Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0284-0011
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2007-12-19T05:00Z

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF           

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

November 29, 2007

CERTIFIED MAIL

Subject:  Revisions to the 2006 Aliphatic Solvents RED

Dear Registrant:

	The Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for the Chemical Case,
Aliphatic Solvents, was signed on July 12, 2006, and made available on
the Internet in a Federal Register Notice dated August 23, 2006 (at
which time, EDocket EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0284 was also established).  This
RED was conducted following the procedures for the Low-Risk process (as
described in the Federal Register on May 14, 2004; Fed Reg 69 (94):
26819-26823).  Early in the process, a SMART Meeting was held to brief
the stake-holders on the process and to receive their feedback (on April
19, 2006), but there was no other pre-RED comment period; however, once
the RED was written and following the announcement of the RED in the
Federal Register, there was a 60 day public comment period.  The comment
period closed on October 23, 2006.  Based on some comments received from
stakeholders, the Agency had made a few revisions, as well as some minor
corrections and editorial clarifications and other updates needed in the
RED, including changes in the text, generally minor revisions, as well
as the addition of a Labeling Changes Summary Table and a Acute
Mammalian Toxicity Batching Memo, each of which documents are further
described in this letter, and inserted as additional appendices within
the revised RED document being announced for public comment.  This
Revised RED document is now marked “[Revised: November 29, 2007]” on
the title page, and supersedes the July 12, 2006, RED document which was
previously posted on the Internet.  Registrants, and all other
interested parties should use this Revised RED for Aliphatic Solvents
document for purposes of implementing and commenting on the Agency RED.

 	The Agency is providing a 60 day public comment period for this
Revised RED.  This Revised RED for Aliphatic Solvents and supporting
documents can also be found on the Agency’s online docketing system,
EDOCKET, at   HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/edocket" 
http://www.epa.gov/edocket  (again in the EDocket EPA-HQ-OPP-2006-0284).
 Public comments, once submitted, will also be available via EDOCKET. 
The Agency encourages commenters to use the EDOCKET system to submit
their comments.

The Revised RED document and other supporting documents announced for
public comment include the following revisions, corrections,
clarifications, and other amendments, which unless otherwise noted, were
the result of the Agency review of the earlier RED or reflect the status
of ongoing issues:  

Revisions include:

There were some revisions made to each of the two Key Labeling Issues,
which appeared on page 32 of the RED:

Based on feedback received from stakeholders, in the first bullet, the
maximum label rate for use in California was increased from 1800 gallons
of spray mix to 2000 gallons of spray mix, to account for concerns
regarding the usage against an important insect pest in California, as
well as due to the size of spray equipment expected to be used in that
state.  The maximum label rate on page 32 for Texas and Florida, 1500
gallons of spray mix, remain unchanged.  (In addition, editorial changes
were made in this bullet, as follows:  the words “per acre” were
added in all instances following “spray mix” in the first bullet
paragraph, to reflect the wording in the beginning of the paragraph;
plus, “(TCS)” was added following the term “Thorough Coverage
Spray” to reflect the wording on many existing labels).

In the second bullet, concerning the spray drift language, some changes
were also made.  For airblast applications, the restriction to “turn
off outward pointing nozzles at row ends and when spraying the outer two
rows” was amended to state “ …  the outer row,” due to
stakeholder concerns regarding fully treating the pest pressure within
the second row in, and due to any outwards spraying towards this second
row inwards being unlikely to drift off-site, especially when the next
sentence of the bullet required that these orchard sprays be applied as
follows:  “into the canopy” (that is, “To minimize spray loss over
the top in orchard applications, spray must be directed into the
canopy.”).  In addition, concerning aerial applications, the RED had
no break in the quotation marks between the airblast and aerial
applications, although there is a break within the Labeling Changes
Summary Table; thus, the text of the Revised RED does include a break in
the quotations, and a new set of quotations;  in addition, the RED had
included a restriction on the height of aerial application above crops,
but only “when spraying within 1000 feet of water bodies or aquatic
habitats;” however, the Agency has determined it is more prudent to
restrict aerial applications to “10 feet above the ground, top of
crops, or above the orchard canopy” under all circumstances, as this
restriction represents both better spray drift management and more
prudent stewardship of chemical applications.

Clarifications include:

	

Comments from the Horticultural Spray Oil Task Force indicated that the
RED had not sufficiently presented a narrative on recent improvements in
the refining of the oils to further reduce the contents of both the
sulfur- and nitrogen-groups (measured as the Unsulfonated Residue [UR]),
 and the polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).  The text of the
Revised RED now includes additional descriptions of the newer refining
procedures followed within industry for the processes utilized for
producing these oils, and the reasons behind utilizing these newer
refining procedures.  Thus, there are inclusions of various new textual
materials on pages 9 and 10, as well as on pages 21 to 22, to reflect
these clarifications in the refining processes.  

On page 10 of the RED, there was a discussion that the various Technical
and End-Use products are currently listed within three OPP Chemical
Codes, as well as that there are a large number CAS Numbers listed on
the existing Confidential Statements of Formula (CSFs; i.e., 12
different CAS Nos.), and that some of these CAS Nos. are found for
different products listed within each of the Chemical Codes. 
Consequently, the Revised RED now indicates that SRRD will work with RD
to insure that all products will now be listed within only one OPP
Chemical Code, specifically 063502, “Mineral Oil.”  

In a similar effort to achieve clarity within this group of Technical
and End-Use Products, due to the current inconsistency in nomenclature
(i.e., there are currently 14 different names listed on the various
labels for the name of the Active Ingredient), the Labeling Changes
Summary Table now specifies a clarification to the situation described
at the top of page 10 of the RED.  Thus, the Revised RED has a
discussion concerning revised labels to be submitted as part of the
reregistration process, and the Labeling Changes Summary Table specifies
the following, regarding the name of the Active Ingredient: “The
Active Ingredient statements must be revised and may include only the
following: “Mineral Oil”.  Note: Other names may be specified, but
only providing there is adequate justification.”  

Corrections include:

Page 4, 3rd paragraph, line 13:  “and” changed to “and/or” to
reflect wording earlier in paragraph

Page 2, 5th full paragraph, line 4: comma deleted after “sorption”
to reflect clarification of poor migration

Page 7, 1st paragraph, line 6: “these three are” added, and “which
are each” deleted

Page 7, 2nd paragraph, line 6: “both” added, and “each” deleted

Page 9, 1st paragraph: numerous additions and changes to clarify recent
changes in the refinement procedures for these oils (see above) 

Page 9, 2nd paragraph, line 7: “with each being directly applied”
added, and “thus there is direct application” deleted 

Page 10, 1st paragraph: numerous additions and changes to clarify recent
changes in the refinement procedures for these oils, as well as issues
regarding OPP Chemical Code and nomenclature (see above) 

Page 10, 2nd paragraph, line 12: “to water bodies” added to clarify
the usage of these oils as mosquito larvicide/pupacide products

Page 10, 3rd paragraph, line 4: “their EFED spreadsheet format”
added, and “the EFED spreadsheets” deleted to reflect actions by
BEAD (rather than EFED)

Page 10, 3rd paragraph, line 10: “by BEAD” inserted to reflect the
Division which performed the action

Page 11, end of 2nd paragraph: “These two Action Memoranda were dated
June 2, 2006, and August 2, 2006, respectively.)” added to reflect the
dates of memoranda, not available when RED was issued

Page 12, throughout 5th paragraph: various editorial changes to more
clearly define the data in Table 4

Page 13, table 4: “Boiling range” added to title of row which was
listed as only “Boiling point”, plus various other changes made in
Table to correct data listed, as well as to revise formatting

Page 15, 2nd paragraph, line 7: “inhalation” added to reflect the
nature of the study

Pages 21 – 22: various editorial changes to reflect changes in the
refinement procedures for these oils (see above)   

Page 23, end of 2nd full paragraph: “i.e., the daphnia were not
“dead”).” was added to clarify the previous parenthetical
statement

Page 27, 1st full paragraph: “by about a third” deleted, because
these registrants have voluntarily agreed to reduce their rates to less
than 42% of the earlier maximum label rates in California, and to less
than 32% of the earlier maximum label rates in Texas and Florida

Page 28, 1st full paragraph, line 7: “the EFED Memo stated” added,
and “it is stated” deleted to clarify what document made the ensuing
specifically referenced quotation,

Page 28, 1st full paragraph, line 8: “[4500 gallons spray mix]”
inserted to clarify the preceding 477 lbs a.i./Acre application rate  

Some other very minor editorial changes were also made on various pages,
too trivial to detail here.

Inclusion of Additional Appendices includes: 

	The Agency has now included two additional appendices in the Revised
RED:  Appendix C, the Labeling Changes Summary Table, which provides
guidance for registrants to utilize in preparing revised labels for
submission as part of their 8-month responses to the Data Call-In; and
Appendix D, the Acute Mammalian Toxicity Batching Memo, which provides
guidance for registrants concerning the Acute Toxicity Batches which the
Agency has identified for groupings (batches of Technical or end-use
products) to reduce the burden on registrants for testing and to reduce
the numbers of organisms required for this testing.  The earlier
Appendix C (Detailed Information on Use Rates for Aliphatic Solvents)
has been moved to Appendix E, and now has a slightly revised title,
“BEAD Complied Table (Based on Existing Labels):  Detailed Information
Concerning Use Rates for Aliphatic Solvents”.  [Note that neither the
earlier RED nor this Revised RED contain a listing of the Generic Data
Requirements and Studies Utilized to make the RED for Aliphatic
Solvents, typically found as Appendix B in most non-Low Risk REDs.  None
of the Low-Risk REDs were structured with these two data tables,
although the Agency has made the decision that, unless there is a
clearly marked instance within that Low Risk RED, all the required data
were available in sufficient and adequate detail to arrive at a RED.]

	The Agency will also be issuing, concurrent with this letter, the
Product-Specific Data Call-Ins (PDCIs) for the Aliphatic Solvents. 
Registrants are reminded that a one-year Storage Stability and Corrosion
Characteristics study is required for all Technical Grade Active
Ingredients and end-use products, and registrants are advised to
initiate this testing as soon as possible.

	If you have any questions on this revised Aliphatic Solvents RED, any
of the revisions, or any new amendments, please contact the RED Chemical
Review Manager in SRRD, Bentley C. Gregg, at 703-308-8178.  If you have
any questions on any aspects of the product reregistration process
and/or the PDCI, please contact the Post-RED Chemical Review Manager in
SRRD, Veronica Dutch, at 703-308-8585.  

							Sincerely,

							Steven Bradbury,

							Director,

							Special Review and Reregistration Division 



Revised Reregistration Eligibility Decision

Exposure and Risk Assessment on Lower Risk Pesticide Chemicals

CASE:  Aliphatic Solvents (3004)

Active Ingredients:  Mineral Oil (063502) & Aliphatic Petroleum
Hydrocarbons (063503)

Special Review and Reregistration Division 

Office of Pesticide Programs

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

One Potomac Yard, 2777 Crystal Drive

Arlington, VA  22202

Revised:  November 29, 2007 



Revised Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) Document for the
Aliphatic Solvents Case

(Mineral Oil and Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbons)

Approved by:	___________________ 

			Steven Bradbury, Ph. D.

			Director

			Special Review and Reregistration Division

Date:		____________________

Table of Contents

Background: 
………………………..…………...………..………….…
….………..  4

I.  Executive Summary: 
……………….…………………..……….……….……… 
4

II. Use Information: 
………………………………………..……….….……...
…..    7

III.  Physical/Chemical Properties: 
……………………………..….……...…….   12   

IV.  Hazard Assessment: 
……………………..…..……..……..………….……...   
14

V.  Exposure Assessment: 
………………………………………………….….…    18

VI.  Dietary (Food) Exposure: 
………………………..…..……………….….….    18

VII.  Drinking Water Exposure: 
…………………………….……..……...….….   19

VII.  Aggregate Exposure Assessment:  
………………………..………………...   19

IX.  Cumulative Exposure:  
…………………………..…………………..….…...    19

X.  Environmental Fate/Ecotoxicity/Environmental Risk Assessment: 
…......       20

	X.I.  Environmental Fate and Transport: 
………………..…....…..…..       20

	X.II.  Ecological Effects Toxicity Data: 
……………………..….......….       21

	X.III.  Estimated Environmental Concentrations: 
………………….…      24

	X.IV.  Ecological Risk Assessment:  
……………………..………...……      27

	X.V.  Endangered Species: 
………………………………..…....…..…..       30

XI.  Mosquito Larvicide/Pupacide Uses:  
…………………......…………............    31

XII.  Labeling for Aliphatic Solvents Products: 
………………………….……..     33

XIII.  Tolerance Reassessment: 
………………………………………..…...……     33

XIV. References: 
……………………………………………..………….…..
……     34

Appendix A.  SLUA (complied by BEAD)
……………………..………………...     36

Appendix B.  Mammalian Toxicity Data for Aliphatic
Solvents……..….……....    41

Appendix C.  Labeling Changes Summary Table (Aliphatic Solvents) 
………      53

Appendix D.  Acute Mammalian Toxicity Batching Memo Appendix 
.……….     59

Appendix E.  BEAD Compiled Table (Based on Existing Labels):  Detailed
Information Concerning Use Rates for Aliphatic Solvents 
......................    69

Background:

This document represents the Revised Reregistration Eligibility Decision
(RED) document for aliphatic solvents.  The Aliphatic Solvents Case
(3004) includes two closely related chemicals, the mineral oils and
aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons, which are products of various types of
petroleum distillation processes, and thus, represented by several
different CAS Numbers.  This assessment summarizes available information
on the uses, physical and chemical properties, toxicological effects,
dietary assessment, and the environmental fate and ecotoxicity of these
aliphatic solvents.  These chemicals have insecticide and/or larvicide
uses as spray oils on agricultural crops and by residential homeowners,
as well as occupational and residential uses as acaricides, fungicides,
herbicides, and virucides, in addition to aquatic uses as mosquito
larvicides/pupacides.  There are also inert ingredient uses for many of
these same CAS Number chemicals; the exemption from the requirement for
a tolerance for the inert ingredient uses of Mineral Oil has already
been reassessed during 2005, and the exemptions from the requirement for
tolerances for the inert ingredient uses of most of the other chemicals
in this RED are being reassessed in a separate document.  

I.  Executive Summary:

The Aliphatic Solvents (Case 3004) includes both mineral oil (OPP
Chemical Code 063502) and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons (063503). 
Twelve chemicals (individual CAS Numbers) are covered in this group.

These aliphatic solvents are the product of petroleum distillations
processes, and thus, they are complex mixtures of long-chain aliphatic
(paraffinic)  compounds.  They are formulated as liquid concentrates for
use as insecticides and/or larvicides on crops, animal premises,
commercial/industrial premises, medical premises, aquatic areas, and
residential premises, as well as occupational and residential uses as
acaricides, fungicides, herbicides, and virucides (for plant pathogens).
 The aquatic area applications are for usage as a mosquito
larvicide/pupacide.  Application equipment includes the following:  for
agricultural crops, by airplane, groundboom sprayer, airblast sprayer,
handgun sprayer, low-pressure handwand sprayer, and/or high-pressure
handwand sprayer; for use at commercial/industrial sites, by
low-pressure handwand sprayer, handgun sprayer, airplane, truck-mounted
ULV sprayer, airblast sprayer, rights-of-way sprayer, and/or high
pressure handwand sprayer; and for residential settings, by hose-end
sprayer, low pressure handwand sprayer, and/or trigger-pump sprayer. 
For the aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons, several end-use products allow
for application to agricultural crops via chemigation, and some products
can be applied via dip to ornamental nursery stock, pineapples, and
citrus.  

These chemicals have a low degree of acute toxicity.  For example, there
was no mortality in rats at acute oral doses of 28,000 mg/kg body
weight, and only slight eye irritation in rats and rabbits.  Based on
subchronic and chronic toxicity, these chemicals are virtually non-toxic
by the oral or dermal route, and they have limited toxicity via the
inhalation route, caused by their physical properties (i.e., the
observed effects are not due to chemical toxicity, but due to irritating
effects, such as interstitial inflammation and alveolar histiocytosis,
related to the body’s defense mechanism against the exposure to a
foreign material, when the aliphatic oils enter the lungs).

There is a short-term dermal NOAEL of 2000 mg/kg/day, from a 28-day
dermal toxicity study.  However, this is a very conservative estimate of
dermal exposures, because it is based on a study in which no effects
were seen even at the highest test concentration (2000 mg/kg/day).  The
actual NOAEL could potentially be much higher, with possibly virtually
no adverse effects at any dose at which these oils might be applied to
the skin.  

There is a short-term inhalation LOAEL of 146.64 mg/kg/day, based on a
28-day inhalation study, in which effects were observed, even at the
lowest inhalation dose tested, 0.52 mg/L, including the following: (1)
various effects in the lungs, (2) increased white blood cell counts in
males, (3) increased absolute liver weight, (4) accessory spleens and/or
abnormally colored spleens, and (5) additional microscopic findings. 
There is also an intermediate-term inhalation NOAEL of 26.1 mg/kg/day,
derived from a 90-day inhalation study, based on effects observed at 0.9
mg/L, with no adverse effects observed at 0.1 mg/L.

An HED memo by OREB (USEPA 1995a) determined that “because toxicity is
very low (the FDA has recommended mineral oil for GRAS status), dermal
exposure does not warrant an exposure study at this time for
reregistration.”  In the same memo, it also was stated that “OREB
does not require an inhalation exposure study for reregistration at this
time,” and the “OREB does not require a mixer/loader/applicator
exposure study for reregistration.”  Consequently, this RED does not
present any assessment for the potential occupational or residential
handler dermal or inhalation exposures, nor any assessment for any
occupational or residential postapplication exposures.  Instead the
Agency has qualitatively assessed these exposures, and has determined
that risks are not of concern.

The overall dietary exposure, and the drinking water (only) dietary
exposure, have also each been qualitatively assessed, based on the
absence of acute and chronic oral effects from exposures to mineral oils
and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons.  These dietary exposures are not
of concern to the Agency, nor does the Agency have concerns for the
aggregate exposures to these chemicals.

The environmental fate assessment of these chemicals indicates they have
low to very low vapor pressures, very low solubility in water, high
octanol-water partition coefficients, and high sorption to organic
matter.  Thus, these chemicals will exhibit very poor migration, due to
their high sorption and low solubility in water, as well as low
potential for volatility.  Fugacity modeling suggests they would remain
partitioned to the terrestrial phase, remaining sorbed to soil or the
foliar surfaces to which they are applied.

The ecological toxicity assessment of these chemicals indicates they
have virtually no toxic effects to mammals or birds (however, there is
potential for impairing the hatching of bird eggs, if the spray oils are
applied directly to the eggs in the nests).  These chemicals are also
virtually non-toxic to honey bees, based on the results from contact
toxicity testing.  Testing of phytotoxic effects have not been submitted
to the Agency, but very high levels of materials are applied to many
different types of plants, without effects reported by applicators or
growers, so the Agency does not have concerns for phytotoxicity, other
than warnings which appear on a few of the labels among the many
currently formulated products.  (Evidence is available that most
registrants have been moving to cleaner technical grade formulations,
with lower amounts of polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), those
components of the spray oils which had historically been thought to
contribute to phytotoxicity).  The results of toxicity testing with
fish, both estuarine/marine and freshwater species, have shown virtually
no toxic effects, and there were no toxic effects in testing with
estuarine/marine mysid shrimp.  There is a study showing adverse effects
on oyster shell deposition (EC50 = 6 mg/L), but this might be due to the
mineral oils coating the surfaces of the food sources for the oysters,
impairing their ability to digest their food.  Studies with daphnia have
shown effects, even at very low exposure concentrations, but many of the
studies submitted to the Agency had been conducted with products no
longer produced as registered products.  In the most recently submitted
study with daphnia, the effects observed included immobilization in the
water column and/or floating on the surface, but visual observations
with a microscope revealed the daphnia hearts were still beating.  Thus,
while immobilization and floating effects were observed even at the
lowest test concentration (EC50 = < 0.9 mg/L), the study reported that
“the test compound, VHVI-4, was not lethal to Daphnia magna at the
highest test concentration (14 mg/L) after 48 hours exposure.”  

Three of the products are also registered solely as mosquito
larvicides/pupacides, acting as surface film agents.  Information has
been received from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC) that these products have important public health benefits,
compared with the various other mosquito larvicides, because these
products are among the only pupacides, and “surface films provide a
valuable option to an integrated mosquito control program.”  In
addition, information was presented by CDC that “surface film
larvicides generally have a shorter environmental persistence (approx.
2-3 days) than most chemical larvicide alternatives.”  The transient
nature of these surface films may have a mitigating effect on the
potential adverse impacts upon daphnia observed above.

The overall ecological risk assessment for these mineral oils and
aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons indicates essentially no concerns for
terrestrial effects (other than the potential for adverse effects on
bird egg-hatching, if spray oils are applied directly to the nests).  In
addition, there were no effects on most aquatic organisms, including
fish (both freshwater and marine) and water-column marine/estuarine
invertebrates (mysid shrimp); however, some impacts were noted in an
oyster shell deposition study, and there is a potential for adverse
effects in daphnids, including immobilization and floating of the
daphnia, in the transient surface films which might result from the
applications of these end-use products, including off-site drift from
airblast applications to orchards (the EFED Memo stated that “9.7% of
the total amount of a product applied” is assumed to drift off-site). 
The Agency is proposing to mitigate these potential adverse impacts on
aquatic invertebrates, effects which might be caused by off-site spray
drift, by placing spray drift language on the revised labels to be
submitted as part of the reregistration process.

II.  Use Information:

The Aliphatic Solvents (Case 3004) include both “Mineral Oil –
includes paraffin oil from 063503” (OPP Chemical Code 063502) and
“Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbons” (OPP Chemical Code 063503).  In
addition, according to the “Status of Pesticides in Registration,
Reregistration, and Special Review” (Spring 1998), commonly called the
Rainbow Report, the Case also includes Kerosene (063501), Mineral
Spirits (063506), and Isoparaffinic Hydrocarbons (505200), although each
of these three are listed in the Rainbow Report as “cancelled.”  

Note, however, that OPPIN Query does list some products in the Kerosene
OPP Chemical Code; however, some of these products contain kerosene only
as an inert ingredient, according to their Confidential Statements of
Formula (CSFs).  Based on their respective CSFs, all of the other
products in OPPIN Query within the Kerosene Chemical Code are end-use
products which are to be formulated with various Technical Grade Active
Ingredients (TGAIs) from both of the other two supported OPP Chemical
Codes, 063502 and 063503, but none of these end-use products actually
contains Kerosene as the active ingredient.  Thus, while these products
are clearly misclassified within OPPIN Query as “Kerosene”, this
information also suggests that the various TGAIs within each of these
supported OPP Chemical Codes have very similar chemical characteristics,
especially considering that these end-use product registrants are able
to utilize these “Mineral Oil” and “Aliphatic Petroleum
Hydrocarbon” TGAIs interchangeably on their respective CSFs.

