity study
has been submitted and reviewed by the Agency.  Therefore, the FQPA
factor was again re-evaluated and is discussed in the 4/2/2007
endosulfan memo (D338576, TXR 0054554).  This memo describes the
residual uncertainties from the 5/30/2003 risk assessment and outlines
how recent neurotoxicity data and published literature demonstrate that
the uncertainty associated with the previous assessment has been
addressed.  Therefore, it was recommended that the FQPA factor not be
retained (i.e., 1X) since there were no residual uncertainties for pre
and/or post-natal toxicity.

Cancer Determination 

The carcinogenicity issue has been considered by the Health Effects
Division-Cancer Peer Review Committee.  The Committee agreed that
“there was no evidence of carcinogenicity” for endosulfan.

SUMMARY OF USE PATTERNS AND FORMULATIONS

Deletion of Uses

After the version of the endosulfan occupational and residential risk
assessment dated February 2, 2000, a 6f notice was issued and finalized
after a 30 day comment period. The following uses have been deleted from
the endosulfan technical labels at the request of the endosulfan task
force and will not be assessed in this document: 

All home and residential uses

Endosulfan in the form of fogger, insecticidal smoke, impregnated
material, dust, pressurized liquid, and pressurized spray.

Food: Citrus (except non-bearing and nursery stock), artichoke,
safflower, sugar beet, watercress, alfalfa, clover/forage (except grown
for seed), corn (field/forage), endive, evening primrose, garden beets,
garlic, and rapeseed (canola).

Non-food: Indoor household uses, wood protectant, unseasoned forest
products, ULV application, Douglas Fir, Juniper, Locust, Maple, and
Willow (forestry use), forestry plantings.

Commercially Grown Greenhouse/Out-of-Doors Ornamental Plants (Except for
Commercially Grown Outdoor Trees and Shrubs) including, but not limited
to, Aster, Carnation, Chrysanthemum, Evening Primrose, Iris, Lilies,
Marigold, Poinsettia, Snapdragon, Tulips, Croft Lily, German Lily,
Hydrangea, Periwinkle, Rhododendron, Rose, Rhododendron, Canescens,
Flowering Peach/Nectarine, Leatherleaf Fern, Holly Fern.

Occupational- and Non-Occupational-Use Products

Products containing endosulfan are intended for occupational use. 
Residential uses will not be included in this assessment, because of the
above mentioned deletion.  Occupational uses include applications to
agricultural food and non-food crops, ornamental and/or shade trees,
fruit and nut crops, ornamental herbaceous trees, and shrubs.

Type of Pesticide/Targeted Pests

Endosulfan [6, 7, 8, 9, 10-hexachloro-1, 5, 5a, 6, 9, 9a, hexahydro-6,
9-methano-2, 4, 3-benzodioxathiepin-3-oxide] is a broad spectrum
insecticide/acaricide.  Examples of the type of pests that endosulfan is
used to control include, but are not limited to, the following:

Field Crops:  Meadow spittlebug, Army cutworm, Aphids, Bean leaf
skeletonizer, Cowpea curculio, Cucumber beetle, Flea beetle, Green stink
bug, Leafhoppers, Mexican bean beetles, Cabbage looper, Cabbage worm,
Cabbage aphid, Cucumber beetles, Whitefly, Cutworms, Diamondback moth,
Corn earworm, Boll weevil, Bollworm, Lygus bugs, Thrips, Melonworm,
Pickleworm, Rindworm, Squash beetle, Squash bug, Blister beetle, Potato
beetle, Rose chafer, Pepper maggot, Cinch bug, Crown mite, June bug,
Harlequin bug, Grape phylloxera, and Grape leafhopper.

Orchard Crops:  Aphids (including Apple aphids, Black cherry aphid,
Black peach aphid, Green peach aphid, Rosy apple aphids, Rusty plum
aphids, Wooly apple aphids), Apple rust mites, Green fruitworm,
Tarnished plant bug, Tentiform leafminers, Whitefly leaf hoppers,
Peachtree borer, Peach twig borer, Plum rust mite, Bud moth, Bud mites,
Twig mites, Filbert aphid, Filbert leafroller, Filbert bud mite, Black
pecan aphic, Pecan nut casebearer, and Spittlebug.

Ornamental  Trees and Shrubs: Leather leaf fern borer, Aphids, Cyclamen
mite, Rose chafer, Whitefly, Dogwood borer, Lilac borer, Colley spruce
gall adelgid, Douglas fir needle midge, Walnut aphid, and Stink bug.

Formulation Types and Percent Active Ingredient

 	Endosulfan is formulated for occupational use as a technical grade
manufacturing product (95 percent active ingredient [ai]), emulsifiable
concentrate (9 percent to 34 percent active ingredient), and a wettable
powder (1 percent to 50 percent active ingredient). The wettable powder
is frequently, but not always, packaged in water soluble bags.

Registered Use Sites

Occupational-Use Sites

Endosulfan has been registered for occupational-use on terrestrial food
and feed crops, indoor food crops, and terrestrial non-food crops.  

.

Endosulfan Uses 

Table 3 presents the currently registered use sites matched with the
formulation, application rate, application equipment, and estimated area
treated daily.

Table 3.  Endosulfan Uses

Use Site	Formulationa	Application Rate 	Application Rate Basisb
Application Equipment	Area Treated Dailyc

Alfalfa--grown for seed, SLN [CA860035] and [NV860005]	EC, WP	1 lb
ai/acre	label rate and SLN rate	Aerial	1,200 acres

Groundboom	200 acres

Almonds, Pecans	EC, WP	3 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Almonds, Walnuts	EC, WP	2 lb ai/acre	proposed rate	Aerial	350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Apples, Pears, Plums, Prunes	EC, WP	2.5 lb ai/acre	proposed rate	Aerial
350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Apricots 	EC, WP	3 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Apricots, Cherries (sweet and tart), Nectarines, Peaches 	EC, WP	2.5 lb
ai/acre	proposed rate	Aerial	350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Barley, Oats	EC, WP	0.5 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	1,200 acres

Groundboom	200 acres

Barley, Oats, Rye, Wheat	EC, WP	0.75 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	1,200
acres

Groundboom	200 acres

Beans (dry)	EC, WP	1 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	1,200 acres

Groundboom	200 acres

Beans (succulent green), Broccoli (inc. Chinese), Brussels Sprouts,
Cabbage (inc. Chinese & Napa), Carrots, Cauliflower, Celery,
Collards--except CA, Cucumbers, Eggplant--except CA, Lettuce (head &
leaf), Melon, Peas (succulent & dry), Peppers, Potatoes (inc. sweet),
Pumpkins, Spinach, Squash (summer and winter), and Tomatoes (field
grown)	EC, WP	1 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Blueberries (highbush)--post harvest 	EC, WP 	1.5 lb ai/acre	label rate
Airblast	40 acres

Blueberries (low- & highbush)--post harvest 	EC, WP 	1.5 lb ai/acre
label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Cherries (sweet and tart)  MI only	EC, WP	1 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial
350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Christmas tree plantations	EC, WP	1 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350
acres

Airblast	40 acres

Handgun	5 acres

Low Pressure Handwand	5 acres

Citrus (nonbearing trees and nursery stock)	EC, WP	2.5 lb ai/acre	label
rate	Aerial	60 acres

Airblast	10 acres

Handgun	5 acres

Low Pressure Handwand	5 acres

Collards--CA only for EC formulation, Kale, Mustard Greens, Turnips	EC,
WP 	0.75 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Corn (sweet, fresh only)	EC, WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350
acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Cotton, Sorghum	EC, WP 	1.5 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	1,200 acres

Groundboom	200 acres

Cotton--foliar after bolls open, SLN [AZ930014][AZ930016] 	EC	0.75 lb
ai/acre	SLN rate	Aerial	1,200 acres

Groundboom	200 acres

Eggplant--foliar, CA only	EC, WP	0.5 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350
acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Filberts	WP	2 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Filberts, SLN [OR780020]	WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	SLN rate	Aerial	350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Grapes	EC, WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Macadamias	EC	1 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Macadamias, SLN [HI880008]	WP 	1 lb ai/acre	SLN rate	Airblast	40 acres

Nursery stock dip:  Peaches, Plums, Prunes	EC, WP	0.005 lb ai/gal
proposed rate	Dip	100 gal

Nursery stock dip:  Strawberry 	EC, WP	0.001 lb ai/gal	label rate	Dip 
100 gal

Nursery stock dip: Cherries, Peaches, Plums 	EC, WP	0.05 lb ai/gal	label
rate 	Dip	100 gal

Ornamental Trees, Shrubs, and Woody Plants	EC, WP	1 lb ai/acre	label
rate	Airblast	10 acres

Handgun	5 acres

Low Pressure Handwand	5 acres

Pears--soil treatment 	EC, WP 	2 lb ai/acre	label rate	Groundboom	80
acres

Handgun	5 acres

Low Pressure Handwand	5 acres

Pineapples	EC, WP	2 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Airblast	40 acres

Postharvest bark treatment:  Apricots, Nectarines, Peaches, SE States
only 	EC,WP	0.025 lb ai/gal	label rate	Handgun	1,000 gal

High Pressure Handwand	1,000 gal

Low Pressure Handwand	40 gal

Postharvest bark treatment:  Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart),
Nectarines, Peaches, Plums, Prunes 	EC,WP	0.0075 lb ai/gal	label rate
Handgun	1,000 gal

High Pressure Handwand	1,000 gal

Low Pressure Handwand	40 gal

Postharvest bark treatment:  Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart),
Nectarines, Peaches, Plums, Prunes	EC, WP	0.005 lb ai/gal	proposed rate
Handgun	1,000 gal

High Pressure Handwand	1,000 gal

Low Pressure Handwand	40 gal

Potato, SLN [WA900023]	EC	1 lb ai/acre	SLN rate	Chemigation (sprinkler)
350 acres

Strawberries	EC, WP	2 lb ai/acre	label rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

1 lb ai/acre	proposed rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Sweet Potato--soil broadcast or band treatment, including SLN [MS810036
for WP]	EC, WP	2 lb ai/acre	label rate and SLN rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Sweet Potato--soil broadcast treatment, SLN [MS810035]	EC	1.5 lb ai/acre
SLN rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

Tobacco--drench treatment to plant bed, limited to use in IN, KY, OH,
PA, and WV	EC, WP	0.0025 lb ai/gal	label rate	Handgun	1,000 gal

Low Pressure Handwand	40 gal

Tobacco--foliar field treatment, limited to use in IN, KY, OH, PA, and
WV	EC, WP	1 lb ai/acre	label rate	Groundboom	80 acres

Tobacco--foliar treatment to seed bed, limited to use in IN, KY, OH, PA,
and WV	EC, WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	label rate	Groundboom	80 acres

Tobacco--foliar treatment to seed bed, limited to use in IN, KY, OH, PA,
and WV	EC, WP	0.005 lb ai/gal	label rate	Handgun	1,000 gal

Low Pressure Handwand	40 gal

Tomatoes (greenhouse)--foliar	EC, WP	1 lb ai/acre	label rate	Handgun	5
acres

Low Pressure Handwand	5 acres

Vegetables grown for seed:  Cabbage (inc. Chinese), Collards, Cucumber,
Kale, Kohlrabi, Melon, Pumpkin, Radish, Rutabaga, Squash (summer and
winter), Turnip; SLNs for EC formulation [OR770043], [WA770016],
[WA760012 - Cabbage only]; SLNs for WP formulation SLN =[WA780029]	EC,
WP 	2 lb ai/acre	label rate and SLN rate	Aerial	350 acres

Groundboom	80 acres

a	EC = emulsifiable concentrate; WP = wettable powder

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates identified
“proposed” are rate reductions proposed by EPA.

c	Amount handled per day values are HED estimates of acres or gallons
handled per day based on industry sources and 

HED estimates.

Methods and Types of Equipment Used for Mixing, Loading, and Application

Equipment for commercial use includes fixed-wing aircraft, chemigation
(potatoes only), groundboom sprayer, airblast sprayer, handgun sprayer,
low-pressure handwand sprayer, high-pressure handwand sprayer, and dip
treatment.  	

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE AND RISK ASSESSMENT/CHARACTERIZATION

Occupational Handler Exposures and Risks

Handler Scenarios

EPA has determined that there are potential exposures to mixers,
loaders, applicators, flaggers, and other handlers during usual
use-patterns associated with endosulfan.  Based on the use patterns,
several major occupational exposure scenarios were identified for
endosulfan:  

Mixing/Loading Liquid Concentrates to Support Aerial Applications (PHED)

Mixing/Loading Liquid Concentrates to Support Aerial Applications
(Proprietary Data)

Mixing/Loading Liquid Concentrates to Support Chemigation Applications
(PHED)

Mixing/Loading Liquid Concentrates to Support Groundboom Applications
(PHED)

Mixing/Loading Liquid Concentrates to Support Airblast Applications
(PHED)

Mixing/Loading Liquid Concentrates to Support Handgun Applications
(PHED)

Mixing/Loading Liquid Concentrates to Support Dip Applications (PHED)

Mixing/Loading Wettable Powders to Support Aerial Applications (PHED)

Mixing/Loading Wettable Powders to Support Chemigation Applications
(PHED)

Mixing/Loading Wettable Powders to Support Groundboom Applications
(PHED)

Mixing/Loading Wettable Powders to Support Airblast Applications (PHED)

Mixing/Loading Wettable Powders to Support Handgun Applications (PHED)

Mixing/Loading Wettable Powders to Support Dip Applications (PHED)

Applying with Aerial Equipment (PHED)

Applying with Groundboom Equipment (PHED)

Applying with Airblast Equipment (PHED)

Applying with Airblast Equipment (Proprietary Data)

Applying with Handgun Equipment (PHED)

Applying with Handgun Equipment (ORETF)

Applying as a Dip (No Data)

Flagging to Support Aerial Spray Applications (PHED)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with Handgun Equipment
(ORETF)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with High-Pressure Handwand
Equipment (PHED)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with Low-Pressure Handwand
Equipment (ORETF ground-directed)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with Low-Pressure Handwand
Equipment (ORETF upward-directed)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates with Low-Pressure Handwand
Equipment (PHED)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates as a Dip (No Data)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Wettable Powders with Handgun Equipment (ORETF)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Wettable Powders in Water Soluble Packaging with
Handgun Equipment (ORETF)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Wettable Powders with High-Pressure Handwand
Equipment (no data)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Wettable Powders with Low-Pressure Handwand
Equipment (PHED)

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates as a Dip (No Data)

Handler Exposure Data - Chemical Specific Data

Handler Study

In support of the reregistration process for endosulfan, AgrEvo USA
submitted a handler exposure study for review by EPA.  The 1987 study,
Exposure of Mixer/Loader/ Applicators to Thiodan( 3EC Insecticide
Applied to Fruit Trees by Airblast Equipment in California was
originally submitted as MRID No. 410485-02.  The registrant subsequently
made revisions and resubmitted the study in 1990 as MRID No. 417152-01. 
EPA determined that both the original and revised study do not meet
Agency guidelines for acceptability under Series 875, Occupational and
Residential Test Guidelines.  The following data gaps and deficiencies
were found:

Study Design:  The study was conducted at 2 sites (3 replicates each)
instead of 3 sites (5 replicates each), as required by Series 875,
Occupational and Residential Test Guidelines. Also, it should be noted
that the biological monitoring data are invalid because the main
excretory pathway for endosulfan is through feces (media not monitored
in study) and not the urine (media monitored in study).  This was
identified in the endosulfan reregistration standard.

Inhalation:  No air pump calibration/operation data were provided. 
Field recovery samples did not appear to be exposed to environmental
conditions (i.e., no air was drawn through the charcoal tubes) during
the actual field sampling trials.  Breakthrough/volatilization
validation data are lacking.

Dermal:  Hand wash field recovery sample results are low and highly
variable.  Also, three samples were lost and not analyzed concurrently
with the remaining field samples.  Since hand exposure accounts for a
large percentage of the total exposure, the quality of the hand wash
recovery samples are necessary to evaluate dermal exposure.  

Based on these deficiencies, the data in MRIDs 410485-02 and 417152-01
are not used in the assessment.  Instead, surrogate-based exposure
assessments for each scenario were developed, where appropriate data
were available, using the Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database7 (PHED)
Version 1.1 and the Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force (ORETF)
data.  In addition, surrogate handler data were used for two assessments
— mixing/loading using a lock and load closed system to support aerial
applications and applying with airblast equipment.

	Registrant Submitted Risk Assessment

The registrant also submitted a risk assessment titled, “Evaluation of
the Human Hazards and Risks Associated with the Application of
Endosulfan” dated March 1989 (MRID 410485-01). This submission was not
used in this risk assessment for the following reasons: the exposure
data used was from the above study (MRID 417152-01) which was found to
be unacceptable, acres treated per day used were not justified and vary
widely from the HED standard values, and the monkey dermal penetration
study which is critical in interpreting the biological monitoring data
was not acceptable.

HED has reviewed Aventis’ “Submission of an Application Exposure
Assessment for Endosulfan and an Evaluation of Possible Endocrine
Effects in Mammalian Species” dated August 4, 1999 (MRID 449391-01)
and concludes that the submission does not follow standard HED policies
or use HED standard default values. HED calculates high-end single-day
exposures to occupational workers, based on maximum label application
rates and standard values for the number of acres that can be treated in
a single day by various types of agricultural equipment.  These standard
acres treated per day values are representative of most crops treated
with endosulfan, including both low (strawberries) and high (potatoes)
acreage crops, and are protective of commercial applicators that may
treat multiple farms or fields in one day.  Although the 1992 U.S.
Census of Agriculture data used by Aventis does represent the national
average crop acreage per farm, it is only representative of individual
farmers and not of commercial applicators, who are likely to treat more
acres in a day than individual growers. 

Handler Exposure Data - Surrogate Data

The PHED Task Force is comprised of representatives from the U.S. EPA,
Health Canada, the California Department of Pesticide regulation, and
member companies of the American Crop Protection Association.  PHED is a
software system consisting of two parts: a database of measured exposure
values for workers involved in the handling of pesticides under actual
field conditions and a set of computer algorithms used to subset and
statistically summarize the selected data.  Currently, the database
contains values for over 1,700 monitored individuals (i.e., replicates).

Users select criteria to subset the PHED database to reflect the
exposure scenario being evaluated.   The subsetting algorithms in PHED
are based on the central assumption that the magnitude of handler
exposures to pesticides are primarily a function of activity (e.g.,
mixing/loading, applying), formulation type (e.g., wettable powders,
granulars), application method (e.g., aerial, groundboom), and clothing
scenarios (e.g., gloves, double layer clothing).

Once the data for a given exposure scenario have been selected, the data
are normalized (i.e., divided by) by the amount of pesticide handled
resulting in standard unit exposures (milligrams of exposure per pound
of active ingredient handled).  Following normalization, the data are
statistically summarized. The distribution of exposure values for each
body part (e.g., chest upper arm) is categorized as normal, lognormal,
or “other” (i.e., neither normal nor lognormal).  A central tendency
value is then selected from the distribution of the exposure values for
each body part.  These values are the arithmetic mean for normal
distributions, the geometric mean for lognormal distributions, and the
median for all “other” distributions.  Once selected, the central
tendency values for each body part are composited into a “best fit”
exposure value representing the entire body. 

The unit exposure values calculated by PHED generally range from the
geometric mean to the median of the selected data set. While data from
PHED provide the best available information on handler exposures, it
should be noted that some aspects of the included studies (e.g.,
duration, acres treated, pounds of active ingredient handled) may not
accurately represent labeled uses in all cases.  HED has developed a
series of tables of standard unit exposure values for many occupational
scenarios that can be utilized to ensure consistency in exposure
assessments (PHED Surrogate Exposure Guide, August 1998).

ORETF Handler Studies (MRID 449722-01):  A report was submitted by the
ORETF (Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force) that presented data in
which the application of various products used on turf by homeowners and
lawncare operators (LCOs) was monitored.  All of the data submitted in
this report were completed in a series of studies.  

OMA002: LCO Liquid Applications with a Low Pressure Handgun tc  \l 1
"OMA002: LCO Liquid Applications with a Low Pressure Handgun"  (MRID
449722-01):  A mixer/loader/applicator study was performed by the
Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force (ORETF) using Dacthal as a
surrogate compound to determine “generic” exposures to individuals
applying a pesticide to turf with a low-pressure “nozzle gun” or
“handgun” sprayer.  Dermal and inhalation exposures were estimated
using whole-body passive dosimeters and breathing-zone air samples on
OVS tubes. Inhalation exposure was calculated using an assumed
respiratory rate of 17 liters per minute for light work (NAFTA, 1999),
the actual sampling time for each individual, and the pump flow rate.  
All results were normalized for pounds active ingredient handled.   

A total of 90 replicates were monitored using 17 different subjects. 
Four different formulations of dacthal [75% wettable powder (packaged in
4 and 24 pound bags), 75% wettable powder in water soluble bags (3 pound
bag), 75% water dispersible granules (2 pound bag) and 55% liquid
flowable (2.5 gallon container)] were applied by five different LCOs to
actual residential lawns at each site in three different locations
(Ohio, Maryland, and Georgia) for a total of fifteen replicates per
formulation.  An additional ten replicates at each site were monitored
while they performed spray application only using the 75 percent
wettable powder formulation.  A target application rate of 2 pounds
active ingredient was used for all replicates (actual rate achieved was
about 2.2 pounds active ingredient per acre). Each replicate treated a
varying number of actual client lawns to attain a representative target
of 2.5 acres (1 hectare) of turf.   The exposure periods averaged five
hours twenty-one minutes, five hours thirty-nine minutes, and six hours
twenty-four minutes, in Ohio, Maryland and Georgia, respectively. 
Average time spent spraying at all sites was about two hours.  All
mixing, loading, application, adjusting, calibrating, and spill clean up
procedures were monitored, except for typical end-of-day clean-up
activities, e.g. rinsing of spray tank, etc.  Dermal exposure was
measured using inner and outer whole body dosimeters, hand washes,
face/neck washes, and personal air monitoring devices.  All test
subjects wore one-piece, 100 percent cotton inner dosimeters beneath 100
percent cotton long-sleeved shirt and long pants, rubber boots and
nitrile gloves.  Gloves are typically worn by most LCOs, and required by
many pesticide labels for mixing and loading.  

