Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPP-2002-0202-0013
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2002-08-14T04:00Z

UNITED
STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
OFFICE
OF
PREVENTION,
PESTICIDES
AND
TOXIC
SUBSTANCES
WASHINGTON,
D.
C.
20460
PC
Code:
009001
DP
Barcodes:
D283667
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
Addition
of
corn
and
canola
seed
treatment
use
to
revised
Lindane
RED
TO:
B.
Shackleford,
Branch
Chief
M.
Howard,
Team
Leader
Special
Review
and
Reregistration
Division
(7508C)

FROM:
N.
E.
Federoff,
Wildlife
Biologist
F.
A.
Khan,
Ph.
D.,
Environmental
Scientist
Environmental
Risk
Branch
V
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division
REVIEWED
and
APPROVED
by:
Mah
Shamim,
Ph.
D.,
Branch
Chief
Environmental
Risk
Branch
V
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division
(7507C)

CANOLA
AND
CORN
SEED
ASSESSMENT
EFED
was
asked
to
add
canola
and
corn
to
its
list
of
lindane
treated
seeds
for
ecological
risk
assessment.
This
document
supersedes
the
Revised
EFED
RED
chapter
for
lindane
(D254764)
and
provides
updated
and
revised
risk
information
regarding
canola
and
corn.
Both
a
terrestrial
(avian
and
mammalian
acute
and
chronic)
and
an
aquatic
assessment
(freshwater
and
marine
fish
and
invertebrates)
were
performed
as
well
as
calculation
of
surface
and
groundwater
EECs.
The
rates
used
were
the
proposed
maximum
1.
456
lb
ai/
100lbs
seed
x
8
lbs
seed/
acre
=
0.
116
lbs
ai/
acre
for
canola
and
a
new
lower
rate
of
0.0558
lb
ai/
100lbs
seed
x
14
lbs
seed/
acre=
0.0078
lbs
ai/
acre
for
corn.
There
are
approximately
113,000­
227,000
seeds
per
pound
of
canola
seed
and
1200­
1600
seeds
per
pound
of
corn
seed.

Summary
Risk
to
birds
and
mammals
have
increased
in
magnitude
(over
10X)
for
the
new
proposed
canola
use
and
were
reduced
(about
2X)
for
corn
under
the
new
rate
scenario.
However,
uncertainty
exists
regarding
actual
risk
to
seed
eating
avian
species
due
to
factors
associated
with
exposure.
Seed
incorporation
may
reduce
availability
of
treated
seed
to
some
species
and
aversion
and
field
studies
(Blus
et
al.
1984
and
1985)
suggest
birds
may
not
be
consuming
treated
seed.
These
exposure
factors
are
not
applicable
to
small
seed
eating
mammals
that
eat
a
large
proportion
of
their
bodyweight
in
seed
per
day.
Therefore,
the
potential
for
risk
to
these
mammals
is
not
as
uncertain.
Risks
to
aquatic
organisms
did
increased
from
the
new
higher
rate
for
canola.
However,
the
assumption
for
GENEEC
2
(Tier
I
water
exposure
model)
that
100%
of
the
compound
will
disassociate
from
the
seed
surface
has
likely
produced
highly
conservative
estimates
and
has
thus
may
have
overestimated
risks.
Drinking
Water
Assessment
EFED
recommends
that
the
Health
Effects
Division
(HED)
use
the
groundwater
(acute
and
chronic
=
0.05
ppb)
and
surface
water
concentrations
(acute
=
4.
16
ppb
and
chronic
=
1.
95
ppb)
for
canola
presented
in
the
table
below
for
drinking
water
EECs
ONLY
IF
the
proposed
canola
use
will
be
supported.
IF
canola
will
not
be
supported
for
registration,
then
the
concentrations
for
wheat
should
be
used.
The
drinking
water
EECs
were
based
on
the
Tier
I
FIRST
(surface
water)
and
SCIGROW
(groundwater)
simulation
models.
The
GENEEC
model
is
no
longer
used
to
estimate
EECs
for
drinking
water.
Therefore,
surface
water
EECs
for
wheat
have
been
revised
using
the
Tier
I
FIRST
model.
The
results
are
provided
in
the
following
table:

Drinking
water
EEC
comparison
for
lindane
wheat
and
canola
seed
treatments.