There are currently about 165 products listed in OPPIN within OPP
Chemical Codes covered in this Case (063501, 063502 [and 063503]). 
Based on a thorough search of the CSFs for these 165 products (a total
of about 225 CSFs, accounting for both Basic and Alternate
formulations), there are twelve different CAS Numbers included in this
Case (Table 1).  Each of these CAS Numbers is listed on one or more of
the CSFs for one or more of the TGAIs within this Case.  Some of these
CAS Numbers have very similar components, because different CAS Numbers
may represent petroleum distillates which are very closely related to
each other, since the assigning of CAS Numbers for petroleum
distillation products (by the Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) of the
American Chemical Society) is based on the last step in the refining
process.  Thus, virtually identical distillation products, produced via
alternative refining pathways, will have different CAS Numbers, although
being essentially identical “oils.”  The materials represented by
these CAS Numbers also have other uses, in addition being pesticide
active ingredients and as pesticidal inert ingredients, including as
various other types of oil-based products; for example, all these CAS
Numbers (except for the mineral oils) are in the High Production Volume
(HPV) data set submitted under the name Lubricating Oil Basestocks
Category.

Table 1.  Description of Chemicals included in the Aliphatic Solvents
Case

Chemical Name	CAS number	Description

Mineral oil; Oil mist (mineral)	8012-95-1	Liquid hydrocarbons from
petroleum.

Mineral oil; Hydrocarbon oils; paraffin liquid	8020-83-5	A mixture of
liquid hydrocarbons obtained from petroleum.

White mineral oil, petroleum	8042-47-5	A highly refined petroleum
mineral oil consisting of a complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained
from the intensive treatment of a petroleum fraction with sulphuric acid
and oleum, or by hydrogenation, or by a combination of hydrogenation and
acid treatment. Additional washing and treating steps may be included in
the processing operation. It consists of saturated hydrocarbons having
carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C15 through C50.

Lubricating oils, petroleum C15-30, hydrotreated neutral oil based,
containing. solvent deasphalted residual oil	72623-84-8	A complex
combination of hydrocarbons obtained by treating light vacuum gas oil,
heavy vacuum gas oil, and solvent deasphalted residual oil with hydrogen
in the presence of a catalyst in a two stage process with dewaxing being
carried out between the two stages. It consists predominantly of
hydrocarbons having carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C15
through C30 and produces a finished oil having a viscosity of
approximately 10cSt at 40.degree.C (104.degree.F). It contains a
relatively large proportion of saturated hydrocarbons.

Lubricating oils, petroleum, C15-30, hydrotreated neutral oil-based 
72623-86-0	A complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained by treating
light vacuum gas oil and heavy vacuum gas oil with hydrogen in the
presence of a catalyst in a two stage process and dewaxing being carried
out between the two stages. It consists predominantly of hydrocarbons
having carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C15 through C30 and
produces a finished oil having a viscosity of approximately 15cSt at
40°C. It contains a relatively large proportion of saturated
hydrocarbons. 

Lubricating oils, petroleum, C20-50, hydrotreated neutral oil-based
72623-87-1	A complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained by treating
light vacuum gas oil, heavy vacuum gas oil and solvent deasphalted
residual oil with hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst in a two stage
process with dewaxing being carried out between the two stages. It
consists predominantly of hydrocarbons having carbon numbers
predominantly in the range of C20 through C50 and produces a finished
oil with a viscosity of approximately 32cSt at 40°C. It contains a
relatively large proportion of saturated hydrocarbons. 

Distillates, petroleum, solvent-refined heavy paraffinic 	64741-88-4	A
complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained as the raffinate from a
solvent extraction process. It consists predominantly of saturated
hydrocarbons having carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C20
through C50 and produces a finished oil with a viscosity of at least 100
SUS at 100°F (19cSt at 40°C). 

Distillates, petroleum, solvent-refined light paraffinic 	64741-89-5	A
complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained as the raffinate from a
solvent extraction process. It consists predominantly of saturated
hydrocarbons having carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C15
through C30 and produces a finished oil with a viscosity of less than
100 SUS at 100°F (19cSt at 40°C). 

Distillates, petroleum, hydrotreated heavy paraffinic 	64742-54-7	A
complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained by treating a petroleum
fraction with hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst. It consists of
hydrocarbons having carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C20
through C50 and produces a finished oil of at least 100 SUS at 100°F
(19cSt at 40°C). It contains a relatively large proportion of saturated
hydrocarbons. 

Distillates, petroleum, hydrotreated light paraffinic 	64742-55-8	A
complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained by treating a petroleum
fraction with hydrogen in the presence of a catalyst. It consists of
hydrocarbons having carbon numbers predominantly in the range of C15
through C30 and produces a finished oil with a viscosity of less than
100 SUS at 100°F (19cSt at 40°C). It contains a relatively large
proportion of saturated hydrocarbons. 

Distillates, petroleum, solvent-dewaxed light paraffinic 	64742-56-9	A
complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained by removal of normal
paraffins from a petroleum fraction by solvent crystallization. It
consists predominantly of hydrocarbons having carbon numbers
predominantly in the range of C15 through C30 and produces a finished
oil with a viscosity of less than 100 SUS at 100°F (19cSt at 40°C). 

Distillates, petroleum, solvent-dewaxed heavy paraffinic	64742-65-0	A
complex combination of hydrocarbons obtained by removal of normal
paraffins from a petroleum fraction by solvent crystallization. It
consists predominantly of hydrocarbons having carbon numbers
predominantly in the range of C20 through C50 and produces a finished
oil with a viscosity not less than 100 SUS at 100.degree.F (19cSt at
40.degree.C).

Based on a review of the approximately 225 CSFs, it seems that most of
these CSFs have been recently revised (within the last 10 years), even
for products with a long history of registration.  Discussions at the
SMART Meeting indicated that many registrants have converted their
processes to produce TGAIs and to formulate end-use products which have
lower amounts of undesirable components (i.e., with lower amounts of
sulfur- and nitrogen-containing groups [as measured by higher
Unsulfonated Residues (UR)], and with fewer side-chains containing
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)).  These sulfur- and
nitrogen-groups and the PAHs have been found to produce phytotoxicity,
formerly a cause for concern among growers using these spray oil
products.  (Some of these revised CSFs list aliphatic petroleum
distillates with some side-chains containing naphtha-groups [cyclic
saturated rings, as opposed to the unsaturated, aromatic rings], because
some registrants have reported that small amounts of these
naphtha-containing side-chains are necessary for pourability; without a
few naphtha-containing groups, the petroleum distillates would have poor
pourability, and would be classified as “waxes”.)

These aliphatic solvents are formulated as liquid concentrates, and each
TGAI is listed on the respective CSF as 100% active ingredient, with no
impurities (Table 2).  The TGAIs are then formulated into end-use
products (often only with an emulsifier), usually with the active
ingredient at 97% or greater, for their use as insecticides and/or
larvicides on crops, animal premises, commercial/industrial premises,
medical premises, aquatic areas, and residential premises.  In addition,
there are three products specifically registered as mosquito
larvicides/pupacides, with these being directly applied to water bodies.
 For the various OPP Chemical Codes, the number of total products
(TGAIs, Manufacturing Use Products (MUPs), and end-use products) are as
follows:  Chemical Code 063502 (Mineral Oil), 130 total products;
Chemical Code 063503 (Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbon), 30 total
products; and as indicated above, 5 total products in Chemical Code
063501 (Kerosene).

Table 2.  Information on TGAIs Within Each OPP Chemical Code

Chem Code Number	Name 	Number of TGAIs	CAS Numbers Represented on the
Various CSFs within each Chemical Code

063501	Kerosene	None	(See text for explanation of this

Chemical Code.)

063502	Mineral Oil	10 (including 1 MUP)	64742-55-8

64742-56-9

64742-65-0

72623-84-8

72623-86-0

72623-87-1

8012-95-1

8042-47-5

063503	Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbon	16 (including 4 MUPs)	64741-88-4

64741-89-5

64742-54-7

64742-55-8

72623-84-81

8002-05-9

8020-83-5

When revised CSFs are submitted during reregistration, it is likely that
CAS Numbers 72623-86-0 and 72623-87-1 will also be included, because
these newer CAS Nos. are not currently listed on the older CSFs from one
registrant, but those CAS Nos. are listed on the CSFs for the TGAIs from
which these products are formulated.

Based on the information in Table 2, some of the CAS Numbers are listed
on the CSFs for the TGAIs within more than one Chemical Code; thus,
there is overlap.  In fact, one company has four TGAIs, all within
063502, but all five of their end-use products (formulated from only
these four TGAIs) are within the other Chemical Code, 063503.  Plus, as
described in the section above, the end-use products within 063501
(Kerosene) do not actually contain Kerosene as an active ingredient, but
each product is formulated with TGAIs from both of the other two OPP
Chemical Codes.  Consequently, as part of this RED, the Agency is
planning to place all these products within the “Aliphatic Solvents”
Case into a single OPP Chemical Code.  Since the publication of this RED
in July 2006, OPP has determined that these TGAIs and end-use products
should all be placed within the Mineral Oils Chemical Code, 063502, for
clarity of nomenclature, since many of these “aliphatic solvents”
products have uses which conform to the classic Mineral Oil uses, many
of which have trade names implying that they are employed as dormant
oils or spray oil.

These products containing aliphatic solvents are formulated as liquid
concentrates. The application equipment includes airplane, groundboom
sprayer, airblast sprayer, handgun sprayer, low-pressure handwand
sprayer, and/or high-pressure handwand sprayer for applications to
agricultural crops; for commercial/industrial sites, application
equipment includes low-pressure handwand sprayer, handgun sprayer,
airplane, truck-mounted ULV sprayer, airblast sprayer, rights-of-way
sprayer, and/or high pressure handwand sprayer.  In residential
settings, typical application equipment includes hose-end sprayer, low
pressure handwand sprayer, and/or trigger-pump sprayer.  For petroleum
hydrocarbons, several products have product labels which allow for
application to agricultural crops via chemigation.  In addition, some
products can be applied via dip to ornamental nursery stock, pineapples,
and citrus.  The three currently registered mosquito larvicide/pupacide
products are applied to water bodies by ground equipment, with one
product also having a label listing aerial applications.

Appendix C contains more detailed information on the crops/use sites,
application equipment, timing of application, maximum application rate,
and re-entry interval (if applicable).  These data were derived by the
Biological and Economic Assessment Division (BEAD) in their EFED
spreadsheet format (for the Environmental Fate and Effects Division). 
In some cases, the entries in the EFED table did not provide pounds
active ingredient per gallon for the mineral oils or the aliphatic
petroleum hydrocarbons.  A review of the physical/chemical
characteristics obtained through a literature search provided a range of
densities for both chemicals.  As a default, the highest density found
for each chemical (7.7 lb ai/gal for mineral oil, and 8.0 lb ai/gal for
aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons, respectively) was used by BEAD as an
estimate for adjusting the application rates for the respective active
ingredient, when necessary.

The information presented in Appendix C indicates many different types
of application methods and use sites for these Mineral Oil and Aliphatic
Petroleum Hydrocarbon products.  According to the BEAD Screening Level
Usage Assessment (SLUA), there may be as much as 75 million pounds of
these products used in the United States annually.  (See Appendix A  for
additional details concerning the BEAD SLUA.)

Mineral oil (8012-95-1) has recently been designated by the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (USFDA) as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS);
the specific usage which is GRAS is as a release agent sprayed on potato
processing equipment, resulting in a presence on food of no more than 5
ppm (GRAS Notice No. GRN 00071; April 21, 2001).  In addition, there are
many other uses for Mineral Oil listed at the USFDA website, Everything
Added to Food in the United States (EAFUS), under their FDA regulations
pertaining to food additives, especially 21CFR 172.878, which
specifically describes the uses of “White Mineral Oil”, but there
are many other listings identified in EAFUS, including as food additives
for direct addition (172.842), as well as for secondary additives
(173.340), various indirect additives (175.105, 175.210, 175.230,
175.300, 176.170, 177.1200, 177.2260, 177.2600, 177.2800, 178.2010,
178.3570, 178.3620, 178.3740, 178.3910), and food additives permitted in
feed and drinking water of animals (573.680).  The citations in EAFUS
specifically refer to “Mineral oil, white” CAS No. 8012-95-1, and
not any of the other mineral oil CAS Numbers; in addition, a search by
CAS Number within EAFUS indicates there are no listings for any of the
other chemicals in this RED, the aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons.  

The tolerance exemptions being reassessed in this RED, with the
respective citation in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and use
pattern as an active ingredient, are listed in Table 3.  Table 3 also
includes the inert ingredient uses of these chemicals.  The exemptions
from the requirement of a tolerance for the inert ingredient uses of
Mineral Oils (180.910 and 180.930) have already previously been
reassessed, in a document dated December 30, 2005, while the other
petroleum hydrocarbon exemptions as inert ingredients are currently
undergoing reassessment, within the Registration Division, with a
completion date on or before August 3, 2006.  (These two Action
Memoranda were dated June 1, 2006, and August 2, 2006, respectively.)

Table 3. Tolerances and Exemptions Being Reassessed for the Aliphatic
Solvents

Tolerance Expression; and Specific Tolerance	40 CFR	PC Code	Use Pattern

Active Ingredient

Mineral oil	“Corn, grain, post-harvest”:  200 ppm 	180.149	063502
Insecticide

	“Sorghum, grain, grain, postharvest”:  200 ppm

	Petroleum oils	Exempt from the requirement  for a tolerance	180.905
063502 / 063503	Pesticide

“Inert (or occasionally active) Ingredient”

“Mineral oil, U.S.P., or conforming to 21 CFR 172.878 or 178.3620(a)
(CAS Reg. No. 8012-95-1)”	180.910	063502	Diluent, carrier and solvent

“Petroleum hydrocarbons, light odorless conforming to 21 CFR
172.884”	180.910	063503	Solvent, diluent

“Petroleum hydrocarbons, synthetic isoparaffinic, conforming to 21 CFR
172.882”	180.910	063503	Solvent, diluent

“Mineral oil, U.S.P., or conforming to 21 CFR 172.878 or 178.3620(a)
(b)”	180.930	063502	Solvent, diluent

“Petroleum hydrocarbons, light odorless conforming to 21 CFR 172.884
or 178.3650”	180.930	063503	Solvent, diluent

“Petroleum hydrocarbons, synthetic isoparaffinic, conforming to 21 CFR
172.882 or 178.3530”	180.930	063503	Solvent, diluent

The active ingredient use listed in Table 3 for 180.149 predates the
establishment of the Environmental Protection Agency.  Spray Oils
(petroleum oils) have been utilized for insect control on crops and
trees for over 130 years, while the post-harvest uses on corn and
sorghum to combat storage insect infestation were in a Tolerance
Petition in the 1950s.  BEAD and SRRD conducted a review of the EFED
spreadsheets (data complied based on the existing labels), and this
search did not detect any Mineral Oils products with a current label for
this grain storage use, as listed at 40 CFR 180.149; thus, as part of
the RED process, SRRD will publish a notification in the Federal
Register proposing to cancel this use, and to revoke this tolerance at
40 CFR 180.149.

Some of the maximum application rates on some of the labels are very
high.  For example, for one suite of pests on citrus, in Florida, Texas,
and California, various labels indicate that applications may be made at
up to 4500 gallons of spray mix (prepared as a thorough coverage spray
[TCS] mix of up to 1.5 gallons of end-use product in 100 gallons of
water).  These registrants have voluntarily agreed to reduce this
maximum amount applied, to only 1500 gallons in Florida and Texas, and
to 2000 gallons in California.  This higher rate in California was
proposed by researchers at the University of California, Kearney Ag
Center, due to a unique citrus pest found in California; this feedback
was the result of the Agency request that USDA seek guidance from
researchers, growers, and other stakeholders.

There currently are few labels with application restrictions on the
number of applications per year, or the timing between applications,
although there are some residential products for homeowner use that do
include such reapplication restrictions. 

III.  Physical/Chemical Properties:

Table 4 provides physical/chemical properties that are available for
certain aliphatic solvents.  Information was not found for all CAS
Numbers included in this RED.

Based on the data in Table 4, as well as various estimates derived from
EPIWIN and other models for developing physical and chemical properties
information (and characterizations for the CAS Numbers in the HPV
submission), it is not feasible to report specific data for each
property, due to the diversity of different compounds present as
components within each of these mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum
hydrocarbons.  However, certain patterns are evident in describing these
oils.  The melting points (pour point, or temperature at which flow
characteristics appear) are below 0 °C.  The actual boiling points or
boiling ranges listed reflect that the CAS Numbers represent mixtures of
compounds, dependent on the types and order of distillation and refining
processes employed, with constituent hydrocarbons of these oils having
boiling points ranging from 300 to 800°C.  Similarly, their vapor
pressures exhibit a very wide range, from 10-4  Pa to 10-16 Pa (about 
10-3  to 10-14 mm Hg), ranging from the smaller to larger constituents. 
Their octanol-water partition coefficients are high, with log Kow values
ranging from about 5 to about 20, from the smaller chain-length to the
larger chain length molecules.  The constituents of the oils are also
very poorly water soluble, with water solubility ranging from 0.001 to
0.6 mg/L, being less soluble with longer chain-length constituents.  

Table 4.  Physical/Chemical Properties of the Aliphatic Solvents

CAS No.	8012-95-1	8042-47-5	64742-55-8	64741-97-5 	72623-87-1	72623-84-8
64742-56-9	64741-88-4	Various 

Appearance, Physical State, Color	Oily, colorless	Clear, water white
liquid	Bright, clear, straw colored	Liquid	Clear and bright neutral
Light straw	White, clear liquid	Amber, viscous liquid	Viscous liquid;
colourless to light yellow

Odor	Odorless	Essentially odorless	Mild lube oil odor	--	None
Hydrocarbon odor	Hydrocarbon	Mild or faint; petroleum	Odourless or mild
petroleum oil like

Solubility in water	Insoluble	Insoluble	Insoluble	--	Negligible
Insoluble	Nil	Insoluble	Insoluble

Boiling point/

Boiling range	360 oC	>260 0C / 500 oF	>500 oF	150 – 600 oC	600 - 894
(temperature scale not provided)	150 – 600 °C

(ICSC, 2001b)	560 – 760 oF	150 – 600 oC	Not available

Density/ Specific Gravity	0.875-0.905	<1	0.86	~0.84 - 0.94 at 15 oC
0.8493	0.875	0.86	~0.84 - 0.94 at 15 oC	0.851 to 0.863 kg/L at 15 oC

Vapor density	--	>1	--	--	NA	NA	>1	>5	Not available

Vapor pressure	<0.5 mmHg @

20 oC	--	--	--

0.0225 mmHg @ 20 oC	NA	<1 mmHg @

68 oF	Negligible at ambient temperature and pressure

References:   8012-95-1: HSDB, 2002

8042-47-5:  MSDS, 2002b

64742-55-8: MSDS, 1994

64741-97-5: ICSC, 2001a

72623-87-1:  MSDS, 2003a

72623-84-8:  MSDS, 2004

64742-56-9: MSDS, 2003b

64741-88-4:  ICSC, 2001b; MSDS, 2002a

IV.  Hazard Assessment:

The toxicity data available for various chemicals in the aliphatic
solvents group are provided in Appendix B.  These data were obtained
from the MRIDs submitted by registrants and EPA’s Health Effects
Division (HED) Toxicity Data Evaluation Reviews (DERs) of these MRIDs,
as well as from the Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances
(RTECS) of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health,
and from High Production Volume (HPV) Robust Summaries, various Material
Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs), and the open literature.

Acute toxicity data for representative chemical constituents are
provided in Table 5.  In general, these mineral oils and aliphatic
petroleum hydrocarbons exhibit a very low degree of acute toxicity in
mammalian testing.

Table 5.  Summary of Representative Acute Toxicity Data for the
Aliphatic Solvents (Mineral Oil and Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbons)

(See Appendix B for additional data and further details)

Study Type	Species	Data Source 

(MRID, or citation)	CAS Number	Results	Toxicity Category

Acute oral	Rat 	(Hine and Zuidema, 1970; also cited in INCHEM (WHO),
1982)	Various 

(lower range of carbon lengths)	LD50  > 25.0 mL/kg  (>28,000 mg/kg) 

no deaths observed	IV

Acute dermal	Rabbit	(NIOSH, 1997a) 	64742-54-7	LD50 >5 g/kg	IV

	Rat	(EPA, 1994a)	64742-56-9	LD50 > 5 g/kg for males and females	IV

Acute inhalation	Rat	(NIOSH, 2000)	64742-55-8	LD50 = 3,900 mg/m3 

(3.9 mg/L) for 4 hr 1	III

Acute eye irritation	Rabbit	(NIOSH, 2003)	8012-95-1	Moderate effect at
500 mg	III

	Rat	(EPA, 1994c)	“Mineral Oil”	Slight eye irritation; did not clear
at day 14 (last day of observation)  	III

Acute dermal irritation	Guinea pig	(NIOSH, 2003)	8012-95-1	Mild effect
at 100 mg for 24 hour	IV

	Rabbit	(NIOSH, 2003)	8012-95-1	Mild effect at 100 mg for 24 hour	IV

Skin sensitization	Guinea pig	(EPA, 1994a)	64742-56-9	Not a dermal
sensitizer

	1.  Most other reports from inhalation toxicity testing indicated no
lethality was observed. 

Based on the subchronic toxicity data in Appendix B, representative data
are presented in Table 6.  For certain specific aliphatic solvents, it
has been reported that the effects of short-term exposure include mild
irritation to the skin, and if swallowed, aspiration into the lungs may
result in chemical pneumonitis.  The effects of long-term exposure
include possible dermatitis with repeated or prolonged contact with skin
(INCHEM, 2001a, b; MSDS, 1994, 2002).  

Table 6.  Summary of Selected Sub-Chronic Toxicity Tests for Aliphatic
Solvents 

Study	Test material	Test animal	Doses	Results

28-day dermal

MRID 413688-22

(EPA, 1996)	Light neutral oil, Gulf

(purity not provided)	C3H/HeNCrlBR mice

(15/sex/dose)	Undiluted test material or 42.5% (w/v) solution in heavy
mineral oil once daily, 3x/week for 4 weeks	NOEL > 2000 mg/kg/day

28-day inhalation

MRID 413688-24

(EPA, 1996)	Light Neutral Oil, Gulf 

(purity not provided)	Fischer 344 rats (10/sex/dose)	0, 0.52, 0.76, or
1.53 g/m3 or g/mL for 6-hours/day. Five days/week, for total of 28 days
LOEL = 520 mg/m3 or mg/mL 

(146.64 mg/kg/day)

90-day inhalation

MRID 450029-01

(Ulrich, 1999)	GB-1111	Crl:CD®(SD)IGS BR rats	Target concentrations: 
0.01, 0.1,  and 1.0 mg/L

Actual concentrations: 0.012, 0.10, and 0.9 mg/L

6 hr exposure	NOEL = 0.1 mg/L

(26.1 mg/kg/day)a

A short-term exposure duration dermal NOAEL of 2000 mg/kg/day was
observed in a 28-day repeat-dose study, in which no adverse effects were
observed at the highest test concentration (2000 mg/kg/day) (EPA, 1996;
MRID 413688-22).  The actual NOAEL could potentially be very much
higher, because it is quite possible that there would be no adverse
effects from dermal exposures, even at the highest possible dosage which
could be applied to the skin.  