Overall, residues were highest on the upper and lower leg portions of
the dosimeters.  In general, concurrent lab spikes produced mean
recoveries in the range of 78-120 percent, with the exception of OVS
sorbent tube sections which produced mean recoveries as low as 65.8
percent.  Adjustment for recoveries from field fortifications were
performed on each dosimeter section or sample matrix for each study
participant, using the mean recovery for the closest field spike level
for each matrix and correcting the value to 100 percent.  The unit
exposure values are presented below in Table 4. [Note the data were
found to be lognormally distributed.  As a result, all exposure values
are geometric means.]

Table 4: Unit Exposure Values Obtained for LCO Liquid Applications with
a Low Pressure Handgun from ORETF Handgun Studies (MRID 449722-01)

Application Method4	

Total Dermal Unit Exposure1 (mg/lb ai)	

(μg/lb ai)

	

Single Layer, No Gloves	

Single Layer, Gloves	

Double Layer, Gloves 3

	

LCO Handgun Spray Mixer/Loader/Applicator

Liquid Flowable	

No Data	

0.45	

0.245	

1.8

LCO Handgun Spray Mixer/Loader/Applicator

Wettable Powder in Water Soluble Bags 	

No Data	

0.68	

0.37	

7.2

LCO Handgun Spray Mixer/Loader/Applicator 

Wettable Powder 	

No Data	

0.80	

0.43	

64

LCO Handgun Spray Applicator Only 

Wettable Powder	

No Data	

0.74	

0.40	

1.0

1 Unit exposure values reported are geometric means.

2 Air concentration (mg/m3/lb ai) calculated using NAFTA ‘99 standard
breathing rate of 17 lpm (1 m3/hr).

3 Exposure calculated using OPP/HED 50% protection factor (PF) for
cotton coveralls on torso, arms, and legs.

4 All commercial handlers wore long pants, long-sleeved shirt, nitrile
gloves and shoes.

	ORETF Handler Studies (MRID   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 445185-01): A report
was submitted by the ORETF (Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force)
that presented data in which the application of various products used on
fruit trees and ornamental plants by homeowners was monitored.  All of
the data submitted in this report were completed in a series of studies.
 

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 OMA005: Homeowner Liquid Applications to Fruit
Trees and Ornamental Plants with a Hose-end Sprayer and a Low Pressure
Handwand (MRID 445185-01): Applications of Sevin Liquid® Carbaryl
insecticide [RP-2 liquid (21%)] were made by volunteers to two young
citrus trees and two shrubs in each replicate that was monitored in the
study.  The test field was located only in Florida.  Twenty (20)
replicates were monitored using hose-end sprayer (Ortho® DIAL or
Spray® hose end sprayer), and 20 replicates were monitored using hand
held pump sprayers (low pressure handwand).

Each replicate opened the end-use product, added it to the hose-end
sprayer or hand held pump and then applied it to the trees and shrubs. 
After application to two trees and two shrubs dosimeters were collected.
 Inhalation exposure was monitored with personal air sampling pumps with
OVS tubes attached to the shirt collar in the breathing zone.  Dermal
exposure was assessed by extraction of carbaryl from inner and outer 100
percent cotton dosimeters. The inner and outer dosimeters were segmented
into: lower and upper arms, lower and upper legs, front and back torso. 
No gloves were worn therefore hand exposure was assessed with 400 ml
handwash with 0.01 percent Aerosol OT-75 sodium dioctyl sulfosuccinate
(OTS).  One hundred percent cotton handkerchiefs wetted with 25 ml OTS
were used to wipe face and neck to determine exposure.  

Field fortification recoveries for passive dosimeters averaged 88.3
percent for inner and 76.2 percent for outer dosimeters.  Face and neck
wipe fortifications average 82.5 percent.  Handwash and inhalation OVS
tube field fortification averaged >90 percent.  Inner and outer
dosimeter and face and neck wipe residues were adjusted for field
fortification results.  Handwash and inhalation residues were not
adjusted. 

Laboratory method validation for each matrix fell within the acceptable
range of 70 to 120 percent.   The limit of quantitation (LOQ) was 1.0
µg/sample for all media except the inhalation monitors where the LOQ
was 0.01 µg/sample.  The limit of detection (LOD) was 0.5 µg/sample
for all media except the inhalation monitors where the LOQ was 0.005
µg/sample.

For use in reregistration documents, the dermal exposure was calculated
by adding the values from the hand rinses, face/neck wipes to the outer
dosimeter lower legs and lower arms plus the inner dosimeter front and
rear torso, upper legs and upper arms.  This accounts for the
residential handler wearing short-sleeved shirt and short pants.  The
results for the low pressure handwand are summarized in Table 5 below.  

	

The distribution of the unit exposure values is categorized as normal,
lognormal, or “other” (i.e., neither normal nor lognormal).  A
central tendency value is selected from the distribution of the exposure
values.  These values are the arithmetic mean for normal distributions,
the geometric mean for lognormal distributions, and the median for all
“other” distributions.   The dermal exposure had a lognormal
distribution so the geometric mean value was used to determine dermal
exposure.  The inhalation exposure had neither a normal or lognormal
distribution so the median was used to determine inhalation exposure. 

Table 5: Unit Exposure Values for Homeowner Liquid Applications to Fruit
Trees and Ornamental Plants with a Low Pressure Handwand Obtained From
ORETF Study (MRID 445185-01)

Scenari⁯潍楮潴敲ݤ潔慴⁬敄浲污唠楮⁴硅潰畳敲‱洨⽧
扬愠⥩䤇桮污瑡潩⁮湕瑩䔠灸獯牵㉥

(μg/lb ai)

	Short Pants, Short Sleeves	Long Pants, Short Sleeves	Long Pants, Long
Sleeves

	Homeowner Liquid Applications with a Hand Held Sprayer (Low Pressure
Handwand)	56	36	30	3.8

	1 Dermal unit exposure values reported are the geometric means.

	2 Inhalation unit exposure values reported are the median values.

ORETF Handler Studies (MRID 444598-01): A report was submitted by the
ORETF (Outdoor Residential Exposure Task Force) that presented data in
which the application of various products used on vegetable gardens by
homeowners was monitored.  All of the data submitted in this report were
completed in a series of studies.  

	OMA006: Homeowner Liquid Application to Garden with a Low Pressure
Handwand (MRID 444598-01):  The study was designed to quantify dermal
and inhalation exposure of homeowners as they mixed, loaded and applied
liquid formulations of a carbaryl end-use product to home garden
vegetables. A low pressure handwand) was used to apply Sevin Liquid®
Brand Carbaryl Insecticide. Twenty replicates were conducted with gloves
and 20 replicates were conducted without gloves. Inhalation exposure was
monitored using personal air samplers (average flow rate of 1.5
liter/minute) and dermal exposure was monitored by using inner and outer
dosimeters, facial/neck wipes, and hand washes. The overall mean field
fortification recovery of each matrix ranged from 77.6 ± 13.6% (outer
dosimeters) to 98.4 ± 3.8% (OVS tubes). Laboratory fortified recovery
samples were analyzed with each set of samples analyzed on a particular
day; however, the results of the laboratory recoveries were not provided
in the Study Report. Unit exposures were calculated for short
pants/short sleeves, long pants/short sleeves, and long pants/long
sleeves scenarios. The results for the low pressure handwand are
summarized in Table 6 below.  

Table 6.  Unit Exposure Values for Homeowner Liquid Application to
Garden with a Low Pressure Handwand Obtained From ORETF Study (MRID
444598-01)

Scenario Monitored	Total Dermal Unit Exposure1

(mg氯⁢楡ഩ䤇桮污瑡潩⁮湕瑩䔠灸獯牵ㅥ

(μg/lb ai)

	Gloves	No Gloves	No Respirator

Homeowner Liquid Applications with a Low Pressure Handwand Sprayer	0.33
15	2.7

	1 Unit exposure values reported are geometric means.

Airblast Applicators (using Carbaryl-Specific Airblast Applicator Data):
 MRID 464482-01, Determination of Dermal and Inhalation Exposure to
Workers during Application of a Liquid Pesticide Product by Open Cab
Airblast Application to Orchard Crops.

This Agricultural Handlers Exposure Task Force (AHETF) study examined
occupational handler exposure during application of carbaryl to orchard
crops using open cab tractors and airblast sprayers.  The objective of
the study was to determine exposure to applicators who wore typical work
clothing (i.e., long pants, shoes, socks, long-sleeved shirt), chemical
resistant gloves, no respirators, and either a “SouWester” hat or
hooded tyvek jacket.  The review of this study was conducted jointly
between the U.S. EPA, Health Canada, and the California Department of
Pesticide Regulation (DPR).  A secondary review document was completed
by Health Canada which contains the unit exposure values that were
agreed upon jointly by the three regulatory Agencies.

Dermal exposure was estimated by measuring residues on or in inner
whole-body dosimeters, inner socks, inner head patches (under the CR
headgear), outer head patches (on top of the CR headgear), face/neck
wipes, and hand washes.  Inhalation exposure was monitored using an OSHA
Versatile Sampler (OVS) tube connected to an air sampling pump. 
Inhalation exposure was calculated using the NAFTA recommended
inhalation rate of 16.7 Lpm.  Unit exposure values used in this
assessment were the arithmetic mean of 15 replicates wearing
“SouWester” hat as chemical-resistant headgear.  The unit exposure
values of the 10 replicate workers wearing hooded tyvek jackets were not
used in this assessment.  The chemical-resistant hooded tyvek jackets
were attached to chemical-resistant jackets.  Since HED (and the WPS)
does not ever require chemical-resistant coveralls (or jackets) for
agricultural workers due to heat stress concerns, HED determined that
only the chemical-resistant hat scenarios were appropriate for use. The
results are summarized in Table 7 below.

Table 7.  Unit Exposure Values for Airblast Application to Orchard Crops
Obtained From Carbaryl Study (MRID 464482-01)

Scenario Monitored	Total Dermal Unit Exposure1

(mg/lb ai)

	Inhalation Unit Exposure1

(μg/lb ai)

	Gloves +  Hat	No Respirator

Liquid Applications with Airblast Sprayer	0.07	3.1

Handlers Involved in Aerial Applications (using Malathion-Specific ULV
Aerial Data):  MRID: 46634-105  Determination of Dermal and Inhalation
Exposure to Workers during Closed-System Loading and ULV Application of
a Liquid Pesticide Product to Cotton.  (DP Barcode: 324585; Decision#:
330654)

The purpose of the study was to determine the dermal and inhalation
exposure of handlers from the closed-system loading of a liquid
pesticide in support of large volume aerial spraying, as well as the
dermal and inhalation exposure of pilots spraying large acreage crops
(cotton) with an ULV formulation by fixed-wing aircraft.  

Seven workers were monitored for dermal and inhalation exposure (total
of 15 loader replicates) while loading a malathion ULV formulation,
Fyfanon® ULV (96.5%), via a closed (lock and load) system to fill
aircraft tanks.  Eight experienced pesticide application pilots (total
of 16 replicates) also were monitored for dermal and inhalation exposure
during routine aerial application of Fyfanon® ULV at a rate of 0.92 lb
active ingredient (ai) per acre to cotton fields in Texas, as part of
the Boll Weevil Eradication Program.  Samples were collected over six
“typical” workdays, from October 18 - 26, 2004.  Loader work periods
ranged from 0.5 to 11 hours, while applicator work periods ranged from 5
to 11.5 hours.  Utilizing 260-gallon totes, loaders handled between 1713
to 9603 pounds of ai.  The ULV formulation was dry-coupled to affect a
direct transfer of liquid from the tote to the aircraft (i.e., no mixing
of water).  Pilots applied between 1544 to 4851 pounds ai to cotton
fields of areas ranging from 1648 to 5425 acres per day.  Loader and
pilot dermal exposures were monitored using inner whole body dosimeters,
inner socks, face/neck wipes and hand washes.  Loader and pilot
inhalation exposures were monitored in their breathing zone using
personal air-pump samplers.  Workers wore long-sleeved shirts, long
pants, shoes and socks.  Loaders also wore chemical resistant gloves
(required by label) and hats.  Pilots wore helmets.

EPA estimated dermal and inhalation unit exposure values as µg/lb ai
handled.  Inhalation unit exposure values were calculated assuming a
breathing rate of 0.0167 m3/minute for loaders (NAFTA light inhalation
rate) and 0.0083 m3/minute for applicators (NAFTA sedentary inhalation
rate). The results are summarized in Table 8 below.  

While there are certain issues with regard to the conduct and results of
the study, none are sufficient to preclude the use of the exposure data
for exposure/risk assessment purposes.  It is important to note that the
hand exposure data were obtained using gloved hands, and therefore, the
use of these data in exposure/risk assessments must assume that workers
will be wearing gloves during the loading activity.

	NOTE:  This is a lock and load closed loading system that uses dry
coupling techniques to transfer the formulated product directly from
large totes to the aircraft tanks.  No water or other materials are
added to the aircraft tank.  Loaders wore long-sleeve shirt, long pants,
boots or shoes, socks, and chemical-resistant gloves.  These closed
loading systems are currently available for some ULV aerial
applications.  These systems are distinct from a closed mixing/loading
system where diluents and other additives are added to the aircraft
tanks.  Only the lock and load technology is used in these high tech
systems.

Table 8.  Unit Exposure Values for Mixing/Loading Liquids in Aerial
Applications Obtained From Malathion Study (MRID 466341-05)

Scenario Monitored	Total Dermal Unit Exposure1

(mg/lb ai)

	Inhalation Unit Exposure1

(µg/lb ai)

	Closed system	Closed system

Mixing/Loading Liquids for Aerial Applications	0.0023	0.0075

Handler Exposure Assumptions

The following assumptions and factors were used to complete this
exposure assessment:

Average body weight of an adult handler was assumed to be 70 kg. 

Daily (8-hour workday) acres and volumes (as appropriate) to be treated
in each scenario include: 

1,200 acres treated for high acreage field crops -- alfalfa, barley,
cotton, dry beans, oats, rye, sorghum, sweet corn, and wheat;

350 acres for aerial applications to all row crops and tree fruit and
nut crops;  

60 acres for aerial applications to nursery crops;

350 acres for flaggers supporting aerial applications;

200 acres for groundboom applications to high acreage field crops --
alfalfa, barley, cotton, dry beans, oats, rye, sorghum, sweet corn, and
wheat;

80 acres per day for groundboom applications to all to all row crops;  

40 acres for airblast applications on tree fruit and nut crops, and 10
acres for airblast applications to ornamentals;

1,000 gallons for high-pressure handwand sprayers; 

5 acres or 1000 gallons for handgun sprayers; and

5 acres or 40 gallons for low pressure handwand sprayers; and

100 gallons for dip treatment.  

Due to a lack of scenario-specific data, HED sometimes calculates unit
exposure values using generic protection factors that are applied to
represent the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) and engineering
controls.  This assessment used a 50 percent protection factor to
account for a double layer of clothing, an 80 percent protection factor
over baseline unit exposure values to represent the use of a
quarter-face dust/mist respirator and a 90 percent protection factor
over baseline inhalation unit exposure values to represent use of half-
or full-face respirator

Handgun sprayers, low-pressure handwand sprayers and high-pressure
handwand sprayers are considered the application techniques used to
apply liquids and wettable powders in tree bark treatments.  The handgun
sprayer and low-pressure handwand sprayer are also assumed to be used in
greenhouses and nurseries, and in drench treatments. 

The duration of exposure for handlers of endosulfan is assumed to be
short- and intermediate-term only.  Long-term exposures are not
anticipated.	

		Handler Exposure Calculations

Handler exposure assessments were completed using a baseline exposure
scenario and, if required, increasing levels of risk mitigation (PPE and
engineering controls) in an attempt to achieve an appropriate margin of
exposure.  The baseline scenario generally represents a handler wearing
long pants, a long-sleeved shirt, no respirator, and no
chemical-resistant gloves. Tables 9, 10, 11, and 12 summarizes the risks
to mixers/loaders, applicators, flaggers, and mixer/loader/ applicators
respectively using PHED and ORETF data.  Table 13 summarizes the risks
to mixers/loaders supporting aerial applications using a closed system
from proprietary data (MRID 466341-05).  Table 14 summarizes the risks
to airblast applicators wearing baseline attire, chemical-resistant
gloves, and chemical-resistant headgear using proprietary data (MRID
464482-01).

The calculations of daily dermal and inhalation exposure to endosulfan
by handlers were used to calculate the daily dose, and therefore the
risks, to those handlers.  Daily dermal exposure was calculated using
the following formula:

                          

Daily Dermal Exposure [mg ai/day] = Unit Exposure [mg ai/lb ai] x Use
Rate [lb ai/A] x Daily Acres Treated or Gals Used [A/day or Gal/day] 

Potential daily inhalation exposure was calculated using the following
formula:

Daily Inhalation Exposure [mg ai/day] = Unit Exposure [µg ai/lb ai] x
Conversion Factor [1 mg/1000 µg] x Use Rate [lb ai/A] x Daily Acres
Treated or Gals Used [A/day or Gal/day] 

For dermal exposure, a female specific body weight of 60 kg was used
because the endpoint was female-specific.  A 45% dermal absorption
factor was applied, since the LOAEL is from an oral study.  Since the
short- and intermediate-term inhalation endpoint was based on an
inhalation study, an inhalation absorption factor is not necessary (100%
is assumed in the formula). For inhalation exposure, an average male and
female body weight of 70 kilograms was used, since the toxicological
endpoint was not sex-specific.  The potential short- and
intermediate-term inhalation and dermal doses were calculated using the
following formulae:

Daily Inhalation Dose [mg ai/kg/day] = Daily Inhalation Exposure [mg
ai/day] x inhalation absorption factor (%) [1/body weight (kg)]

Daily Dermal Dose [mg ai/kg/day] = Daily Dermal Exposure [mg ai/day] x
dermal absorption factor (%) x [1/body weight (kg)] 

		Handler Risk Calculations

The short- and intermediate-term dermal endpoint is an LOAEL of 3.7
mg/kg/day and is based on a reproductive study and a DNT study.  The
inhalation endpoint for short- and intermediate-term inhalation risks,
0.001 mg ai/L, was converted to an oral equivalent dose using the HED
Route-to-Route Extrapolations memo dated October 9, 1998, presented
below:

Inhalation NOAEL (mg/kg/day) = [NOAEL (mg ai/L) x RV (L/hr) x D x A x AF
x 5 days/week] ( BW x 7 days/week

where:

RV	=	respiratory volume (8.46 liters of air respired per hour at rest)

D	=	duration of daily animal exposure (based on a 6-hour/day study)

BW	=	mean body weight in kg of Wistar rat (0.187 kg)

A	=	absorption - the ratio of deposition and absorption in the
respiratory tract compared to absorption by the oral route, assumed to
be 1

AF	=	activity factor - animal default is 1

The following formulae were used in the calculation of the short- and
intermediate-term dermal and inhalation MOEs.

Dermal MOE = [Dermal LOAEL (mg/kg/day)] ( [Short- and intermediate-term
Dermal Dose (mg/kg/day)]

Inhalation MOE = [Inhalation NOAEL (mg/kg/day)] ( [Short-and
intermediate- term Inhalation Dose (mg/kg/day)]

An MOE of 300 has been identified as the target risk level for short-
and intermediate-term dermal occupational exposure scenarios.  An MOE of
100 has been identified as the target risk level for short- and
intermediate-term inhalation occupational exposure scenarios.  Since the
toxicological effects are similar (decreased body weight) for the dermal
endpoint and the inhalation endpoint, the dermal and inhalation risks to
handlers are combined.  Since the level of concern is 300 for dermal
risks and 100 for inhalation risks, an aggregated risk index (ARI) is
calculated.  The level of concern for an ARI is 1 (i.e., ARIs greater
than 1 are not a concern). ARIs are calculated using the following
formula:  Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) = 1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/
(Inhalation MOE / 100)).  