WHEAT
Application
Rate
(lbs
ai/
A)
Acute
Chronic
Groundwater
0.051
0.011
µ
g/
L
0.
011
µ
g/
L
Surface
Water
0.051
0.
98
µ
g/
L
0.
46
µ
g/
L
CANOLA
Application
Rate
(lbs
ai/
A)
Acute
Chronic
Groundwater
0.
116
0.025
µ
g/
L
0.
025
µ
g/
L
Surface
Water
0.116
4.16
µ
g/
L
1.
95
µ
g/
L
Ground
Water
Ground
water
concentrations
were
predicted
with
SCIGROW.
Input
parameters
are
summarized
in
the
table
below.
The
entire
SCIGROW
output
file
is
located
in
Appendix
I
at
the
end
of
this
memo.

SCIGROW
input
parameters
and
results
for
lindane.

Application
Rate:
Wheat
Canola
1
@
0.
051
lb/
acre
1
@
0.
116
lb/
acre
Aerobic
Soil
Half
Life
980
days
(mean
Value)

Organic
Carbon
Partitioning
Coefficient
(Koc)
1367
mL/
g
(median
Value)

EEC:
Wheat
Canola
0.011
µg/
L
0.013
µg/
L
Surface
Water
The
following
inputs
were
used
for
the
FIRST
modeling.
The
FIRST
output
file
is
located
in
Appendix
I
at
the
end
of
this
memo.

Input
Parameters
for
FIRST
Parameter
Value
Application
Rate
and
Number
0.
051
lb
ai/
A
x
1
application
(Wheat)
0.
116
lb
ai/
A
x
1
application
(Canola)

Organic
Carbon
Partitioning
Coefficient
942
ml/
g
lowest
of
4
values
(MRID
00164346)

Solubility
7
ppm
Application
Type
Granular/
incorporated
to
1.
2
inches
Percent
Cropped
Area
56%
for
Wheat
and
87%
for
Canola
Aerobic
Soil
Half­
life
980
days
single
value
(MRID
406225­
01)*

Aerobic
Aquatic
Half­
life
1960
days
(aerobic
soil
halflife
x
2)

Photolysis
stable
(MRIDs
0016457;
001645545;
447931)

Hydrolysis
stable
(MRID
00161630)

*In
a
336­
day
aerobic
soil
metabolism
study,
lindane
degraded
very
slowly,
with
a
registrant­
calculated
half
life
of
980
days,
thus
the
"3x"
rule
was
not
applied.

Terrestrial
and
Aquatic
Assessments
Risk
to
birds
and
mammals
have
increased
in
magnitude
(over
10X)
for
the
proposed
canola
use.
However,
uncertainty
exists
regarding
actual
risk
to
seed
eating
avian
species
due
to
factors
associated
with
exposure.
Seed
incorporation
may
reduce
availability
of
treated
seed
to
some
species.
Aversion
and
field
studies
(Blus
et
al.
1984
and
1985)
suggest
birds
may
not
be
consuming
treated
seed.
These
exposure
factors
are
not
applicable
to
small
seed
eating
mammals
that
eat
a
large
proportion
of
their
bodyweight
in
seed
per
day.
Therefore,
the
potential
for
risk
to
these
mammals
is
not
as
uncertain.
Risks
to
aquatic
organisms
increased
only
slightly.
The
assumption
for
GENEEC
2
(Tier
I
water
exposure
model)
that
100%
of
the
compound
will
disassociate
from
the
seed
surface
has
likely
produced
highly
conservative
estimates
and
has
thus
likely
overestimated
the
EEC's
and
resulting
risks.
EFED
also
believes
that
a
seed
leaching
study
would
greatly
increase
certainty
regarding
a
more
realistic
estimate
of
compound
for
groundwater
leaching
and
runoff.
This
in
turn
would
allow
a
refinement
of
exposure
estimates
and
environmental
concentration
values
(EECs).
EFED
has
issued
a
guidance
for
this
study
(Memo
from
Denise
Keehner
re:
Standard
Method
for
Determining
the
Leachability
of
Pesticides
from
Treated
Seeds,
7/
6/
2000).
The
results
of
the
risk
assessment
are
as
follows:

Avian
The
labels
with
the
highest
rates
(lb
lindane/
100
lb
seed)
were
used
to
evaluate
potential
maximum
consumption
of
lindane
by
terrestrial
animals.
The
current
approach
uses
daily
food
intake
calculated
using
the
relationships
described
in
Nagy
(1987
as
cited
in
USEPA,
1993).
Acute
risk
quotients
(RQ)
were
then
calculated
based
on
animals
receiving
their
full
diet
from
lindane­
treated
seeds
for
a
1­
day
time
period.
In
addition,
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
mg
ai/
kg/
seed
and
the
dietary
LC50
endpoint.

Birds
may
be
exposed
to
granular
pesticides
and
seed
treatments
by
ingesting
granules
or
seeds
when
foraging
for
food
or
grit.
They
also
may
be
exposed
by
other
routes,
such
as
by
walking
on
exposed
granules
or
drinking
water
contaminated
by
granules
or
treated
seeds.
The
assessment
below
bases
acute
exposure
on
the
quantity
of
seeds
that
a
bird
could
ingest
in
one
day
and
that
the
bird
eats
only
lindane­
treated
seeds.
This
approach
defines
a
risk
quotient
(RQ)
as:

RQ=
Dose/
LD50
where
Dose
=
the
amount
of
lindane
that
a
bird
could
receive
by
ingesting
treated­
seeds
in
a
24­
hour
period
per
bird
mass
(dose
units
in
mg/
Kg).
Risk
is
assumed
to
occur
for
any
RQ
value
greater
than
0.5.

The
dose
that
a
bird
could
receive
by
eating
treated
seeds
can
be
approximated
from
the
estimated
amount
of
food
that
a
bird
can
eat
in
a
day.
The
dose
can
be
described
as:

Dose
=
(FI)(
C)(
T)/
Mbird
where
FI
=
the
food
ingestion
rate
[kg/
day]
C
=
active
ingredient
concentration
on
seed
(mg/
kg)
T
=
relevant
duration
time
for
food
consumption
(assumed
to
be
1
day
in
this
assessment)
[day].
Mbird
=
mass
(wet)
of
bird
[kg].

The
rate
of
food
consumption
(FI)
of
a
bird
can
be
estimated
by
the
method
of
Nagy
(1987;
also
see
EPA,
1993).
For
passerines,
the
Nagy
relationship
is:

FI
=
0.
141
(Mbird)
0.850
and
for
non­
passerines
the
relationship
is:

FI
=
0.
054
(Mbird)
0.751
Acute
RQ
results
for
this
analysis
are
summarized
in
the
table
below.
Small
birds,
which
consume
proportionally
larger
quantities
of
food
with
respect
to
their
body
weight,
are
at
greater
risk
than
larger
birds.
RQs
exceeded
0.5
for
the
sparrow
and
the
red­
winged
black
bird
for
all
seed
treatments.
For
the
quail,
RQ
indicated
risk
only
for
the
seeds
with
the
highest
application
rates.
However,
even
when
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
dietary
LC50
for
quail,
risk
was
exceeded
for
all
seed
types.
Thus
it
can
be
implied
that
seed
eating
birds
with
smaller
body­
weights
than
the
quail
may
be
at
increased
risk
since
lindane
toxicity
seems
to
be
inversely
related
to
bodyweight.