A short-term exposure duration inhalation LOAEL of 146.64 mg/kg/day was
observed in a 28-day inhalation study.  Adverse effects were reported at
the lowest exposure dosage, 0.5 mg/L, based on the following
observations:  (1) multiple lung effects, (2) increased white blood cell
counts in males, (3) increased absolute liver weight, (4) accessory
spleens and/or abnormally colored spleens, and (5) additional
microscopic findings (EPA, 1996; MRID 413688-24).  An intermediate-term
exposure duration inhalation NOAEL of 26.1 mg/kg/day was observed in a
90-day inhalation study, in which effects were observed at 0.9 mg/L, but
there were no adverse effects observed at 0.1 mg/L (EPA, 1996; MRID
450029-01).  

Metabolism / Absorption:

Oral doses of mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons are
poorly absorbed across the gastrointestinal tract lining, and most are
rapidly eliminated unchanged in the feces (75 to 98%, within 8 hours to
4 days).  In addition, these materials also show very poor permeability
across the dermal barrier (very little is absorbed through the skin). 
Similarly, any of these materials which enter the lungs are also
generally not absorbed, but there may be phagocytosis by the surrounding
lung cells, with some materials then being transported to the spleen and
liver, with eventual elimination occurring, mostly unmetabolized, within
the feces.

The April 1997 data call-ins for the Mineral Oils (GCDI-063502-17721)
and for Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbons (GCDI-063503-17722) did not
require data for various types of repeat dose toxicity studies,
including either reproductive/developmental or carcinogenicity toxicity
testing, via either oral or dermal exposure dosing.  Thus, these data
have not been submitted by registrants, and the information presented
was derived from various review documents.  Data were required for
Mutagenicity/Genotoxicity (Gene mutation – Ames [84-2a; 870.5100]) and
for Structural Chromosomal Aberration [84-2b; 870.5375]); a number of
studies have been submitted, and DERs written for most. 

Reproduction/Developmental Effects:

In the HPV Submission for Lubricating Oils Basestocks (for most of the
CAS Numbers as in this RED), various repeat dose studies were reviewed
for reproductive and developmental toxicity effects.  It was concluded
from dermal dosing studies, that mineral oil had no effects (on
mortality, clinical signs of toxicity, body weight, food consumption,
absolute organ weights, microscopic changes in reproductive organs of
parental animals, number of corpora lutea, implantation sites, live pups
per litter, no gross anomalies, and body weights of pups or weight gains
of pups).  In a 4-week inhalation study, there were no treatment related
effects on sperm morphology.  In a one-generation reproduction study,
both males and females were dosed by gavage, and there were no adverse
effects (no clinical findings, growth weights and food consumption was
normal, no effects on fertility and mating indices in either males or
females, and at necropsy, organ weights and histopathology were
considered normal by the study authors).  Two other studies were
reported with white mineral oil, both via single daily gavage doses.  In
one study, both sexes were dosed, and some effects were observed, which
the study authors concluded were within the “spectrum of malformations
[which] occurs spontaneously in Sprague-Dawley rat.”  In the companion
study in which only pregnant females were dosed, fetal effects were
noted, but “the study authors considered these malformations to be
minor and within the normal ranges for the strain of rat”
(Sprague-Dawley).  In general, these studies were performed at very high
dosages, from about 900 mg/kg-bw/day (1 mL/kg-bw/day) to about 4500
mg/kg-bw/day (5 mL/kg-bw/day).

Carcinogenicity:

The following information has been reported for the aliphatic solvents
with regards to carcinogenicity (IARC, 1987):

  Untreated and mildly-treated oils are carcinogenic to humans (Group
1), and

  Highly-refined oils are not classifiable as to their carcinogenicity
to humans (Group 3).

The chemicals included in this RED are categorized as highly to severely
refined oils and, therefore, are classified as Group 3, meaning the
evidence of carcinogenicity is inadequate in humans and inadequate or
limited in experimental animals.

Mutagenicity/Genotoxicity:

In DERs written by HED (EPA, 1994d), the mutagenicity of various test
materials were all characterized as being non-mutagenic, in general, but
with problems due to the presence of suspended oil droplets, due to the
poor water solubility of the test materials.  Results reported show the
following:  no treatment related increases in the number of revertants
to histidine in either the plate incorporation or liquid suspensions
assays (Ames tests); in a mouse lymphoma forward mutation assay, there
were no adverse effects (but problems were encountered in removing the
test material from the cells, due to the insolubility with the aqueous
media); the test material did not appear to be clastogenic in an in vivo
mammalian cytogenetics assay with bone marrow, but the DER stated that
data needs to be submitted to confirm that the test material is absorbed
from the gastro-intestinal tract and transported to target tissue [bone
marrow] in effective concentrations.  

In the HPV Submission for Lubricating Oils Basestocks (HPV, 2004), it
was concluded that in the in vitro (mutagenicity) tests, the results had
low mutagenicity indices, and that the in vivo results would probably be
negative, both due to the low bioavailability of these test materials,
and due to the negative results observed in in vitro mutagenicity
testing and dermal carcinogenicity studies. 

Special Considerations for Infants and Children:

The data found on reproductive and developmental toxicity for the
aliphatic solvents (the mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum
hydrocarbons) indicate that for most CAS Numbers, there are few effects
that suggest any reproductive impairment or adverse fetal impacts that
would occur at doses not also having maternal impacts.  In general, most
of the studies reported in the HPV submission were conducted at very
high dosing levels, whether by the dermal, inhalation, or oral route of
exposure.  Overall, therefore, there are no concerns at the present time
for potential sensitivity of infants and children to these mineral oils
and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons, because any reproductive and
developmental toxicity effects only occurred at doses much greater than
those expected from use of these chemicals as active ingredients.  

Endocrine Disruption: 

EPA is required under the FFDCA, as amended by FQPA, to develop a
screening program to determine whether certain substances (including all
pesticide active and other ingredients) “may have an effect in humans
that is similar to an effect produced by a naturally occurring estrogen,
or other such endocrine effects as the Administrator may designate.” 
Following recommendations of its Endocrine Disruptor and Testing
Advisory Committee (EDSTAC), EPA determined that there was a scientific
basis for including, as part of the program, the androgen and thyroid
hormone systems, in addition to the estrogen hormone system.  EPA also
adopted EDSTAC’s recommendation that the Program include evaluations
of potential effects in wildlife.  For pesticide chemicals, EPA will use
FIFRA and, to the extent that effects in wildlife may help determine
whether a substance may have an effect in humans, FFDCA authority to
require the wildlife evaluations.  As the science develops and resources
allow, screening of additional hormone systems may be added to the
Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP).  When additional
appropriate screening and/or testing protocols being considered under
the Agency’s EDSP have been developed, the aliphatic solvents may be
subjected to further screening and/or testing to better characterize
effects related to endocrine disruption.  However, at the present time,
the Agency has no evidence that the aliphatic solvents are associated
with endocrine disruption.

V. Exposure Assessment:

There is a potential for dermal and inhalation exposure to aliphatic
solvents (both mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons) in
occupational scenarios from handling aliphatic solvent-containing
products during the mixing, loading, and application process (i.e.,
mixers/loaders/applicators).  Short-term exposures are likely (from 1 to
30 days); however, it is less certain that pesticide handlers would have
intermediate-term exposures (i.e., continuous exposures of greater than
30 days, that is, from 1 month to 6 months).  However, as part of the
earlier Phase 4 Reregistration Process, the Occupational and Residential
Exposure Branch (OREB) of HED (USEPA 1995b) determined that, for the
Mineral Oils and Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbons, the “toxicity is
very low (the FDA has recommended mineral oil for GRAS status), dermal
exposure does not warrant an exposure study at this time for
reregistration.”  In addition “OREB does not require an inhalation
exposure study for reregistration at this time,” and “OREB does not
require a mixer/loader/applicator exposure study for reregistration.” 
Thus, various Guidelines were waived by OREB, and not required as part
of a GDCI, including Guidelines 133-4, Inhalation Exposure [new #
875.2500], as well as the following applicator exposure monitoring: 
Guideline 231, Estimation of Dermal Exposure at Outdoor Sites [new #
875.1100], Guideline 232, Estimation of Inhalation Exposure at Outdoor
Sites [new # 875.1300], Guideline 233, Estimation of Dermal Exposure at
Indoor Sites [new # 875.1200], and Guideline 234, Estimation of
Inhalation Exposure at Indoor Sites [new # 875.1400].

Thus, the Agency has determined that only a qualitative exposure
assessment is required for these scenarios, and that the application
rates, anticipated use patterns, and current labels for the aliphatic
solvents products are not of concern to the Agency.  This qualitative
exposure/risk assessment also suggests there are no concerns for
handlers, reentry workers, or residential homeowners.

A review of some of the current labels indicates that about half of
these labels list requirements for gloves as Personal Protective
Equipment (PPE).  This qualitative assessment of human exposure risk has
indicated there are no risk concerns; any PPE requirements needed for
end-use products will be determined based on the acute toxicity testing
review data developed during reregistration for these end-use products.

Cancer risks were not calculated, since no toxicological endpoint for
cancer was selected, because these materials described in this RED are
not carcinogens.

VI.  Dietary (Food) Exposure:

There has been a tolerance of 200 ppm established for mineral oil, for
post harvest uses on corn and sorghum (40 CFR 180.149).  However, an HED
Memo (EPA, 1995a) indicated that residue data would not be required for
Mineral Oil, and specifically that the following data requirements were
“not applicable”:  171-4(a), Nature of residue – plants; 171-4(b),
Nature of residue – animals: 171-4(c), Residue analytical method –
plant; 

171-4(d), Residue analytical method – animals; 171-4(e), Storage
stability; 171-4(f), Magnitude of residue – potable water; 171-4(g),
Magnitude of residue – fish; 171-4(h), Magnitude of residue –
irrigated crop; 171-4(i), Magnitude of residue – food handling;
171-4(j), Magnitude of residue – meat/milk/poultry/eggs; and
171-4(k/l), Crop field trials/process.  

The Agency has no concerns for food uses of these mineral oils and
aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons, as a result of their use as an active
ingredient.  As described in previous sections, the acute and chronic
oral toxicity of these materials is extremely low, and thus, no
quantitative assessment of dietary (food only) risk is deemed necessary.

 

VII.  Drinking Water Exposure:

The HED Memo (EPA, 1995a), which indicated that various types of residue
data would not be required for Mineral Oil, specifically indicated that
the data requirement for Magnitude of residue – Potable water (Old
Guideline Number: 171-4(f), New Guideline Number 860.1400) was “not
applicable”:  Thus, residue data have not been collected for drinking
water concentrations of these active ingredients.  One specific use of
mineral oil has been granted GRAS status, and many other uses have been
permitted under various other food use regulations by US FDA.  Based on
the available data concerning the absence of acute and chronic oral
toxicity for both mineral oil and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons,
these active ingredients are not of concern to the Agency.  

VIII.  Aggregate Exposure Assessment:

For aggregate exposure, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA)
section 408 directs the Agency to consider available information
concerning exposures from the pesticide residue in food and all other
non-occupational exposures, including drinking water from ground water
or surface water and exposure through pesticide use in gardens, lawns,
or buildings (residential and other indoor uses).  The Food Quality
Protection Act amendments to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
[FFDCA, Section 408(b)(2)(A)(ii)] require “that there is a reasonable
certainty that no harm will result from aggregate exposure to pesticide
chemical residue, including all anticipated dietary exposures and other
exposures for which there are reliable information.”  In assessing the
aggregate exposure for the aliphatic solvents, the Agency has determined
in the preceding sections that risks from food, drinking water,
residential uses of a pesticide, and other non-occupational sources of
exposure are minimal, having virtually insignificant impact on human
health.  

IX.  Cumulative Exposure:

Section 408(b)(2)(D)(v) of the FFDCA requires that, when considering
whether to establish, modify, or revoke a tolerance, the Agency consider
“available information” concerning the cumulative effects of a
particular pesticide’s residues and “other substances that have a
common mechanism of toxicity.”  

EPA does not have, at this time, available data to determine whether the
Aliphatic Solvents have a common mechanism of toxicity with other
substances.  Unlike other pesticides for which EPA has followed a
cumulative risk approach based on a common mechanism of toxicity, EPA
has not made a common mechanism of toxicity finding as to the Aliphatic
Solvents and any other substances, and the Aliphatic Solvents do not
appear to produce toxic metabolites produced by other substances.   

For the purposes of this tolerance action, therefore, EPA has not
assumed that Aliphatic Solvents have a common mechanism of toxicity with
other substances.  For information regarding the Agency’s efforts to
determine which chemicals have a common mechanism of toxicity and to
evaluate the cumulative effects of such chemicals, see the policy
statements released by EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs concerning
common mechanism determinations and procedures for cumulating effects
from substances found to have a common mechanism on EPA’s website at
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/cumulative/.

X.  Environmental Fate/Ecotoxicity/Ecological Risk Assessment:  

X.I.  Environmental Fate and Transport:

There is a wide range of components present in each of these various
mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons products, but the EFED
Memorandum concluded that “based on the broad descriptions of the CAS
Numbers, it appears that the composition of the oils are similar across
the two PC Codes.  Therefore, the toxicological and fate properties may
be similar.”  

The data for most of the physical and chemical properties (Table 4) are
from MSDSs, or are based on various estimates derived from EPIWIN and
other models for developing physical and chemical properties
information.  Thus, any description concerning the environmental fate
and transport of these mixtures of components will require some degree
of generalization in characterizing the environmental fate.  For
example, the vapor pressures exhibit a very wide range, from somewhat
volatile to very poorly volatile (i.e., 10-4  Pa to 10-16 Pa [about 10-3
 to 10-14 mm Hg]).  The octanol-water partition coefficients are, in
general, high, with log Kow values ranging from about 5 to about 20, for
the smaller chain-length to the larger chain length molecules.  Thus,
these components are also likely to have high Koc values, indicating a
high degree of sorption to the organic matter in soils, as well as to
foliar surfaces onto which they are sprayed.  In addition, their
constituent components are also very poorly water soluble, with
solubility values ranging from 0.001 to 0.6 mg/L, being least soluble
for the larger constituents.  Thus, these sorption characteristics and
water solubility data suggest very poor migration in dissolved phase of
water.  Fugacity modeling to determine the distribution of these
components in the environment suggest that most would partition to the
terrestrial phase, and remain sorbed to soil or the foliar surfaces onto
which they are sprayed.  

These aliphatic oils do not contain functional groups which would
undergo photo-degradation in the ultraviolet or visible light ranges,
although if any have aromatic components, they can undergo direct
photolysis (however, most registrants now produce TGAIs with
substantially reduced amounts of aromatic components, compared with the
spray oils formerly formulated).  While many of the components are
poorly volatile, if some do volatilize, they might contain substituent
groups that may undergo atmospheric gas-phase oxidation reactions. 
While these components are poorly soluble in water, they do not contain
functional groups that are susceptible to hydrolysis in aqueous
suspension.  Due to the complexity in size of the components of these
oils, they may slowly undergo some primary biodegradation, but do not
readily undergo rapid mineralization (i.e., complete breakdown to carbon
dioxide and water).

X.II.  Ecological Effects Toxicity Data:

Based on data submitted to the Agency and literature from other sources
to augment these data, the EFED Memorandum Describing the Ecological
Risk Assessment on Aliphatic Oils (PC Codes 063502 and 063503) compiled
a summary table on the ecological effects to the key biological
components of the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem (Table 7).

Table 7.  Summary of eco-toxicity values used in the Aliphatic Oils
screening level ecological risk assessment.

Surrogate Species	Toxicity Data Used in the Ecological Risk Assessment a
Comment (the data as reported from various studies) 	Data Source for
toxicity value used in assessment

Fish	None used  (Essentially no lethality observed to any fish species)
No effects were observed in fish species in any of the multiple studies
conducted at the limit concentrations for these types of studies. 
Weight of evidence was used to estimate potential risks.

Daphnia	EC50 = < 0.9 mg/L

LC50 = > 14.0 mg/L	LC50s:  0.02, 0.1, 0.41, “<0.9”, and 2.4 mg/L. 
(The data for the three lowest values are based on test materials no
longer appropriate for risk estimation, and therefore, the next highest
LC50 was utilized.)  	44637337

Oysters	6 mg/L	EC50:  6 mg/L	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 44762002

Aquatic Plants	No data	None	N/A

Mammals	> 28 g/kg-bw  

(no deaths occurred at 25 mL/kg-bw)	Data obtained from secondary
literature; no chronic or reproduction toxicity studies were submitted
to the Agency.  (See Appendix C of EFED Memorandum for discussion of
various of these data.)	Hine and Zuidema (1970)

Birds	LD50: >2250 mg/kg-bw

LC50: >5620 ppm	No chronic or reproduction toxicity studies were
submitted.	44608001;41793202; 41742101; 4780903; 44780902

Terrestrial Plants	No data	None	N/A

a  No chronic or reproduction studies have been submitted to the Agency.

In general, these aliphatic oils (mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum
hydrocarbons) are not toxic to most aquatic and terrestrial organisms. 
There was essentially no lethality observed in any of the tests
conducted with fish species (in either freshwater or estuarine/ marine
species), mammals (rats or mice), or birds (in either acute, oral,
single-dose or subchronic dietary feeding tests).  Data were cited in
the EFED Memorandum that in one fish toxicity test, up to a 50% mixture
(500,000 mg/L) did not result in any observed mortality.  Data were also
presented indicating no treatment-related effects in various honey bee
contact studies.  The EFED memo did report that some types of oils have
been tested on bird eggs, and have caused smothering (lack of oxygen
transport, and impaired hatching ability); however, the data provided in
that EFED memo do not appear to indicate that the likelihood of off-site
drift of spray applications would have demonstrated impacts on bird egg
hatching.  

The EFED memo indicated that no testing information had been submitted
on the effects of these oils on plants.  However, some information in
the EFED EIIS (Ecological Incidents Information System) database does
indicate incidents of plant damage.  The HPV submission reviewed data on
toxicity testing with various freshwater algae, and reported there were
“no adverse effects” at the levels tested.  There is not much
information on actual testing with terrestrial plants; however, for some
crops, high amounts of spray oils have been safely applied onto the
foliar surfaces for insecticidal purposes.  Historically, there had been
some reports of phytotoxic effects (“burned” leaves, and some
current labels list phytotoxicity warnings); however, many of the newer
TGAIs being formulated by most Technical registrants do not appear to
have these same adverse effects, possibly because of the reduced amounts
of polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and the increased amounts of
Unsulfonated Residues (lower amounts of nitrogen and sulfur in
side-chains) reported to be present in the newer TGAIs, contaminants
thought to have been the causes of the phytotoxic effects in older
TGAIs.

There was an oyster shell deposition study, in which there was
statistically significant reduction of shell deposition, with a 96-hr
EC50 of 5.57 mg/L, as reported in the study.  This study was conducted
in 1998-99 for Golden Bear Oil Specialties, Inc. with a test material
which is no longer formulated, and thus not applied to the environment. 
(The registrant for this test material, GB-1111, is now Clark Mosquito
Products.)  It is possible that one reason for the reduced oyster shell
deposition could be due to the oils coating onto the outer surface of
the algal materials made available of food to these filter-feeding
oysters, thus, rendering the oysters less able to break-down and utilize
these food materials for nutrition.

There are also two toxicity studies available with mysid shrimp
(Mysidopsis bahia, an estuarine/marine species of invertebrates).  One
study (MRID 446254-01), conducted in 1998-99 for Golden Bear Oil
Specialties, Inc. (with the same no-longer formulated test material as
described above), yielded a 96-hr LC50 value of 1.2 mg/L.  Another study
(MRID 450513-02) was conducted in 1997, for Petro-Canada (with a test
material still being utilized as a TGAI, and described as severely
hydrotreated [i.e., more highly refined that the Golden Bear product]);
for this test material, a 96-hr LC50 value could not be calculated,
because the data reported did not indicate 50% mortality, even at the
highest test concentration, (nominal) 500,000 mg/L.  The study reported
that “most observed mortality appeared to occur when organisms swam
toward the top of the test container and became trapped in the overlying
layer.”  The nominal concentrations, and reported mortality data, were
as follows:  control, 10%; 31,250 mg/L, 20%; 62,500 mg/L, 20%; 125,000
mg/L, 15%; 250,000 mg/L, 25%; and 500,000 mg/l, 30% mortality.

The organism utilized for the ecological risk assessment was the water
flea, Daphnia magna.  Based on the data reported in the EFED Memorandum
(Table 7), a number of different studies have been submitted, describing
the results of daphnia toxicity testing.  However, detailed analyses of
some of the studies submitted reveal that a few of the test materials
utilized in aquatic toxicity testing are no longer used in formulating
TGAIs or end-use products for spray oils.  For example, the lowest LC50
value reported in Table 7 for Daphnia, 0.02 mg/L, was from a 1990-91
study, conducted for Unocal Corporation / PureGro Company, with 90
Neutral Oil; however, according to the Agency REFS database, this
product was apparently cancelled in 1993.  The next higher LC50 value
reported in Table 7, 0.1 mg/L, was a test conducted for Golden Bear Oil
Specialties, Inc. (with a test material no longer formulated, and thus
not applied to the environment).  (Note also that the registrant for
this test material, GB-1111, is now Clark Mosquito Products, and a
review of the CSF for their product indicates their product is
formulated with an unregistered technical; thus, RD and SRRD have
suggested that when Clark submits a revised CSF as part of the
reregistration process, that the CSF utilize a registered TGAI.)  The
next higher LC50 value for Daphnia, 0.41 mg/L, is from a toxicity test
conducted in 1983, with a product called 100 Paraffine Oil.  This study
was submitted in support of four products, two of which have since been
cancelled (Chevron Ag Base Lite Neutral and Chevron Ag 100), and for the
two other products, revised CSFs have been submitted in the 1990s
(Valent Orchard Spray, with a revised CSF submitted in 1992, and Volck
Supreme Spray, with a newer, revised CSF in 1996); therefore, it is
clear that daphnia toxicity testing data developed with “100 Paraffine
Oil” is no longer still appropriate for characterizing currently
formulated TGAIs and end-use products.  