Table 9: Mixers/Loaders:  Summary of Short- and Intermediate-Term
Endosulfan Risks

Crop	Form.a	Exposure Scenario	App. Rateb	Amt Handled Dailyc	Risksi,j,k
(Level of Concern = 300 for dermal, 100 for inhalation, and 1 for
combined ARI) 

	Baselined

Dermal

(MOE)	Baselined

Inh

(MOE)	Baseline Dermal + Baseline Inh

(ARI)	PPE-Ge Dermal + Baseline Inh

(ARI)	PPE-G,DLf Dermal + Baseline Inh

(ARI)	PPE-Ge Dermal + 80% PPE-Rg Inh

(ARI)	PPE-G,DLf Dermal + 80% PPE-Rg Inh

(ARI)	PPE-G Dermal + 90% PPE-Rg Inh

(ARI)	PPE-G,DL Dermal +90% PPE-Rg Inh

(ARI)	Combined Eng Conh

Dermal + Baseline Inh

(ARI)	Combined Eng Conh Dermal + Eng Con Inh

(ARI)

Blueberries (low- and highbush)	EC	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.32
22	0.0011	0.084	0.1	0.12	0.16	0.13	0.17	0.14	0.33

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.4	97	0.0047	0.37	0.44	0.53	0.69
0.56	0.74	0.60	1.4

	WP	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.25	1	0.00074	0.0046	0.0049	0.012
0.014	0.014	0.017	N/A 	0.25

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.1	3	0.0033	0.02	0.022	0.051	0.059
0.062	0.076	N/A	1.1

Blueberries (highbush)	EC  	Airblast	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	2.8	190
0.0094	0.74	0.88	1.1	1.4	1.1	1.5	1.2	2.9

	WP	Airblast	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	2.2	5	0.0065	0.041	0.043	0.1	0.12
0.12	0.15	N/A	2.20

Grapes	EC  	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.32	22	0.0011	0.084	0.1
0.12	0.16	0.13	0.17	0.14	0.33

Airblast	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	2.8	190	0.0094	0.74	0.88	1.1	1.4	1.1
1.5	1.2	2.9

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.4	97	0.0047	0.37	0.44	0.53	0.69
0.56	0.74	0.60	1.4

	  WP	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.25	1	0.00074	0.0046	0.0049	0.012
0.014	0.014	0.017	N/A	0.25

Airblast	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	2.2	5	0.0065	0.041	0.043	0.1	0.12	0.12
0.15	N/A	2.2

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.1	3	0.0033	0.02	0.022	0.051	0.059
0.062	0.076	N/A	1.1

Nursery stock dip: strawberries	EC 	Dip	0.001 lb ai/gal	100 gal	1700
120,000	5.6	440	530	640	830	670	890	720	1,700

	  WP

0.001 lb ai/gal	100 gal	1300	3,300	3.9	24	26	61	71	75	91	N/A	1,300

Strawberries	EC 	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	0.24	17
0.00081	0.063	0.076	0.091	0.12	0.096	0.13	0.10	0.25

Aerial	1 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	350 acres	0.49	33	0.0016	0.13	0.15
0.18	0.24	0.19	0.26	0.21	0.49

Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	80 acres	1.1	73	0.0035	0.28	0.33
0.4	0.52	0.42	0.56	0.45	1.1

	1 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	80 acres	2.1	150	0.0071	0.55	0.66	0.8	1
0.84	1.1	0.91	2.1

	  WP	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	0.19	0	0.00056	0.0035
0.0037	0.0087	0.01	0.011	0.013	N/A	0.19

	  WP	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	350 acres	0.38	1	0.0011	0.007
0.0074	0.017	0.02	0.021	0.026	N/A	0.37

Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	80 acres	0.83	2	0.0024	0.015	0.016
0.038	0.044	0.047	0.057	N/A	0.81

	1 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	80 acres	1.7	4	0.0049	0.03	0.032	0.076
0.089	0.093	0.11	N/A	1.6

Alfalfa (grown for seed); SLN [CA860035] and [NV860005]	EC 	Aerial	1 lb
ai/acre	1200 acres	0.14	10	0.00047	0.037	0.044	0.053	0.069	0.056	0.074
0.06	0.14

Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	200 acres	0.85	58	0.0028	0.22	0.26	0.32	0.41
0.34	0.45	0.36	0.86

	WP 	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.11	0	0.00033	0.002	0.0022	0.0051
0.0059	0.0062	0.0076	N/A	0.11

Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	200 acres	0.67	2	0.002	0.012	0.013	0.03	0.036
0.037	0.046	N/A	0.65

Barley , Oats	EC 	Aerial	0.5 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.28	19	0.00094	0.074
0.088	0.11	0.14	0.11	0.15	0.12	0.29

Groundboom	0.5 lb ai/acre	200 acres	1.7	120	0.0056	0.44	0.53	0.64	0.83
0.67	0.89	0.72	1.7

	WP	Aerial	0.5 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.22	1	0.00065	0.0041	0.0043	0.01
0.012	0.012	0.015	N/A	0.22

Groundboom	0.5 lb ai/acre	200 acres	1.3	3	0.0039	0.024	0.026	0.061	0.071
0.075	0.091	N/A	1.3

Barley, Oats, Rye, Wheat	EC 	Aerial	0.75 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.19	13
0.00063	0.049	0.059	0.071	0.092	0.075	0.099	0.08	0.19

Groundboom	0.75 lb ai/acre	200 acres	1.1	78	0.0038	0.3	0.35	0.42	0.55
0.45	0.6	0.48	1.1

	WP 	Aerial	0.75 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.15	0	0.00043	0.0027	0.0029
0.0067	0.0079	0.0083	0.01	N/A	0.14

Groundboom	0.75 lb ai/acre	200 acres	0.89	2	0.0026	0.016	0.017	0.04
0.047	0.05	0.061	N/A	0.87

Beans (dry)	EC 	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.14	10	0.00047	0.037
0.044	0.053	0.069	0.056	0.074	0.06	0.14

Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	200 acres	0.85	58	0.0028	0.22	0.26	0.32	0.41
0.34	0.45	0.36	0.86

	WP	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.11	0	0.00033	0.002	0.0022	0.0051
0.0059	0.0062	0.0076	N/A	0.11

Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	200 acres	0.67	2	0.002	0.012	0.013	0.03	0.036
0.037	0.046	N/A	0.65

Cotton SLN [AZ930014][AZ930016] 	EC	Aerial	0.75 lb ai/acre	1200 acres
0.19	13	0.00063	0.049	0.059	0.071	0.092	0.075	0.099	0.08	0.19

Groundboom	0.75 lb ai/acre	200 acres	1.1	78	0.0038	0.3	0.35	0.42	0.55
0.45	0.6	0.48	1.1

Cotton, Sorghum	EC 	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.095	7	0.00031
0.025	0.029	0.035	0.046	0.037	0.05	0.04	0.10

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	200 acres	0.57	39	0.0019	0.15	0.18	0.21	0.28
0.22	0.3	0.24	0.57

	  WP	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.074	0	0.00022	0.0014	0.0014
0.0034	0.004	0.0041	0.0051	N/A	0.07

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	200 acres	0.44	1	0.0013	0.0081	0.0086	0.02
0.024	0.025	0.03	N/A	0.43

Sweet Corn (fresh only)	EC  	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.32	22
0.0011	0.084	0.1	0.12	0.16	0.13	0.17	0.14	0.33

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.4	97	0.0047	0.37	0.44	0.53	0.69
0.56	0.74	0.60	1.4

	WP	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.25	1	0.00074	0.0046	0.0049	0.012
0.014	0.014	0.017	N/A	0.25

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.1	3	0.0033	0.02	0.022	0.051	0.059
0.062	0.076	N/A	1.1

Tobacco (drench treatment to plant bed)  limited to use in IN, KY, OH,
PA, and WV	EC 	Handgun	0.0025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	68	4,700	0.23	18	21	25
33	27	36	29	69

	WP	Handgun	0.0025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	53	130	0.16	0.97	1	2.4	2.8	3	3.6
N/A	52

Tobacco (foliar field treatment) limited to use in IN, KY, OH, PA, and
WV	EC 	Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	80 acres	2.1	150	0.0071	0.55	0.66	0.8	1
0.84	1.1	0.91	2.1

	WP	Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.7	4	0.0049	0.03	0.032	0.076	0.089
0.093	0.11	N/A	1.6

Tobacco (foliar treatment to seed bed) limited to use in IN, KY, OH, PA,
and WV	EC 	Handgun	0.005 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	34	2,300	0.11	8.9	11	13	17
13	18	14	34

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.4	97	0.0047	0.37	0.44	0.53	0.69
0.56	0.74	0.60	1.40

	WP	Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.1	3	0.0033	0.02	0.022	0.051
0.059	0.062	0.076	N/A	1.10

Handgun	0.005 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	27	65	0.078	0.49	0.52	1.2	1.4	1.5	1.8
N/A	26

Citrus (nonbearing trees and nursery stock)	EC 	Aerial	2.5 lb ai/acre	60
acres	1.1	78	0.0038	0.3	0.35	0.42	0.55	0.45	0.6	0.48	1.1

Airblast	2.5 lb ai/acre	10 acres	6.8	470	0.023	1.8	2.1	2.5	3.3	2.7	3.6
2.9	6.9

Handgun	2.5 lb ai/acre	5 acres	14	930	0.045	3.5	4.2	5.1	6.6	5.4	7.1	5.8
14.0

	WP	Aerial	2.5 lb ai/acre	60 acres	0.89	2	0.0026	0.016	0.017	0.04	0.047
0.05	0.061	N/A	0.87

Airblast	2.5 lb ai/acre	10 acres	5.3	13	0.016	0.097	0.1	0.24	0.28	0.3
0.36	N/A	5.2

Handgun	2.5 lb ai/acre	5 acres	11	26	0.031	0.19	0.21	0.49	0.57	0.6	0.73
N/A	10.0

Ornamentals: Trees, Shrubs, Woody plants	EC	Handgun	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres
34	2,300	0.11	8.9	11	13	17	13	18	14.00	34.0

Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	10 acres	17	1,200	0.056	4.4	5.3	6.4	8.3	6.7	8.9
7.20	17.0

	WP	Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	10 acres	13	33	0.039	0.24	0.26	0.61	0.71	0.75
0.91	N/A	13.0

Handgun	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	27	65	0.078	0.49	0.52	1.2	1.4	1.5	1.8	N/A
26.0

Christmas Tree Plantations	EC 	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.49	33
0.0016	0.13	0.15	0.18	0.24	0.19	0.26	0.21	0.49

Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	4.3	290	0.014	1.1	1.3	1.6	2.1	1.7	2.2	1.8
4.3

Handgun	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	34	2,300	0.11	8.9	11	13	17	13	18	14	34.0

	WP	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.38	1	0.0011	0.007	0.0074	0.017	0.02
0.021	0.026	N/A	0.37

Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	3.3	8	0.0098	0.061	0.065	0.15	0.18	0.19
0.23	N/A	3.3

Handgun	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	27	65	0.078	0.49	0.52	1.2	1.4	1.5	1.8	N/A
26

Apples, Pears, Plums, and Prunes	EC 	Aerial	2.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres
0.19	13	0.00064	0.051	0.06	0.073	0.095	0.077	0.1	0.08	0.20

Airblast	2.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	1.7	120	0.0056	0.44	0.53	0.64	0.83	0.67
0.89	0.72	1.7

	WP	Aerial	2.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.15	0	0.00045	0.0028	0.003	0.0069
0.0081	0.0085	0.01	N/A	0.15

Airblast	2.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	1.3	3	0.0039	0.024	0.026	0.061	0.071
0.075	0.091	N/A	1.3

Apricots	EC 	Aerial	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	0.16	11	0.00054
0.042	0.05	0.061	0.079	0.064	0.085	0.07	0.16

Airblast	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	40 acres	1.4	97	0.0047	0.37	0.44	0.53
0.69	0.56	0.74	0.60	1.4

	WP

 	Aerial	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	0.13	0	0.00037	0.0023
0.0025	0.0058	0.0068	0.0071	0.0087	N/A	0.12

Airblast	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	40 acres	1.1	3	0.0033	0.02	0.022
0.051	0.059	0.062	0.076	N/A	1.1

Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart), Nectarines, Peaches	EC 	Aerial	2.5 lb
ai/acre (proposed rate)	350 acres	0.19	13	0.00064	0.051	0.06	0.073	0.095
0.077	0.1	0.08	0.20

Airblast	2.5 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	40 acres	1.7	120	0.0056	0.44
0.53	0.64	0.83	0.67	0.89	0.72	1.7

	WP	Aerial	2.5 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	350 acres	0.15	0	0.00045
0.0028	0.003	0.0069	0.0081	0.0085	0.01	N/A	0.15

Airblast	2.5 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	40 acres	1.3	3	0.0039	0.024
0.026	0.061	0.071	0.075	0.091	N/A	1.3

Cherries (sweet and tart-MI only)	EC 	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.49
33	0.0016	0.13	0.15	0.18	0.24	0.19	0.26	0.21	0.49

Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	4.3	290	0.014	1.1	1.3	1.6	2.1	1.7	2.2	1.8
4.3

	WP 	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.38	1	0.0011	0.007	0.0074	0.017	0.02
0.021	0.026	N/A	0.37

Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	3.3	8	0.0098	0.061	0.065	0.15	0.18	0.19
0.23	N/A	3.3

Nursery stock dip: cherries, peaches, plums, 	EC 	Dip	0.05 lb ai/gal	100
gal	34	2,300	0.11	8.9	11	13	17	13	18	14	34

	  WP

0.05 lb ai/gal	100 gal	27	65	0.078	0.49	0.52	1.2	1.4	1.5	1.8	N/A	26

Nursery stock dip: peaches, plums, prunes	EC 	Dip	0.005 lb ai/gal	100
gal	340	23,000	1.1	89	110	130	170	130	180	140.00	340

	  WP

0.005 lb ai/gal	100 gal	270	650	0.78	4.9	5.2	12	14	15	18	N/A	260

Pears (soil treatment) 	EC  	Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.1	73
0.0035	0.28	0.33	0.4	0.52	0.42	0.56	0.45	1.1

Handgun	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	17	1,200	0.056	4.4	5.3	6.4	8.3	6.7	8.9	7.20
17

	WP	Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	0.83	2	0.0024	0.015	0.016	0.038
0.044	0.047	0.057	N/A	0.81

Handgun	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	13	33	0.039	0.24	0.26	0.61	0.71	0.75	0.91
N/A	13

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart),
Nectarines, Peaches, Plums, Prunes 	EC 	Handgun	0.0075 lb ai/gal (label
rate)	1000 gal	23	1,600	0.075	5.9	7.1	8.5	11	9	12	9.70	23

	0.005 lb ai/gal (proposed rate)	1000 gal	34	2,300	0.11	8.9	11	13	17	13
18	14.00	34

	WP

  	Handgun	0.0075 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	18	43	0.052	0.32	0.35
0.81	0.95	0.99	1.2	N/A	17

	0.005 lb ai/gal (proposed rate)	1000 gal	27	65	0.078	0.49	0.52	1.2	1.4
1.5	1.8	N/A	26

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Peaches, Nectarines; SE States
only	EC 	Handgun	0.025 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	6.8	470	0.023	1.8
2.1	2.5	3.3	2.7	3.6	2.9	6.9

	  WP

0.025 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	5.3	13	0.016	0.097	0.1	0.24	0.28
0.3	0.36	N/A	5.2

Almonds, Filberts, Walnuts	WP	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	350
acres	0.19	0	0.00056	0.0035	0.0037	0.0087	0.01	0.011	0.013	N/A	0.19

Airblast	2 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	40 acres	1.7	4	0.0049	0.03	0.032
0.076	0.089	0.093	0.11	N/A	1.6

Almonds, Pecans	EC 	Aerial	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	0.16	11
0.00054	0.042	0.05	0.061	0.079	0.064	0.085	0.07	0.16

Airblast	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	40 acres	1.4	97	0.0047	0.37	0.44	0.53
0.69	0.56	0.74	0.60	1.4

	WP

 	Aerial	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	0.13	0	0.00037	0.0023
0.0025	0.0058	0.0068	0.0071	0.0087	N/A	0.12

Airblast	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	40 acres	1.1	3	0.0033	0.02	0.022
0.051	0.059	0.062	0.076	N/A	1.1

Almonds, Walnuts	EC 	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	350 acres	0.24
17	0.00081	0.063	0.076	0.091	0.12	0.096	0.13	0.10	0.25

Airblast	2 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	40 acres	2.1	150	0.0071	0.55	0.66
0.8	1	0.84	1.1	0.91	2.1

Filberts, SLN [OR780020]	WP	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.25	1
0.00074	0.0046	0.0049	0.012	0.014	0.014	0.017	N/A	0.25

Airblast	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	2.2	5	0.0065	0.041	0.043	0.1	0.12	0.12
0.15	N/A	2.2

Macadamias	EC 	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.49	33	0.0016	0.13	0.15
0.18	0.24	0.19	0.26	0.21	0.49

Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	4.3	290	0.014	1.1	1.3	1.6	2.1	1.7	2.2	1.8
4.3

Macadamias, SLN [HI880008]	WP	Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	3.3	8
0.0098	0.061	0.065	0.15	0.18	0.19	0.23	N/A	3.3

Bean (succulent green), Broccoli (including Chinese), Brussels Sprouts,
Cabbage (including Chinese & Napa), Carrots, Cauliflower, Celery,
Collards (other than CA), Cucumbers, Eggplant (except CA), Lettuce (head
& leaf), Melon, Peas (succulent & dry), Peppers, Potatoes (including
sweet), Pumpkins, Spinach, Squash, Tomatoes (field grown)	EC  	Aerial	1
lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.49	33	0.0016	0.13	0.15	0.18	0.24	0.19	0.26	0.21
0.49

Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	80 acres	2.1	150	0.0071	0.55	0.66	0.8	1	0.84	1.1
0.91	2.1

	WP

 	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.38	1	0.0011	0.007	0.0074	0.017	0.02
0.021	0.026	N/A	0.37

Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.7	4	0.0049	0.03	0.032	0.076	0.089
0.093	0.11	N/A	1.6

Collards (CA only), Kale, Mustard Greens, Turnips 	EC 	Aerial	0.75 lb
ai/acre	350 acres	0.65	44	0.0021	0.17	0.2	0.24	0.32	0.26	0.34	0.28	0.65

Groundboom	0.75 lb ai/acre	80 acres	2.8	190	0.0094	0.74	0.88	1.1	1.4	1.1
1.5	1.2	2.9

Collards, Kale, Mustard Greens, Turnips	WP

  	Aerial	0.75 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.51	1	0.0015	0.0093	0.0099	0.023
0.027	0.028	0.035	N/A	0.50

Groundboom	0.75 lb ai/acre	80 acres	2.2	5	0.0065	0.041	0.043	0.1	0.12
0.12	0.15	N/A	2.2

Eggplant	WP	Aerial	0.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.76	2	0.0022	0.014	0.015
0.035	0.041	0.043	0.052	N/A	0.74

Groundboom	0.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	3.3	8	0.0098	0.061	0.065	0.15	0.18
0.19	0.23	N/A	3.3

Eggplant, CA only	EC 	Aerial	0.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.97	67	0.0032
0.25	0.3	0.36	0.47	0.38	0.51	0.41	0.98

Groundboom	0.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	4.3	290	0.014	1.1	1.3	1.6	2.1	1.7	2.2
1.8	4.3

Pineapples	EC 	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.24	17	0.00081	0.063	0.076
0.091	0.12	0.096	0.13	0.10	0.25

Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.1	73	0.0035	0.28	0.33	0.4	0.52	0.42
0.56	0.45	1.1

Airblast	2 lb ai/acre	40 acres	2.1	150	0.0071	0.55	0.66	0.8	1	0.84	1.1
0.91	2.1

	WP	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.19	0	0.00056	0.0035	0.0037	0.0087
0.01	0.011	0.013	N/A	0.19

Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	0.83	2	0.0024	0.015	0.016	0.038	0.044
0.047	0.057	N/A	0.81

Airblast	2 lb ai/acre	40 acres	1.7	4	0.0049	0.03	0.032	0.076	0.089	0.093
0.11	N/A	1.6

Potatoes, SLN [WA900023]	EC	Chemigation	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.49	33
0.0016	0.13	0.15	0.18	0.24	0.19	0.26	0.21	0.49

Sweet Potatoes	EC 	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	0.24	17
0.00081	0.063	0.076	0.091	0.12	0.096	0.13	0.10	0.25

Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	80 acres	1.1	73	0.0035	0.28	0.33
0.4	0.52	0.42	0.56	0.45	1.1

Sweet Potatoes (including SLN MS810036)	WP	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (label
rate)	350 acres	0.19	0	0.00056	0.0035	0.0037	0.0087	0.01	0.011	0.013	N/A
0.19

Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	80 acres	0.83	2	0.0024	0.015	0.016
0.038	0.044	0.047	0.057	N/A	0.81

Sweet Potatoes (soil broadcast treatment), SLN [MS810035]	EC	Aerial	1.5
lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.32	22	0.0011	0.084	0.1	0.12	0.16	0.13	0.17	0.14
0.33

Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.4	97	0.0047	0.37	0.44	0.53	0.69
0.56	0.74	0.60	1.4

Tomatoes (greenhouse)	WP	Handgun	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	27	65	0.078	0.49
0.52	1.2	1.4	1.5	1.8	N/A	26

	EC 	Handgun	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	34	2,300	0.11	8.9	11	13	17	13	18	14.00
34

Vegetables grown for seed: Cabbage (including Chinese), Collards, Kale,
Kohlrabi, Radish, Rutabaga, Turnip SLN  [OR770043],[WA770016], SLN
[WA760012-Cabbage only]	EC	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.24	17	0.00081
0.063	0.076	0.091	0.12	0.096	0.13	0.10	0.25

	EC	Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	1.1	73	0.0035	0.28	0.33	0.4	0.52
0.42	0.56	0.45	1.1

Vegetables grown for seed: Cabbage (including Chinese), Collards, Kale,
Kohlrabi, Radish, Rutabaga, Turnip SLN [WA780029]	WP	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre
350 acres	0.19	0	0.00056	0.0035	0.0037	0.0087	0.01	0.011	0.013	N/A	0.19

	WP	Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	0.83	2	0.0024	0.015	0.016	0.038
0.044	0.047	0.057	N/A	0.81

a	EC = emulsifiable concentrate; WP = wettable powder

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled
“proposed” are rate reductions proposed by EPA.

c	Amount handled per day values are HED estimates of acres or gallons or
other area/amount treated per day based on industry sources and HED
estimates.                    

d	Baseline Dermal = Baseline is long-sleeve shirt, long pants, shoes,
socks and no gloves.  Baseline Inhalation = no respirator.

e	PPE-G = Single layer w/gloves is baseline attire plus
chemical-resistant gloves.

f	PPE-DL = Double layer w/gloves is coveralls worn over long-sleeve
shirt and long pants, plus chemical-resistant gloves. 

g	80% Respirator is quarter-face dust/mist respirator (that provides an
80% protection factor) and 90% respirator is a half-face dust/mist
respirator or a full-face dust/mist respirator (that provides a 90% 

	protection factor). 

h	Engineering control is closed mixing/loading system.

i	Dermal Margin of Exposure (MOE) = LOAEL (3.7 mg/kg/day) / dermal daily
dose (mg/kg/day), where dermal dose = daily unit exposure (mg/lb ai)  x
application rate x amount handled per day x 45% dermal absorption / body
weight (60 kg adult female).  Level of concern = 300.

j	Inhalation Margin of Exposure (MOE) = NOAEL (0.2 mg/kg/day) /
inhalation daily dose (mg/kg/day), where inhalation dose = daily unit
exposure (μg/lb ai)  x application rate x amount handled per day  x
100% inhalation absorption / body weight (70 kg adult).  Level of
concern = 100

k	Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) --  combined dermal and inhalation risks =
1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 100)).  Level of
concern = 1.



Table 10: Applicators:  Summary of Short- and Intermediate-Term
Endosulfan Risks for Applicators

Cropa	Exposure Scenario	Application Rateb	Area Treated Dailyc	Risksi,j,k
(Level of Concern = 300 for dermal, 100 for inhalation, and 1 for
combined ARI)

Baselined Dermal (MOE)	Baselined Inh

(MOE) 	Baseline Dermal + Baseline Inh

(ARI) 	 PPE-Ge Dermal + Baseline Inh 

(ARI)	 PPE-G,DLf Dermal + Baseline Inh

(ARI) 	 PPE-G Dermal + 80% PPE-Rg Inh

(ARI) 	PPE-G,DL Dermal + 80% PPE-R g Inh

(ARI)	 PPE-G Dermal + 90% PPE-R g Inh

(ARI) 	PPE-G,DL Dermal + 90% PPE-R g Inh

(ARI)

	Combined Eng Conh Dermal + Baseline Inh

(ARI) 	Combined Eng Conh Dermal + Eng Cont Inh

(ARI) 

Blueberry (low- and highbush)	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
0.54

	Groundboom 	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	290	160	0.6	0.6	0.7	0.87	1.1	0.92
1.2	1.0	2.5

Blueberry (highbush)	Airblast	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	23	52	0.066	0.094
0.12 w/ HG	0.11	0.15 w/ HG	0.11	0.16 w/ HG	0.38	1.10

Grapes	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.54

	Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres 	290	160	0.6	0.6	0.7 	0.87	1.1 	0.92
1.2 	1.0	2.5

	Airblast	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	23	52	0.066	0.094	0.12 w/ HG	0.11	0.15
w/ HG	0.11	0.16 w/ HG	0.38	1.1

Strawberries	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.41

1 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.81

	Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	80 acres	220	120	0.45	0.45	0.52
0.65	0.81	0.69	0.87	0.75	1.9

1 lb ai/acre (proposed rate)	80 acres	440	240	0.91	0.91	1	1.3	1.6	1.4
1.7	1.5	3.7

Alfalfa (grown for seed); SLN [CA860035] and [NV860005]	Aerial	1 lb
ai/acre	1200 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.24

	Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	200 acres	180	95	0.36	0.36	0.42	0.52	0.65	0.55
0.69	0.60	1.5

Barley , Oats	Aerial	0.50 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.47

	Groundboom	0.5 lb ai/acre	200 acres	350	190	0.72	0.72	0.84	1	1.3	1.1
1.4	1.2	3.0

Barley, Oats, Rye, Wheat	Aerial	0.75 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
0.32

	Groundboom	0.75 lb ai/acre	200 acres	230	130	0.48	0.48	0.56	0.7	0.86
0.74	0.92	0.80	2.0

Beans (dry)	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.24

	Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	200 acres	180	95	0.36	0.36	0.42	0.52	0.65	0.55
0.69	0.60	1.5

Cotton SLN [AZ930014][AZ930016]

(EC only)	Aerial	0.75 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.32

	Groundboom	0.75 lb ai/acre	200 acres	230	130	0.48	0.48	0.56	0.7	0.86
0.74	0.92	0.80	2.0

Cotton, Sorghum	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.16

	Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	200 acres	120	63	0.24	0.24	0.28	0.35	0.43
0.37	0.46	0.40	1.0

Sweet Corn (fresh only)	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.54

	Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	290	160	0.6	0.6	0.7	0.87	1.1	0.92
1.2	1.0	2.5

Tobacco (drench treatment to plant bed)  limited to use in IN, KY, OH,
PA, and WV	Handgun

(PHED)	0.0025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	4,000	No Data	1.8	3.2	1.9	3.4
1.9	3.4	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	0.0025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	5,600	No Data	0.88	1.6	0.89
1.6	0.89	1.6	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

Tobacco (foliar field treatment) limited to use in IN, KY, OH, PA, and
WV	Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	80 acres	440	240	0.91	0.91	1	1.3	1.6	1.4	1.7
1.5	3.7

Tobacco (foliar treatment to seed bed) Limited to use in IN, KY, OH, PA,
and WV	Groundboom	1.5 lb ai/acre	80 acres	290	160	0.6	0.6	0.7	0.87	1.1
0.92	1.2	1.0	2.5

	Handgun

(PHED)	0.005 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	2,000	No Data	0.92	1.6	0.96	1.7
0.96	1.7	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	2,800	No Data	0.44	0.8	0.44
0.82	0.44	0.82	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

Citrus (nonbearing trees and nursery stock)	Aerial	2.5 lb ai/acre	60
acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	1.9

	Airblast	2.5 lb ai/acre	10 acres	55	120	0.16	0.22	0.3 w/ HG	0.26	0.36
w/ HG	0.27	0.38 w/ HG	0.92	2.7

	Handgun

(PHED)	2.5 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	800	No Data	0.37	0.64	0.38	0.68
0.39	0.69	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	2.5 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	1,100	No Data	0.18	0.32	0.18	0.33
0.18	0.33	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

Ornamental Trees, Shrubs, and Woody Plants	Handgun

(PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	2,000	No Data	0.92	1.6	0.96	1.7	0.96
1.7	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	2,800	No Data	0.44	0.8	0.44	0.82
0.44	0.82	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	10 acres	140	310	0.4	0.56	0.74 w/ HG	0.66	0.91 w/
HG	0.67	0.94 w/ HG	2.3	6.8

Christmas Tree Plantations	Aerial	1.0 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
0.81

	Handgun

(PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	2,000	No Data	0.92	1.6	0.96	1.7	0.96
1.7	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	2,800	No Data	0.44	0.8	0.44	0.82
0.44	0.82	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	34	78	0.1	0.14	0.18 w/ HG	0.16	0.23 w/
HG	0.17	0.23 w/ HG	0.57	1.7

Apples, Pears, Plums, Prunes	Aerial	2.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
0.32

	Airblast	2.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	14	31	0.04	0.056	0.074	0.066	0.091
0.067	0.094	0.23	0.68

Apricots	Aerial	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.27

	Airblast	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	40 acres	11	26	0.033	0.047	0.061
0.055	0.076	0.056	0.078	0.19	0.56

Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart), Nectarines, Peaches	Aerial	2.5 lb
ai/acre (proposed)	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.32

	Airblast 	2.5 lb ai/acre (proposed)	40 acres	14	31	0.04	0.056	0.074
0.066	0.091	0.067	0.094	0.23	0.68

Cherries (sweet and tart - MI only)	Aerial	1.0 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	0.81

	Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	34	78	0.1	0.14	0.18	0.16	0.23	0.17	0.23
0.57	1.7

Pears (soil treatment)	Groundboom 	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	220	120	0.45
0.45	0.52	0.65	0.81	0.69	0.87	0.75	1.9

	Handgun

(PHED)	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	1,000	No Data	0.46	0.8	0.48	0.85
0.48	0.86	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	1,400	No Data	0.22	0.4	0.22	0.41
0.22	0.41	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart),
Nectarines, Peaches, Plums, Prunes	Handgun

(PHED)	0.0075 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	No Data	1,300	No Data	0.62
1.1	0.64	1.1	0.64	1.1	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	0.0075 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	No Data	1,900	No Data
0.29	0.52	0.3	0.54	0.3	0.55	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun

(PHED)	0.005 lb ai/gal (proposed)	1000 gal	No Data	2,000	No Data	0.92
1.6	0.96	1.7	0.96	1.7	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal (proposed)	1000 gal	No Data	2,800	No Data	0.44
0.8	0.44	0.82	0.44	0.82	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Nectarines, Peaches (SE States
only)	Handgun

(PHED)	0.025 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	No Data	400	No Data	0.18
0.32	0.19	0.34	0.19	0.34	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	0.025 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	No Data	560	No Data	0.088
0.16	0.089	0.16	0.089	0.6	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

Almonds, Pecans	Aerial	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
0.27

	Airblast	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	40 acres	11	26	0.033	0.047	0.061
0.055	0.076	0.056	0.078	0.19	0.56

Almonds, Walnuts	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (proposed)	350 acres	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
0.41

	Airblast	2 lb ai/acre (proposed)	40 acres	17	39	0.05	0.07	0.092	0.082
0.11	0.084	0.12	0.29	0.85

Filberts

(WP only)	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre (proposed)	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.41

	Airblast	2 lb ai/acre (proposed)	40 acres	17	39	0.05	0.07	0.092	0.082
0.11	0.084	0.12	0.29	0.85

Filberts, SLN [OR780020]

(WP only)	Aerial	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.54

	Airblast	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	23	52	0.066	0.094	0.12	0.11	0.15	0.11
0.16	0.38	1.1

Macadamias

(EC only)	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.81

	Airblast	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	34	78	0.1	0.14	0.18	0.16	0.23	0.17	0.23
0.57	1.7

Bean, Broccoli (including Chinese), Brussels Sprouts, Cabbage (including
Chinese & Napa),

 Carrots, Cauliflower, Celery, Collards (other than CA), Cucumbers,
Eggplant (except CA), Lettuce (head & leaf), Melon, Peas (succulent &
dry), Peppers, Potatoes (including sweet), Pumpkins, Spinach, Squash,
Tomatoes (field grown)	Aerial	1 lb ai/acre	

350 acres 	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	0.81

	Groundboom	1 lb ai/acre	80 acres	440	240	0.91	0.91	1	1.3	1.6	1.4	1.7
1.5	3.7

Collards (CA only for EC formulation), Kale, Mustard Greens, Turnips
Aerial	0.75 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	1.1

	Groundboom	0.75 lb ai/acre	80 acres	590	320	1.2	1.2	1.4	1.7	2.2	1.8	2.3
2.00	5.0

Eggplant (CA only for EC formulation)	Aerial	0.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	1.6

	Groundboom	0.50 lb ai/acre	80 acres	880	470	1.8	1.8	2.1	2.6	3.2	2.8	3.5
3.00	7.5

Pineapple	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.41

	Airblast	2 lb ai/acre	40 acres	17	39	0.05	0.07	0.092	0.082	0.11	0.084
0.12	0.29	0.85

	Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	220	120	0.45	0.45	0.52	0.65	0.81	0.69
0.87	0.75	1.9

Sweet Potatoes (including SLN MS810036 for WP formulation)	Aerial	2 lb
ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data
No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.41

	Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre (label rate)	80 acres	220	120	0.45	0.45	0.52
0.65	0.81	0.69	0.87	0.75	1.9

Tomatoes (greenhouse)	Handgun

(PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	2000	No Data	0.92	1.6	0.96	1.7	0.96
1.7	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

	Handgun 

(ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	2,800	No Data	0.44	0.8	0.44	0.82
0.44	0.82	Not Feasible 	Not Feasible 

Vegetables grown for seed: Cabbage (including Chinese), Collards, Kale,
Kohlrabi, Radish, Rutabaga, Turnip: EC formulation SLN = 
[OR770043],[WA770016], [WA760012-Cabbage only]; WP formulation SLN
=[WA780029]	Aerial	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	0.41

	Groundboom	2 lb ai/acre	80 acres	220	120	0.45	0.45	0.52	0.65	0.81	0.69
0.87	0.75	1.9

a	All crops assessed for use with both emulsifiable concentrate (EC) and
wettable powder (WP) formulation, unless noted otherwise.

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled
“proposed” are rate reductions proposed by EPA.

c	Amount handled per day values are HED estimates of acres or gallons or
other area/amount treated per day based on industry sources and HED
estimates.                    

d	Baseline Dermal = Baseline is long-sleeve shirt, long pants, shoes,
socks and no gloves.  Baseline Inhalation = no respirator.

e	PPE-G = Single layer w/gloves is baseline attire plus
chemical-resistant gloves.

f	PPE-DL = Double layer w/gloves is coveralls worn over long-sleeve
shirt and long pants, plus chemical-resistant gloves.  An HG indicates
that headgear is also worn.

g	80% Respirator is quarter-face dust/mist respirator (that provides an
80% protection factor).  90% Respirator is a half-face dust/mist
respirator or a full-face dust/mist respirator (that provides a 90%
protection factor).      

h	Engineering control is enclosed cab or enclosed cockpit. 

i	Dermal Margin of Exposure (MOE) = LOAEL (3.7 mg/kg/day) / dermal daily
dose (mg/kg/day), where dermal dose = daily unit exposure (mg/lb ai)  x
application rate x amount handled per day x 45% dermal absorption / body
weight (60 kg adult female).  Level of concern = 300.

 = daily unit exposure (μg/lb ai)  x application rate x amount handled
per day  x 100% inhalation absorption / body weight (70 kg adult). 
Level of concern = 100

k	Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) -- combined dermal and inhalation risks =
1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 100)).  Level of
concern = 1.



Table 11: Flaggers:  Summary of Short- and Intermediate Term Endosulfan
Risks

Crop	Formulationa	Application Rateb	Amount Handled Dailyc	Risksi,j,k
(Level of Concern = 300 for dermal, 100 for inhalation, and 1 for
combined ARI)

Baselined Dermal (MOE)	Baselined Inhalation

(MOE) 	Baseline Dermal + Baseline Inhalation

(ARI) 	PPE-DLe Dermal + Baseline Inhalation (ARI)	PPE-DLe Dermal + 80%
PPE-Rf Inhalation (ARI)	PPE-DLe Dermal + 90% PPE-Rg Inhalation (ARI)
Combined Eng Conth Dermal + Baseline Inhalation

(ARI) 	Combined Eng Conth Dermal + Eng Cont Inhalation

(ARI) 

Blueberries (low- and highbush)	EC/WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	85	76
0.21	0.22 	0.29 	0.30 	0.72	10

Grapes 	EC/WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	85	76	0.21	0.22 	0.29 	0.30 	0.72
10

Strawberries	EC/WP	2 lb ai/acre 

(label rate)	350 acres	64	57	0.16	0.17 	0.22 	0.23 	0.54	8

1 lb ai/acre (proposed)	350 acres	130	110	0.31	0.33 	0.43 	0.45 	1.1	16

Alfalfa (grown for seed); SLN [CA860035] and [NV860005]	EC/WP	1 lb
ai/acre	350 acres	130	110	0.31	0.33 	0.43 	0.45 	1.1	16

Barley , Oats	EC/WP	0.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	260	230	0.62	0.67 	0.87 
0.90 	2.2	31

Barley, Oats, Rye, Wheat	EC/WP	0.75 lb ai/acre	350 acres	170	150	0.41
0.44 	0.58 	0.60 	1.4	21

Beans (dry)	EC/WP	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	130	110	0.31	0.33 	0.43 	0.45 
1.1	16

Cotton SLN [AZ930014][AZ930016] 	EC	0.75 lb ai/acre	350 acres	170	150
0.41	0.44 	0.58 	0.60 	1.4	21

Cotton, Sorghum	EC/WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	85	76	0.21	0.22 	0.29 
0.30 	0.72	10

Sweet Corn (fresh only)	EC/WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	85	76	0.21	0.22 
0.29 	0.30 	0.72	10

Citrus (nonbearing trees and nursery stock)	EC/WP	2.5 lb ai/acre	60
acres	300	270	0.73	0.78 	1.0 	1.1 	2.5	36

Christmas Tree Plantations	EC 	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	130	110	0.31	0.33 
0.43 	0.45 	1.1	16

Apples, Pears, Plums, Prunes	EC/WP	2.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	51	46	0.12
0.13 	0.17 	0.18 	0.43	6.2

Apricots	EC/WP	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	43	38	0.1	0.11 	0.14 
0.15 	0.36	5.2

Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart), Nectarines, Peaches	EC/WP	2.5 lb
ai/acre (proposed)	350 acres	51	46	0.12	0.13 	0.17 	0.18 	0.43	6.2

Cherries (sweet and tart-MI only)	EC 	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	130	110
0.31	0.33 	0.43 	0.45 	1.1	16

Almonds, Pecans	EC/WP	3 lb ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	43	38	0.1	0.11
	0.14 	0.15 	0.36	5.2

Almonds, Walnuts	EC/WP	2 lb ai/acre (proposed)	350 acres	64	57	0.16	0.17
	0.22 	0.23 	0.54	7.8

Filberts	   WP	2 lb ai/acre (proposed)	350 acres	64	57	0.16	0.17 	0.22 
0.23 	0.54	7.8

Filberts, SLN [OR780020]	   WP	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	85	76	0.21	0.22 
0.29 	0.30 	0.72	10

Macadamias	EC 	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	130	110	0.31	0.33 	0.43 	0.45 	1.1
16

Bean (succulent green), Broccoli (including Chinese), Brussels Sprouts,
Cabbage (including Chinese & Napa), Carrots, Cauliflower, Celery,
Collards (other than CA), Cucumbers, Eggplant (except CA), Lettuce (head
& leaf), Melon, Peas (succulent & dry), Peppers, Potatoes (including
sweet), Pumpkins, Spinach, Squash, Tomatoes (field grown)	EC/WP	1 lb
ai/acre	350 acres	130	110	0.31	0.33 	0.43 	0.45 	1.1	16

Collards (CA only for EC formulation), Kale, Mustard Greens, Turnips 
EC/WP	0.75 lb ai/acre	350 acres	170	150	0.41	0.44 	0.58 	0.60 	1.4	21

Eggplant (CA only for EC formulation)	EC/WP	0.50 lb ai/acre	350 acres
260	230	0.62	0.67 	0.87 	0.90 	2.2	31

Pineapple	EC/WP	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	64	57	0.16	0.17 	0.22 	0.23 	0.54
7.8

Sweet Potatoes (including SLN MS810036 for WP formulation)	EC/WP	2 lb
ai/acre (label rate)	350 acres	64	57	0.16	0.17 	0.22 	0.23 	0.54	7.8

Vegetables grown for seed: Cabbage (including Chinese), Collards, Kale,
Kohlrabi, Radish, Rutabaga, Turnip: EC formulation SLN [OR770043]
[WA770016]  [WA760012-Cabbage only]; WP formulation SLN [WA780029]	EC/WP
2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	64	57	0.16	0.17 	0.22 	0.23 	0.54	7.8

a	EC = emulsifiable concentrate; WP = wettable powder

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled
“proposed” are rate reductions proposed by EPA.  

c	Amount handled per day values are HED estimates of acres or gallons or
other area/amount treated per day based on industry sources and HED
estimates.                    

d	Baseline Dermal = Baseline is long-sleeve shirt, long pants, shoes,
socks and no gloves.  Baseline Inhalation = no respirator.

e	PPE-DL = Double layer is coveralls worn over long-sleeve shirt and
long pants.  No gloves (no G) are worn. 

f	80% Respirator is quarter-face dust/mist respirator (that provides an
80% protection factor).

g	90% Respirator is a half-face dust/mist respirator or a full-face
dust/mist respirator (that provides a 90% protection factor).           
 

h	Engineering control is enclosed cab. 

i	Dermal Margin of Exposure (MOE) = LOAEL (3.7 mg/kg/day) / dermal daily
dose (mg/kg/day), where dermal dose = daily unit exposure (mg/lb ai)  x
application rate x amount handled per day x 45% dermal absorption / body
weight (60 kg adult female).  Level of concern = 300.

j	Inhalation Margin of Exposure (MOE) = NOAEL (0.2 mg/kg/day) /
inhalation daily dose (mg/kg/day), where inhalation dose = daily unit
exposure (μg/lb ai)  x application rate x amount handled per day  x
100% inhalation absorption / body weight (70 kg adult).  Level of
concern = 100

k	Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) -- combined dermal and inhalation risks =
1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 100)).  Level of
concern = 1.



Table 12: Mixers/Loaders/Applicators:  Summary of Short- and
Intermediate-Term Endosulfan Risks

Crop	Form.a	Exposure Scenario	App Rateb	Amount Handled Dailyc	Risksi,j,k

(Level of Concern = 300 for dermal, 100 for inhalation, and 1 for
combined ARI)Total MOEs (Target MOE = 100)

	Baselined Dermal (MOE)	Baselined Inhalation

(MOE) 	Baseline Dermal + Baseline Inhalation

(ARI) 	 PPE-Ge Dermal + Baseline Inhalation 

(ARI)	 PPE-G,DLf Dermal + Baseline Inhalation

(ARI) 	 PPE-Ge Dermal + 80% Rg Inhalation

(ARI) 	PPE-G,DL f  Dermal + 80% Rg Inhalation

(ARI)	 PPE-Ge Dermal + 90% Rh Inhalation

(ARI) 	PPE-G,DL f Dermal+ 90% Rh Inhalation

(ARI)

Tobacco (drench treatment to plant bed)  limited to use in IN, KY, OH,
PA, and WV	EC 	Handgun (ORETF)	0.0025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	3,100
No Data	1.4	2.5	1.4	2.6	1.5	2.7

Low Pressure Handwand - Ground Directed (ORETF)	0.0025 lb ai/gal	40 gal
330	52,000	1.1	45	No Data	49	No Data	49	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.0025 lb ai/gal	40 gal	49	4,700	0.16	21	23
33	37	35	41

	WP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.0025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	88	No Data	0.42
0.56	0.69	1.1	0.75	1.3

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.0025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	780	No Data
0.86	1.4	0.94	1.7	0.96	1.7

	WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.0025 lb ai/gal	40 gal	No Data	130	No
Data	0.76	0.86	1.5	1.9	1.7	2.2

Tobacco (foliar treatment to seed bed) limited to use in IN, KY, OH, PA,
and WV	EC 	Handgun (ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	1,600	No
Data	0.7	1.2	0.72	1.3	0.73	1.3

Low Pressure Handwand - Ground Directed (ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal	40 gal
160	26,000	0.55	23	No Data	24	No Data	25	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.005 lb ai/gal	40 gal	25	2,300	0.082	11	11
16	19	18	20

	WP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	44	No Data	0.21
0.28	0.35	0.57	0.38	0.65

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	390	No Data
0.43	0.72	0.47	0.85	0.48	0.87

	WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.005 lb ai/gal	40 gal	No Data	64	No
Data	0.38	0.43	0.74	0.94	0.83	1.1

Citrus (nonbearing trees and nursery stock)	EC 	Handgun (ORETF)	2.5 lb
ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	620	No Data	0.28	0.49	0.29	0.53	0.29	0.53

Low Pressure Handwand - Overhead Directed (ORETF)	2.5 lb ai/acre	5 acres
1.3	290	0.0044	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	2.5 lb ai/acre	5 acres	0.39	37	0.0013	0.17
0.18	0.26	0.3	0.28	0.32

Citrus (nonbearing trees and nursery stock)	 WP	Handgun (ORETF)	2.5 lb
ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	18	No Data	0.085	0.11	0.14	0.23	0.15	0.26

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	2.5 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	160	No Data
0.17	0.29	0.19	0.34	0.19	0.35

	WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	2.5 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	1	No
Data	0.0061	0.0069	0.012	0.015	0.013	0.018

Ornamentals: Trees, Shrubs, Woody plants	EC	Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre
5 acres	No Data	1,600	No Data	0.7	1.2	0.72	1.3	0.73	1.3

Ornamentals: Shrubs, Woody plants

Low Pressure Handwand - Ground Directed (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	6.6
1,000	0.022	0.91	No Data	0.98	No Data	0.99	No Data

Ornamentals: Trees

Low Pressure Handwand - Overhead Directed (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres
3.3	740	0.011	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data