The daphnia toxicity study (MRID 446373-37) with the next higher
toxicity results was conducted for Petro-Canada, in 1997, with a product
designated in the report as VHVI-4, referred to as “N100DW basestock
which is one of the raw materials used to make the final Spray Oil 10,
13, 15, 22 products.”  These products are still being formulated by
Petro-Canada, with their most recent CSFs dating from 1995 and 1997, so
clearly this test material is representative of Petro-Canada’s
currently formulated TGAIs and end-use products, as well as the TGAIs
and end-use-products for some other registrants who also purchase their
TGAIs from Petro-Canada.  The static testing (i.e., not with continuous
flow conditions) was conducted for 48 hours, and samples were collected
for “later verification of the test concentrations if required”, but
test concentrations were not clearly reported, so the reported levels
will be considered to be only nominal (i.e., unmeasured, or estimated). 
The highest concentration tested, 14 mg/L, was reported to be “the
maximum solubility of VHVI-4 in water;” however, the text reported
that the “test solutions had a thin film of oil on the surface prior
to addition of test organisms.”  In describing the test results, the
report stated “there was no mortality in any of the test treatments.
This was confirmed by examination under a microscope for the presence of
a heartbeat. Several neonates in all test concentrations were floating
on the surface of the test solutions in all VHVI-4 concentrations, at 24
hours and 48 hours.”  The actual data results reported in Appendix C
of MRID 446373-37 also list a number of daphnia being counted as I for
“immobilized,” or F for “floating”, with 20 of 20 test organisms
floating in both 14 mg/L and 7 mg/L, 19 floating and 1 immobilized at
3.5 mg/L, 10 floating and 10 immobilized at 1.8 mg/L, 17 floating and 3
immobilized at 0.9 mg/L (the lowest nominal test concentration), and all
20 normal in the control.  Based on these data, it is clear that there
are some effects on the daphnia, although apparently not lethality, even
at the lowest test concentration, so the EC50 is < 0.9 mg/L.  It is also
possible that these effects may be transient, and might be reversible,
with the daphnia becoming free of their “immobilized” conditions
when the surface films break up.  Thus, in light of the absence of any
significant mortality, even at the highest concentration tested, it
might also be inferred that the LC50 could be reported as “> 14
mg/L.”  (The EFED Memorandum had indicated that the LC50 was “<0.9
mg/L (100% mortality occurred at all concentrations)”, but that is not
in agreement with the actual text reported in the body of MRID, or with
the data, as report in the body and appendix of the MRID; i.e., the
daphnia were not “dead”).

The EFED Memorandum did conclude that there was uncertainty whether the
effects observed in the daphnid toxicity studies were caused by the
physical effects resulting from the oils coating the organism or from a
different mode of action (such as the organisms becoming entrapped in
the oils floating on the surface), although some studies did report that
daphnids were also immobile in the bottom or in the middle of the test
containers.  The EFED memo concluded that entrapment in surface oil
slicks would be less likely to occur in streams and rivers (moving water
bodies), and oil slicks would be a higher concern in quiescent waters,
such as wetlands and stagnant lakes.

It is not surprising that there would be some disparity among the
various MRIDs reporting the results of toxicity tests with daphnia. 
These mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons have very low
water solubility, based on the information available, including water
solubility data for 10 of these same CAS Numbers, as reported in the
Lubricating Oils Basestocks Category for the HVP submissions.  In fact,
the HPV submission dataset provides data indicating that oils with these
CAS Numbers are essentially non-toxic to daphnid invertebrates, with the
following reported data in the Test Plan and Robust Summaries: no
mortality, based on Water Accommodated Fractions (WAFs), for 48-hr at
1000 mg/L exposures to Daphnia magna, and 96-hr at 10,000 mg/L exposures
to Gammarus pulex; and for various CAS Numbers, there were no effects on
mortality or reproduction after 21 days exposure at 1000 mg/L for
Daphnia magna in static renewal tests (with the following CAS Nos.:
64741-88-4; 64741-89-5, 64742-55-8, and 64742-65-0).  The differences in
the toxicity to invertebrates observed between the registrant-submitted
MRIDs and the HVP data may be due to the methods of attempting to get
these poorly soluble oils into the water column into a
solution/suspension.  

X.III.  Estimated Environmental Concentrations:

Terrestrial Concentration Estimates

The EFED Memorandum described the procedure utilized to develop   SEQ
CHAPTER \h \r 1 estimated environmental concentrations (EECs) on
terrestrial systems by using the Tier I exposure model, T-REX (Version
1.2.3.).  This procedure was utilized to estimate the potential dietary
exposures for terrestrial organisms, as a result of applications of
mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons (aliphatic spray oils)
at various applications rates, 10, 50, 150, and 477 lbs/acre (single
application) (Table 8).  

Table 8.  EECs for Selected Terrestrial Animal Food Items After
Applications of Oils .

Food Item	EEC (ppm), as predicted, resulting from application rates of
10 to 477 lbs a.i./Acre

	10 lbs a.i./Acre	50 lbs a.i./Acre	150 lbs a.i./Acre	477 lbs a.i./Acre

Short grass	2400	12,000	36,000	114,000

Tall grass	1100	5500	17,000	52,000

Broadleaf forage, small insects 	1350	6800	20,000	64,000

Fruits, seeds, pods, large insects	150	750	2300	7200

This estimation procedure analysis indicates that the aliphatic spray
oils may be found on animal feed items at extremely high concentrations
(up to 114,000 ppm).  These concentrations were then converted to doses
(mg/kg-bw) for 15-, 35-, and 1000-gram mammals, and 20-, 100-, and
1000-gram birds.  (See Appendix B of the EFED Memorandum for details
concerning these calculations, including the body weight adjusted EECs
for 10, 150, and 477 lbs/acre applications for both the birds and
mammals.)  

Aquatic Concentration Estimates

The EFED Memorandum also described the procedure utilized to develop  
SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 EECs in aquatic systems.  EFED performed separate
modeling efforts for spray drift alone, and for off-site runoff.  For
the off-site spray drift alone, the modeling to develop EECs was
performed for airblast applications, known to have the highest off-site
drift for the various ground application procedures (Table 9).  EFED
assumed that “9.7% of the mass applied to a 10 hectare field would
drift off-site into an adjacent 20,000,000 L water body (standard drift
assumption in GENEEC2 for orchard airblast applications, and EFED’s
standard ecological water body volume).”  The EECs in Table 9 assume
no runoff, but do assume an off-site drift of 9.7% of the total amount
of a product applied, and also assume no degradation, partitioning, or
differential distribution of the various components within the spray oil
end-use product.  It is known that some components of these spray oils
(the lower molecular weight fractions) may be more volatile than others,
but this model also does not take into consideration any volatilization
of components during off-site drift. 

Table 9.  Preliminary Aquatic EECs from Spray Drift Into a Standard
Ecological Pond

Application Rate	EEC: Resulting Only from Off-Site Spray Drift (9.7% of
Amount Applied)

477 lbs a.i./Acre	2.6 mg/L

150 lbs a.i./Acre	0.82 mg/L

50 lbs a.i./Acre	0.27 mg/L

10 lbs a.i./Acre	0.05 mg/L

The EFED Memorandum reported that the simple screening level analysis,
GENEEC, was the procedure used to qualitatively evaluate the
contribution of off-site runoff to the overall aquatic EECs.  GENEEC was
run assuming that these aliphatic spray oils were being applied by
granular application (not a labeled use), explaining that this procedure
was a convenience to minimize spray drift in the model run to zero.  In
the absence of environmental fate data for these complex mixtures, EFED
assumed that the relevant processes (aerobic soil and aquatic
metabolism, hydrolysis, and photolysis) were all stable.  GENEEC was run
across a very wide potential range of Koc values that might be expected
for the various constituents within the aliphatic spray oils (Table 10).
 

Table 10.  EECs Predicted Using GENEEC, Assuming Only Off-Site Runoff 1

Koc 	Application Rate (lbs a.i./Acre)	EEC (ppm)

0.001	477	26.79

	150	8.44

	50	2.82

0.01	477	26.79

	150	8.44

	50	2.82

0.1	477	26.79

	150	8.44

	50	2.82

1	477	26.76

	150	8.43

	50	2.81

10	477	26.35

	150	8.30

	50	2.77

100	477	22.79

	150	7.18

	50	2.39

1000	477	10.04

	150	3.16

	50	1.05

10,000	477	2.51

	150	0.79

	50	0.26

100,000	477	1.41

	150	0.44

	50	0.15

1.  GENEEC Model with No Spray Drift, and with a “Complete
Stability” Assumption for All Dissipation Processes

The GENEEC modeling analysis (Table 10) suggests that even with the wide
range of Koc values used, the predicted EECs vary by only a factor of 20
(from 26.79 ppm to 1.41 ppm, at the current maximum application rate,
477 lbs a.i./Acre).  This analysis also indicates that from a Koc of
0.001 and 100, there is very little difference in resulting EECs, but as
Koc increases from 100 to 1000, there is a dramatic drop in EEC.  This
pattern is significant, because most of the components which make up the
spray oils will be in the higher Koc range.  The EFED Memorandum
presented estimates from the Horticultural Oil Spray Task Force (HSOTF),
that the typical Koc would be 47,860.  The EFED Memorandum also
presented data from a study (Nudelman et al., 2002, as cited by HSOTF)
which reported that for many aliphatic spray oils, the Koc values range
from 900 to 6600.  The EFED Memorandum concluded, based on the weight of
evidence for the aliphatic spray oils, that a reasonable estimate of Koc
for these complex mixtures would be between 1000 and 100,000, with a
GENEEC estimate based on a Koc of 10,000 being a reasonable assumption
of exposure due to runoff.  Thus, at the current highest single
application of 477 lbs a.i./Acre, the contribution to the EEC from
runoff would not be expected to exceed 2.5 ppm (mg/L); at 150 lbs
a.i./Acre, the EEC was predicted to be 0.97 ppm, and for the more
typical average application rate, 50 lbs a.i./Acre, the EEC was
predicted to be 0.26 ppm (Table 10).  

The registrants with the highest maximum application rates have
voluntarily agreed to lower these rates.  Thus, their new maximum rates
are now more in line with the 150 lbs a.i./Acre estimates included in
Tables 9 and 10, with off-site spray drift and off-site runoff EECs of
0.82 ppm and 0.79 ppm, respectively, and a combined estimate of off-site
EEC of 1.6 ppm, resulting from a single application with 150 lbs
a.i./Acre.

X.IV.  Ecological Risk Assessment:

Terrestrial Organisms

The EFED Memorandum compiled a summary of terrestrial risk estimates
(Table 11), based on the toxic effects data for terrestrial animals
(Table 7) and the EECs of aliphatic spray oils which would occur on
animal food items (Table 8).  Table 11 shows the application rate
associated with the following key toxicity endpoints, respectively: for
birds, a behavioral endpoint (specifically a “slightly reduced
reaction to external stimuli (sound and movement)”), as well as data
from an acute gavage test and from a dietary feeding test; and for
mammals, data from an acute gavage test.  

Table 11.  Application Rates Associated with Key Toxicity Endpoints in
Terrestrial Organisms

Application Rate	Toxicity Endpoint	Comment

Birds

4 lbs a.i./Acre	Application rate associated with lowest dietary
concentration that produced a toxic effect in birds (NOAEC 1000 ppm, and
LOAEC 1780 ppm; MRID 417421-01). 	Toxic effects in bobwhite quail
included a slight reduced reaction to external stimuli.  (However, no
mortality occurred at the highest dose tested, 5620 ppm.)

6 lbs a.i./Acre	Application rate associated with highest body weight
adjusted dose  tested in available acute oral gavage bird studies (1620
mg/kg-bw; adjusted from 2250 mg/kg-bw for a 20-gram bird).	No mortality
occurred at this dose.

23 lbs a.i./Acre	Application rate associated with highest dietary
concentration tested in available bird studies (5620 ppm).	No mortality
occurred at this concentration.

Mammals

12.7 lbs a.i./Acre	Application rate associated with EECs on short grass
that is 1/10th of the limit dose tested in mammals, 28,000 mg/kg-bw. 	No
mortality occurred at this concentration. (Hine and Zuidema, 1970)

The EFED Memorandum stated that the toxic effects data available for
acute risk to terrestrial organisms are difficult to use, because no
mortality was observed at the limit dose in acute and subacute bird
studies, even though the levels tested in the various studies were not
as high as the potential exposures from the high application rates. 
However, it could be interpreted that because there was no mortality
observed in any of the studies, these test materials are innocuous
(virtually without any toxic effects, even at very elevated doses,
except for the self-limiting aspects of producing diarrhea or vomiting).
 In addition, utilizing a startle reflex in birds or even assessing the
potential risk based on limit doses, at which no mortality was observed,
would result in an overestimate of the potential for terrestrial risks
of these potentially innocuous test materials.

The EFED Memorandum concluded that there was much uncertainty in the
ecological risk assessment, due to the absence of mortality.  However,
the information presented also did postulate that there might be a
potential for risks to the eggs of egg-laying animals, in or adjacent to
the treated field, although the Agency does not generally regulate based
on egg-smothering within application sites.  Further, there was limited
information on which to predict the off-site drift estimates of the
amount of the test material which would impair egg-hatching in off-site
nests.  In addition, the EFED Memo stated that the high application
rates (especially the 477 lbs a.i./Acre [4500 gallons spray mix]
currently on some labels, but even some lower rates) “do not allow for
a definitive conclusion with respect to potential risks to terrestrial
animals,” because the concentrations estimated (by modeling) to be on
food items could actually be higher than levels tested in submitted
studies in birds and mammals.  (However, as stated above, these test
materials may be “innocuous,” at virtually any dose administered,
because none of the testing data have revealed any mortality in birds or
mammals.)  In addition, the EFED Memorandum pointed out that no chronic
or reproduction toxicity data in terrestrial animals have been submitted
to the Agency under FIFRA (although apparently none have ever been
required under a GDCI), and that no plant toxicity data have been
submitted; therefore, the EFED Memorandum continued, “definitive risk
conclusions cannot be made at this time with respect to these surrogate
species.”

In conclusion, the following factors characterize the terrestrial risk
assessment for the spray oils:  1) a lack of mortality data observed in
any testing with mammalian and avian species; 2) the absence of current
reports of phytotoxicity data in these important agricultural crops,
even at high application rates; and 3) reductions have been voluntarily
proposed by registrants from the former, very high, maximum application
rates.  Based on this weight of evidence, the Agency has concluded that
it does not have any concerns regarding the reregistration of these
mineral oil and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbon products, due solely to
terrestrial risk assessment. 

Aquatic Organisms

The EFED Memorandum presented preliminary aquatic risk estimations.  The
available data from various toxicity studies had revealed no mortality,
including for various fish species and for estuarine/marine
invertebrates, mysid shrimp.  The aquatic risk assessment information
presented in the EFED Memorandum was preliminary risk quotients (RQs)
based on the reported toxicity data for aquatic invertebrates.  These RQ
values were based on EECs developed on only the off-site spray drift and
on the direct application to water.  The EFED Memorandum pointed out
that the contribution of runoff to the EEC is only discussed
qualitatively, because the composition of the runoff component might not
be toxicologically similar to the composition of oils that enters water
via spraydrift or those which were used in the available toxicity
studies.  The EFED Memorandum also acknowledged that during runoff,
there may be a differential separation of the components, due to
differences in solubility, or some components becoming very highly
sorbed to soil and/or foliar surfaces, or that some components might
degrade, or others become volatilized, and enter the atmosphere. 

Table 12.  Preliminary Aquatic EECs from Drift Into a Standard
Ecological Pond Compared with Aquatic Invertebrate Toxicity Data

Application Rate	EEC from 9.7% Drift Only, into a 20,000,000 L
ecological pond	Daphnid RQs, based on:	Oyster RQ, based on EC50 of 6
mg/L

EC50 =  0.02 mg/L	EC50: < 0.9 mg/L	LC50:  > 14 mg/L

	477 lbs a.i./Acre	2.6 mg/L	130	2.9	0.19	0.43

150 lbs a.i./Acre	0.82 mg/L	41	0.91	0.059	0.14

50 lbs a.i./Acre	0.27 mg/L	14	0.31	0.02	0.045

10 lbs a.i./Acre	0.05 mg/L	2.5	0.056	0.0036	<0.01

Direct Application EEC 	2.1 mg/L	105	2.3	0.15	0.35

For their daphnia RQs, the EFED Memorandum relied only on the toxicity
data reported for 90 Neutral Oil (MRID 419028-03; EC50 = 0.02 mg/L);
however, Table 12 lists additional RQ estimates from a study with a
different test material, VHVI-4.  These estimates are included because,
as explained in the section above describing the Ecological Effects
Toxicity Data, many of the available daphnia toxicity studies,
previously submitted to the Agency, had been conducted with materials
which are no longer appropriate for risk assessment purposes (the
products tested are no longer registered, or registrants have agreed to
submit revised CSFs with different TGAIs).  Thus, a range of RQs are
presented in Table 12, with the data for the EC50 = 0.02 mg/L retained
for comparative purposes (although that product was cancelled in 1993,
thus, these values are no longer appropriate and are overly
restrictive).  

There should be some clarification presented on the other two data
columns.  In the study with VHVI-4 (MRID 446373-37), almost all the
daphnia were either immobilized or floating, so the EC50 is less than
0.9 mg/l, the lowest nominal test concentration; however, the RQs
reported in Table 12 are based on the actual 0.9 mg/L value, the lowest
nominal concentration tested.  The actual situation is that
immobilization/floating may actually occur at even lower concentrations,
so based on the “immobilization/floating” endpoint, the true RQs
might be higher than in that data column.  It is not known from the
study report how long the daphnia would remain immobilized, or how long
the surface film would remain in place, which is contributing to their
entrapment.  However, the CDC stated in a letter, dated June 13, 2006,
that “surface film larvicides generally have a shorter environmental
persistence (approx. 2-3 days) than most chemical larvicide
alternatives.”  Thus, the surface film should break up within a few
days.  In addition, that study did report microscope observations of the
daphnia, revealing that their hearts were still beating; thus, the
daphnia were not dead at the conclusion of the 2-day test period. 
Therefore, the actual LC50 value would be greater than the highest dose
tested, 14 mg/L, also reported to be the “the maximum solubility of
VHVI-4 in water.”  If the daphnia survive their immobilization, and
are able to break-free from the oils, then the RQs presented in that
data column in Table 12 may actually be overestimates of the true RQs,
and even for daphnia, the Agency would not have any concerns regarding
the reregistration of these mineral oil and aliphatic petroleum
hydrocarbon products, based on the aquatic risk assessments.

X.V.  Endangered Species:

The Endangered Species Act required federal agencies to ensure that
their actions are not likely to jeopardize listed species or adversely
modify designated critical habitats.  The Agency has developed the
Endangered Species Protection Program to identify pesticides whose use
may cause adverse impacts on federally listed endangered and threatened
species, and to implement mitigation measures that address these
impacts.  To assess the potential of registered pesticide uses that may
affect any particular species, EPA puts basic toxicity and exposure data
developed for the REDs into context for individual listed species and
considers ecological parameters, pesticide use information, the
geographic relationship between specific pesticide uses and species
locations and biological requirements and behavioral aspects of the
particular species.  When conducted, these analyses take into
consideration any regulatory changes recommended in the RED being
implemented at that time.  A determination that there is a likelihood of
potential effects to a listed species may result in limitations on the
use of the pesticide, other measures to mitigate any potential effects,
and/or consultations with the Fish and Wildlife Service or National
Marine Fisheries Service, as necessary.  If the Agency determines use of
these aliphatic solvents (the mineral oil and aliphatic petroleum
hydrocarbon products) “may affect” listed species or their
designated critical habitat, EPA will employ the provisions in the
Services regulations (50 CFR Part 402).  

XI.  Mosquito Larvicide/Pupacide Uses:  

There are three end-use products with labels solely for mosquito
larvicide/pupacide applications: 

Bonide Mosquito Larvicide, EPA Reg. No. 4-195; 

Clarke Mosquito Control Products, Mosquito Larvicide GB-1111, EPA Reg.
No. 8329-72; and 

BVA 2 Mosquito Larvicide Oil, EPA Reg. No. 70589-1.  

These registered products (at least one is each of the OPP Chemical
Codes, in Mineral Oils and in Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbons) have
labeled uses for direct application to water bodies.  To address this
use, the EFED Memorandum described a process which assumed that the
maximum labeled application rate (37 lbs/acre, the highest among the
three products) would be applied directly to the treated water body.  In
order to develop EECs for the ecological risk assessment, EFED assumed
that the application would occur to EFED's standard EXAMS water body of
20,000,000 L.  (See the EFED Memorandum for additional details of the
EXAMS model).  According to the results of this model, assuming
instantaneous equilibrium, the EEC for these mosquito larvicide/pupacide
products, when applied directly to the water body, would be 2.1 mg/L
(ppm), based on the description from the EFED Memorandum (see Table 12
for RQs, based on this EEC).

Due to the characteristics of these mosquito control products, however,
it is likely that the oils would not mix within the water column, and
that the exposures would be restricted to a much higher concentration at
the film layer on the surface of the water.  Thus, there would be a
higher EEC exposure at the surface, but in a smaller proportion of the
entire water body, and a lower EEC throughout the vertical extent of the
water body.  Thus, any possible adverse effects on the critical
components of the aquatic ecosystem would be much lower within the water
column.

Concerning these mosquito larvicide/pupacide uses, the Agency has
solicited a benefits consultation from the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC).  In a letter (dated June 13, 2006), Dr. Michael A.
McGeehin of CDC described the comparative benefits of Aliphatic Oils, as
follows: 

“Surface film larvicides generally have a shorter environmental
persistence (approx. 2-3 days) than most chemical larvicide
alternatives.”

“They are very quick acting, making them well suited to situations
where rapid control is required, such as habitats in which most of the
mosquitoes are in late larval or pupil stages, or in ephemeral habitats
in which the active ingredient need not be present for a long time.”

“Surface film larvicides like the oils kill all immature mosquito
stages (all larval stages and pupae).  Therefore, timing of application
is not as critical as with other products that require the active
ingredient be consumed by feeding larvae (e.g., those containing
Bacillus thurinigensis israelensis, Bti) or during key periods in larval
development (e.g., the insect growth regulators).”

“Surface films kill pupae, while most other products do not.  As such,
they often provide the only alternative for control of immature
mosquitoes in certain habitats before they become adults.”

“Surface films perform effectively under most field conditions,
regardless of water quality (pH, turbidity, and BOD don’t impact
performance), and on all mosquito species that use the water surface to
breathe (e.g., excluding members of the genera Mansonia or
Coquillettidia).  Other larvicides, such as those using BTI, bacillus
sphaericus, and methoprene, often don’t perform well in highly
polluted water that can produce large numbers of Culex pipiens or Culex
quinquefasciatus mosquitoes (important West Nile virus vectors).  Bti
doesn’t work well with anophelines, because of their habit of feeding
near the water surface.  As such, surface films provide a valuable
option to an integrated mosquito control program.”

The letter from McGeehin of CDC further went on to describe the types of
areas where these surface film mosquito larvicides/pupacides have
advantages.  For example, these surface film mosquito
larvicides/pupacides are utilized in any habitat where pupae and late
4th instar larvae are found and/or the organic content of the water is
extremely high.  The most common type of this situation would be where
the organic matter in the water would reduce the efficacy of other types
of larvicides (sites such as storm sewer catch basins, sewage treatment
plants, storm water impoundments collecting runoff in urban areas, dairy
lagoons, or agricultural processing facilities where waste water
accumulates, such as sugar beet plants in the Great Plains States).  The
surface film mosquito larvicides/pupacides are also effective in areas
known to produce mosquitoes for only a very short time duration, sites
which are expected to be dry for some time periods, or where the use of
longer duration products would not be warranted, such as swales along
rivers and lakes, and certain types of floodwater habitats.  If longer
term control is needed, surface film oils would not be reapplied, but
instead, a product would be used which would provide a longer duration
of control (such as Bti, B. sphaericus, or methoprene).  These surface
film oils would not be routinely utilized in marsh or swamp habitats,
unless the mosquitoes were found to be in the pupil stage and
concentrated within a discrete area, and in these situations, the
surface film products would be targeted in that discrete area, rather
than broadcast over a very large area.