Ornamentals: Trees, Shrubs, Woody plants

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	0.99	93	0.0033	0.42
0.46	0.66	0.75	0.71	0.81

Ornamentals: Trees, Shrubs, Woody plants	 WP 	Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb
ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	44	No Data	0.21	0.28	0.35	0.57	0.38	0.65

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	390	No Data	0.43
0.72	0.47	0.85	0.48	0.87

	WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	3	No Data
0.015	0.017	0.029	0.037	0.033	0.044

Christmas Tree Plantations	EC	Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No
Data	1,600	No Data	0.7	1.2	0.72	1.3	0.73	1.3

Low Pressure Handwand - Overhead Directed (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres
3.3	740	0.011	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	0.99	93	0.0033	0.42
0.46	0.66	0.75	0.71	0.81

	 WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	3	No Data
0.015	0.017	0.029	0.037	0.033	0.044

Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	44	No Data	0.21	0.28	0.35
0.57	0.38	0.65

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	390	No Data	0.43
0.72	0.47	0.85	0.48	0.87

Pears (soil treatment) 	EC  	Handgun (ORETF)	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No
Data	780	No Data	0.35	0.62	0.36	0.66	0.36	0.67

Low Pressure Handwand - Ground Directed (ORETF)	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	3.3
520	0.011	0.45	No Data	0.49	No Data	0.49	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	0.49	47	0.0016	0.21
0.23	0.33	0.37	0.35	0.41

Pears (soil treatment)	 WP 	Handgun (ORETF)	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data
22	No Data	0.11	0.14	0.17	0.28	0.19	0.33

Handgun (ORETF)	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	190	No Data	0.22	0.36	0.24
0.43	0.24	0.43

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	2 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	1	No Data
0.0076	0.0086	0.015	0.019	0.017	0.022

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart),
Nectarines, Peaches, Plums, Prunes 	EC 	Handgun (ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal
(proposed rate)	1000 gal	No Data	1,600	No Data	0.7	1.2	0.72	1.3	0.73	1.3

High Pressure Handwand	0.005 lb ai/gal (proposed rate)	1000 gal	No Data
23	No Data	0.084	0.11	0.12	0.17	0.12	0.19

Low Pressure Handwand - Overhead Directed (ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal
(proposed rate)	40 gal	82	18,000	0.27	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.005 lb ai/gal (proposed rate)	40 gal	25
2,300	0.082	11	11	16	19	18	20

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart),
Nectarines, Peaches, Plums, Prunes 	EC 	Handgun (ORETF)	0.0075 lb ai/gal
(label rate)	1000 gal	No Data	1,000	No Data	0.47	0.82	0.48	0.88	0.48
0.89

High Pressure Handwand	0.0075 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	No Data	16
No Data	0.056	0.073	0.079	0.12	0.083	0.13

Low Pressure Handwand - Overhead Directed (ORETF)	0.0075 lb ai/gal
(label rate)	40 gal	55	12,000	0.18	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No
Data	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.0075 lb ai/gal (label rate)	40 gal	16
1,600	0.055	7	7.6	11	12	12	14

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart),
Nectarines, Peaches, Plums, Prunes	 WP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal
(proposed rate) 	1000 gal	No Data	44	No Data	0.21	0.28	0.35	0.57	0.38
0.65

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.005 lb ai/gal (proposed rate) 	1000 gal	No
Data	390	No Data	0.43	0.72	0.47	0.85	0.48	0.87

	WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.005 lb ai/gal (proposed rate)	40 gal
No Data	64	No Data	0.38	0.43	0.74	0.94	0.83	1.1

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart),
Nectarines, Peaches, Plums, Prunes	WP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.0075 lb ai/gal
(label rate)	1000 gal	No Data	29	No Data	0.14	0.19	0.23	0.38	0.25	0.43

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.0075 lb ai/gal (label rate)	1000 gal	No
Data	260	No Data	0.29	0.48	0.31	0.57	0.32	0.58

	WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.0075 lb ai/gal (label rate)	40 gal	No
Data	42	No Data	0.25	0.29	0.49	0.62	0.55	0.73

Postharvest bark treatment: Apricots, Nectarines, Peaches (SE States
only)	EC 	Handgun (ORETF)	0.025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	310	No Data
0.14	0.25	0.14	0.26	0.15	0.27

High Pressure Handwand	0.025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	5	No Data	0.017
0.022	0.024	0.035	0.025	0.038

Low Pressure Handwand - Overhead Directed (ORETF)	0.025 lb ai/gal	40 gal
16	3,700	0.055	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.025 lb ai/gal	40 gal	4.9	470	0.016	2.1
2.3	3.3	3.7	3.5	4.1

	  WP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	9	No Data	0.042
0.056	0.069	0.11	0.075	0.13

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	0.025 lb ai/gal	1000 gal	No Data	78	No Data
0.086	0.14	0.094	0.17	0.096	0.17

	WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	0.025 lb ai/gal	40 gal	No Data	13	No
Data	0.076	0.086	0.15	0.19	0.17	0.22

Tomatoes (greenhouse)	EC 	Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data
1,600	No Data	0.7	1.2	0.72	1.3	0.73	1.3

Low Pressure Handwand - Ground Directed (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	6.6
1,000	0.022	0.91	No Data	0.98	No Data	0.99	No Data

Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	0.99	93	0.0033	0.42
0.46	0.66	0.75	0.71	0.81

	WP 	Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	44	No Data	0.21	0.28
0.35	0.57	0.38	0.65

	WP in WSP	Handgun (ORETF)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	390	No Data	0.43
0.72	0.47	0.85	0.48	0.87

	WP	Low Pressure Handwand (PHED)	1 lb ai/acre	5 acres	No Data	3	No Data
0.015	0.017	0.029	0.037	0.033	0.044

a	EC = emulsifiable concentrate; WP = wettable powder

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled
“proposed” are rate reductions proposed by EPA.

c	Amount handled per day values are HED estimates of acres or gallons or
other area/amount treated per day based on industry sources and HED
estimates.                    

d	Baseline Dermal = Baseline is long-sleeve shirt, long pants, shoes,
socks and no gloves.  Baseline Inhalation = no respirator.

e	PPE-G = Single layer w/gloves is baseline attire plus
chemical-resistant gloves.

f	PPE-G, DL = Double layer w/gloves is coveralls worn over long-sleeve
shirt and long pants, plus chemical-resistant gloves. 

g	80% Respirator is quarter-face dust/mist respirator (that provides an
80% protection factor).

h	90% Respirator is a half-face dust/mist respirator or a full-face
dust/mist respirator (that provides a 90% protection factor).      

i	Dermal Margin of Exposure (MOE) = LOAEL (3.7 mg/kg/day) / dermal daily
dose (mg/kg/day), where dermal dose = daily unit exposure (mg/lb ai)  x
application rate x amount handled per day x 45% dermal absorption / body
weight (60 kg adult female).  Level of concern = 300.

nhalation dose = daily unit exposure (μg/lb ai)  x application rate x
amount handled per day  x 100% inhalation absorption / body weight (70
kg adult).  Level of concern = 100

k	Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) -- combined dermal and inhalation risks =
1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 100)).  Level of
concern = 1.



Table 13: Applicators using Airblast Equipment:  Summary of Short-and
Intermediate-Term Endosulfan Risks

(assessed using Carbaryl unit exposure data MRID 464482-01)

Use Sitea	App Rateb	Area Treated Dailyc 	Unit Exposured 	Daily Dosee 

(mg/kg/day)	Risks f,g,h (Level of Concern = 300 for dermal, 100 for
inhalation, and 1 for combined ARI)

	Dermal Baseline + GL 

+ HG (mg/lb ai)

	Baseline Inh (ug/lb ai)

	80% PPE-R Inh (ug/lb ai)

	90% PPE-R Inh (ug/lb ai)	Dermal Baseline + GL 

+ HG 	Baseline Inh 

	80% PPE-R Inh 

	90% PPE-R Inh 	Dermal

Baseline

 + GL 

+ HG

(MOE) 	Baseline Inh 

(MOE)

	Dermal Baseline

+ GL 

+ HG

+ Inh Baseline

(ARI)	

Dermal Baseline

+ GL 

+ HG

+ 80%  R

Inh

(ARI) 

	Dermal Baseline

+ GL 

+ HG

 + 90%  R Inh

(ARI) 

Blueberry (highbush) 	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31	0.032
0.0027	0.00053	0.00027	120	75	0.26	0.35	0.37

Grapes 	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31	0.032	0.0027	0.00053
0.00027	120	75	0.26	0.35	0.37

Citrus (nonbearing trees and nursery stock)	2.5 lb ai/acre	10 acres	0.07
3.1	0.62	0.31	0.013	0.0011	0.00022	0.00011	280	180	0.62	0.85	0.89

Ornamentals: Trees, Shrubs, Woody plants	1 lb ai/acre	10 acres	0.07	3.1
0.62	0.31	0.0053	0.00044	0.000089	0.000044	700	450	1.5	2.1	2.2

Christmas Tree Plantations	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31
0.021	0.0018	0.00035	0.00018	180	110	0.38	0.53	0.56

Apples, Pears, Plums, Prunes	2.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31
0.053	0.0044	0.00089	0.00044	70	45	0.15	0.21	0.22

Apricots	3 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31	0.063	0.0053	0.0011
0.00053	59	38	0.13	0.18	0.19

Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart), Nectarines, Peaches (proposed rate)
2.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31	0.053	0.0044	0.00089	0.00044
70	45	0.15	0.21	0.22

Cherries (sweet and tart - MI only)	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62
0.31	0.021	0.0018	0.00035	0.00018	180	110	0.38	0.53	0.56

Almonds, Pecans	3 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31	0.063	0.0053
0.0011	0.00053	59	38	0.13	0.18	0.19

Almonds, Walnuts (proposed rate)	2 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62
0.31	0.042	0.0035	0.00071	0.00035	88	56	0.19	0.27	0.28

Filberts (WP only proposed rate)	2 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62
0.31	0.042	0.0035	0.00071	0.00035	88	56	0.19	0.27	0.28

Filberts, SLN [OR780020] (WP only)	1.5 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62
0.31	0.032	0.0027	0.00053	0.00027	120	75	0.26	0.35	0.37

Macadamias (EC only)	1 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31	0.021
0.0018	0.00035	0.00018	180	110	0.38	0.53	0.56

Pineapple	2 lb ai/acre	40 acres	0.07	3.1	0.62	0.31	0.042	0.0035	0.00071
0.00035	88	56	0.19	0.27	0.28

a	EC = emulsifiable concentrate; WP = wettable powder

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled
“proposed” are rate reductions proposed by EPA.

c	Acres treated per day values are HED estimates of acres treated per
day based on industry sources and HED estimates.		

d	Unit Exposure estimates were obtained from surrogate carbaryl data
MRID 464482-01.  Dermal represents use of long-sleeve shirt, long pants,
shoes, socks, plus chemical-resistant

gloves and chemical-resistant headgear.  Baseline inhalation represents
use of no respirator.  80% Respirator is quarter-face dust/mist
respirator (that provides an 80% protection factor).  90% Respirator is
a half-face dust/mist respirator or a full-face dust/mist respirator
(that provides a 90% protection factor). 

e	Daily Dose = Application rate (lb ai/acre) x Acres treated/day x Unit
Exposure (mg/lb ai) x absorption factor (45% for dermal, 100% for
inhalation) / body weight (60 kg for dermal and 70 kg for

inhalation).  

f	Dermal MOE = LOAEL (3.7 mg/kg/day) / daily dose (mg/kg/day).  Level of
concern = 300.  

g	Inhalation MOEs = NOAEL (0.2 mg/kg/day) / inhalation daily dose
(mg/kg/day.  Level of concern = 100.

h	Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) -- combined dermal and inhalation risks =
1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE / 100)).  Level of
concern = 1.



Table 14: Closed System Loading to Support Aerial Application:  

Summary of Short- and Intermediate-Term Endosulfan Risks 

(assessed using Malathion unit exposure estimates MRID 46634105)

Crop Grouping	Crop or Target	Formulationa	Application Rateb	Area Treated
Dailyc 	Engineering Control Unit Exposured	Engineering Control Dosee 
Risks .

 (Level of Concern = 300 for dermal, 100 for inhalation, and 1 for
combined ARI)

	Dermal

(mg/lb ai)	Inhalation (ug/lb ai)	Dermal

(mg/kg/day)	Inhalation

(mg/kg/day)	Eng Con Dermalf

(MOE)	Eng Con Inhalationg

(MOE)	Eng Con Dermal + Inhalationh

(ARI)

Berries and Vine/Trellis	Blueberry (low- and highbush)	EC	1.5 lb ai/acre
350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.0091	0.00006	410	3,600	1.3

Berries and Vine/Trellis	Grapes	EC  	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023
0.0075	0.0091	0.00006	410	3,600	1.3

Berries and Vine/Trellis	Strawberries	EC  (label rate)	2 lb ai/acre	350
acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.012	0.00008	310	2,700	0.98

Berries and Vine/Trellis	Strawberries	EC (proposed rate)  	1 lb ai/acre
350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.006	0.00004	610	5,300	2.0

Field / Row Crop	Alfalfa (grown for seed); SLN [CA860035] and [NV860005]
EC 	1 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.021	0.00013	180	1,600	0.57

Field / Row Crop	Barley , Oats	EC 	0.5 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.0023
0.0075	0.01	0.00006	360	3,100	1.1

Field / Row Crop	Barley, Oats, Rye, Wheat	EC 	0.75 lb ai/acre	1200 acres
0.0023	0.0075	0.016	0.00010	240	2,100	0.77

Field / Row Crop	Beans (dry)	EC 	1 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.0023	0.0075
0.021	0.00013	180	1,600	0.57

Field / Row Crop	Cotton SLN [AZ930014][AZ930016] 	EC	0.75 lb ai/acre
1200 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.016	0.00010	240	2,100	0.77

Field / Row Crop	Cotton, Sorghum	EC 	1.5 lb ai/acre	1200 acres	0.0023
0.0075	0.031	0.00019	120	1,000	0.38

Field / Row Crop	Sweet Corn (fresh only)	EC  	1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres
0.0023	0.0075	0.0091	0.00006	410	3,600	1.3

Nursery Crops	Citrus (nonbearing trees and nursery stock)	EC 	2.5 lb
ai/acre	60 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.0026	0.00002	1,400	12,000	4.6

Pine Trees	Christmas Tree Plantations	EC 	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023
0.0075	0.006	0.00004	610	5,300	2.0

Pome and Stone Fruits	Apples, Pears, Plums, and Prunes	EC 	2.5 lb
ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.015	0.00009	250	2,100	0.79

Pome and Stone Fruits	Apricots	EC  (label rate)	3 lb ai/acre	350 acres
0.0023	0.0075	0.018	0.00011	200	1,800	0.66

Pome and Stone Fruits	Apricots, Cherries (sweet & tart), Nectarines,
Peaches	EC (proposed rate) 	2.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.015
0.00009	250	2,100	0.79

Pome and Stone Fruits	Cherries (sweet and tart-MI only)	EC 	1 lb ai/acre
350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.006	0.00004	610	5,300	2.0

Tree Nut	Almonds, Pecans	EC (label rate)	3 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023
0.0075	0.018	0.00011	200	1,800	0.66

Tree Nut	Almonds, Walnuts	EC (proposed rate) 	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres
0.0023	0.0075	0.012	0.00008	310	2,700	0.98

Tree Nut	Macadamias	EC 	1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.006
0.00004	610	5,300	2.0

Vegetables	Bean (succulent green), Broccoli (including Chinese),
Brussels Sprouts, Cabbage (including Chinese & Napa), Carrots,
Cauliflower, Celery, Collards (except CA), Cucumbers, Eggplant (except
CA), Lettuce (head & leaf), Melon, Peas (succulent & dry), Peppers	EC  
1 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.006	0.00004	610	5,300	2.0

Vegetables	Collards (CA only), Kale, Mustard Greens, Turnips 	EC 	0.75
lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.0045	0.00003	820	7,100	2.6

Vegetables	Eggplant, CA only	EC 	0.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023	0.0075
0.003	0.00002	1,200	11,000	3.9

Vegetables	Pineapples	EC 	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.012
0.00008	310	2,700	0.98

Vegetables	Sweet Potatoes	EC (label rate)	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023
0.0075	0.012	0.00008	310	2,700	0.98

Vegetables	Sweet Potatoes (soil broadcast treatment), SLN [MS810035]	EC
1.5 lb ai/acre	350 acres	0.0023	0.0075	0.0091	0.00006	410	3,600	1.3

Vegetables Grown for Seed	Vegetables grown for seed: Cabbage (including
Chinese), Collards, Kale, Kohlrabi, Radish, Rutabaga, Turnip SLN 
[OR770043],[WA770016], SLN [WA760012-Cabbage] 	EC	2 lb ai/acre	350 acres
0.0023	0.0075	0.012	0.00008	310	2,700	0.98

a	EC = emulsifiable concentrate; WP = wettable powder

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled
“proposed” are rate reductions proposed by EPA.

c	Acres treated per day values are HED estimates of acres treated per
day based on industry sources and HED estimates.		

d	Engineering Control Unit Exposure estimates were obtained from
surrogate malathion data MRID 46634105.  Engineering control is a lock
and load closed loading system that uses dry coupling techniques

	to transfer the formulated product from 260-gallon totes to the
aircraft tanks.  No water or other materials are added to the aircraft
tank.  Loaders wore long-sleeve shirt, long pants, boots or shoes,
socks, and 

	chemical-resistant gloves.

e	Engineering  Control Daily Dose = Application rate (lb ai/acre) x
Acres treated/day x Unit Exposure (in mg/lb ai) x absorption factor (45%
for dermal, 100% for inhalation) / body

weight (60 kg for dermal and 70 kg for inhalation)

f	Engineering  Control Dermal MOE = LOAEL (3.7 mg/kg/day) / dermal daily
dose (mg/kg/day).  Level of concern = 300.

g	Engineering  Control Inhalation MOE = NOAEL (0.2 mg/kg/day) /
inhalation daily dose (mg/kg/day.  Level of concern = 100.

h	Engineering  Control Aggregated Risk Index (ARI) -- combined dermal
and inhalation risks = 1 / (1/ (Dermal MOE /300) + 1/ (Inhalation MOE /
100)).  Level of concern = 1.

		Summary of Risk Concerns for Handlers, Data Gaps, and Confidence in
Exposure

 		and Risk Estimates

Dermal and inhalation risks for handlers are combined using an ARI
approach since the toxicological effects for the dermal and inhalation
endpoints are similar.  Handler exposure to endosulfan are expected to
be short-term (1 day to one month) and intermediate-term (more than 30
days up to 6 months).  Long-term exposures are not anticipated.  The
target MOE for the short- and intermediate-term dermal risks is 300. 
The target MOE for the short- and intermediate-term inhalation risks is
100.  The target ARI for combined short- and intermediate-term dermal
plus inhalation risks is 1.

			Quick Reference to Handler Risks

Table 15 is a quick reference to the risks to mixers and loaders
handling liquid concentrates and wettable powder formulations.  Field
crops include alfalfa (grown for seed), barley, cotton, dry beans, oats,
rye, sorghum, sweet corn (fresh only) and wheat.  A high-tech loading
system for aircraft is a lock and load closed loading system that uses
dry coupling techniques to transfer the formulated product from
260-gallon totes to the aircraft tanks.  No water or other materials are
added to the aircraft tank.  In the malathion study where these data
were obtained, loaders wore long-sleeve shirt, long pants, boots or
shoes, socks, and chemical-resistant gloves.  These closed loading
systems are currently available for some ULV aerial applications.  These
systems are distinct from a closed mixing/loading system where diluents
and other additives are added to the aircraft tanks.  Only the lock and
load technology is used in these high tech systems.

Table 15:  Quick Reference for Risks to Mixers/Loaders Using PHED and
Proprietary Data

Handler Task	Application Rate	Area Treated Daily	Risk Mitigation Where 

ARIs ≥ 1

Mixing/Loading Liquid Concentrates

Mix/Load LC to Support Aerial Applications	> 0.5 lb ai/A	1200 acres 

(field crops)	Risks a concern even with high-tech closed loading system
for aircraft (malathion data)

	0.5 lb ai/A

High-tech closed mixing/loading system for aircraft (malathion data)

	> 2.0 lb ai/A

	350 acres 

≤ 2.0 lb ai/A

High-tech closed mixing/loading system for aircraft (malathion data)

	2.5 lb ai/A	60 acres

(nonbearing citrus in nurseries)	Closed mixing/loading system 

(PHED data)

Mix/Load/Apply LC for Chemigation Applications	1.0 lb ai/A 	350 acres

 (SLN  Potatoes WA)	Risks a concern even with closed mixing/loading
system (PHED data)

Mix/Load LC to Support Groundboom Applications	> 0.75 lb ai/A	200 acres

≥ 1.5 lb ai/A	80 acres

(row crops)	Closed mixing/loading system (PHED data)

	1.0 lb ai/A

Double layer attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

	0.75 lb ai/A

Baseline attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

	0.5 lb ai/A

Baseline attire plus gloves

Mix/Load LC to Support Airblast Applications	≥ 2.5 lb ai/A	40 acres

(tree crops)	Closed mixing/loading system

	2.0 lb ai/A

Double layer attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

	1.5 lb ai/A

Baseline attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

	1.0 lb ai/A	40 acres

(tree crops)	Baseline attire plus gloves

10 acres

≤ 0.005 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire

Mixing/Loading Wettable Powders

Mix/Load WP to Support Aerial Applications	All	1200 acres 

(field crops)	Risks a concern even with water-soluble packaging

	All	350 acres 

(row and tree crops)

	Mix/Load WP to Support Groundboom Applications	≥ 0.75 lb ai/A	200
acres

(field crops)	Risks a concern even with water-soluble packaging

	< 0.75 lb ai/A

Water-soluble packaging

	> 1.5 lb ai/A	80 acres

(row crops)	Risks a concern even with water-soluble packaging

	≤ 1.5 lb ai/A

Water-soluble packaging

Mix/Load WP to Support Airblast Applications	All	40 acres

(tree crops)	Water-soluble packaging

10 acres

(nonbearing citrus in nurseries)

	Mix/Load WP to Support Handgun Applications	≥ 2.0 lb ai/A	5 acres
Water-soluble packaging

	< 2.0 lb ai/A

Baseline attire plus gloves plus an 80 PF dust/mist respirator

	0.025 lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons	Water-soluble packaging

	0.0075 lb ai/gallon

Double layer body protection plus gloves plus an 90 respirator

	0.005 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

	0.0025 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire plus gloves

Mix/Load WP to Support Dip Applications	0.05 lb ai/gallon	100 gallons
Baseline attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

	0.005 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire plus gloves 

	0.001 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire

Table 16 is a quick reference for risks to applicators applying
endosulfan.  Field crops include alfalfa (grown for seed), barley,
cotton, dry beans, oats, rye, sorghum, sweet corn (fresh only) and
wheat.