In conclusion, the CDC letter from McGeehin summarized the findings by
stating that the “mineral oils and aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons
used as surface films provide a valuable option in integrated mosquito
control programs that target mosquitoes of public health importance.”

XII.  Labeling for Aliphatic Solvents Products:

A summary of the various label changes are included in the Label Table. 
Key changes, and the important reasons, are as follows: 

Due to concerns that maximum label rates for citrus on some labels that
were as high as 4500 gallons of spray mix per acre (equal to 477 lbs
a.i../Acre), these registrants have voluntarily agreed to reduce their
highest rate on citrus, with revised labels which will indicate that
applications in Texas and Florida should not exceed 1500 gallons of
spray mix per acre, and in California, should not exceed 2000 gallons of
spray mix per acre (based on Thorough Coverage Spray (TCS), with 1.5
gallons of product mixed in 100 gallons of water).

Due to concerns for the potential for spray drift to travel off-site,
and deposit onto surface waters, possibly resulting in adverse effects
to aquatic invertebrates, the revised labels submitted in fulfillment of
reregistration activities should include the following statement
concerning the restrictions on the use of airblast equipment on the
outer edges of orchards: “For airblast applications, turn off outward
pointing nozzles at row ends and when spraying the outer row. To
minimize spray loss over the top in orchard applications, spray must be
directed into the canopy.”  In addition, the following language
restrictions should appear on those labels describing aerial spraying:
“For aerial applications of agricultural products, do not release
spray at a height greater than 10 feet above the ground, top of crops,
or above the orchard canopy.”

XIII.  Tolerance Reassessment:

The Tolerance Expression at 40 CFR 180.149 for active ingredient use for
Mineral Oil (Table 3), the post-harvest uses on corn and sorghum (to
combat storage insect infestation) predates the establishment of the
Environmental Protection Agency, having been first proposed in the
1950s.  A review of the EFED spreadsheets developed by BEAD and an
extensive search of the existing labels failed to detect any Mineral Oil
products with a current label for this grain storage usage.  Thus, as
part of the reregistration process, SRRD will publish a notice of intent
to revoke this tolerance (40 CFR 180.149) in the Federal Register.

Taking into consideration all available information presented herein on
the aliphatic solvents, including the mineral oils and aliphatic
petroleum hydrocarbons, the Agency has determined that there is a
reasonable certainty that no harm to any population subgroup will result
from aggregate exposure to these chemicals when considering exposure
through food commodities and as well as any occupational or
non-occupational sources for which there is reliable information. 
Therefore, the current exemption from the requirement of a tolerance
established for “Petroleum Oils” when applied to growing crops, in
accordance with good agricultural practice, under 40 CFR 180.905, is
reassessed as being safe under section 408(q) of the FFDCA.

XIV.  References:

CDC (2006).  US Centers of Disease Control and Prevention.  Letter:
Aliphatic Oils Consult: Describing the Public Health Benefits.  Letter
from Michael A. McGeehin, Director, Division of Environmental Hazards
and Health Effects, National Center for Environmental Health, CDC, to
Debra Edwards, OPP.  June 13, 2006.    

  

EFED (2006).  Environmental Fate and Effects Division.  Memorandum
Describing the Environmental Fate and Effects Division’s Ecological
Risk Assessment on Aliphatic Oils (PC Codes 063502 and 063503) in
Support of Reregistration Eligibility Decision.  Memorandum from Brain
Anderson/Stephen Carey/Mark Corbin (ERB III/EFED) to Mark Perry/Bentley
Gregg (SRRD).  April 25, 2006.  DP Barcodes: 327645, 313161.

EPA (1992).  Environmental Protection Agency.  EPA File Symbol/EPA Reg.
No.: 10163-RLU Gowan Spray Oil.  Memorandum from Mark Perry (Biologist,
Precautionary Review Section/Registration Support Branch/Registration
Division) to Dennis Edwards (Insecticide/Rodenticide Branch/Registration
Division).  File: 009979.

EPA (1994a).  Environmental Protection Agency.  EPA ID#063503: Aliphatic
Petroleum Hydrocarbons – Review of Ten Acute Toxicity Studies. 
Memorandum from Paul Chin, Ph.D. (Section 2/Toxicity Branch I/HED) to
Kathryn Davis/Bonnie Adler (Reregistration Division).  File: 010813.

EPA (1994b).  Environmental Protection Agency.  EPA ID#063502: Mineral
Oil – Review of Acute Toxicity Studies.  Memorandum from Paul Chin,
Ph.D. (Section 2/Toxicity Branch I/HED) to Kathryn Davis/Bonnie Adler
(Reregistration Division).  File: 13000 Tox Reviews: 032895.

EPA (1994c).  Environmental Protection Agency.  EPA ID#063502: Mineral
Oil – Review of Acute Toxicity Studies.  Memorandum from Paul Chin,
Ph.D. (Section 2/Toxicity Branch I/HED) to Kathryn Davis/Bonnie Adler
(Reregistration Division).  File: 13000 Tox Reviews: 032894.

EPA (1994d).  Environmental Protection Agency.  EPA ID#063503-000862:
Mutagenicity Studies for Petroleum Distillates, Oils, Solvents, or
Hydrocarbons.  Memorandum from Sheryl K. Reilly, Ph.D. (Review Section
II, Toxicology Branch I, HED) to Kathryn Davis/Bonnie Adler
(Reregistration Division).  File: 13000 Tox Reviews: 033210.

EPA (1995a)  Environmental Protection Agency.  OPP Official Record,
Health Effects Division, Scientific Data Reviews, EPA Series 361.  CBRS
Transmittal Sheet for Phase 4 Reviews.  Case No. 3004; Chemical No(s):
63502/63503.

EPA (1995b)  Environmental Protection Agency.  OPP Official Record,
Health Effects Division, Scientific Data Reviews, EPA Series 361.  OREB
Transmittal Sheet for Phase 4 Reviews.  Case No. 3004; Chemical No(s):
63502/63503.

EPA (1996).  Environmental Protection Agency.  Petroleum Oils.  Review
of Toxicology Data.  Memorandum from Raymond K. Locke (Section
2/Toxicity Branch I/HED) to Kathryn Davis/Bonnie Adler (Reregistration
Division).  File: 13000 Tox Reviews: 001714.

HPV (2004).  High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Challenge Program. 
Lubricating Oil Basestocks Category  Test Plan, Revised March 2, 2004
(201-15135A), and Robust Summary of Information, Revised January 13,
2004 (201-15135B).

http://www.epa.gov/chemrtk/lubolbse/c14364tc.htm

HSDB (2002).  Hazardous Substance Database: Mineral Oil (CAS#
8012-95-1).

http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search/f?./temp/~QKsJzx:1

IARC (1987).  International Agency for Research on Cancer – Summaries
and Evaluations.  Mineral oils: Untreated and Mildly Treated Oils (Group
1) and Highly Refined Oils (Group 3).  Supplement 7:  p. 252.

ICSC (2001a).  International Chemical Safety Cards.  Distillates,
petroleum, solvent-refined light naphthenic (CAS# 64741-97-5).
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ipcsneng/neng1430.html

ICSC (2001b).  International Chemical Safety Cards.  Distillates,
petroleum, solvent-refined heavy paraffinic (CAS# 64741-88-4).
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ipcsneng/neng1431.html

Inchem (1982).  IPSC (International Programme on Chemical Safety) 
Environmental Health Criteria 20:  Selected Petroleum Products.

http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc020.htm

Inchem (2001a).  Distillates, petroleum, solvent-refined heavy
paraffinic (CAS# 

64741-88-4).  ISCS: 1431.

Inchem (2001b).  Distillates, petroleum, solvent-refined light
naphthenic (CAS# 

64741-97-5).  ISCS: 1430

MSDS (1994).  Material Safety Data Sheet:  Pennzar 71.  Hydrotreated
light paraffinic distillate (CAS# 64742-55-8).
http://www.stlucieco.gov/msq/fog/chemicals/ULV_oil_msds.pdf

MSDS (2002a).  Material Safety Data Sheet:  Adams Iso #100 Motor Oil. 
Distillates, petroleum, solvent-refined heavy paraffinic (CAS#
64741-88-4). 
http://www.adamselevator.com/Adams/AdamsWeb.nsf/D2B44C9D84212C4B85256BD1
004DE52C/$File/motor%20100.pdf?openelement

MSDS (2002b).  Material Safety Data Sheet:  Ergon-West Virginia, Inc. 
Hyprene P70N.   (CAS# 64742-56-9). 
http://www.adapcoinc.com/pdf/ulvm.pdf

MSDS (2003a).  Material Safety Data Sheet:  BVA Spray Oils.   (CAS#
72623-87-1).  http://www.adapcoinc.com/pdf/BVA13m.pdf

MSDS (2003b).  Material Safety Data Sheet:  Lamp Fuel used in Hollowick
HD8 and HD 12 Disposable Cells.   (CAS# 8042-47-5). 
http://www.hollowick.com/newimages/HD8_HD12MSDS2003_b.pdf

MSDS (2004).  Material Safety Data Sheet:  Vacuum Pump Oil.  (CAS#
72623-84-8)

  HYPERLINK "http://www.fjcinc.com/msds22vacuumpumpoil.htm" 
http://www.fjcinc.com/msds22vacuumpumpoil.htm 

MSDS (2006).  Material Safety Data Sheet:  Spray Oil 10, 13, 15, 22. 
(CAS#:  “The base oil may be a mixture of the following CAS#s:
8042-47-5, 64742-46-7, 64742-52-5, 64742-54-7, 72623-84-8, 72623-85-9,
72623-86-0, 72623-87-1, 178603-64-0, 

178603-65-1, 178603-66-2, 445411-73-4”). 

http://www.online.petro-canada.ca/datasheets/en_us/spray10.pdf

NIOSH (1997a).  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health:
The Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances.  Mineral oil,
petroleum distillates, hydrotreated (mild) heavy paraffinic (CAS#
64742-54-7).  RTECS#: PY8035500.

NIOSH (2000).  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health:
The Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances.  Mineral oil,
petroleum distillate, hydrotreated (severe) light paraffinic (CAS#
64742-55-8).  RTECS#: PY8036501.

NIOSH (2003).  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health:
The Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances.  Mineral Oil (CAS#
8012-95-1).  RTECS#: PY8030000.

Ulrich, Charles (1999).  A 90-day (with Recovery) Nose-only Inhalation
Toxicity Study of GB-1111 Technical in Albino Rats.  MRID 450029-01.

WHO (1996).  World Health Organization, International Programme on
Chemical Safety, “Toxicological Evaluation of Certain Food Additives
and Contaminants in Food,” WHO Food Additives Series 35, “Mineral
Oils (Food-Grade), Paraffin Waxes and Microcrystalline Waxes.”   
HYPERLINK "http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v35je10.htm" 
http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v35je10.htm 

WHO (2003).  World Health Organization, International Programme on
Chemical Safety, “Safety Evaluation of Certain Food Additives,” WHO
Food Additives Series 50, “Mineral Oils (Medium- and Low-Viscosity)
and Paraffin Waxes.”

http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v50je04.htm

Appendix A.  SLUA (complied by BEAD)

Paraffin Oil (063503)

Screening-level Usage Analysis (SLUA)

Date:  12/13/05

What is a Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA)?

Available estimates of pesticide usage data for a particular active
ingredient that is used on agricultural crops in the United States.

What does it contain?

Pesticide usage data for a single active ingredient only.

Agricultural use sites (crops) that the pesticide is reported to be used
on. 

Available pesticide usage information (i.e., does not include all of the
United States).

Annual percent of crop treated (average & maximum) for each agricultural
crop.

Average annual pounds of the pesticide applied for each agricultural
crop (i.e., for the states surveyed, not for the entire United States).

What assumptions can I make about the reported data?

Average pounds of active ingredient applied - Values are calculated by
merging pesticide usage data sources together; averaging by year,
averaging across all years, & then rounding.  Note:  If the estimated
value is less than 500, then that value is labeled <500.  Estimated
values between 500 & <1,000,000 are rounded to 1 significant digit. 
Estimated values of 1,000,000 or greater are rounded to 2 significant
digits.)

Average percent of crop treated - Values are calculated by merging data
sources together; averaging by year, averaging across all years, &
rounding to the nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is
less than 1, then the value is labeled <1.

Maximum percent of crop treated - Value is the single maximum value
reported across all data sources, across all years, & rounded up to the
nearest multiple of 5.  Note:  If the estimated value is less than 2.5,
then the value is labeled <2.5.

What are the data sources used?

USDA-NASS (United States Department of Agriculture’s National
Agricultural Statistics Service) – pesticide usage data from 1999 to
2004.

NCFAP (National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy) – pesticide
usage data from 1997 and used only if data are not available from the
other sources.

Private Pesticide Market Research – pesticide usage data from 1999 to
2004.

California DPR data can be requested separately.

What are the data limitations?

Additional registered uses may exist but are not included because the
available surveys do not report usage (e.g., small acreage crops).

Lack of reported usage data for the pesticide on a crop does not imply
zero usage.

Usage data on a particular site may be noted in data sources, but not
quantified.  In these instances, the site would not be reported in the
SLUA.

Non-agricultural use sites (e.g., turf, post-harvest, mosquito control,
etc.) are not reported in the SLUA.  A separate request must be made to
receive these estimates.

Some sites show some use, even though they are not on the label.  This
usage could be due to Section 18 requests, existing stocks of the
chemical, data collection errors, experimental use permit (EUP), and/or
because of an illegal use. 

Who do I contact for further information and/or questions on this SLUA?

Jenna Carter (703 308-8370)

Art Grube (703 308-8095)

             

Thursday, December 8, 2005 10:28

Screening Level Estimates of Agricultural Uses of Paraffin Oil (063503)

Sorted Alphabetically

	  	 	

	Crop	                Lbs A.I.          Percent Crop Treated

	     		                                   Avg.            Max.

	1 	Almonds	8,300,000		25             60

	2 	Apples	6,600,000		30             65

	3 	Apricots	400,000		35             65

	4 	Avocados	600,000		20             35

	5 	Beans, Green	6,000		<1              5

	6 	Blackberries	3,000		 5             10

	7 	Blueberries	6,000		 5              5

	8 	Broccoli	30,000		<1           <2.5

	9 	Cabbage	5,000		<1           <2.5

	10	Cantaloupes	2,000		<1           <2.5

	11	Carrots	5,000		<1           <2.5

	12	Cauliflower	90,000		 5              5

	13	Celery	20,000		 5              5

	14	Cherries	1,300,000		15             30

	15	Corn		60,000	

	16	Cotton	30,000	

	17 	Cucumbers	10,000		<1              5

	18	Grapefruit	4,900,000		40             80

	19	Grapes	1,200,000		 5             10

	20	Hazelnuts (Filberts)	90,000		 5             10

	21	Lemons	2,100,000		30             45

	22	Limes		100,000		80             80

	23 	Nectarines	1,200,000		60             75

	24	Olives	90,000		 5             10

	25	Onions	5,000		<1           <2.5

	26	Oranges	35,700,000		40             75

	27	Peaches	2,100,000		25             45

	28   	Pears	               3,700,000		45             85

	29 	Peas, Green	<500		<1           <2.5

	30	Pecans	200,000		<1           <2.5

	31	Peppers	7,000		<1           <2.5

	32	Pistachios	1,100,000		15             40

	33	Prunes & Plums	2,000,000		30             50

	34	Pumpkins	7,000		<1           <2.5

	35 	Raspberries	10,000		 5             10

	36 	Squash     	50,000		 5             10

	37	Strawberries	7,000		<1              5

	38	Sweet Corn	20,000		<1           <2.5

	39	Tangelos	600,000		80             95

	40	Tangerines	1,400,000		60             70

	41	Tomatoes	100,000		<1           <2.5

	42	Walnuts	200,000	 	 5             10

	43 	Watermelons	20,000		<1           <2.5

	  	 		

______________________________________		

	  	 		

All numbers rounded.		

'<500' indicates less than 500 pounds of active ingredient.

'<2.5' indicates less than 2.5 percent of crop is treated.



Appendix B.  Mammalian Toxicity Data for Aliphatic Solvents

ACUTE TOXICITY

Table B-1. Summary of Acute Toxicity for the Aliphatic Solvents (Mineral
Oil and Petroleum Hydrocarbons)

Study Type	Test species:  Result

Reference

PC Code: 063502

Test Material: Mineral Oil	CAS#: 8012-95-1	Gowan Spray Oil

(EPA Reg. 10163-RLU)	MRD-87-984; mineral oil	90 Neutral Oil ; mineral
oil 

(100% purity)

Acute oral	Mouse:  LD50 = 22 g/kg

(NIOSH, 2003 [document cited is in German; translation indicates that
mineral oil was not tested alone, only in combination with other
chemicals])

  

Rat:  LD50 = > 25 mL/kg  (> 28 g/kg)  no deaths observed  (Hine and
Zuidema (1970) also cited in INCHEM (WHO), 1982)	Rat:  LD50 >5 g/kg

(EPA, 1992)	Rat:  LD50 > 5 g/kg for males and females

(EPA, 1994c)	NFa

Acute dermal	NFa	Rabbit:  LD50 > 2 g/kg

(EPA, 1992)	Rat:  LD50 >2 g/kg for males and females

(EPA, 1994c)	Rat:  LD50 >2 g/kg for males and females

(EPA, 1994b)

Acute inhalation	NFa	Rat:  LC50 > 4.6 mg/L

(EPA, 1992)	Rat:  LC50 > 4.7 mg/L

(EPA, 1994c)	Rat:  LC50 > 3.5 mg/L

(EPA, 1994b)

Acute eye irritation	Rabbit:  Moderate effect at 500 mg

(NIOSH, 2003)	NFa	Rat:  Slight eye irritation; did not clear at day 14
(last day of observation)  (EPA, 1994c)	NFa

Acute dermal irritation	Guinea pig:  Mild effect at 100 mg/24 hour

(NIOSH, 2003)	NFa	NFa	NFa

	Rabbit:  Mild effect at 100 mg/24 hour

(NIOSH, 2003)

	Skin sensitization

NFa	NFa	NFa

PC Code: 063503

Test Material:  

Petroleum hydrocarbons 	Hydrotreated light paraffinic petroleum
distillates 

(64742-55-8)	Hydrotreated heavy paraffinic petroleum distillates 

(64742-54-7)	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-9/64742-56-9*)

*CAS number found in HPV Robust Summary

Acute oral	NFa	Rat:  LD50 = >15 g/kg

(NIOSH, 1997a)	Rat:  LD50 >5 g/kg for males and females

(EPA, 1994a)

Acute dermal	NFa	Rabbit:  LD50 = >5 g/kg

(NIOSH, 1997a)	Rat:  LD50 >5 g/kg for males and females

(EPA, 1994a)

Acute inhalation	Rat:  LD50 = 3,900 mg/m3 (3.9 mg/L) for 4 hr

(NIOSH, 2000 [from an OTS document, published in 01/06/83, submitted by
BP Oil, conducted by Gulf Life Sciences Center 1983; original document
not seen])	NFa	NFa

Acute eye irritation	NFa	NFa	Rabbit:  Not an eye irritant

(EPA, 1994a)

Acute dermal irritation	NFa	NFa	Rabbit:  Slight skin irritant

(EPA, 1994a)

Skin sensitization	NFa	NFa	Guinea pig:  Not a dermal sensitizer

(EPA, 1994a)

a NF = Not found

Description of Specific Acute Toxicity References from Table B-1:

Hine CH, Zuidema HH. (1970)  The toxicological properties of hydrocarbon
solvents.  Industrial Medicine.  39(5):39-44.

NIOSH (1997a).  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health:
The Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances.  Mineral oil,
petroleum distillates, hydrotreated (mild) heavy paraffinic (CAS#
64742-54-7). RTECS#: PY8035500.

NIOSH (2000). National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health: The
Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances.  Mineral oil,
petroleum distillate, hydrotreated (severe) light paraffinic (CAS#
64742-55-8).  RTECS#: PY8036501.

NIOSH (2003).  National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health:
The Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances.  Mineral Oil (CAS#
8012-95-1).  RTECS#: PY8030000.

INCHEM (1982)  WHO. Environmental Health Criteria 20.  Selected
Petroleum Products.  IPCS (International Programme on Chemical Safety)

EPA (1992).  EPA File Symbol/EPA Reg. No.: 10163-RLU Gowan Spray Oil. 
Memorandum dated 9/1/92 from Mark Perry (Precautionary Review Section,
Registration Support Branch, Registration Division) to Dennis Edwards
(Insecticide-Rodenticide Branch, Registration Division).  (HED Doc#
009979)

Summary:  Acute toxicity tests on product: Gowan Spray Oil (EPA Reg.
10163-RLU – not found in PPIS nor in HED label spreadsheet), which
contains 99% mineral oil (no CAS number provided) by weight.  

Acute oral, acute dermal and eye irritation studies accepted as core
guideline data.

Acute inhalation and dermal irritation studies acceptable as core
minimum data.

Acute inhalation study: particle size distribution only determined once
during exposure period

Dermal irritation: study failed to include a 48 hour evaluation period

Eye and dermal irritation studies do not support product registration
because of the presence of an inert.

Acute Toxicity data for Gowan Spray Oil (99% mineral oil) (EPA, 1992)

Study Type	Results	Toxicity Category

Acute oral – rat	LD50 >5 g/kg	IV

Acute dermal – rabbit	LD50 > 2 g/kg	III

Acute inhalation – rat	LC50 > 4.6 mg/L	III

EPA (1994a).  EPA ID# 063503:  Aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons –
Review of 10 Acute Toxicity Studies.  Memorandum dated 3/3/94 from Paul
Chin, Ph.D. (Section 2, Toxicology Branch I, HED) to Kathryn
Davis/Bonnie Adler (PM52, Reregistration Division).  (HED Doc# 010813;
PC Code: 063503)

**CAS numbers were found in the HPV Robust Summaries.  API 78-10 is not
included in the list of CAS numbers provided by EPA for the aliphatic
solvents RED.

Summary of Acute Toxicity data for Aliphatic Petroleum Hydrocarbons from
EPA (1994)

Study Type	Test material

(API 78-9/64742-56-9 

& 

API 78-10/64742-56-0)	MRID	Results	Toxicity Category

063503

Acute oral: rat	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-10)	416853-13	LD50 >5 g/kg for males and females	IV

	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-9)	416853-14

Acute dermal: rat	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-9)	416853-15	LD50 >5 g/kg for males and females	IV

	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-10)	416853-16

Primary eye irritation: rabbit	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-9)	416853-17	Not an eye irritant	IV

	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-10)	416853-18

Primary dermal irritation: rabbit	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-9)	416853-19	Slight skin irritant	IV

	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-10)	416853-20

Dermal sensitization: guinea pig	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-10)	416853-21	Not a dermal sensitizer	NA

	Paraffinic oil 

(API 78-9)	416853-22

EPA (1994b).  EPA ID# 063502:  Mineral Oil – Review of Acute Toxicity
Studies.  Memorandum from Paul Chin, Ph.D. (Section 2, Toxicology Branch
I, HED) to Kathryn Davis/Bonnie Adler (PM52, Reregistration Division). 
(HED Doc# 010809; PC Code: 063502, No CAS numbers provided)

EPA (1994c).  EPA ID# 063502:  Mineral Oil – Review of Acute Toxicity
Studies.  Memorandum from Paul Chin, Ph.D. (Section 2, Toxicology Branch
I, HED) to Kathryn Davis/Bonnie Adler (PM52, Reregistration Division). 
(HED Doc# 010810; PC Code: 063502, No CAS numbers provided.)