Table 16: Quick Reference for Risks to Applicators 

Handler Task	Application Rate	Area Treated Daily	Risk Mitigation Where 

s ≥ 1

Aerial Applications – Spray

(PHED)	All	1200 acres

(field crops)	Risks a concern even with enclosed cockpits 

	> 0.75 lb ai/A 	350 acres (row crops and tree crops)	Risks a concern
even with enclosed cockpits

	≤ 0.75 lb ai/A

Enclosed cockpits

	2.5 lb ai/A	60 acres

(nonbearing citrus in nurseries)	Enclosed cockpits

Groundboom Applications

(PHED)	≥ 0.75 lb ai/A	200 acres

(field crops)	Enclosed cabs

	0.5 lb ai/A

Baseline attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

	2.0 lb ai/A	80 acres

(row crops)	Enclosed cabs

	1.5 lb ai/A

Double layer attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

	1.0 lb ai/A

Double layer attire plus gloves

	≤ 0.75 lb ai/A

Baseline attire

Airblast Applications

(PHED)	≥ 2.0 lb ai/A	40 acres

(tree crops)	Risks a concern even with enclosed cabs

	≤ 1.5 lb ai/A

Enclosed cabs

	2.5 lb ai/A	10 acres

(nursery crops)	Enclosed cabs

	1.0 lb ai/A

Baseline attire plus gloves plus headgear (carbaryl data)

Dip Applications

(No Data)	All	100 gallons	No Data

Handgun Applications

(PHED)	≥ 2.0 lb ai/A	5 acres	Risks remain a concern even with double
layer attire plus gloves plus 90% respirator

	< 2.0 lb ai/A

	0.025 lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons

0.005 and 0.0075 

lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons

0.0025 lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons	Baseline attire

Handgun Applications

(ORETF)	All	5 acres	Risks remain a concern even with double layer attire
plus gloves plus 90% respirator

	> 0.025 lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons

0.025 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire plus gloves

Table 17 is a quick reference for risks to flaggers supporting aerial
spray applications. 

Table 17:  Quick Reference for Risks to Flaggers Using PHED Data

Handler Task	Application Rate	Area Treated Daily	Risk Mitigation Where
ARIs ≥ 1

Flag to Support Aerial Applications	All	350 acres	Enclosed cabs

	2.5 lb ai/A 	60 acres 

nonbearing citrus in nurseries	Double layer attire plus an 80%
respirator

Table 18 is a quick reference for risks to mixers/loaders/applicators.

Table 18:  Quick Reference for Risks to Mixers/Loaders/Applicators 

Using PHED and ORETF Data

Handler Task	Application Rate	Area Treated Daily	Risk Mitigation 

s ≥ 1

Mixing/Loading/Applying Liquid Concentrates

Mix/Load/Apply LC with Handgun Sprayer

(ORETF data)	> 1.0 lb ai/A	5 acres	Risks a concern with double layer
attire plus gloves plus a 90% respirator 

	≤ 1.0 lb ai/A

Double layer attire plus gloves

	≥ 0.0075 lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons	Risks a concern with double layer
attire plus gloves plus a 90% respirator

	0.005 lb ai/gallon

Double layer attire plus gloves

	0.0025 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire plus gloves

Mix/Load/Apply LC with High Pressure Handwand Sprayer

(PHED data)

	All	1000 gallons	Risks a concern with double layer attire plus gloves
plus a 90% respirator

Mix/Load/Apply LC with Low-Pressure Handwand Sprayer

≥ 1.0 lb ai/A	5 acres	Risks a concern with double layer attire plus
gloves plus a 90% respirator

	0.005 lb ai/gallon	40 gallons	Baseline attire plus gloves

	0.0025 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire

Mix/Load/Apply LC with Low-Pressure Handwand Sprayer

(ORETF overhead-directed data)	All	5 acres 

	Risks a concern with baseline attire (only data available)

40 gallons

	Mix/Load/Apply LC with Low Pressure Handwand Sprayer

(PHED data)	All	5 acres	Risks a concern with double layer attire plus
gloves plus a 90% respirator

40 gallons	Baseline attire plus gloves

Mix/Load/Apply LC as Dip	All	100 gallons	No Data

Mixing/Loading/Applying Wettable Powders

Mix/Load/Apply WP with Handgun Sprayer

(ORETF data)	All	5 acres	Risks a concern even with double layer attire
plus gloves plus a 90% respirator

	> 0.0025 lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons

0.0025 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

Mix/Load/Apply WP in WSP with Handgun Sprayer

(ORETF data)	All	5 acres	Risks a concern even with double layer attire
plus gloves plus a 90% respirator

	> 0.0025 lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons

0.0025 lb ai/gallon

Double layer attire plus gloves

Mix/Load/Apply WP with High-Pressure Handwand Sprayer

(PHED data)	All	5 acres	No Data

1000 gallons

	Mix/Load/Apply WP with Low Pressure Handwand Sprayer

(PHED data)	All	5 acres	Risks a concern with double layer attire plus
gloves plus a 90% respirator

	≥ 0.0075 lb ai/gallon	1000 gallons

0.005 lb ai/gallon

Double layer attire plus gloves plus a 90% respirator

	0.0025 lb ai/gallon

Baseline attire plus gloves plus an 80% respirator

Mix/Load/Apply WP as Dip	All	100 gallons	No Data

	Data Gaps 

Data gaps exist for the following scenarios:

(7) Applying dip treatments to trees and roots or whole plants. 

No exposure data exists for mixing/loading/applying wettable powders
with a high pressure handwand sprayer.  This scenario is expected to
have risks of concern since similar scenarios assessed in this document,
mixing/loading wettable powders and mixing/loading/applying liquids with
a high pressure handwand sprayer, have risks of concern.  

Data Quality and Confidence in Assessment

Several issues must be considered when interpreting the occupational
exposure risk assessment. These include:

Several generic protection factors were used to calculate handler
exposures (e.g., 90 percent PF over baseline for inhalation unit
exposure to account for use of a half- or full-face respirator).  

Some of the surrogate data used from PHED were rated as low confidence.

Occupational Postapplication Exposures and Risks

	Postapplication Exposures and Assumptions

EPA has determined that there are potential short- and intermediate-term
postapplication exposures to individuals entering treated fields.  For
the purpose of conducting this assessment, crops were grouped in order
to assign the most representative dislodgeable foliar residue (DFR) data
to the crops.  The crop groups listed below were chosen because
appropriate residue data were available (see description of
postapplication DFR study below: MRID 444031-02).  The crop groups and
corresponding surrogate residue data sources are as follows:

Tree Fruit and Nut Crops:  DFR data for peaches were used, based on a
study using an application rate of 3 lb ai/acre, to determine exposure
from postapplication activities associated with all tree crops (15 tree
crops other than peaches).  This application rate is consistent with the
label application rates for most fruit and nut trees.  For the crops
where the application rates were not 3 lbs ai/acre, the DFR data were
adjusted (linear) to the appropriate application rate for the individual
crops.  

Vine and Trellis Crops:  This scenario is based on DFR data for grapes
using an application rate of 1.5 lbs ai/acre.  This is the labeled
application rate for grapes and highbush blueberries.  

Field and Row Crops: DFR data for melons were used and were assumed to
be representative of exposure from postapplication activities associated
with all the remaining crops registered for endosulfan except for grapes
and tree fruit and nut crops.  The DFR data were based on an application
rate of 1 lb ai/acre.  However, most of the labeled application rates
for these crops range from 0.25 to 3 lb ai/acre.  Thus, the DFR data
were adjusted (linear) to the appropriate application rate for the
individual crops.

	Chemical-specific DFR Data 

A DFR study was conducted for endosulfan and its metabolites,
beta-endosulfan and endosulfan sulfate.  The study evaluated
dislodgeable residue dissipation for endosulfan applied to peaches,
grapes, and melons (MRID No. 444031-02).  In summary, the dislodgeable
foliar residue study completed in support of the regulatory requirements
for endosulfan did not completely meet the criteria contained in Series
875, Occupational and Residential Test Guidelines.  This conclusion is
based on the following issue: the DFR study was performed in only one
geographical area.  Series 875, Occupational and Residential Test
Guidelines, recommend that, “In general, DFR samples should be
collected from at least three geographically distinct locations per
formulation type.”   While the Endosulfan Task Force contends that
California is the worst case climate for the least amount of residue
dissipation, further DFR studies may need to be conducted in the areas
where there is the highest use of endosulfan.  Other issues were
identified in HED’s review of the DFR study, but these were addressed
in a supplemental report submitted by the Endosulfan Task Force. 

Despite the uncertainty listed above, HED recommended that the data from
this DFR study be used in assessing the appropriate postapplication
exposure from agricultural activities using endosulfan. The study is
appropriate for regulatory use in assessing postapplication residues on
fruit trees and low growing fruits crops.  The DFR data from this study
were used in assessing postapplication risks to endosulfan. 

Peaches - Endosulfan (Phaser 3EC and Phaser 50WP) was applied to plots
of mature fruit at a site located in California using an “Air-O-Fan”
airblast sprayer which operated at 150 PSI and sprayed approximately 400
gallons per acre. The test substance was applied at a rate of 3 lb
ai/acre.  A single application was made.  (This may underestimate
exposures following repeated applications as indicated on the label.) 
Foliage samples were collected at days 0 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 14, 17, 21, 24,
and 28 postapplication.  Each sample consisted of 40 leaf discs that
were 5 cm2.  Leaf samples were collected in glass jars and transported
to the laboratory on blue ice.  The samples were dislodged the same day
as collected and analyzed for levels of alpha-endosulfan,
beta-endosulfan, and endosulfan sulfate.  Laboratory recovery samples
were within the acceptable range. The residue data for peaches are shown
in Table 19.

For the purposes of this assessment, a regression analysis was conducted
using the natural log-transformed DFR data from this study.  Average DFR
data from each of the 4 trials done for both formulations were used in
the regression analysis.  To predict residue levels on peaches, the
following equation was used:

y = mx + b 	where:

x	=	days postapplication;

m	=	slope of the regression line;

b	=	constant; and

y	=	residue on day x.

For Phaser 3EC applied to peaches, m is -0.09131 and b is -1.91431.  The
R value for these data is 0.84.  For Phaser 50WP applied to peaches, m
is -0.09728, b is -0.55653, and R value is 0.96.  The predicted DFRs on
days 1 through 41 are shown in Table 20 for Phaser 50WP.  The predicted
DFRs on days 1 through 53 are shown in Table 21 for Phaser 3EC. This
study used an application rate of 3 lbs ai/acre and a single
application.  This is consistent with the labeled application rates for
peaches and other fruit and nut trees.  For the crops where the
application rates were not 3 lbs ai/acre, the DFR data were adjusted
(linear) to the appropriate application rate for the individual crops. 
Since the correlation coefficients (R value) for these data are 0.84 and
0.96, a linear method of predicting the DFR data is considered
representative of the distribution of the data.  This fit is also
considered adequate based on the uncertainties that result from the use
of data from only one geographic location and the extrapolation of the
peach DFR data to 15 other tree crops. 

Table
㤱›䄠瑣慵⁬癁牥条⁥楄汳摯敧扡敬䘠汯慩⁲敒楳畤獥
漠⁦湅潤畳晬湡椠⁮敍潬獮‬敐捡敨ⱳ愠摮䜠慲数⹳܍
ഇ䄍灰楬慣楴湯ഇ匍浡汰⁥湉整癲污⠠䅄⥔ݢ

DFR Residues (μg/cm2)a

Melon 	

Peach	

Grapes 

3EC	

50WP 	

3EC	

50WP	

 3EC	

50WP 

1	

0	

0.70	

1.77	

NA	

NA	

0.61	

1.51

	

1	

0.21	

0.72	

NA	

NA	

0.26	

0.90

	

3	

0.05	

0.22	

NA	

NA	

0.08	

0.61

	

5	

0.05	

0.19	

NA	

NA	

0.06	

0.39

	

7	

0.04	

0.11	

NA	

NA	

0.04	

0.29

2	

0	

1.23	

1.00	

0.46	

1.02	

0.71	

1.32

	

1	

0.54	

1.14	

0.16	

0.55	

0.31	

1.36

	

3	

0.15	

0.53	

0.09	

0.43	

0.11	

0.51

	

5	

0.09	

0.32	

0.07	

0.30	

0.09	

0.74

	

7	

0.06	

0.18	

0.04	

0.22	

0.03	

0.28

	

10	

0.05	

0.12	

0.03	

0.16	

0.02	

0.20

	

14	

0.05	

0.07	

0.03	

0.11	

0.04	

0.24

	

17	

0.03	

0.04	

0.03	

0.10	

0.05	

0.30

	

21	

0.02	

0.02	

0.05	

0.09	

0.02	

0.20

	

24	

0.02	

0.04	

0.02	

0.07	

0.04	

0.19

	

28	

0.02	

0.03	

0.01	

0.04	

LOQ	

0.13

Footnotes:

LOQ - DFR residue is below limit of quantification (0.01 µg/cm2).

NA - not applicable. Peaches have only one application of pesticide.

a 	DFR residues from crops are obtained from application of either two
labeled products (Phaser( EC or Phaser( WP), and table entries are
averages of triplicate samples taken at each sample interval.

b	DAT = days after treatment.

Table 20.  Predicted DFR Levels Based on Measured DFRs for Phaser 50WP
used on Peaches, Grapes, and Melons

Sample Interval (DAT)a	

DFR µg/cm2	

Sample Interval (DAT)a	

DFR µg/cm2

	

Grapes	

Peaches	

Melons

Grapes	

Peaches	

Melons

0	

0.84	

0.57	

0.70	

34	

0.074	

0.021	

0.0065

1	

0.78	

0.52	

0.65	

35	

0.068	

0.019	

0.0056

2	

0.73	

0.47	

0.56	

36	

0.064	

0.017	

0.0046

3	

0.68	

0.43	

0.49	

37	

0.059	

0.016	

0.004

4	

0.63	

0.39	

0.43	

38	

0.055	

0.014	

0.0035

5	

0.59	

0.35	

0.37	

39	

0.051	

0.013	

6	

0.55	

0.32	

0.32	

40	

0.048	

0.012	

7	

0.51	

0.29	

0.28	

41	

0.045	

0.011	

8	

0.47	

0.26	

0.24	

42	

0.041	

	

9	

0.44	

0.24	

0.21	

43	

0.039	

	

10	

0.41	

0.22	

0.18	

44	

0.036	

	

11	

0.38	

0.20	

0.16	

45	

0.033	

	

12	

0.36	

0.18	

0.14	

46	

0.031	

	

13	

0.33	

0.16	

0.12	

47	

0.029	

	

14	

0.31	

0.15	

0.11	

48	

0.027	

	

15	

0.29	

0.13	

0.092	

49	

0.025	

	

16	

0.27	

0.12	

0.08	

50	

0.023	

	

17	

0.25	

0.11	

0.069	

51	

0.022	

	

18	

0.23	

0.099	

0.06	

52	

0.020	

	

19	

0.22	

0.090	

0.052	

53	

0.019	

	

20	

0.20	

0.082	

0.046	

54	

0.018	

	

21	

0.19	

0.074	

0.04	

55	

0.016	

	

22	

0.17	

0.067	

0.034	

56	

0.015	

	

23	

0.16	

0.061	

0.03	

57	

0.014	

	

24	

0.15	

0.056	

0.026	

58	

0.013	

	

25	

0.14	

0.050	

0.023	

59	

0.012	

	

26	

0.13	

0.046	

0.02	

60	

0.011	

	

27	

0.12	

0.041	

0.017	

61	

0.011	

	

28	

0.11	

0.038	

0.015	

62	

0.0099	

	

29	

0.11	

0.034	

0.013	

63	

0.0092	

	

30	

0.10	

0.031	

0.011	

64	

0.0086	

	

31	

0.091	

0.028	

0.0098	

65	

0.0080	

	

32	

0.085	

0.025	

0.0085	

66	

0.0074	

	

33	

0.079	

0.023	

0.0074	

	

	

	

Footnote:

a DAT = days after treatment.

Table 21:  Predicted DFR Levels Based on Measured DFRs for Phaser 3 EC
used on Peaches, Grapes, and Melons

Sample Interval (DAT)a	

DFR µg/cm2	

Sample Interval (DAT)a	

DFR µg/cm2

	

Grapes	

Peaches	

Melons

Grapes	

Peaches	

Melons

0	

0.20	

0.15	

0.31	

34	

0.0028	

0.0066	

0.0047

1	

0.18	

0.13	

0.28	

35	

0.0024	

0.0060	

0.0042

2	

0.16	

0.12	

0.25	

36	

0.0021	

0.0055	

0.0037

3	

0.14	

0.11	

0.22	

37	

0.0019	

0.0050	

0.0033

4	

0.12	

0.10	

0.19	

38	

0.0017	

0.0046	

0.0029

5	

0.11	

0.093	

0.17	

39	

0.0015	

0.0042	

0.0026

6	

0.096	

0.085	

0.15	

40	

0.0013	

0.0038	

0.0023

7	

0.085	

0.078	

0.13	

41	

0.0011	

0.0035	

0.0020

8	

0.074	

0.071	

0.12	

42	

0.0010	

0.0032	

0.0018

9	

0.066	

0.065	

0.010	

43	

0.00088	

0.0029	

0.0016

10	

0.058	

0.059	

0.092	

44	

0.00078	

0.0027	

0.0014

11	

0.051	

0.054	

0.081	

45	

0.00068	

0.0024	

0.0012

12	

0.045	

0.049	

0.072	

46	

0.00060	

0.0022	

0.0011

13	

0.040	

0.045	

0.063	

47	

0.00053	

0.0020	

0.00095

14	

0.035	

0.041	

0.056	

48	

0.00047	

0.0018	

0.00084

15	

0.031	

0.037	

0.049	

49	

0.00041	

0.0017	

16	

0.027	

0.034	

0.044	

50	

0.00036	

0.0015	

17	

0.024	

0.031	

0.039	

51	

0.00032	

0.0014	

18	

0.021	

0.028	

0.034	

52	

0.00028	

0.0013	

19	

0.018	

0.026	

0.030	

53	

0.00025	

0.0012	

20	

0.016	

0.024	

0.027	

54	

0.00022	

0.0011	

21	

0.014	

0.022	

0.024	

55	

0.00019	

0.00097	

22	

0.013	

0.020	

0.021	

56	

0.00017	

0.00089	

23	

0.011	

0.018	

0.018	

57	

0.00015	

0.00081	

24	

0.0098	

0.016	

0.016	

58	

0.00013	

0.00074	

25	

0.0086	

0.015	

0.014	

59	

0.00012	

0.00067	

26	

0.0076	

0.014	

0.013	

60	

0.00010	

0.00062	

27	

0.0067	

0.013	

0.011	

61	

0.000091	

0.00056	

28	

0.0059	

0.011	

0.0099	

62	

0.000080	

0.00051	

29	

0.0052	

0.010	

0.0088	

63	

0.000070	

0.00047	

30	

0.0046	

0.0095	

0.0078	

64	

0.000062	

0.00043	

31	

0.0040	

0.0087	

0.0069	

65	

0.000055	

0.00039	

32	

0.0036	

0.0079	

0.0061	

66	

0.000048	

0.00036	

33	

0.0031	

0.0072	

0.0054	

67	

0.000042	

0.00032	

  Footnote:

a DAT = days after treatment.

Melons - Endosulfan (Phaser 3EC and Phaser 50WP) was applied to melons
at a site in California. Pesticide was applied by an Allis Chalmers GII
sprayer (appears to be similar to a groundboom sprayer) at a rate of 1
lb ai/acre.  Two applications were made.  The melons were immature at
the time of both applications. Foliage samples were collected by leaf
punch at 0, 1, 3, 5, and 7 days after the first application and at days
0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 14, 17, 21, 24, and 28 days after the second
application. Foliage samples consisted of 40 leaf discs that were 5 cm2.
 Leaf samples were collected in glass jars and transported to the
laboratory on blue ice.  The samples were dislodged the same day as
collected and analyzed for levels of alpha-endosulfan, beta-endosulfan,
and endosulfan sulfate.  Laboratory recovery samples were within the
acceptable range.  However, field recovery samples were not analyzed and
no storage stability study was conducted. The residue data for melons
are shown in Table 19.

For the purposes of this assessment, a regression analysis was conducted
using the natural log-transformed DFR data after the second application
from this study to predict residue levels, as shown above. Average DFR
data from each of the 4 trials done for both formulations were used in
the regression analysis.  For melons, m is -0.12341 and b is -1.15627
for Phaser 3EC.  The R value for these data is 0.87.  For Phaser 50WP on
melons, m is -0.13955, b is -0.35023, and R value is 0.94.  The
estimated DFRs on days 1 through 38 are shown in Table 20 for Phaser
50WP.  The estimated DFRs on days 1 through 48 are shown in Table 21 for
Phaser 3EC. This study used an application rate of 1 lbs ai/acre and two
applications.  However, most of the labeled application rates for these
crops range from 0.25 to 3 lb ai/acre.  Thus, the DFR data were adjusted
(linear) to the appropriate application rate for the individual crops. 
Since the correlation coefficients (R value) for these data are 0.94 and
0.87, a linear method of predicting the DFR data is considered
representative the distribution of the data.  This fit is also
considered adequate based on the uncertainties that result from the use
of data from only one geographic location and the extrapolation of the
melon DFR data to 37 other crops. 

Grapes - Endosulfan (Phaser 3EC and Phaser 50WP) was applied to grapes
at a location in California.  The pesticide was applied by an Allis
Chalmers G III U-Boom Grape Sprayer, at a rate of 1.5 lbs ai/acre.  Two
applications were made.  Foliage samples were collected from the
experimental plots at 0, 1, 3, 5, and 7 days after the first application
and at days 0, 1, 3, 5, 7, 10, 14, 17, 21, 24, and 28 days after the
second application. Foliage samples consisted of 40 leaf discs that were
5 cm2.  Leaf samples were collected in glass jars and transported to the
laboratory on blue ice.  The samples were dislodged the same day as
collected and analyzed for levels of alpha-endosulfan, beta-endosulfan,
and endosulfan sulfate.  Laboratory recovery samples were within the
acceptable range. The residue data for grapes are shown in Table 19.

For the purposes of this assessment, a regression analysis was conducted
using the natural log-transformed DFR data after the second application
from this study to predict residue levels, as shown above. Average DFR
data from each of the 4 trials done for both formulations were used in
the regression analysis.  For Phaser 50WP on grapes, m is -0.07169, b is
-0.17214, and R value is 0.86.  The predicted DFRs on days 1 through 66
are shown in Table 20 for Phaser 50WP.  For Phaser 3EC on grapes, m is
-0.10004 and b is -1.66886, after the second application.  The R value
for these data is 0.72.   Since the R value is low, all of the
replicates were analyzed in a regression analysis for the Phaser 3EC use
on grapes.  This analysis yielded a higher R value of 0.81 with an m of
-0.1268 and a b of-1.583.  The actual residue data for all four
replicates for the use of the Phaser 3EC on grapes are presented in
Table 22.  The predicted DFRs on days 1 to 67 from the use of the 4
replicates of actual residues are shown in Table 21 for Phaser 3EC. This
study used an application rate of 1.5 lbs ai/acre and two applications. 
This is consistent with the labeled application rate for grapes.  Since
the correlation coefficients (R value) for these data are 0.86 and 0.81,
a linear method of predicting the DFR data is considered representative
the distribution of the data.  This fit is also considered adequate
based on the uncertainties that result from the use of data from only
one geographic location. 

Table 22.  Actual Dislodgeable Foliar Residues of Endosulfan in Grapes
Using the EC Formulation.

Day after treatment	

Replicate 1 (µg/cm2)	

Replicate 2 (µg/cm2)	

Replicate 3 (µg/cm2)	

Replicate 4 (µg/cm2)

0	0.810	0.790	0.620	0.630

1	0.260	0.380	0.280	0.330

3	0.100	0.110	0.100	0.120

5	0.110	0.120	0.080	0.050

7	0.020	0.040	0.030	0.020

10	0.020	0.030	0.020	0.010

14	0.010	0.040	0.100	0.020

17	0.030	0.080	0.050	0.030

21	0.010	0.020	0.010	0.050

24	0.010	0.020	0.005a	0.080

28	0.005a	0.005a	0.005a	0.005a

Footnote:

a	Less than LOQ of 0.01 µg/cm2 so half of the LOQ was used.

	Other Postapplication Data

It should be noted that another DFR study (MRID 403039-01) was conducted
for endosulfan. This study examined DFR residues on apples, apricots,
processing tomatoes, and cherry tomatoes.  The study was unacceptable
for the following reasons:

The field recovery data for apples and processing tomatoes were
unacceptably low and field recovery data for apricots and cherry
tomatoes were variable;

The lab recovery data for all crops were highly variable;

Storage stability data were not provided; apple, apricot, and processing
tomato samples were stored for approximately 4 months and cherry tomato
samples were stored for an unspecified period of time prior to analysis;
and

Meteorological data were incomplete.

Therefore, this study is unacceptable and was not used in estimating
postapplication exposures in this document.  All postapplication
exposure estimates were based on MRID# 444031-02.  Table 23 compares the
half lives of the two endosulfan DFR studies.  The half lives from the
unacceptable study were similar to or higher than the half lives from
the study used to determine postapplication exposure in this assessment.
 This demonstrates that the DFR data from the unacceptable study would
result in restricted entry interval calculations similar to or even
longer than the ones calculated in this assessment.

Table 23.  Comparison of DFR Data Half Lives for Wettable Powder
Formulation.

DFR Study Used in Assessment 444031-02	

Unacceptable Study 403039-01

Crop	

Half Life (days)a	

Crop	

Half Life (days)a

Grapes	

9.7	

Apples	

15.2

Melons	

5.0	

Apricots	

11

Peaches	

7.1	

Processing Tomatoes	

12.8

	

	

Cherry Tomatoes	

5

a  Half life (days)  = -ln (2)/m where m = slope of predicted residues
from the regression analysis.

	Exposure and Risk Calculations

The DFR data was adjusted for other application rates using the
following equation:

Adjusted DFR = Actual AR ÷ Study AR x Study DFR

Where:

Adjusted DFR 	=	DFR adjusted for an application rate;

Actual AR		=	actual application rate for the crop being assessed;

Study AR		=	application rate in the DFR study;

Study DFR		=	DFR from the study

Short- and intermediate-term doses and MOEs were calculated as follows: 

ADD = [DFR x Tc x ET x mg/1000 µg] ( BW

where:

ADD	=	average daily dose (mg/kg/day);

DFR	=	dislodgeable foliar residue (µg/cm2);

Tc	=	transfer coefficient (cm2/hr);

ET	=	exposure time (8 hours/day); and

BW	=	body weight (70 kg).

and

MOE = LOAEL / ADD

The crops were grouped according to similar application rates, transfer
coefficients, and DFR data used.  The assumptions used for both short
and intermediate term postapplication exposures are as follows:

Assumptions

All transfer coefficients applicable to a crop were used to determine
the range of risks to various postapplication tasks.  

The transfer coefficients used in this assessment are from the
Agricultural Re-entry Task Force (ARTF) database.  An interim transfer
coefficient policy was developed by HED(s Science Advisory Council for
Exposure using the ARTF database (policy # 3.1).  It is the intention of
HED(s Science Advisory Council for Exposure that this policy will be
periodically updated to incorporate additional information about
agricultural practices in crops and new data on transfer coefficients. 
Much of this information will originate from exposure studies currently
being conducted by the ARTF, from the further analysis of studies
already submitted to the Agency, and from the studies in the published
scientific literature.

Exposure time is assumed to be 8 hours per day.  This represents a
typical work day.

The average body weight of 60 kg is used.

Short- and intermediate-term risks are assessed since postapplication
workers are assumed to be exposed to endosulfan continuously for up to
six months.  

	Short- and Intermediate-term Postapplication Exposures and Risks

A dose and a MOE are determined from the declining predicted DFR values
until the target MOE of 300 is reached for every crop for both
formulations.  Since the short and intermediate-term dermal endpoints
are the same, the risks for short- and intermediate-term exposures are
mathematically identical.  The LOAEL used in the short- and
intermediate-term assessment is 3.7 mg/kg/day and the target MOE is 300.
 Table 24 summarizes postapplication risks to endosulfan following
wettable powder applications and Table 25 summarizes postapplication
risks to endosulfan following liquid concentrate applications.  

The tables indicate there is a special concern for mechanical harvesting
tasks for several crops, including alfalfa, cotton, tree nuts,
cucurbits, brassica crops, mustard greens, spinach, and pineapple. 
These crops are commonly mechanically harvested; however the harvesting
is not fully mechanized and exposure to postapplication workers
participating in the harvesting is likely.  Currently, HED has no
established transfer coefficients to estimate postapplication worker
exposure during mechanical harvesting of these crops.  Therefore, it
should not be assumed that mechanical harvesting would result in less
exposure to workers than other postapplication tasks associated with
these crops. 



Table 24.  Wettable Powder: Summary of Postapplication Risk Assessment
for Endosulfan Using Study DFR

Crop Groupa	Use Site	App Rates (lbs. ai/ acre)b	Low	Medium	High

	Transfer Coefficient (cm2/hr) 

(and Activity)	Short- and Intermediate-Term Risks (LOC=300)	Transfer
Coefficient (cm2/hr) 

(and Activity)	Short- and Intermediate-Term Risks (LOC=300)	Transfer
Coefficient (cm2/hr)

(and Activity)	Short- and Intermediate-Term Risks (LOC=300)

DATc	MOE at Day 0

DATc	MOE at Day 0

DATc	MOE at Day 0

BERRY: LOW

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Strawberry	2.0

Label	400

(Irrigating, Mulching, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	10	77	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Pinching, Training)	20	21

1.0

Proposed

5	150

NA	NA

15	41

	Blueberries (lowbush)	1.5	400

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding, Thinning)	8	102	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Hand Pruning)	18	27

BUNCH/ BUNDLE

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Tobacco	1.0

field treatment	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	2000

(Hand Harvesting, Stripping, Hand Pruning, Thinning, Topping, Hand
Weeding)	17	31

FIELD & ROW CROPS: LOW to MEDIUM 

(Nongrass Animal Feeds)

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Alfalfa	1.0	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	Special concern for mechanical harvesting
NA	NA

FIELD & ROW CROPS: LOW to MEDIUM 

(Cereal Grains)

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Barley, Oats	0.5	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Scouting, Irrigating)	10	82	NA	NA	NA

	Rye, Wheat	0.75	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Scouting, Irrigating)	13	55	NA	NA	NA

FIELD & ROW CROPS: LOW to MEDIUM

(Fiber)

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Cotton	0.75 (foliar after bolls open)	NA	NA
NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	13	55	2500

(Hand harvesting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	16	33

1.5 (foliar until boll opens)

NA	NA

18	27	Special concern for mechanical harvesting	NA	NA

FIELD & ROW CROPS: LOW to MEDIUM 

(Legume Vegetable)

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Beans (succulent green & dry), 

Peas (succulent foliar & dry foliar)	1.0	100

(Hand Weeding, Thinning)	0	620	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	2500

(Hand harvesting)	18	25

FIELD & ROW CROPS: TALL

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Sweet Corn, (fresh)	1.5	NA	NA	NA	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	15	41	17,000 

(Detaselling, Hand Harvesting)	35	2

	Sorghum	1.5	100

(Hand Weeding)	0	410	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	NA	NA	NA

TREE FRUIT: DECIDUOUS 

(Pome Fruits)

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Apples, Pears	2.5	1000

(Scouting, Hand Weeding, Irrigating)	15	73	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training, Tying (pear))	19	48
3000

(Thinning)	26	24

TREE FRUIT: DECIDUOUS 

(Stone Fruits)

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Apricots	3.0

Label	1000

(Scouting)	17	60	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training)	21	40	3000

(Thinning)	28	20

2.5

Proposed

15	73

19	48

26	24

	Nectarines, Peaches	2.5	1000

(Scouting, Hand Weeding, Irrigating)	15	73	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training)	19	48	3000

(Thinning)	26	24

	Cherries (sweet and tart)	2.5	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	15	73	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training)	19	48	3000

(Thinning)	26	24

	Plums, Prunes	2.5	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	73	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training)	19	48	3000

(Thinning)	26	24

TREE FRUIT: EVERGREEN  

(Pine trees)

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Christmas Trees	1.0	1000

(Irrigating, Hand Weeding, Scouting)	6	180	1500

(Cone Pruning, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Staking, Thinning,
Topping, Training)	10	120	3000

(Seed Cone Harvesting)	17	60

TREE NUTS

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Almonds	3.0

Label	500

(Scouting, Thinning)	10	120	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	26	24

2.0

Proposed

6	180

NA	NA

22	36

	Macadamia Nuts	1.0	500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	0	360	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)	15	73

	Pecans	3.0	500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	10	120	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	26	24

	Walnuts	2.0	500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	6	180	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	22	36

NURSERY 

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Nonbearing Citrus	2.5	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	400

(All tasks)	6	180

	Flowers, Flowering Plants, Nursery Stock, Shade Trees, Shrubs, Woody
Plants	2.5	NA	NA	NA	400

(All tasks, except harvesting flowers or foliage grown for cutting)	6
180	

5100

(Harvesting flowers or foliage grown for cutting)	32	14

VEGETABLE: ROOT & TUBER

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Carrot	1.0	300

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	3	210	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand harvesting)	18	25

	Potatoes 	1.0	300

(Hand Weeding)	3	210	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	NA	NA	NA

	Sweet Potatoes	1.0

foliar	300

(Hand Weeding, Thinning)	3	210	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	18	25

	Turnip	0.75	300

(Irrigating, Scouting, Thinning, Hand Weeding)	1	270	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	16	33

VEGETABLE: CUCURBIT

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Cucumber	1.0	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	15	41	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	18	25

	Summer Squash	1.0	500

(Thinning)	7	120	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	15	41	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Leaf Pulling, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	18	25

	Winter Squash	1.0	500

(Thinning)	7	120	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	15	41	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	18	25

	Pumpkin	1.0	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	15	41	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning, Turning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting)	18	25

	Melon	1.0	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	15	41	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning, Turning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	18	25

VEGETABLE: FRUITING

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Eggplant	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding, Thinning)	7	120	700

(Irrigating, Scouting)	9	88	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Staking, Tying)	12	62

0.5

(CA only)

2	250

4	180

7	120

	Fresh Tomato	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding)	7	120	700

(Irrigating, Scouting)	9	88	1000

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning, Staking Thinning, Training, Tying)	12	62

	Pepper	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding, Thinning)	7	120	700

(Irrigating, Scouting)	9	88	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Staking, Tying)	12	62

VEGETABLE: HEAD AND STEM BRASSICA

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Broccoli (including Chinese Broccoli)	1.0	2000

(Thinning, Hand Weeding)	17	31	4000

(Scouting)	22	15	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	23	12

	Brussels Sprouts	1.0	2000

(Hand Weeding)	17	31	4000

(Scouting)	22	15	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Topping)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	23	12

	Cabbage (including Chinese Cabbage or Napa)	1.0	2000

(Hand Weeding)	17	31	4000

(Scouting)	22	15	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	23	12

	Cauliflower	1.0	2000

(Hand Weeding)	17	31	4000

(Scouting)	22	15	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Tying)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	23	12

VEGETABLE: LEAFY

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Celery	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding)	7	120	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	2500

(Hand harvesting)	18	25

	Collards	1.0	500

(Hand weeding)	7	120	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	2500

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning, Thinning)	18	25

2.0 (crops grown for seed)

12	62

20	21

23	12

	Kale, Kohlrabi	0.75	500

(Hand weeding)	5	160	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	13	55	2500

(Hand harvesting, Thinning)	17	33

2.0 (crops grown for seed)

12	62

20	21

 23	12

	Mustard Greens	0.75	500

(Hand weeding)	5	160	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	13	55	2500

(Hand harvesting, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	16	33

	Spinach	1.0	500

(Hand weeding, Thinning)	7	120	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	2500

(Hand harvesting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	18	25

	Lettuce	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding)	7	120	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	41	2500

(Hand harvesting)	18	25

STALK & STEM VEGETABLE

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Pineapples	2.0	300

(Hand Weeding)	8	100	500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	12	62	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	17	31

VINE/ TRELLIS

DFR: MRID 44403102

(grapes)	Grape

(table and raisin)	1.5	500

(Irrigating, Hand Weeding, Hedging)	17	93	1000

(Scouting)	26	47	5000

(Tying, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Training, Thinning, Leaf Pulling)

Very High

10,000

(Girdling, Cane Turning, Tying)	49

Very High

59	9

Very High

5

	Grape

 (juice and wine)	1.5	500

(Irrigating, Hand Weeding, Hedging)	17	93	1000

(Scouting)	26	47	5000

(Tying, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Training, Thinning, Leaf Pulling)
49	9

	Blueberries (highbush)	1.5	500

(Irrigating, Hand Weeding, Hedging)	17	93	1000

(Scouting)	26	47	5000

(Hand pruning, Thinning)	49	9

a	DFR Data sources:

	1) MRID 44403102 (melons): Slope = -0.13955; Day 0 concentration = 1.00
ug/cm2; Study application rate = 1.0 lb ai/acre

2) MRID 44403102 (peaches): Slope = -0.09728; Day 0 concentration = 1.02
ug/cm2; Study application rate = 3.0 lb ai/acre

	3) MRID 44403102 (grapes): Slope =-0.07169; Day 0 concentration = 1.32
ug/cm2; Study application rate 1.5 lb ai/acre

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled
“proposed” 

are rate reductions proposed by EPA.

MOE ≥300



Table 25: Liquid Concentrates: Summary of Postapplication Risk
Assessment for Endosulfan 

Using Endosulfan-Specific DFR Data

Crop Groupa	Use Site	App Rates (lbs. ai/ acre)b	Low	Medium	High

	Transfer Coefficient (cm2/hr) 

(and Activity)	Short- and Intermediate-Term Risks (LOC=300)	Transfer
Coefficient (cm2/hr) 

(and Activity)	Short- and Intermediate-Term Risks (LOC=300)	Transfer
Coefficient (cm2/hr)

(and Activity)	Short- and Intermediate-Term Risks (LOC=300)

DATc	MOE at Day 0

DATc	MOE at Day 0

DATc	MOE at Day 0

BERRY: LOW

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Strawberry	2.0

Label	400

(Irrigating, Mulching, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	13	63	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Pinching, Training)	24	17

1.0

Proposed

8	130

NA	NA

18	33

	Blueberries (lowbush)	1.5	400

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding, Thinning)	11	84	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Hand Pruning)	22	22

BUNCH/ BUNDLE

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Tobacco	1.0

field treatment	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	2000

(Hand Harvesting, Stripping, Hand Pruning, Thinning, Topping, Hand
Weeding)	21	25

FIELD & ROW CROPS: LOW to MEDIUM 

(Nongrass Animal Feeds)

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Alfalfa	1.0	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	Special concern for mechanical harvesting
NA	NA

FIELD & ROW CROPS: LOW to MEDIUM 

(Cereal Grains)

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Barley, Oats	0.5	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Scouting, Irrigating)	13	67	NA	NA	NA

	Rye, Wheat	0.75	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Scouting, Irrigating)	16	45	NA	NA	NA

FIELD & ROW CROPS: LOW to MEDIUM 

(Fiber)

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Cotton	0.75 (foliar after bolls open)	NA	NA
NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	16	45	2500

(Hand harvesting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	20	27

1.5 (foliar until boll opens)

NA	NA

22	22	Special concern for mechanical harvesting	NA	NA

FIELD & ROW CROPS: LOW to MEDIUM 

(Legume Vegetable)

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Beans (succulent green & dry), 

Peas (succulent foliar & dry foliar)	1.0	100

(Hand Weeding, Thinning)	0	500	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	2500

(Hand harvesting)	23	20

FIELD & ROW CROPS: TALL

DFR: MRID 44403102 (melons)	Sweet Corn, (fresh)	1.5	NA	NA	NA	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	18	33	17,000 

(Detasselling, Hand Harvesting)	41	2

	Sorghum	1.5	100

(Hand Weeding)	0	330	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	NA	NA	NA

TREE FRUIT: DECIDUOUS 

(Pome Fruits)	Apples, Pears	2.5	1000

(Scouting, Hand Weeding, Irrigating)	7	160	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training, Tying (pear))	12	110
3000

(Thinning)	19	54

TREE FRUIT: DECIDUOUS 

(Stone Fruits)

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Apricots	3.0

Label	1000

(Scouting)	9	130	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training)	14	89	3000

(Thinning)	21	45

2.5

Proposed

7	160

12	110

19	54

	Nectarines, Peaches	2.5	1000

(Scouting, Hand Weeding, Irrigating)	7	160	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training)	12	110	3000

(Thinning)	19	54

	Cherries (sweet and tart)	2.5	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	7	160	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training)	12	110	3000

(Thinning)	19	54

	Plums, Prunes	2.5	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting)	7	160	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Propping, Hand Pruning, Training)	12	110	3000

(Thinning)	19	54

TREE FRUIT: EVERGREEN  

(Pine trees)

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Christmas Trees	1.0	1000

(Irrigating, Hand Weeding, Scouting)	0	400	1500

(Cone Pruning, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Staking, Thinning,
Topping, Training)	2	270	3000

(Seed Cone Harvesting)	9	130

TREE NUTS

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Almonds	3.0

Label	500

(Scouting, Thinning)	2	270	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	19	54

2.0

SRRD Proposed

0	400

NA	NA

15	80

	Macadamia Nuts	1.0	500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	0	800	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)	7	160

	Pecans	3.0	500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	2	270	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	19	54

	Walnuts	2.0	500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	0	400	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	15	80

NURSERY 

DFR: MRID 44403102

(peaches)	Nonbearing Citrus	2.5	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	400

(All tasks)	0 (12 hours)	400

	Flowers, Flowering Plants, Nursery Stock, Shade Trees, Shrubs, Woody
Plants	2.5	NA	NA	NA	400

(All tasks, except harvesting flowers or foliage grown for cutting)	0
400	5100

(Harvesting flowers or foliage grown for cutting)	25	32

VEGETABLE: ROOT & TUBER

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Carrot	1.0	300

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	5	170	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand harvesting)	22	20

	Potatoes 	1.0	300

(Hand Weeding)	5	170	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	NA	NA	NA

	Sweet Potatoes	1.0

foliar	300

(Hand Weeding, Thinning)	5	170	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	22	20

	Turnip	0.75	300

(Irrigating, Scouting, Thinning, Hand Weeding)	3	220	NA	NA	NA	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	20	27

VEGETABLE: CUCURBIT

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Cucumber	1.0	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	18	33	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	22	20

	Summer Squash	1.0	500

(Thinning)	9	100	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	18	33	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Leaf Pulling, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	22	20

	Winter Squash	1.0	500

(Thinning)	9	100	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	18	33	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	22	20

	Pumpkin	1.0	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	18	33	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning, Turning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting)	22	20

	Melon	1.0	NA	NA	NA	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	18	33	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning, Turning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	22	20

VEGETABLE: FRUITING

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Eggplant	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding, Thinning)	9	100	700

(Irrigating, Scouting)	12	72	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Staking, Tying)	15	50

0.5

(CA only)

4	200

6	140

9	100

	Fresh Tomato	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding)	9	100	700

(Irrigating, Scouting)	12	72	1000

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning, Staking Thinning, Training, Tying)	15	50

	Pepper	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding, Thinning)	9	100	700

(Irrigating, Scouting)	12	72	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Staking, Tying)	15	50

VEGETABLE: HEAD AND STEM BRASSICA

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Broccoli (Including Chinese Broccoli)	1.0	2000

(Thinning, Hand Weeding)	21	25	4000

(Scouting)	26	13	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	28	10

	Brussels Sprouts	1.0	2000

(Hand Weeding)	21	25	4000

(Scouting)	26	13	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Topping)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	28	10

	Cabbage (Including Chinese Cabbage or Napa)	1.0	2000

(Hand Weeding)	21	25	4000

(Scouting)	26	13	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	28	10

	Cauliflower	1.0	2000

(Hand Weeding)	21	25	4000

(Scouting)	26	13	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Tying)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	28	10

VEGETABLE: LEAFY

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Celery	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding)	9	100	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	2500

(Hand harvesting)	22	20

	Collards	1.0	500

(Hand weeding)	9	100	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	2500

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning, Thinning)	22	20

2.0 (crops grown for seed)

15	50

24	17

28	10

	Kale, Kohlrabi	0.75	500

(Hand weeding)	7	130	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	16	45	2500

(Hand harvesting, Thinning)	20	27

2.0 (crops grown for seed)

15	50

24	17

28	10

	Mustard Greens	0.75	500

(Hand weeding)	7	130	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	16	45	2500

(Hand harvesting, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	20	27

	Spinach	1.0	500

(Hand weeding, Thinning)	9	100	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	2500

(Hand harvesting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	22	20

	Lettuce	1.0	500

(Hand Weeding)	9	100	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18	33	2500

(Hand harvesting)	22	20

STALK & STEM VEGETABLE

DFR: MRID 44403102

(melons)	Pineapples	2.0	300

(Hand Weeding)	11	84	500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15	50	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	21	25

VINE/ TRELLIS

DFR: MRID 44403102

(grapes)	Grape

(table and raisin)	1.5	500

(Irrigating, Hand Weeding, Hedging)	6	170	1000

(Scouting)	13	87	5000

(Tying, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Training, Thinning, Leaf Pulling)

Very High

10,000

(Girdling, Cane Turning, Tying)	29

Very High:

36	

17

Very High

8.7

	Grape

 (juice and wine)	1.5	500

(Irrigating, Hand Weeding, Hedging)	6	170	1000

(Scouting)	13	87	5000

(Tying, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Training, Thinning, Leaf Pulling)
29	17

	Blueberries (highbush)	1.5	500

(Irrigating, Hand Weeding, Hedging)	6	170	1000

(Scouting)	13	87	5000

(Hand pruning, Thinning)	29	17

a	DFR Data sources:

	1) MRID 44403102 (melons): Slope = -0.12341; Day 0 concentration = 1.23
ug/cm2; Study application rate = 1.0 lb ai/acre

	2) MRID 44403102 (peaches): Slope = -0.09131; Day 0 concentration =
0.46 ug/cm2; Study application rate = 3.0 lb ai/acre

	3) MRID 44403102 (grapes): Slope =-0.10004; Day 0 concentration = 0.71
ug/cm2; Study application rate 1.5 lb ai/acre

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled
“proposed” are rate reductions proposed by EPA.

c	DAT =  Day after Treatment when MOE 300

		Non-Occupational Exposures

	Nonoccupational exposures to endosulfan, such as from spray drift, were
not included in this assessment.  The Agency is developing policy on how
to appropriately assess potential risks from spray drift, and after the
policy is in place, the Agency will reevaluate the potential
non-occupational risks from endosulfan.