Summary of Acute Toxicity data for Mineral Oil (EPA, 1994b and 1994c)

Study Type	Test materials	MRID	Results	Toxicity Category

Acute oral – rat	MRD-87-984; mineral oil	416853-07	LD50 > 5 g/kg for
males and females	IV

Acute dermal - rat	90 Neutral Oil ; mineral oil (100% purity)	416853-11
LD50 >2 g/kg for males and females	III

	MRD-87-984; mineral oil	416853-08	LD50 >2 g/kg for males and females
III

Acute inhalation - rat	90 Neutral Oil ; mineral oil (100% purity)
416853-12	LC50 > 3.5 mg/L	IV

	MRD-87-984; mineral oil	416853-09	LC50 > 4.7 mg/L	IV

Primary eye irritation  - rat	MRD-87-984; mineral oil	416853-10	Slight
eye irritation; did not clear at day 14 (last day of observation)	III

SUB-CHRONIC TOXICITY

Description of Data from Sub-chronic Toxicity Studies and Referenced
DERs:

EPA (1996).  Petroleum Oils.  Review of Toxicology Data.  Memorandum
from Raymond Locke (Section 2, Toxicology Branch I, HED) to Kathryn
Davis/Bonnie Adler (PM52, Reregistration Division).  (HED Doc # 012030)

Petroleum oils – Review of toxicology data (PC Code 063503; no CAS
numbers provided)

Summary of Subchronic toxicity tests for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (EPA,
1996)

Study	Test material	Test animal	Doses	Results	Study classification 

NOTE: Memo indicates that for MRIDs 413688-06, 413688-29, 413688-21,
413688-22, 413688-07, 413688-23, and 413688-24:  Since petroleum oils
tests for inhalation toxicity elicited adverse lung effects in rats, all
of the available dermal and inhalation toxicity data must be reviewed by
the HED’s TES Committee

28-day dermal

MRID 413688-22	Light neutral oil, Gulf

(purity not provided)	C3H/HeNCrlBR mice

(15/sex/dose)	Undiluted test material or 42.5% (w/v) solution in heavy
mineral oil once daily, 3x/week for 4 weeks	LOEL > 2000 mg/kg/day
Unacceptable, but upgradable due to lack of purity and stability data on
test material.

Based on lack of toxicity, a repetition of the study was not required

14-day dermal

MRID 413688-29	100 Paraffine Oil, Gulf

 (purity not provided)	New Zealand white rabbits

(3/sex/dose)	0, 1 or 2 g/kg/day for 5 days/week for 2 week period
Systemic LOEL 

> 2000 mg/kg/day	Unacceptable, but upgradable due to lack of purity and
stability data on test material.

Based on lack of toxicity, a repetition of the study was not required

14-day dermal

MRID 413688-06	Gulf Orchard Spray 70 

(purity not provided)	New Zealand white rabbits

(3/sex/dose)	0, 1, or 2 g/kg/day for 5 days/week for 2-week period
Systemic LOEL 

> 2000 mg/kg/day	Unacceptable, but upgradable due to lack of purity and
stability data on test material.

Based on lack of toxicity, a repetition of the study was not required

5-day dermal

MRID 413688-21	Light Neutral Oil, Gulf 

(purity not provided)	Fischer 344 rats (5/sex/dose)	0, 0.85, 1.0, or 2.0
g/kg/day for 5 days/week for 1-week period	Systemic and dermal LOEL

> 2000 mg/kg/day	Unacceptable, but upgradable due to lack of purity and
stability data on test material.

Based on lack of toxicity, a repetition of the study was not required

28-day inhalation

MRID 413688-24	Light Neutral Oil, Gulf 

(purity not provided)	Fischer 344 rats (10/sex/dose)	0, 0.52, 0.76, or
1.53 g/m3 or g/mL for 6-hours/day. Five days/week, for total of 28 days
LOEL = 520 mg/m3 or mg/mL 

(146,640 mg/kg/day)a	Unacceptable, but upgradable due to lack of purity
and stability data on test material.

9-day inhalation

MRID 413688-07	70 Orchard Spray

(purity not provided)	Fischer 344 rats (5/sex/dose)	0, 0.70, 1.60 g/m3
or g/mL for 6-hours/day for total of 9 exposures	LOEL ≤  700 mg/m3 or
mg/mL 

(197,400 mg/kg/day)a	Unacceptable, but upgradable due to lack of purity
and stability data on test material.

Does not satisfy the guideline requirement for subchronic inhalation
study, but is satisfactory for use as a range-finding study

5-day inhalation

MRID 413688-23	Light Neutral Oil, Gulf 

(purity not provided)	Fischer 344 rats (5/sex/dose)	0, 0.54, 1.70 or
2.79 g/m3 or g/mL for 6-hours/day for total of 5 exposures	LOEL =  1700
mg/m3 or mg/mL 

(479,400 mg/kg/day)a

NOEL = 540 mg/m3 or mg/mL 

(152,280 mg/kg/day)a	Unacceptable, but upgradable due to lack of purity
and stability data on test material.

Does not satisfy the guideline requirement for subchronic inhalation
study, but is satisfactory for use as a range-finding study

a  Conversion of g/mL to g/kg/day performed using route-to-route
extrapolation method.  Assumed default values for respiratory volume and
body weight based on test species.  

Equation:  mg/kg/day = mg/L * A * CF * D * AF

Where:  mg/L	=	NOEL/LOEL in mg/L;

A	=	absorption or ration of deposition and absorption in the respiratory
tract compared to another route;  assumed to be 100% ;

CF	=	Conversion factor based on default respiratory volume and body
weight (L/hr/kg);

D	=	Duration of exposure (hr/day);

AF	=	Activity factor – default for animals = 1.

Ulrich, Charles.  (1999)   “A 90-day (with recovery) nose-only
inhalation toxicity study of GB-1111 Technical in Albino Rats”.  WIL
Research Laboratories, Inc., Ashland, OH.  Project Number WIL-357008. 
December 2, 1999.  MRID 450029-01. 

Test Material:  GB-1111; EPA Reg. #8239-72, lists active ingredient as
CAS# 8002-05-9: petroleum distillates, naptha)  

EPA Reg. # 8239-72 is listed as GB-1313 in HED label spreadsheet

Summary of Subchronic toxicity test (Ulrich, 1999)

Study	Test material	Test animal	Doses	Results

90-day inhalation	GB-1111	Crl:CD®(SD)IGS BR rats	Target concentrations:
 0.01, 0.1,  and 1.0 mg/L

Actual concentrations: 0.012, 0.10, and 0.9 mg/L	NOEL = 0.1 mg/L

(26.1 mg/kg/day)a

a  Conversion performed using assumption of body weight and respiratory
volume since exact conversion factor is not known for this species of
rat.  Used minimum default conversion factor provided for all species of
rats. 

API (2004).  High Production Volume: Robust Summary of Information on
Lubricating Oil Basestocks.  Prepared by American Petroleum Institute
(API).  

Summary:  Provides acute as well as repeat dose testing.  Not all
identify NOELs and LOELs, or assess the CAS numbers listed for the
aliphatic solvents RED.  

Summary of Robust Summary Sub-chronic Information from the HPV
Submission

Study	Test material	Test animal	Doses	Results	Study classification 

28-day inhalation

from HPV Robust Summary	WTO 

(white oil, CAS# 8042-47-5)  

&

HBO (hydrotreated base oil, CAS# 64742-54-7)	Male/female Sprague-Dawley
rats

(10/sex/dose)	0, 50, 220, and 1000 g/m3 for 6 hr/day, 5 days/week, 4
weeks	LOAEL: 210 mg/m3 

(54,810 mg/kg/day)

NOAEL: 50 mg/m3 (13,050 mg/kg/day)	?

Miscellaneous Toxicity Information provided:

EPA (1995a).  OPP Official Record, Health Effects Division, Scientific
Data Reviews, EPA Series 361.  CBRS Transmittal Sheet for Phase 4
Reviews, Case No. 3004; Chemical No(s): 63502/63503, .  

Summary:  Residue data for mineral oil (PC code: 063502; no CAS number
provided):  Based on CBRS Transmittal Sheet for Phase 4 Reviews dated
9/7/95, CBRS will not require residue data for mineral oil is the
Toxicology Branch I, HED, concludes that there are no toxicological
concerns.  In addition, a recommendation will be made for the exemption
of mineral oil from tolerance requirements for food/feed uses.  

EPA (1995b).  OPP Official Record, Health Effects Division, Scientific
Data Reviews, EPA Series 361.  OREB Transmittal Sheet for Phase 4
Reviews, Case No. 3004; Chemical No(s): 63502/63503.  

Summary:  Aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbons (#63503; no CAS numbers
provided) information specific to postapplication exposure monitoring
test guidelines subdivision K:

Indicated that dermal exposure does not warrant an exposure study since
mineral oil is applied by either low volume spray or high volume ground
spraying and because toxicity is low (FDA recommended it for GRAS
status).

Indicated that OREB does not require inhalation exposure study for same
reasons.



Appendix C.  Labeling Changes Summary Table (Aliphatic Solvents)
Labeling Changes Summary Table (Aliphatic Solvents)

In order to be eligible for reregistration, all product labels must be
amended to incorporate the risk mitigation measures outlined in the
Aliphatic Solvents RED, and especially in Section XII.  The following
table describes how language on the labels should be amended:

Description	

Aliphatic Solvents: Required Labeling Language	

Placement on Label

Manufacturing-Use Products

Required on all MUPs	“Only for formulation into the following use(s)
[fill blank only with those uses that are being supported by MP
registrants].”	Directions for Use

One of these statements may be added to a label to allow reformulation
of the product for a specific use or all additional uses supported by a
formulator or user group.	“This product may be used to formulate
products for specific use(s) not listed on the MP label if the
formulator, user group, or grower has complied with U.S. EPA submission
requirements regarding support of such use(s).”

“This product may be used to formulate products for any additional
use(s) not listed on the MP label if the formulator, user group, or
grower has complied with U.S. EPA submission requirements regarding
support of such use(s).”	Directions for Use

Environmental Hazards Statements Required by the RED and Agency Label
Policies 	“Do not discharge effluent containing this product into
lakes, streams, ponds, estuaries, oceans, or other waters unless in
accordance with the requirements of a National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit and the permitting authority has been
notified in writing prior to discharge. Do not discharge effluent
containing this product to sewer systems without previously notifying
the local sewage treatment plant authority. For guidance contact your
State Water Board or Regional Office of the EPA.”	Directions for Use



End-Use Products Intended for Occupational Use (WPS and non-WPS)

Name of Active Ingredient	Active Ingredient statements must be revised
and may include only the following :

“Mineral Oil”. 

Note:  Other names may be specified, but only providing there is
adequate justification.  

	Handler PPE Requirements for Liquid Formulations 	“Personal
Protective Equipment (PPE)”

“Some materials that are chemical-resistant to this product are
(registrant inserts correct chemical-resistant material).  If you want
more options, follow the instructions for category [registrant inserts
A,B,C,D,E,F,G,or H] on an EPA chemical-resistance category selection
chart.”

“Mixers, loaders, applicators, flaggers, and other handlers must wear:

long-sleeve shirt and long pants, and

shoes plus socks.”

See engineering controls for additional requirements.	Precautionary
Statements: Hazards to Humans and Domestic Animals

User Safety Requirements	“Follow manufacturer's instructions for
cleaning/maintaining PPE.  If no such instructions for washables exist,
use detergent and hot water.  Keep and wash PPE separately from other
laundry.”

 

“Discard clothing and other absorbent material that have been drenched
or heavily contaminated with the product’s concentrate.  Do not reuse
them.”  

	Precautionary Statements: Hazards to Humans and Domestic Animals
immediately following the PPE requirements

Engineering Controls for aerial applications (Immediately following PPE
and User Safety Requirements.)	Enclosed Cockpits

“Engineering Controls:

Pilots must use an enclosed cockpit that meets the requirements listed
in the WPS for agricultural pesticides [40 CFR 170.240(d)(6)].” 
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to Humans and Domestic Animals 



User Safety Recommendations	“USER SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS”

“Users should wash hands before eating, drinking, chewing gum, using
tobacco, or using the toilet.”

“Users should remove clothing/PPE immediately if pesticide gets
inside.  Then wash thoroughly and put on clean clothing.”

“Users should remove PPE immediately after handling this product. 
Wash the outside of gloves before removing.  As soon as possible, wash
thoroughly and change into clean clothing.”	Precautionary Statements
under: Hazards to Humans and Domestic Animals immediately following
Engineering Controls

(Must be placed in a box.)

Environmental 

Hazards Statement 	“ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS”

“For terrestrial uses: Do not apply directly to water, or to areas
where surface water is present or to intertidal areas below the mean
high water mark. Do not contaminate water when disposing of equipment
washwater or rinsate.” 

“Drift and runoff may be hazardous to aquatic organisms in water
adjacent to treated areas.”	Precautionary Statements under
Environmental Hazards 

Restricted-Entry Interval 

for products with WPS uses 	“Do not enter or allow worker entry into
treated areas during the restricted entry interval (REI) of 12 hours.”

Note:  Product Registration Notice 95-3 declared aliphatic solvents to
be eligible for a 4 hour restricted-entry interval.  A 4 hour REI is
permitted, but only provided that the registrant certifies that the
end-use product meets all the conditions established in PR Notice 95-3
for end-use products to be eligible for a 4 hour REI.	Directions for
Use, Agricultural Use Requirements Box

Early Entry Personal Protective Equipment for  products with WPS uses 
“PPE required for early entry to treated areas that is permitted under
the Worker Protection Standard and that involves contact with anything
that has been treated, such as soil or water, is:

coveralls,

shoes plus socks, and

chemical-resistant gloves made of any waterproof material.”	Directions
for Use, Agricultural Use Requirements Box

Entry Restrictions  

for products with non-WPS uses on the label

	 “Do not enter or allow others to enter until sprays have dried.”

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 If no WPS uses on the product label, place the
appropriate statement in the Directions for Use Under General
Precautions and Restrictions.  If the product also contains WPS uses,
then create a Non-Agricultural Use Requirements box as directed in PR
Notice 93-7 and place the appropriate statement inside that box.

General Application Restrictions for products with WPS or non-WPS uses
on the label	“Do not apply this product in a way that will contact
workers or other persons, either directly or through drift.”  

“Only protected handlers may be in the area during application.”
Place in the Direction for Use.

Other Application Restrictions:  

Spray Drift Label Language for Products Applied as a Spray   SEQ CHAPTER
\h \r 1 	SPRAY DRIFT MANAGEMENT:

“A variety of factors including weather conditions (e.g., wind
direction, wind speed, temperature, relative humidity) and method of
application (e.g., ground, aerial, airblast, chemigation) can influence
pesticide drift.  The applicator and grower must evaluate all factors
and make appropriate adjustments when applying this product.”

WIND SPEED:

“Do not apply at wind speeds greater than 15 mph at the application
site.”

DROPLET SIZE:

“Apply as a medium or coarser spray (ASAE standard 572), and the
minimum volume mean diameter (VMD) for spinning atomizer nozzles.”
Directions for Use under General Precautions and Restrictions and/or
Application Instructions

Spray Drift Label Language for Products Applied as a Spray through
Ground Equipment	RELEASE HEIGHT:

“Apply using a nozzle height of no more than 4 feet above the ground
or crop canopy.”

WIND SPEED:

“Do not apply at wind speeds greater than 15 mph at the application
site.”

DROPLET SIZE:

“Apply as a medium or coarser spray (ASAE standard 572), and the
minimum volume mean diameter (VMD) for spinning atomizer nozzles.”
Directions for Use under General Precautions and Restrictions

Spray Drift Label Language for Products Applied as a Spray through
Airblast Equipment	“For airblast applications, turn off outward
pointing nozzles at row ends and when spraying outer row.  To minimize
spray loss over the top in orchard applications, spray must be directed
into the canopy.”

TEMPERATURE INVERSIONS:

“If applying at wind speeds less than 3 mph, the applicator must
determine if a) conditions of temperature inversion exist, or b) stable
atmospheric conditions exist at or below nozzle height.  Do not make
applications into areas of temperature inversions or stable atmospheric
conditions.”	Directions for Use under General Precautions and
Restrictions

Spray Drift Label Language for Products Applied as an Aerial Spray
RELEASE HEIGHT:

“For aerial applications of agricultural products, do not release
spray at a height greater than 10 feet above the ground, top of crops,
or above the orchard canopy.”

BOOM LENGTH:

“The boom length must not exceed 75% of the wingspan or 90% of the
rotor blade diameter.”

SWATH ADJUSTMENT:

“When applications are made with a cross-wind, the swath will be
displaced downwind.  The applicator must compensate for this
displacement at the downwind edge of the application area by adjusting
the path of the aircraft upwind.  Leave at least one swath unsprayed at
the downwind edge of the treated field.” 

WIND SPEED:

“Do not apply at wind speeds greater than 15 mph at the application
site.”

DROPLET SIZE:

“Apply as a medium or coarser spray (ASAE standard 572), and the
minimum volume mean diameter (VMD) for spinning atomizer nozzles.”
Directions for Use under General Precautions and Restrictions

Special Instructions for the Reductions in Maximum Applications Rates on
some Labels for Citrus 	Citrus:  Maximum of 159 pounds active ingredient
per acre (maximum 1500 gallons of spray mix per acre) in Texas and
Florida, and 212 pounds active ingredient per acre (maximum 2000 gallons
of spray mix per acre) in California (based on Thorough Coverage Spray,
with 1.5 gallons of product mixed in 100 gallons of water).

Products Primarily Used as Mosquito Larvicides/Pupacides

	Environmental 

Hazards Statement 	“ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS”

“Aquatic organisms may be killed in waters where this pesticide is
used. Consult with the State agency with primary responsibility for
regulating pesticides before applying to public waters to determine if a
permit is needed.”  	Precautionary Statements under Environmental
Hazards 

Entry Restrictions 

	“Do not allow adults, children or pets to enter until sprays have
dried.”

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Directions for Use under General Precautions and
Restrictions

General Application Restrictions	“Do not apply this product in a way
that will contact adults, children, or pets, either directly or through
drift.” 	Place in the Direction for Use



Appendix D.  Acute Mammalian Toxicity Batching Memo Appendix



	UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C.  20460

OFFICE OF           

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

May 2, 2007

MEMORANDUM	

SUBJECT:	Acute Mammalian Toxicity Batching Appendix for Aliphatic
Solvents RED.

FROM:	Mark Perry, Toxicologist & Team Leader     

Product Reregistration Branch

Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508C)

TO:	     	Bentley Gregg, CRM

Product Reregistration Branch

Special Review and Reregistration Division (7508C)       

Attached is the batching appendix for the Aliphatic Solvents RED. 
Please let us know if you have any questions regarding this document. 

 		

							Sent to CRM on 5/2/07

EPA’S BATCHING OF THE ALIPHATIC SOLVENTS PRODUCTS FOR MEETING ACUTE
MAMMALIAN TOXICITY DATA REQUIREMENTS FOR REREGISTRATION

In an effort to reduce the time, resources and number of animals needed
to fulfill the acute toxicity data requirements for reregistration of
products containing the aliphatic solvents listed in the RED as the
active ingredient(s), the Agency has batched products which can be
considered similar for purposes of acute toxicity.  Factors considered
in the sorting process include each product's active and inert
ingredients (identity, percent composition and biological activity),
type of formulation (e.g., emulsifiable concentrate, aerosol, wettable
powder, granular, etc.), and labeling (e.g., signal word, use
classification, precautionary labeling, etc.).  Note that the Agency is
not describing all the products within a batch as “substantially
similar” because some products within the batch may not be considered
chemically similar or have identical use patterns.

Using available information, batching has been accomplished by the
process described in the preceding paragraph.  Notwithstanding the
batching process, the Agency reserves the right to require, at any time,
acute toxicity data for an individual product should the need arise. 

Registrants of products within a batch may choose to cooperatively
generate, submit or cite a single battery of six acute toxicological
studies to represent all the products within that batch.  It is the
registrants’ option to participate in the process with all other
registrants, only some of the other registrants, or only their own
products within a batch, or to generate all the required acute
toxicological studies for each of their own products.  If a registrant
chooses to generate the data for a batch, he/she must use one of the
products within the batch as the test material.  If a registrant chooses
to rely upon previously submitted acute toxicity data, he/she may do so
provided that the data base is complete and valid by the standards in
place today (see acceptance criteria attached), the formulation tested
is considered by EPA to be similar for acute toxicity, and the
formulation has not been significantly altered since submission and
acceptance of the acute toxicity data.  Regardless of whether new data
are generated or existing data are referenced, registrants must clearly
identify the test material by EPA Registration Number.  If more than one
Confidential Statement of Formula (CSF) exists for a product, the
registrant must indicate the formulation actually tested by identifying
the corresponding CSF.

In deciding how to meet the product specific data requirements,
registrants must follow the directions given in the Data Call-In Notice
and its attachments appended to the RED.  The DCI Notice contains two
response forms which are to be completed and submitted to the Agency
within 90 days of receipt.  The first form, “Data Call-In Response,”
asks whether the registrant will meet the data requirements for each
product.  The second form, “Requirements Status and Registrant’s
Response,” lists the product specific data required for each product,
including the standard six acute toxicity tests.  A registrant who
wishes to participate in a batch must decide whether he/she will provide
the data or depend on someone else to do so.  If a registrant supplies
the data to support a batch of products, he/she must select one of the
following options: Developing Data (Option 1), Submitting an Existing
Study (Option 4), Upgrading an Existing Study (Option 5), or Citing an
Existing Study (Option 6).  If a registrant depends on another
registrant’s data, he/she must choose among: Cost Sharing (Option 2),
Offers to Cost Share (Option 3), or Citing an Existing Study (Option 6).
 If a registrant does not want to participate in a batch, the choices
are Options 1, 4, 5, or 6.  However, a registrant should know that
choosing not to participate in a batch does not preclude other
registrants in the batch from citing his/her studies and offering to
cost share (Option 3) those studies.

Three OPP Chemical Codes (063501, 063502, and 063503) were found which
contain aliphatic solvents in products as their active ingredient(s). 
The RED found all the CAS Nos. within the products within these three
OPP Chemical Codes to be substantially similar (for purposes of the
RED), and consequently the RED determined that only one OPP Chemical
Code would be needed for reregistration of these products.  This
batching exercise has started with the listing of the products within
their current OPP Chemical Codes, but as will be seen, the batches may
cite data across current OPP Chemical Codes, as indicated within the
respective tables, except for the various “no batch” groups,
products in which must cite data for each respective product (or provide
the Agency with information that the registrant no longer wishes to have
that respective product listed as an product containing “Aliphatic
Solvents” as one of the Active Ingredients). 