		Data Gaps

	If the registrant is interested in refining endosulfan(s restricted
entry intervals, additional DFR data and/or worker exposure monitoring
data may be submitted.

		Occupational Postapplication Summary

         		 Summary of Endosulfan Postapplication Exposures and Risks

Wettable Powders

The Quick Reference Table (Table 26) indicates the day after treatment
(DAT) where risks were not a concern (i.e., MOEs ≥ 300) with the
postapplication activity with the highest transfer coefficient
applicable to the crop or crop grouping.  The DAT where risks were not a
concern ranges from day 6 for tasks related to cultivation of nonbearing
citrus plants on nurseries to day 59 for girdling, cane turning, and
tying for grapes. 

The tables indicate there is a special concern for mechanical harvesting
tasks for several crops, including alfalfa, cotton, tree nuts,
cucurbits, brassica crops, mustard greens, spinach, and pineapple. 
These crops are commonly mechanically harvested; however the harvesting
is not fully mechanized and exposure to postapplication workers
participating in the harvesting is likely.  Currently, HED has no
established transfer coefficients to estimate postapplication worker
exposure during mechanical harvesting of these crops.  Therefore, it
should not be assumed that mechanical harvesting would result in less
exposure to workers than other postapplication tasks associated with
these crops. 

Table 26.  Quick Reference for Postapplication Risks — Wettable
Powders

Cropa	Application Rates 

(lbs. ai/ acre)b	Transfer Coefficient (cm2/hr)

reatment when MOE ≥300

Strawberry	2.0

Label	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Pinching, Training)	20

	1.0

Proposed

15

Blueberries (lowbush)	1.5	1500

(Hand Pruning)	18

Tobacco	1.0

field treatment	2000

$

#

ó

–

–

„–

„jô1$^„–

y

„y

„jô1$]„ãÿ^„y

y

?

ᘀ䱨⸨㔀脈ࡕᘉ䱨⸨㔀脈ᘉ敇㔀脈ᔏ䱨⸨ᘀ䱨⸨㔀脈
ᘆﭨ鬯ᬀ

 

 

ž

?

’

␱愁Ĥ摧⡌.ᔀ½

¾

¿

þ

ÿ

ᔀ䕨扸ᘀ䱨⸨　ᕊ唀Ĉ䡭Ѐ䡮Ѐࡵᰁ;

<

=

>

?

@

A

]

^

_

`

p

q

r

Œ

Ž

‘

’

“

”

°

±

²

³

â

ã

ä

þ

–

&

&

&

&

&

hþ

h

@

@

 h

 h

 h

 h

 h

h

옍)

옍)

Ö

j

혈r氅혀稍匒餘耣樆

"̀Ĥ옍)

옍)

␅؁Ĥ옍)

愀Ĥ摧⋢÷"̀Ĥ옍)

耀锆

@

"̀Ĥ옍)

ਁ㌃愀϶咊"̀Ĥ옍)

옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

愀Ĥ摧也S"̀Ĥ옍)

"̀Ĥ옍)

耀愆

"̀Ĥ옍)

耀愆

\

h

愀Ĥ摧岩Q"̀Ĥ옍)

耀愆

@

耀愆

咊"̀Ĥ옍)

ਁ㌃愀϶咊"̀Ĥ옍)

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1$gd

h

Ff½

"

#

'

£

§

«

±

Ò

ÿ

 

!

&

e

¢

£

Ñ

 

#

&

&

'

q

u

}

š

£

§

«

±

µ

¹

½

Á

Å

É

Í

Ñ

Ò

Ó

Ø

Ù

ö

ÿ



!

%

&

6

:

A

[

e

j

m

u

u

{

€

†

Œ

’

˜

¢

£

¤

¥

®

È

Ñ

Õ

Ø

ß

ä

é

î

ó

ø

ý

Ff

ô

@

Ff

@

ô

ô

@

kd

Ffw

@

ô

@

ô

  h

@

@

ᄀ梄㄁Ĥ葠Ũ摧Ⱏ

*ì

ଆ

hþ

hþ

hþ

耀ଆ

耀ଆ

*ì

^„îþgdþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

ଆ

耀ଆ

耀ଆ

ଆ

耀ଆ

耀ଆ

耀ଆ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

耀ଆ

kdÅ

耀ଆ

耀ଆ

耀ଆ

ଆ

ꀀଆ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

耀ଆ

ଆ

ꀀଆ

耀ଆ

hþ

hþ

hþ

hþ

˜	*ì

*ì

ᄀ梄㄁Ĥ葠Ũ摧෾F

_

`

y

z

{

~

w

~

÷

ø

hþ

Ö

×

v

w

y

y

y

y



y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

옍)

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

$

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

옍)

@

@

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

kd

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

J	2

$

@

@

J	2

y

y

y

y

@

$

@

@

@

@

@

$

@

@

$

@

@

$

@

@

$

@

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

y

$

y

$

y

@

옍)

FfÌ

Ff

@

Ffð

	

Fft 

Ff¦!

FfÁ-

Ff¬'

FfÖ3

FfÝ?

Ff×9

FfãE

FfþQ

FfäK

X

Ff$d

Ff-^

Ff+p

Ff*j

FfEv

Ffe‚

Ff_|

Ffkˆ

Ffi”

FfqŽ

Ffaš

Ffm¦

Ffg 

Ff¼¬

¹

Ff

³

¿

Ff#Ë

Å

Ff)Ñ

FfÍÝ

Ff{×

FfÙé

FfÓã

Ffßï

Ffëû

Ffåõ

„ÿC	ª

ing, Topping, Hand Weeding)	17

Alfalfa	1.0	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	15

Barley, Oats	0.5	1500

(Scouting, Irrigating)	10

Rye, Wheat	0.75	1500

(Scouting, Irrigating)	13

Cotton	0.75 (foliar after bolls open)	2500

(Hand harvesting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	16

	1.5 (foliar until boll opens)	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding	18

Beans (succulent green & dry), 

Peas (succulent foliar & dry foliar)	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)	18

Sweet Corn, (fresh)	1.5	17,000 

(Detasselling, Hand Harvesting)	35

Sorghum	1.5	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15

Pome Fruits: Apples, Pears	2.5	3000

(Thinning)	26

Stone Fruits: Apricots	3.0

Label	3000

(Thinning)	28

	2.5

Proposed

26

Stone Fruits: Cherries (sweet and tart), Nectarines, Peaches, Plums,
Prunes	2.5	3000

(Thinning)	26

Christmas Trees	1.0	3000

(Seed Cone Harvesting)	17

Almonds	3.0

Label	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	26

	2.0

Proposed

22

Macadamia Nuts	1.0	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)	15

Pecans	3.0	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	26

Walnuts	2.0	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	22

Nonbearing Citrus	2.5	400

(All tasks)	6

Flowers and Foliage Grown for Cuttings	2.5	5100 

(Harvesting))	32

Flowers, Flowering Plants, Nursery Stock, Shade Trees, Shrubs, Woody
Plants

400

(All tasks, except harvesting cut flowers or cut foliage)	6

Carrot	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)	18

Potatoes 	1.0	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	15

Sweet Potatoes	1.0	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	18

Turnip	0.75	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	16

Cucurbits: Cucumber, Melon, Pumpkin, Summer Squash, Pumpkin, Winter
Squash	1.0	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	18

Eggplant	1.0	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Staking, Tying)	12

	0.5

(CA only)

7

Fresh Tomato	1.0	1000

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning, Staking Thinning, Training, Tying)	12

Pepper	1.0	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Staking, Tying)	12

Brassica: Broccoli, Brussels Sprouts, Cabbage,  Chinese Broccoli,
Cauliflower, Napa	1.0	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	23

Celery	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)	18

Collards	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning, Thinning)	18

	2.0 (crops grown for seed)

23

Kale, Kohlrabi	0.75	2500

(Hand harvesting, Thinning)	17

	2.0 (crops grown for seed)

23

Mustard Greens	0.75	2500

(Hand harvesting, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	16

Spinach	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	18

Lettuce	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)	18

Pineapples	2.0	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	17

Grape

(table and raisin)	1.5	5000

(Tying, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Training, Thinning, Leaf Pulling)

Very High

10,000

(Girdling, Cane Turning, Tying)	49

Very High

59

Grape

 (juice and wine)	1.5	5000

(Tying, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Training, Thinning, Leaf Pulling)
49

Blueberries (highbush)	1.5	5000

(Hand pruning, Thinning)	49

a	DFR Data sources:

	1) MRID 44403102 (melons): Slope = -0.13955; Day 0 concentration = 1.00
ug/cm2; 

Study application rate = 1.0 lb ai/acre

2) MRID 44403102 (peaches): Slope = -0.09728; Day 0 concentration = 1.02
ug/cm2;

Study application rate = 3.0 lb ai/acre

	3) MRID 44403102 (grapes): Slope =-0.07169; Day 0 concentration = 1.32
ug/cm2; 

	Study application rate 1.5 lb ai/acre

b	Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from
EPA registered 

labels for endosulfan, except rates labeled “proposed” are rate
reductions proposed by 

EPA.

Liquid Concentrates

DAT) where risks were not a concern (i.e., MOEs ≥ 300) with the
postapplication activity with the highest transfer coefficient
applicable to the crop or crop grouping.  The DAT where risks were not a
concern ranges from day 0 (12 hours after application) for tasks related
to cultivation of nonbearing citrus plants on nurseries to day 36 for
girdling, cane turning, and tying for grapes.

The tables indicate there is a special concern for mechanical harvesting
tasks for several crops, including alfalfa, cotton, tree nuts,
cucurbits, brassica crops, mustard greens, spinach, and pineapple. 
These crops are commonly mechanically harvested; however the harvesting
is not fully mechanized and exposure to postapplication workers
participating in the harvesting is likely.  Currently, HED has no
established transfer coefficients to estimate postapplication worker
exposure during mechanical harvesting of these crops.  Therefore, it
should not be assumed that mechanical harvesting would result in less
exposure to workers than other postapplication tasks associated with
these crops.

Table 27.  Quick Reference for Postapplication Risks — Liquid
Concentrates

Cropa	App Rates 

(lbs. ai/ acre)b	Transfer Coefficient (cm2/hr)

reatment when MOE ≥300

Strawberry	2.0

Label	1500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Pinching, Training)	24

	1.0

Proposed

18

Blueberries (lowbush)	1.5	1500

(Hand Pruning)	22

Tobacco	1.0

field treatment	2000

(Hand Harvesting, Stripping, Hand Pruning, Thinning, Topping, Hand
Weeding)	21

Alfalfa	1.0	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	18

Barley, Oats	0.5	1500

(Scouting, Irrigating)	13

Rye, Wheat	0.75	1500

(Scouting, Irrigating)	16

Cotton	0.75 (foliar after bolls open)	2500

(Hand harvesting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	20

	1.5 (foliar until boll opens)	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting, Hand Weeding)	22

Beans (succulent green & dry), 

Peas (succulent & dry)	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)	23

Sweet Corn, (fresh)	1.5	17,000 

(Detasselling, Hand Harvesting)	41

Sorghum	1.5	1000

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18

Pome Fruit: Apples, Pears	2.5	3000

(Thinning)	19

Stone Fruits: Apricots	3.0

Label	3000

(Thinning)	21

	2.5

Proposed

19

Stone Fruits: Cherries (sweet and tart), Nectarines, Peaches, Plums,
Prunes	2.5	3000

(Thinning)	19

Christmas Trees	1.0	3000

(Seed Cone Harvesting)	9

Almonds	3.0

Label	2500

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	19

	2.0

SRRD Proposed

15

Macadamia Nuts	1.0	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)	7

Pecans	3.0	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	19

Walnuts	2.0	2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	15

Nonbearing Citrus	2.5	400

(All tasks)	0

(12 hours)

Flowers and Foliage Grown for Cuttings	2.5	5100 

(Harvesting) 	25

Flowers, Flowering Plants, Nursery Stock, Shade Trees, Shrubs, Woody
Plants	2.5	400

(All tasks, except harvesting cut flowers or cut foliage)	0

(12 hours)

Carrot	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)	22

Potatoes 	1.0	1500

(Irrigating, Scouting)	18

Sweet Potatoes	1.0

foliar	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	22

Turnip	0.75	2500

(Hand Harvesting)	20

Cucurbits: Cucumber, Melon, Pumpkin, Summer Squash, Winter Squash	1.0
2500

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	22

Eggplant	1.0	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Staking, Tying)	15

	0.5

(CA only)

9

Fresh Tomato	1.0	1000

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning, Staking Thinning, Training, Tying)	15

Pepper	1.0	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Staking, Tying)	15

Brassica: Broccoli, Brussels Sprouts, Cabbage, Chinese Broccoli,
Cauliflower, Napa	1.0	5000

(Hand Harvesting, Irrigating, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	28

Celery	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)	22

Collards	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting, Hand pruning, Thinning)	22

	2.0 (crops grown for seed)

28

Kale, Kohlrabi	0.75	2500

(Hand harvesting, Thinning)	20

	2.0 (crops grown for seed)

28

Mustard Greens	0.75	2500

(Hand harvesting, Thinning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	20

Spinach	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	22

Lettuce	1.0	2500

(Hand harvesting)	22

Pineapples	2.0	1000

(Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning)

Special concern for mechanical harvesting	21

Grape

(table and raisin)	1.5	5000

(Tying, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Training, Thinning, Leaf Pulling)

Very High

10,000

(Girdling, Cane Turning, Tying)	29

Very High:

36

Grape

 (juice and wine)	1.5	5000

(Tying, Hand Harvesting, Hand Pruning, Training, Thinning, Leaf Pulling)
29

Blueberries (highbush)	1.5	5000

(Hand pruning, Thinning)	29

a	DFR Data sources:

	1) MRID 44403102 (melons): Slope = -0.12341; Day 0 concentration = 1.23
ug/cm2; Study 

	application rate = 1.0 lb ai/acre

	2) MRID 44403102 (peaches): Slope = -0.09131; Day 0 concentration =
0.46 ug/cm2; Study 

application rate = 3.0 lb ai/acre

	3) MRID 44403102 (grapes): Slope =-0.10004; Day 0 concentration = 0.71
ug/cm2; Study 

application rate 1.5 lb ai/acre

„ÿC	ª

1

2

n

o

.

.

1

2

I

M

R

k

k

n

o



Õ

í

ð

¡

£

·

Ò

Ý

æ

>	

?	

H	

J	

Z	

]	

t	

‰	

Š	

‹	

	

	

‘	

›	

œ	

«	

¬	

Å	

Æ	

Ù	

Ü	

D

œ

¡

¢

£

·

¸

>	

?	

Š	

萑ː葠ː摧彻ᄀŠ	

‹	

‘	

œ	

	

Ë	

Ø	

	Ü	

Ý	

â	

\

^



 

,

G

H

I

r

s

v

w

ˆ

§

¨

¸

×

Ø

C

D

c

Œ

‘

æ

ç

૒

૔

૖

૞

૰

૲

૲

૸

ૺ

ଦ

ମ

ସ

ସ

ୖ

ଡ଼

୞

୮

୶

v

–

 





ట

ఠ

న

బ

ఱ

ఱ

ై

౉

౳

౶

౷

w

„

ˆ



¤

§

ಧ

ನ

ಳ

ಸ

ಽ

೔

೔

೗

೘

೟

೾

ഃ

ഃ

ക

ഖ

ീ

ൃ

ൄ

D

E

c

h

ඐ

එ

න

෈

෌

ෑ

ෑ

෣

෦

෧

෻

෿

෿

ง

ว

ส

ห

ำ

ำ

ื

฼

๓

๖

๗

ຈ

ຉ

ຠ

຤

ສ

ຯ

ຯ

຺

ຽ

຾

຿

ໃ

ໃ

໌

ໍ

໐

໑

༝

P༝

༡

༦

༱

༴

༵

ཧ

ཨ

཰

ུ

ེ

ཿ

ཿ

ྟ

ྠ

࿊

࿍

࿎

࿥

࿦

࿵

࿹

࿾

ဨ

ဨ

ဪ

ါ

ဲ

ံ

ျ

ျ

ၥ

ၦ

႐

႓

႔

	ჳ

ჴ

ᄆ

ᄊ

ᄎ

ᄚ

ᄚ

ᄜ

ᄧ

ᄨ

ᅏ

ᅓ

ᅓ

ᅙ

ᅧ

ᅪ

ᅫ

ᆷ

ሆ

ሇ

ሎ

ሒ

ሗ

ሩ

ሩ

ሬ

ር

ሷ

ሻ

ቀ

ቀ

቗

ቚ

ቛ

ቪ

ቮ

኏

ነ

ኗ

ኜ

ኡ

ኡ

ኳ

኶

኷

ዹ

ዽ

Z 

[ 

c 

d 

  

¡ 

³ 

´ 

À 

Á 

Ä 

Å 

 

 

 

 

 

 

F 

G 

Q 

Y 

[ 

k 

m 

t 

v 

† 

ˆ 

“ 

” 

™ 

š 

ý 

þ 

# 

$ 

c 

d 

„ 

… 

½ 

¾ 

Þ 

ß 

 

, 

- 

W 

Z 

ፚ

፛

፤

፨

፭

᎝

᎝

Ꭰ

Ꭱ

Ꭲ

Ꭶ

Ꮀ

Ꮀ

Ꮁ

Ꮃ

Ꮄ

Ꮑ

Ꮕ

Ꮕ

Ꮚ

ᐍ

ᐐ

ᐑ

ᐘ

ᐘ

ᐜ

ᐡ

ᑃ

ᑆ

ᑇ

G 

š 

ž 

£ 

Ï 

Ð 

ú 

ý 

	ᓽ

ᓾ

ᔅ

ᔉ

ᔎ

ᔠ

ᔠ

ᔣ

ᔤ

ᔭ

ᔱ

ᔶ

ᔶ

ᕠ

ᕣ

ᕤ

ᕥ

ᖀ

ᖀ

ᖁ

ᖄ

ᖅ

ᖔ

ᖙ

ᖙ

ᖞ

ᖺ

ᖽ

ᖾ

ᖿ

ᖿ

ᗚ

ᗛ

ᗞ

ᗟ

ᗮ

î 

ó 

ø 

ᙂ

ᙃ

ᙋ

ᙏ

ᙔ

ᙦ

ᙦ

ᙧ

ᚑ

ᚔ

ᚕ

᚝

᚝

ᚡ

ᚦ

ᚸ

ᚻ

ᚼ

	᜞

ᜟ

ᜥ

᜸

᜼

ᝁ

៏

័

៖

៨

៬

៱

៱

ᠺ

ᠽ

ᠾ

ᡕ

ᡙ

ᡙ

ᡞ

ᡷ

᡺

᡻

ᢏ

Application rates are the maximum application rates determined from EPA
registered labels for

endosulfan, except rates labeled “proposed” are rate reductions
proposed by EPA.

 PAGE   

Page   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  98 

Page   PAGE  15  of   NUMPAGES  98 

Page   PAGE  56  of   NUMPAGES  98 

	Occupational Exposures

Page   PAGE  87  of   NUMPAGES  98 

Page   PAGE  98  of   NUMPAGES  98