	

Batching Instructions:

Products listed in any Batch having a “T” designation, may cite data
for any other product within any T Batch.  Products listed in any Batch
having an “E” designation, may cite data for any other product
within any E Batch.  Any product in any “No Batch” group should
generate their own acute mammalian toxicity data.  Please note that any
acute toxicity values utilized in this document were for informational
purposes only, and the Agency reserves the right to determine that the
data used to arrive at these batching decisions may not meet current
acceptance criteria.

Batch E for Products from OPP Chemical Code 063501 (as listed in OPPIN
Query on 4/30/07)

EPA   HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'5')"  Reg. No. 	 
HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'3')"  Registration Name 
  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'6')"  % Active
Ingredient 

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(39008)"  1842-283 	TRIANGLE 435 SOLUBLE
OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(39006)"  1842-284 	TRIANGLE 455 SOLUBLE
OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(482127)"  10951-19 	BFR 440 SUPREME SPRAY
OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(4646)"  19713-123 	DAMOIL DORMANT &
SUMMER SPRAY OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36703)"  34704-805 	BIOCOVER MLT	98

No Batch Products from OPP Chemical Code 063501 (as listed in OPPIN
Query on 4/30/07)

EPA   HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'5')"  Reg. No. 	 
HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'3')"  Registration Name 
  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'6')"  % Active
Ingredient 

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(473399)"  53883-163 	CONTROL XX-X-X TURF
FERTILIZER WITH .083% BIFENTHRIN INSECTICIDE	Not reported in OPPIN Query

Batch T Products from OPP Chemical Code 063502 (as listed in OPPIN Query
on 4/30/07)

EPA   HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'5')"  Reg.  No.	 
HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'3')"  Registration Name 
  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'6')"  % of Active
Ingredient 

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(15354)"  19713-373 	PARAFFINIC OIL TECH
100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(29150)"  69526-1 	SPRAY OIL 10	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(29151)"  69526-2 	SPRAY OIL 13	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(29139)"  69526-3 	SPRAY OIL 15	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(29140)"  69526-4 	SPRAY OIL 22	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(464731)"  74322-7 	HYSPRAY PXT MUP	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(464742)"  74322-8 	HYSPRAY P35 MUP	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34234)"  75652-1 	ORCHEX 796	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30414)"  75652-2 	ORCHEX 692	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(5272)"  75652-3 	ORCHEX 892	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(35446)"  75652-4 	EXXON DORMANT SPRAY OIL
75	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36070)"  75652-5 	EXXON DORMANT SPRAY OIL
100	100

Batch E Products from OPP Chemical Code 063502 (as listed in OPPIN Query
on 4/30/07)

EPA   HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'5')"  Reg. No. 	 
HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'3')"  Registration Name 
  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'6')"  % Active
Ingredient 

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(531)"  4-195 	BONIDE MOSQUITO LARVICIDE
98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(1689)"  239-16 	VOLCK OIL SPRAY	97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(21057)"  2935-311 	RED-TOP SUPERIOR SPRAY
OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(27708)"  2935-405 	SUPREME OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(15299)"  2935-523 	SUPREME OIL 98	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30677)"  6218-71 	SUMMIT HORTICULTURAL
SPRAY OIL	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(484893)"  9779-RNRR 	SPRAY OIL 470	98.5

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(10186)"  11656-95 	GAVICIDE-C	99.7

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(17967)"  11656-96 	GAVICIDE SUPER 90	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16284)"  34704-551 	SUPERIOR SPRAY OIL
98.84

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(395120)"  41856-G 	GRIFFIN 470 OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(395229)"  53883-113 	SUPER-FINE SPRAY OIL
98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36018)"  69526-5 	PURESPRAY SPRAY OIL 10E
98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36019)"  69526-6 	SPRAY OIL 13E	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36020)"  69526-7 	SPRAY OIL 22E	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36017)"  69526-8 	SPRAY OIL 15E	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(486330)"  69526-RN 	PC TURF AND
ORNAMENTALS	98

No Batch Products from OPP Chemical Code 063502 (as listed in OPPIN
Query on 4/30/07)

EPA 

  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'5')"  Reg. No. 	 
HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'3')"  Registration Name 
  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'6')"  % Active
Ingredient 

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(3752)"  769-810 	PYRETHRUM 25-5 ULV
INSECTICIDE	70

Batch T Products from OPP Chemical Code 063503 (as listed in OPPIN Query
on 4/30/07)

EPA 

  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'5')"  Reg. No. 	 
HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'3')"  Registration Name 
  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'6')"  % Active
Ingredient 

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34196)"  862-4 	SUNSPRAY 11N	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34195)"  862-6 	SUNSPRAY 7N	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34183)"  862-10 	SUNSPRAY 6N	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(22524)"  862-18 	SUNSPRAY 8N	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34185)"  862-20 	SUNSPRAY 9N	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(28341)"  862-21 	SUNSPRAY 6C	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34186)"  862-22 	SUNSPRAY 11C	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(10182)"  862-24 	SUNSPRAY 9C	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(5419)"  862-29 	SUNSPRAY ULTRA-N	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(17371)"  2935-543 	ORTHO GULF ORCHARD
SPRAY 70	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(1238)"  2935-545 	VALENT PREMIUM AG 100
100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(481720)"  11930-6 	PERVADE MOSQUITO
LARVICIDE PETROLEUM OIL	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30972)"  19713-397 	DREXEL 415 TECHNICAL
100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30916)"  19713-398 	DREXEL 455 TECHNICAL
100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(2284)"  55206-1 	BVA SPRAY 10	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(2283)"  55206-2 	BVA SPRAY 13	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(33453)"  55206-3 	BVA SPRAY 15	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(33454)"  55206-4 	BVA SPRAY 22	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(38174)"  75107-1 	SPRAY BASE	100

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(395196)"  75395-2 	SK ENSPRAY N	100

Batch E Products from OPP Chemical Code 063503 (as listed in OPPIN Query
on 4/30/07)

EPA 

  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'5')"  Reg. No. 	 
HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'3')"  Registration Name 
  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'6')"  % Active
Ingredient 

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(2643)"  4-80 	BONIDE HORTICULTURAL AND
DORMANT SPRAY OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(29573)"  192-188 	DEXOL DORMANT & SUMMER
OIL SPRAY II	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34120)"  655-602 	PRENTOX DORMANT OIL
SPRAY CONCENTRATE	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34222)"  769-317 	SUPERIOR OIL 70	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34166)"  769-843 	PRATT'S SUMMER SPRAY
OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34164)"  769-848 	PRATT'S 6N SUPERIOR OIL
98.75

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(20396)"  769-886 	AGRISECT SUPERIOR OIL
98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(20473)"  802-415 	LILLY/MILLER SUPERIOR
TYPE SPRAY OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34209)"  829-83 	SA-50 SOLUBLE OIL SPRAY
98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34194)"  862-8 	SUNSPRAY 7E	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34193)"  862-9 	SUNSPRAY 11E	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34184)"  862-11 	SUNSPRAY 6E	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(7376)"  862-19 	SUNSPRAY 9E	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(29735)"  862-23 	SUNSPRAY 6E PLUS	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(29287)"  862-28 	SUNSPRAY ULTRA-FINE
YEAR-ROUND PESTICIDAL OIL	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(38426)"  862-31 	SUNSPRAY 6E WESTERN	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34191)"  869-67 	GREEN LIGHT DORMANT
SPRAY ALSO SUMMER SPRAY	97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(3290)"  1386-53 	SUPERIOR MISCIBLE SPRAY
OIL	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(98770)"  2724-655 	SECURITY ORNAMENTAL
AND FRUIT SPRAY OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(23691)"  2935-461 	WILBUR-ELLIS CITRI OIL
99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(17485)"  2935-542 	VOLCK SUPREME SPRAY
97.95

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(20530)"  3468-9 	SUPREME OIL INSECTICIDE
98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16756)"  5481-273 	ROYAL 70 SUPERIOR
SPRAY OIL	97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(31787)"  5481-510 	LEFFINGWELL SUPREME
415 OIL	96.69

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(23631)"  5887-37 	BLACK LEAF DORMANT
SPRAY	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16692)"  5905-294 	SOL-OIL 97	97.2

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16695)"  5905-368 	OMNI SUPREME SPRAY	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(1782)"  5905-520 	PAR F 70 SOLUBLE OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(28679)"  5905-546 	SUNGRO 455 SOLUBLE OIL
99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(3665)"  5905-547 	435 SOLUBLE OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16897)"  7401-9 	FERTI-LOME DORMANT SPRAY
AND SUMMER OIL SPRAY	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16867)"  7401-126 	FERTI LOME SCALE
INSECT SPRAY	97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(23636)"  7401-428 	HI-YIELD DORMANT SPRAY
97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(34169)"  7401-443 	SCALECIDE	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(12387)"  8329-72 	MOSQUITO LARVICIDE
GB-1111 	98.7

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(39119)"  9688-179 	CHEMSICO DORMANT OIL
SPRAY	97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16310)"  9779-251 	DORMANT OIL 435	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(19658)"  9779-332 	ASGROW CITRUS OIL	97.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(5432)"  9779-336 	RIVERSIDE DORMANT OIL
415	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(19753)"  10404-66 	LESCO HORTICULTURAL
OIL INSECTICIDE	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30570)"  10951-15 	BRITZ 415 SUPREME OIL
SPRAY	99.7

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(28982)"  10951-16 	BRITZ SUPREME SPRAY
OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36511)"  11656-97 	FIRST CHOICE NARROW
RANGE 415 SPRAY OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30958)"  19713-391 	415 OIL 98.8	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30944)"  19713-392 	415 OIL 98	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30946)"  19713-393 	435 OIL 98	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30949)"  19713-394 	435 OIL 98.8	98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30950)"  19713-395 	455 OIL 98	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30947)"  19713-396 	DREXEL 455 OIL 98.8
98.8

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(39838)"  19713-542 	DREXEL FO-70	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(32813)"  33955-458 	ACME DORMANT OIL
SPRAY	97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(23695)"  34704-319 	DORMANT QUIK-MIX
HEAVY	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(89136)"  34704-337 	NIAGARA CITRUS SOL
OIL LIGHT MEDIUM CODE 30390	99.3

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(23693)"  34704-352 	CLEAN CROP SUPREME
OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(89145)"  34704-353 	CLEAN CROP SUPERIOR
70 OIL	97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(89163)"  34704-372 	NIAGARA SUMMER QUIK
MIX, LIGHT MEDIUM CODE R-292	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(89176)"  34704-383 	CITRUS SOLUBLE OIL -
HEAVY MEDIUM	99.3

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(12329)"  34704-396 	CITRUS SOLUBLE
OIL-MEDIUM	99.3

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(89213)"  34704-464 	SUPER 94 SPRAY OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(2335)"  34704-596 	CLEAN CROP SUPERIOR
DORMANT SPRAY OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(1691)"  34704-727 	SPRAY OIL 415	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36704)"  34704-806 	BIOCOVER UL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36789)"  34704-808 	BIOCOVER LS	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36787)"  34704-809 	BIOCOVER SS	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(393446)"  34704-849 	Glacial Spray Fluid
98.4

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36222)"  35276-1 	DIAMOND BRAND 435
SOLUBLE OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36246)"  35276-2 	DIAMOND BRAND 455
SOLUBLE OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36010)"  41856-1 	GRIFFIN 455 SOLUBLE OIL
99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(36011)"  41856-2 	GRIFFIN 435 SOLUBLE OIL
99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(19441)"  51036-26 	MICRO FLO COMPANY/ 435
SOLUBLE OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16309)"  51036-27 	MICRO FLO 455 SOLUBLE
OIL	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(19389)"  51036-139 	SOLUBLE OIL 97	99

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(4888)"  65564-1 	JMS STYLET-OIL	97.1

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(469355)"  69526-9 	PETRO-CANADA PURESPRAY
GREEN	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(35729)"  70589-1 	BVA 2 MOSQUITO
LARVICIDE OIL	97

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(28084)"  71058-2 	HI SUPREME SPRAY OIL	98

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(395134)"  75395-1 	SK ENSPRAY 99	99

No Batch Products from OPP Chemical Code 063503 (as listed in OPPIN
Query on 4/30/07)

EPA 

  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'5')"  Reg. No. 	 
HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'3')"  Registration Name 
  HYPERLINK "JavaScript:sortUpdate(document.sort,'6')"  % Active
Ingredient 

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(32193)"  4-166 	BONIDE OIL & LIME SULPHUR
SPRAY	80

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(37432)"  4-419 	BONIDE ALL SEASONS
HORTICULTURAL SPRAY OIL RTU	2

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(17480)"  239-2528 	ORTHO DORMANT INSECT &
DISEASE CONTROL	34.84

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(9968)"  769-628 	SMCP VAPONA INSECTICIDE
50% CONCENTRATED SOLUTION	50

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(11394)"  769-646 	X-CEL OIL PLUS
MALATHION	89

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(30175)"  769-928 	WARNER ENTERPRISES
INDOOR INSECT FOGGER	14.477

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(21446)"  829-175 	SA-50 BRAND MALATHION
OIL SPRAY	75

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(16693)"  5905-302 	SOL OIL PLUS	90

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(391783)"  6218-78 	READY-TO-USE
YEAR-ROUND SPRAY OIL	1

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(12011)"  7401-372 	FERTI-LOAM WHITEFLY &
MEALYBUG KILLER	.216

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(3600)"  9779-324 	TROPIC SUPREME OIL	90

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(35934)"  19713-489 	DREXEL 8020 I	80

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(23696)"  34704-318 	DORMANT FLOWABLE
EMULSION	80

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(89158)"  34704-367 	SUMMER FLOWABLE
EMULSION LIGHT-MEDIUM INSECTICIDE-MITICIDE	80

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(7374)"  44446-9 	ZOT WASP SPRAY FORMULA 2
35.375

  HYPERLINK "javascript:viewRI(96985)"  48813-1 	SAF-T-OIL	80



Appendix E.  BEAD Compiled Table (Based on Existing Labels):  Detailed
Information Concerning Use Rates for Aliphatic Solvents



Table C-1.  Use Rate for Mineral Oil (PC Code 063502)

Agricultural Use Sites

Crop/Site	Equipment	Timing	Maximum Application Rate (lb ai/A)	ReEntry
Interval

ACEROLA (WEST INDIES CHERRY)	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun
When needed	0.07056 lb ai/gal	4 h

ALFALFA	aerial	Foliar	14.04	Not specified

ALMOND	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Delayed dormant, Dormant
123.3	4 h

	0.13916 lb ai/gal	4 h

	aerial	Dormant, Summer, Delayed dormant	84.23	12 h

APPLE	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Delayed dormant	164.4	4 h

	19.25 lb ai	4 h

	0.1433 lb ai/gal	12 h

	aerial	Dormant	84.23	12 h

APRICOT	low pressure handwand, handgun	Delayed dormant, Dormant	123.3	4
h

	19.25 lb ai	4 h

	0.1433 lb ai/gal	12 h

	aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant, Summer	84.23	12 h

ARTICHOKE -  CHINESE	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When
needed	0.07056 lb ai/gal	4 h

ASPARAGUS

ATEMOYA	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed

AVOCADO	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Late fall	209.6	4 h

BANANA	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Foliar	10.584	4 h

BALM	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056 lb
ai/gal	4 h

BASIL

BEAN

BEETS (UNSPECIFIED)

BLUEBERRY	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	10.584
4 h

BUSHBERRIES

BROCCOLI -  CHINESE	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When
needed	0.07056 lb ai/gal	4 h

CABBAGE	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056
lb ai/gal	4 h

CANEBERRIES	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed
10.584	4 h

CARAMBOLA (JALEA)	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed
0.07056 lb ai/gal	4 h

CAULIFLOWER	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun

	CELERY

CHERRY	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Dormant, Delayed dormant
123.3	4 h

	19.25 lb ai

	Summer	1.6846 lb ai/gal	12 h

	aerial

84.23

	CHRISTMAS TREE PLANTATION	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun
Winter	0.1654 lb ai/gal	4 h

CITRUS	aerial, airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Foliar	139.16	4
h

	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Foliar	0.0974 lb ai/gal	4 h

COFFEE	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	42.336	4 h

CORN -  FIELD	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed
0.1411 lb ai/gal	4 h

CORN (UNSPECIFIED)	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	Foliar
7.018	12 h

	aerial	Foliar	3.509	12 h

CUCURBIT VEGETABLES	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When
needed	0.07056 lb ai/gal	4 h

EGGPLANT	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056
lb ai/gal	4 h

FIG	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Delayed dormant, Dormant
21.168	4 h

GINGER	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056 lb
ai/gal	4 h

GINSENG (MEDICINAL)

GOURD (WAX) -  CHINESE

GRAPEFRUIT	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	469.2	4
h

Foliar	0.1012 lb ai/gal	12 h

Late summer, Fall	10.78 lb ai	4 h

	aerial	Foliar	216.8	12 h

GRAPES	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	Postharvest, Dormant
41.64	4 h

	0.41748 lb ai/gal

	Dormant	7.7 lb ai

aerial	Dormant	7.7

	HOPS	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	Foliar, Postharvest
38.5	4 h

Foliar	0.14112 lb ai/gal

	KIWI FRUIT	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	42.336
4 h

LEMON	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	469.2	4 h

Foliar	0.1012 lb ai/gal	12 h

	10.78 lb ai	4 h

	aerial

216.8	12 h

	10.78 lb ai	4 h

LETTUCE	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056
lb ai/gal	4 h

LIME	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	469.2	4 h

Fall, Late summer	10.78 lb ai

aerial

10.78

10.78 lb ai

	MANGO	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	10.584	4 h

MARJORAM/OREGANO	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed
0.07056 lb ai/gal	4 h

MELONS

MINT/PEPPERMINT/ SPEARMINT

NECTARINE	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Dormant, Delayed
dormant	123.3	4 h

Summer	1.6846 lb ai/gal	12 h

Delayed dormant	19.25 lb ai	4 h

	aerial	Dormant, Delayed dormant	84.23	12 h

	19.25 lb ai	4 h

OLIVE	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Postharvest, Prebloom
156.4	4 h

Prebloom	11.55 lb ai

	Dormant, Delayed dormant	0.13916 lb ai/gal

	ORANGE	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	469.2	4 h

Late summer, Fall	10.78 lb ai

	Foliar	0.1012 lb ai/gal	12 h

	aerial

216.8

	ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES	aerial	Foliar	34.741	4 h

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand
Dormant	0.23 lb ai	Not specified

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES	airblast, handgun, low pressure
handwand, high pressure handwand

	ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand
Foliar	0.2756 lb ai/gal	4 h

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES	airblast, handgun, low pressure
handwand, high pressure handwand

	ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand
Dormant	0.2205 lb ai/gal	4 h

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS

When needed	0.15 lb ai	Not specified

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS

When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	PAPAYA	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	10.584	4 h

PEACH	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Dormant, Delayed dormant
123.3	4 h

	19.25 lb ai

0.1433 lb ai/gal	12 h

	aerial	Dormant	84.23

	PEAR	aerial	Delayed dormant	385	4 h

	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Dormant	164.4	4 h

Delayed dormant	19.25 lb ai	4 h

PEAR	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Summer	1.6846 lb ai/gal	12
h

PECAN

When needed	56.448	4 h

PEPPER	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056 lb
ai/gal	4 h

PINEAPPLE	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	14.112	4
h

	diptank	When needed	0.14112 lb ai/gal	4 h

PISTACHIO	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Delayed dormant,
Dormant	123.3	4 h

PLANTAIN	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Foliar	10.584	4 h

PLUM	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Delayed dormant, Dormant
123.3 lb ai	4 h

	19.25

0.1433 lb ai/gal	12 h

	aerial	Summer	84.23

	POTATO -  WHITE/IRISH	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When
needed	0.07056 lb ai/gal	4 h

PRUNE	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Dormant, Delayed dormant
123.3	4 h

	19.25 lb ai

0.1433 lb ai/gal	12 h

	aerial	Delayed dormant	84.23

	PUMPKIN	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056
lb ai/gal	4 h

RADISH

SPINACH	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056
lb ai/gal	4 h

SQUASH (ALL OR UNSPECIFIED)

STRAWBERRY	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed
0.05292 lb ai/gal	4 h

SUGAR BEETS (INCL. TOPS)	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When
needed	0.14112 lb ai/gal	4 h

SWEET POTATO	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed
0.07056 lb ai/gal	4 h

TANGELO	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	469.2	4 h

TANGERINES

TOBACCO	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056
lb ai/gal	4 h

TOMATO	groundboom, low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed	0.07056 lb
ai/gal	4 h

WALNUT (ENGLISH/BLACK)	aerial, airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun
Foliar, Dormant, Delayed dormant	55.664	4 h

	airblast, low pressure handwand, handgun	Late spring	0.9826 lb ai/gal
12 h

Table C-2.  Use Rate for Mineral Oil (PC Code 063502)

Occupational Use Sites

Crop/Site	Equipment	Timing	Maximum Application Rate (lb ai/A)	ReEntry
Interval

AGRICULTURAL DRAINAGE SYSTEMS	low pressure handwand, handgun	When needed
34.104	Not specified

	aerial

27.28

	HOUSEHOLD/DOMESTIC DWELLINGS OUTDOOR PREMISES	truck mounted ULV sprayer

0.385

	NONAGRICULTURAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY/FENCEROWS/

HEDGEROWS

	0.385

	ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES	aerial	Foliar	34.741	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant	0.226 lb ai	Not
specified

Foliar	0.2756 lb ai/gal	4 h

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS	handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant
0.226 lb ai	Not specified

	0.2205 lb ai/gal	4 h

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS

When needed	0.150 lb ai	Not specified

	0.137 lb ai/gal

	ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES	aerial	Foliar	34.741	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand, high pressure handwand
Dormant	0.226 lb ai	Not specified

	handgun, low pressure handwand, high pressure handwand	Foliar	0.2756 lb
ai/gal	4 h

PASTURES	truck mounted ULV sprayer	When needed	0.385	Not specified

RECREATIONAL AREAS

SWAMPS/MARSHES/

WETLANDS/STAGNANT WATER

WIDE AREA/GENERAL OUTDOOR TREATMENT (PUBLIC HEALTH USE)	truck mounted
ULV sprayer	When needed	0.385	Not specified

Table C-3.  Use Rate for Mineral Oil (PC Code 063502)

Residential Use Sites

Crop/Site	Equipment	Timing	Maximum Application Rate 

(lb ai/A)	ReEntry Interval

ALMOND	hose-end sprayer, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant, Dormant
0.226 lb ai	Not specified

	0.2055 lb ai/gal

	APPLE

	0.226 lb ai

0.2856 lb ai/gal

	APRICOT

Dormant, Delayed dormant	0.226 lb ai

	Dormant	0.2856 lb ai/gal

	ASPARAGUS

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	AVOCADO	hose-end sprayer, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.0268 lb ai/gal
Not specified

Foliar	0.030 lb ai

	BALM

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	BANANA

When needed	0.1096 lb ai/gal

	BASIL

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	BEAN

When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	BEETS

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	BLUEBERRY

Dormant	0.226 lb ai

0.2055 lb ai/gal

	CABBAGE

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	CABBAGE

When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	CAULIFLOWER

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	CHERRY

Dormant, Delayed dormant	0.226 lb ai

	Dormant	0.2856 lb ai/gal

	CITRUS

	0.120 lb ai

	CITRUS

Dormant	0.1096 lb ai/gal

	CORN (UNSPECIFIED)

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	CUCURBIT VEGETABLES

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	DRAINAGE SYSTEMS

When needed	34.104

	EGGPLANT	hose-end sprayer, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.150 lb ai	Not
specified

When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	FIG

Dormant, Delayed dormant	0.2055 lb ai/gal

	GRAPEFRUIT

Fall, Spring, Early winter	0.120 lb ai

	Foliar	0.1339 lb ai/gal

	GRAPES

Postharvest, Dormant, Prebloom, Delayed dormant	0.150 lb ai

	LEMON

Fall, Spring, Early winter	0.120 lb ai

	Foliar	0.1339 lb ai/gal

	LETTUCE

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	LIME

Foliar	0.1339 lb ai/gal

	MANGO

	0.030 lb ai

	MARJORAM/OREGANO

	0.150 lb ai

	MELONS

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	MINT/PEPPERMINT/SPEARMINT

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	NECTARINE

Delayed dormant, Dormant	0.226 lb ai

0.2055 lb ai/gal

	OLIVE

Foliar, Postharvest	0.1096 lb ai/gal

	ORANGE

Dormant	0.120 lb ai

	Foliar	0.1339 lb ai/gal

	ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES

Dormant	0.226 lb ai

	ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES	hose-end sprayer, low pressure handwand
Dormant	0.2856 lb ai/gal	Not specified

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS

	0.226 lb ai

0.2055 lb ai/gal

	ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS

When needed	0.150 lb ai

0.137 lb ai/gal

	ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES

Dormant	0.226 lb ai

0.2856 lb ai/gal

	PEACH

Dormant, Delayed dormant	0.226 lb ai

	Dormant	0.2856 lb ai/gal

	PEAR

Dormant, Delayed dormant	0.226 lb ai

	Dormant	0.2856 lb ai/gal

	PECAN

	0.226 lb ai

0.2055 lb ai/gal

	PEPPER

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	PEPPER

When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	PLUM

Dormant, Delayed dormant	0.150 lb ai

	PLUM

Dormant	0.2856 lb ai/gal

	POTATO -  WHITE/IRISH

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	PRUNE

Dormant, Delayed dormant	0.150 lb ai

0.137 lb ai/gal

	RADISH

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	SQUASH (ALL OR UNSPECIFIED)	hose-end sprayer, low pressure handwand
Foliar	0.150 lb ai	Not specified

When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	STRAWBERRY

Dormant, Summer	0.075 lb ai

	Dormant	0.0685 lb ai/gal

	SWEET POTATO

Foliar	0.150 lb ai

	TANGERINES

Foliar	0.1339 lb ai/gal

	TOMATO

	0.150 lb ai

	When needed	0.137 lb ai/gal

	 

Table C-4.  Use Rate for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PC Code 063503)

Agricultural Use Sites

Crop/Site	Equipment	Timing	Maximum Application Rate (lb ai/A)	ReEntry
Interval

ACEROLA (WEST INDIES CHERRY)	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand
Foliar	0.072 lb ai/gal	4 h

ALFALFA	aerial	Foliar	13.9

groundboom	Foliar	1.74

aerial, groundboom	Seed crop	1.76

	ALMOND	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant	137	12
h

	5.62 lb ai/gal	4 h

	24.0 lb ai

aerial	Dormant, Delayed dormant	56.2

4.71 lb ai/gal

	AMARANTH -  CHINESE	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
0.072 lb ai/gal	4 h

APPLE	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant	167	4 h

	24.0 lb ai

5.62 lb ai/gal

aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	56.2

64.0 lb ai

4.71 lb ai/gal

chemigation	Foliar	21.6

	APRICOT	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant	137	12
h

	24 lb ai	4 h

	2.82 lb ai/gal

aerial

56.2

4.71 lb ai/gal

	ARTICHOKE -  CHINESE	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
0.072 lb ai/gal	4 h

ASPARAGUS	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

ASPARAGUS	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.141 lb
ai/gal	4 h

	aerial

11.2

	ATEMOYA	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.072 lb ai/gal
4 h

AVOCADO	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	213	4 h

	0.119 lb ai/gal

aerial	Fall	126

	BALM	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.140 lb ai/gal
4 h

BANANA	aerial, airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant	11.2	4 h

Foliar	0.517 lb ai/gal

	BASIL	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.140 lb ai/gal
4 h

BEANS -  SUCCULENT (LIMA)	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

BEANS	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

	aerial

11.2

	BEETS (UNSPECIFIED)	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
15.56	4 h

	0.072 lb ai/gal

	BLACKBERRY	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant, Delayed
dormant	16 lb ai	Not specified

BLUEBERRY	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant, Delayed
dormant	21.2	4 h

	16 lb ai	Not specified

	0.219 lb ai/gal

aerial	Dormant	21.2	4 h

	2.13 lb ai/gal

	BROCCOLI	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

BROCCOLI -  CHINESE	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.072 lb ai/gal

	BUSHBERRIES	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.56	4 h

	0.1077 lb ai/gal

	CABBAGE	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

	0.140 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

chemigation

21.6

	CANEBERRIES	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

Dormant, Postharvest	0.140 lb ai/gal

aerial	Foliar	11.2

	CARAMBOLA (JALEA)	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.072
lb ai/gal	4 h

CAULIFLOWER	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

	0.140 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

chemigation

21.6

	CELERY	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

	0.140 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

	CHERRY	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant,
Dormant	137	12 h

	24 lb ai	4 h

	2.82 lb ai/gal

aerial

56.2

4.71 lb ai/gal

	CHRISTMAS TREE PLANTATIONS	aerial	Winter	28.2	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.293 lb ai/gal

	CITRUS	dip	Nurserystock	0.072 lb ai/gal	24 h

	aerial	Foliar	105	4 h

CITRUS	aerial	Foliar	1.77 lb ai/gal	4 h

	chemigation

21.6

airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Nonbearing, Foliar	11.2

1.77 lb ai/gal

	CITRUS HYBRIDS OTHER THAN TANGELO	airblast, handgun, low pressure
handwand	Foliar	478	4 h

COFFEE	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	43.1	4 h

COLE CROPS	aerial, airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	11.2
4 h

	0.140 lb ai/gal

	COLLARDS	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

CORIANDER	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.072 lb
ai/gal	4 h

CORN -  FIELD	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

Early spring, Summer	0.285 lb ai/gal

aerial	Foliar	14.2

	Early spring, Summer	1.42 lb ai/gal

	CORN (UNSPECIFIED)	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

COTTON (UNSPECIFIED)	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.140 lb ai/gal

15.6

aerial

11.2

	CRANBERRY	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.140 lb
ai/gal	4 h

CUCUMBER	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.119 lb ai/gal

15.6

aerial

11.2

	CUCURBIT VEGETABLES	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
15.6	4 h

CUCURBIT VEGETABLES	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
0.141 lb ai/gal	4 h

DECIDUOUS FRUIT TREES (UNSPECIFIED)	airblast, handgun, low pressure
handwand	Dormant	16 lb ai

0.417 lb ai/gal	12 h

EGGPLANT	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

15.6

0.140 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

	FIG	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant, Dormant
119	4 h

	24 lb ai

0.949 lb ai/gal

aerial

56.2

	FLAVORING/SPICE CROPS	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
0.140 lb ai/gal	4 h

GINGER	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.072 lb ai/gal
4 h

GINSENG (MEDICINAL)	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
0.072 lb ai/gal	4 h

GOURD (WAX) -  CHINESE	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
0.054 lb ai/gal	4 h

GRAPEFRUIT	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	478	4 h

	12 lb ai

	Postharvest, Dormant, Foliar, Delayed dormant	1.77 lb ai/gal

aerial	Foliar	104

	Postharvest, Dormant, Foliar, Delayed dormant	1.77 lb ai/gal

	GRAPES	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant,
Dormant	42.4	4 h

	16 lb ai	Not specified

GRAPES	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant,
Dormant	0.417 lb ai/gal	12 h

	aerial

42.2	4 h

	aerial	Dormant	0.711 lb ai/gal	4 h

GRASSES GROWN FOR SEED	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand
Foliar, Postharvest	14.0	4 h

HONEYCOMB	aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	35.9	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.216 lb ai/gal

	HOPS	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	20.5	4 h

	0.144 lb ai/gal

	KIWI FRUIT	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	43.1	4 h

	0.070 lb ai/gal

	LEMON	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	478	4 h

Foliar	12 lb ai

	Postharvest, Delayed dormant, Dormant, Foliar	1.77 lb ai/gal

aerial	Foliar	137	12 h

Foliar, Postharvest, Delayed dormant, Dormant	1.77 lb ai/gal	4 h

LETTUCE	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

	0.140 lb ai/gal

	LIME	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	478	4 h

	12 lb ai

0.135 lb ai/gal	Not specified

MACADAMIA NUT (BUSHNUT)	aerial, airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand
Dormant	11.2	4 h

Foliar	0.119 lb ai/gal

	MANGO	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

MANGO	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.106 lb ai/gal	4
h

	aerial

7.23	12 h

MARJORAM/OREGANO	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.140
lb ai/gal	4 h

MELONS	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

	0.140 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

chemigation

21.6

	MUSTARD	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

NECTARINE	aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	56.1	4 h

	48 lb ai

4.71 lb ai/gal

airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand

125

24 lb ai

4.22 lb ai/gal

	OKRA	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

OLIVE	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	304	12 h

Foliar, Prebloom	12 lb ai	4 h

Foliar, Prebloom	0.213 lb ai/gal

aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	34.8

	Foliar, Prebloom	1.07 lb ai/gal

	ONION	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	aerial, groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	11.2	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.119 lb ai/gal	4 h

ORANGE	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	478	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	12 lb ai	4 h

	1.77 lb ai/gal

aerial

137	12 h

ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES	airblast, low pressure handwand, hose-end
sprayer, handgun	Dormant	108	Not specified

	airblast, low pressure handwand, hose-end sprayer, handgun	Dormant,
Delayed dormant	24 lb ai	Not specified

	2.13 lb ai/gal	4 h

	dip	Nursery stock	0.072 lb ai/gal	24 h

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS	handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant	81.7
Not specified

	0.282 lb ai/gal	4 h

	dip	Nurserystock	0.072 lb ai/gal	24 h

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS	handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant
81.7	Not specified

	0.217 lb ai/gal	4 h

	dip	Nurserystock	0.072 lb ai/gal	24 h

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES	handgun, low pressure handwand, high
pressure handwand	Dormant	108	Not specified

	24	Not specified

Delayed dormant	0.296 lb ai/gal	4 h

	aerial	Dormant	35.9	4 h

PAPAYA	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	10.8	4 h

Germination	10.7

	PEACH	aerial	Dormant, Delayed dormant	56.1	4 h

	64 lb ai

4.71 lb ai/gal

airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant, Delayed dormant	137	12
h

	24 lb ai	4 h

	14.1 lb ai/gal	Not specified

PEANUTS (UNSPECIFIED)	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	aerial, airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	11.2	4 h

	0.140 lb ai/gal

	PEAR	aerial	Dormant	70.3	Not specified

	48 lb ai	4 h

	aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	3.03 lb ai/gal	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand

176

24 lb ai

4.22 lb ai/gal

	PEAS -  SOUTHERN	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

PECAN	aerial	Dormant	56.2	4 h

	48 lb ai	4 h

	4.71 lb ai/gal	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant, Foliar	81.7	Not
specified

Dormant	2 lb ai	Not specified

	42.3 lb ai/gal	4 h

PEPPER	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

15.6

0.141 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

	PEPPERMINT, SPEARMINT	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
14.0	4 h

PERSIMMON	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.070 lb
ai/gal	4 h

PINEAPPLE	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	14.4	4 h

	dip

0.144 lb ai/gal

	PISTACHIO	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant,
Dormant	125	4 h

	0.216 lb ai/gal

aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	41.6	4 h

PLANTAIN	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	10.8	4 h

	0.108 lb ai/gal

	PLUM	aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	55.7	4 h

	aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	48 lb ai	4 h

	4.71 lb ai/gal

airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand

137	12 h

	24 lb ai	4 h

	4.22 lb ai/gal

	POMEGRANATE	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant	41.6	24 h

POTATO -  WHITE/IRISH	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

15.6

0.140 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

	PRUNE	aerial	Delayed dormant, Dormant	137	12 h

	48 lb ai	4 h

	4.71 lb ai/gal

airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand

125

24 lb ai

13.9 lb ai/gal

	PUMPKIN	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.6	4 h

	0.119 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

	RADISH	aerial, groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	11.2	4
h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.141 lb ai/gal

	RAMBUTAN	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.072 lb
ai/gal	4 h

RASPBERRY (BLACK -  RED)	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand
Dormant, Delayed dormant	16 lb ai	Not specified

SMALL FRUITS	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant	16 lb ai
4 h

	0.417 lb ai/gal	12 h

SORGHUM (UNSPECIFIED)	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

SOYBEANS (UNSPECIFIED)	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.140

	SPEARMINT	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.140 lb
ai/gal	4 h

SPINACH	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.072 lb ai/gal

	SQUASH (ALL OR UNSPECIFIED)	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

15.6

0.141 lb ai/gal

aerial

11.2

	STONE FRUITS	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Delayed dormant
137	12 h

STRAWBERRY	aerial	Dormant	11.2	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

27.8

	Foliar	0.119 lb ai/gal

	SUGAR BEET	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	15.8	4 h

	0.144 lb ai/gal

aerial	When needed	14.2

	SWEET POTATO	aerial, groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar
11.2	4 h

	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

0.140 lb ai/gal

	

TANGELO	aerial	Foliar	70.6	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	478	4 h

	12 lb ai

	TANGERINES	aerial	Foliar	70.6	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand

478

12 lb ai

airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.135 lb ai/gal	Not
specified

TARO	groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand	Foliar	0.072 lb ai/gal	4
h

TOBACCO	aerial	Foliar	11.2	4 h

	chemigation

21.6

groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

15.6

0.140 lb ai/gal

	TOMATO	aerial	Foliar	11.2	4 h

	chemigation

21.6

groundboom, handgun, low pressure handwand

15.8

0.141 lb ai/gal

	TURNIP	chemigation	Foliar	21.6	4 h

WALNUT (ENGLISH/BLACK)	aerial	Delayed dormant	35.9	4 h

	airblast, handgun, low pressure handwand

193

0.421 lb ai/gal

	

Table C-5.  Use Rate for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PC Code 063503)

Commercial Use Sites

Crop/Site	Equipment	Timing	Maximum Application Rate (lb ai/A)	ReEntry
Interval

ANIMAL KENNELS/SLEEPING QUARTERS (COMMERCIAL)	low pressure handwand,
hose-end sprayer, handgun	When needed	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2	Not specified

COMMERCIAL STORAGES/WAREHOUSES PREMISES;
COMMERCIAL/INSTITUTIONAL/INDUSTRIAL PREMISES/EQUIP. (INDOOR)	low
pressure handwand, hose-end sprayer, handgun	When needed	3.13E-07 lb
ai/ft3	Not specified

DAIRY FARM MILK STORAGE ROOMS/HOUSES/SHEDS

	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2

3.13E-07 lb ai/ft3

	EATING ESTABLISHMENTS

	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2

3.13E-07 lb ai/ft3

	FOOD PROCESSING PLANT PREMISES (NONFOOD CONTACT)

	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2

3.13E-07 lb ai/ft3

	HOSPITALS/MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS PREMISES (HUMAN/VETERINARY)

	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2

3.13E-07 lb ai/ft3

	HOUSEHOLD/DOMESTIC DWELLINGS CONTENTS; HOUSEHOLD/DOMESTIC DWELLINGS
INDOOR PREMISES	low pressure handwand, trigger pump sprayer

5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2

3.13E-07 lb ai/ft3

	INTERMITTENTLY FLOODED AREAS/WATER; AQUATIC AREAS/WATER;
SWAMPS/MARSHES/WETLANDS/STAGNANT WATER	low pressure handwand, hose-end
sprayer, handgun

36.7

	ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES	airblast, low pressure handwand, hose-end
sprayer, handgun	Dormant	108

	Dormant	24 lb ai

	Dormant, Delayed dormant	2.13 lb ai/gal	4 h

	dip	Nurserystock	0.072 lb ai/gal	24 h

ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS	handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant	81.7
Not specified

Dormant	0.282 lb ai/gal	4 h

	dip, handgun, low pressure handwand	Nurserystock	0.072 lb ai/gal	24 h

ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS	handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant
81.7	Not specified

	handgun, low pressure handwand	Dormant	0.217 lb ai/gal	4 h

	dip	Nurserystock	0.072 lb ai/gal	24 h

ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES	handgun, low pressure handwand, high
pressure handwand	Dormant	108	Not specified

	aerial	Dormant	35.9	4 h

	handgun, low pressure handwand, high pressure handwand	Dormant	24 lb ai
Not specified

Delayed dormant	0.296 lb ai/gal	4 h

PET LIVING/SLEEPING QUARTERS	low pressure handwand, hose-end sprayer,
handgun	When needed	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2	Not specified

WIDE AREA/GENERAL OUTDOOR TREATMENT (PUBLIC HEALTH USE)	low pressure
handwand, hose-end sprayer, handgun, rights-of-way sprayer	When needed
36.7	Not specified

Table C-6.  Use Rate for Petroleum Hydrocarbons (PC Code 063503)

Residential Use Sites

Crop/Site	Equipment	Timing	Maximum Application Rate (lb ai/A)	ReEntry
Interval

ALMOND	low pressure handwand, hose-end sprayer	Delayed dormant, Dormant
0.2055 lb ai/gal	Not specified

APPLE

Foliar, Dormant	81.7

	Dormant	24 lb ai

0.276 lb ai/gal

	APRICOT

Delayed dormant, Dormant	0.206 lb ai/gal

	ASPARAGUS

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	BALM	low pressure handwand, hose-end sprayer	Foliar

Not specified

BANANA

Foliar	0.71

	BASIL

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	BEANS

Foliar

BEETS (UNSPECIFIED)

Foliar

BLACKBERRY

Delayed dormant, Dormant	16 lb ai

	BLUEBERRY

Delayed dormant, Dormant

Dormant	0.219 lb ai/gal

	CABBAGE

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	CAULIFLOWER

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	CHERRY

Delayed dormant, Dormant	16 lb ai

	Dormant	0.276 lb ai/gal

	CITRUS

Foliar	44.2

2 lb ai

0.138 lb ai/gal

	COLE CROPS

	0.137 lb ai/gal

	CORN (UNSPECIFIED)

	0.135 lb ai/gal 

	CUCURBIT VEGETABLES

	0.137 lb ai/gal

	DECIDUOUS FRUIT TREES (UNSPECIFIED)

Dormant	0.276 lb ai/gal

	DRAINAGE SYSTEMS; INTERMITTENTLY FLOODED AREAS/WATER; SEWAGE SYSTEMS;
SWAMPS/MARSHES/WETLANDS/STAGNANT WATER

When needed	34.4

	EATING ESTABLISHMENTS

	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2

3.13E-07 lb ai/ft3

	EGGPLANT

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	FIG	low pressure handwand, hose-end sprayer	Delayed dormant, Dormant
0.211 lb ai/gal	Not specified

GRAPEFRUIT

Foliar	0.135 lb ai/gal

	GRAPES

Delayed dormant, Dormant	16 lb ai

	Dormant	0.207 lb ai/gal

	HOUSEHOLD/DOMESTIC DWELLINGS CONTENTS; HOUSEHOLD/DOMESTIC DWELLINGS
INDOOR PREMISES

When needed	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2

	When needed	3.13E-07 lb ai/ft3

	LEMON

Foliar	0.135 lb ai/gal

	LETTUCE

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	LIME

	0.135 lb ai/gal

	MARJORAM/OREGANO

	0.137 lb ai/gal

	MELONS

NECTARINE

Delayed dormant, Dormant	0.206 lb ai/gal

	OLIVE

Prebloom, Foliar	0.070 lb ai/gal

	ORANGE

Foliar	0.135 lb ai/gal

	ORNAMENTAL AND/OR SHADE TREES

Dormant	108

24 lb ai

	Delayed dormant	0.483 lb ai/gal

	ORNAMENTAL HERBACEOUS PLANTS

Dormant	81.7

	Foliar	0.063 lb ai

	Delayed dormant	0.483 lb ai/gal

	ORNAMENTAL NONFLOWERING PLANTS

Dormant	81.7

	Foliar	0.063 lb ai

0.483 lb ai/gal 

	ORNAMENTAL WOODY SHRUBS AND VINES	low pressure handwand, hose-end
sprayer	Dormant	107.92	Not specified

	24 lb ai

	Delayed dormant	0.4828 lb ai/gal

	PEACH

Dormant, Foliar	81.7

	Dormant	24 lb ai

	Delayed dormant	0.276 lb ai/gal

	PEAR

Dormant, Foliar	81.7

	Dormant	24 lb ai

0.271 lb ai/gal

	PECAN

Dormant, Foliar	81.7

	Dormant	2 lb ai

0.271 lb ai/gal

	PEPPER

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	PET LIVING/SLEEPING QUARTERS

When needed	5.34E-05 lb ai/ft2

	PLUM

Dormant, Foliar	81.7

	Delayed dormant, Dormant	16 lb ai

	Delayed dormant	0.276 lb ai/gal

	POTATO -  WHITE/IRISH

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	PRUNE

Dormant, Foliar	81.7

	Delayed dormant	0.276 lb ai/gal

	RADISH

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	RASPBERRY (BLACK -  RED)

Delayed dormant, Dormant	16 lb ai

	SPEARMINT

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	SQUASH (ALL OR UNSPECIFIED)

STRAWBERRY	low pressure handwand, hose-end sprayer	Summer, Dormant	0.069
lb ai/gal	Not specified

SWEET POTATO

Foliar	0.137 lb ai/gal

	TANGERINES

	0.135 lb ai/gal

	TOMATO

	0.137 lb ai/gal

	WALNUT (ENGLISH/BLACK)

Delayed dormant, Dormant	0.141 lb ai/gal

	

  Not a CAS No. listed on any CSF for the Aliphatic Solvents RED, but
included herein for comparative purposes.

 Various CAS #s are listed, as follows:  8042-47-5, 64742-46-7,
64742-52-5, 64742-54-7, 72623-84-8, 72623-85-9, 72623-86-0, 72623-87-1,
178603-64-0, 178603-65-1, 178603-66-2, 445411-73-4.

   PPE that is established on the basis of Acute Toxicity of the end-use
product must be compared to the active ingredient PPE in this document. 
In the case of multiple active ingredients, the more protective PPE must
be placed on the product labeling.  For guidance on which PPE is
considered more protective, see PR Notice 93-7.

 PAGE   

 PAGE   2 

  PAGE  58 

 PAGE   

 PAGE   98