Table
Summary
of
RQ
evaluation.
RQs
in
bold
indicate
potential
risk..
Lindane
Seed
Conc
(per
label)
Dose
(mg
ai
consumed
per
day
/kg
bird)
RQ
=Dose/
LD50
RQ=
Seed
concentration/
LC50
crop
example
label
#
lb
ai/
100
lb
seed
mg
ai/
kg
seed
sparrow
(FI
=
0.00613
kg/
day)
a
RWBB
(FI
=
0.0114
kg/
day)
a
quail
(FI
=
0.0148
kg/
day)
a
sparrow
(LD50=56
mg/
kg)
RWBB
(LD50=75
mg/
kg)
quail
(LD50=122
mg/
kg)
Quail
LC50=425
ppm
barley
34704­
658
0.0375
375
92.0
82.4
31.1
1.64
1.10
0.25
0.88
corn
71096­
2
0.
125
1250
307
275
103
5.48
3.67
0.85
2.94
LOW
rate
corn
proposed
0.
0558
558
137
122
46
2.45
1.64
0.38
1.31
oats
2935­
0492
0.0313
313
76.6
68.7
25.9
1.37
0.92
0.21
0.74
rye
2935­
0492
0.0328
328
80.4
72.1
27.2
1.44
0.96
0.22
0.77
sorghum
8660­
53
0.0628
628
154
138
52.1
2.75
1.84
0.43
1.48
wheat
555­
144
0.0426
426
104
93.5
35.3
1.86
1.25
0.29
1.00
Canola
(proposed
maximum
rate)
proposed
1.
456
14560
3570
3192
1211
63.75
42.56
9.93
34.26
Canola
½
rate
proposed
0.
72
7200
1765
1578
599
31.51
21.04
4.91
16.94
a
Dose
=
seed
concentration
x
food
intake
rate,
where
food
intake
rate
(FI)
is
based
on
Nagy
equation
(see
text),
assuming
the
following
typical
bird
weights:
Sparrow
wt
=
25
g;
Red
winged
BB
wt
=
52
g,
Bobwhite
quail
wt
=
178
g
(Clench
and
Leberman.
1978).

Chronic
To
determine
chronic
risk
to
birds,
the
concentration
on
the
food
item
(seeds)
was
determined
from
the
label.
Chronic
RQ
was
calculated
using
the
following
equation:
RQ
=
Concentration
on
seeds
/
NOAEC.
Results
are
given
in
the
table
below
and
suggest
a
potential
for
chronic
reproductive
risk
to
avian
species
from
the
use
of
lindane­
treated
seed.
RQs
in
bold
indicate
potential
risk.

Lindane
Seed
Conc
(per
label)
RQ
=Seed
Concentration/
NOAEC
crop
example
label
#
lb
ai/
100
lb
seed
mg
ai/
kg
seed
mallard
(NOAEC=
15
mg/
kg)
Quail
(NOAEC
=
80
mg/
kg)

barley
34704­
658
0.0375
375
25.0
4.7
corn
71096­
2
0.
125
1250
83.3
15.6
LOW
rate
corn
proposed
0.
0558
558
37.2
6.9
oats
2935­
0492
0.0313
313
20.8
3.9
rye
2935­
0492
0.0328
328
21.9
4.1
sorghum
8660­
53
0.0628
628
41.9
7.9
wheat
555­
144
0.0426
426
28.4
5.3
Canola
(proposed
maximum
rate)
proposed
1.
456
14560
970.7
182.0
Canola
½
rate
proposed
0.
72
7200
480.0
90.0
Mammalian
Mammals
may
be
exposed
to
granular
pesticides
ingesting
granules
or
seeds
when
foraging
for
food
or
grit.
They
also
may
be
exposed
by
other
routes,
such
as
by
walking
on
exposed
granules
or
drinking
water
contaminated
by
granules
or
treated
seeds.
The
mammalian
assessment
was
performed
in
a
similar
manner
as
for
birds
as
given
above.
In
addition,
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
mg
ai/
kg/
seed
and
the
dietary
LC50
endpoint.
The
Nagy
relationship
for
the
general
case
of
all
mammals
is:

FI
=
0.
0687
(Mmammals)
0.822
where
Mmammals
is
the
mammal
mass
in
kg.
Results
are
summarized
below.
Since
RQs
above
0.
5
indicate
potential
risk,
the
results
indicate
the
possibility
of
acute
risk
to
seed­
eating
mammals
for
all
seed
treatments,
including
canola,
with
smaller
mammals
being
more
vulnerable
than
larger
mammals.

Table
summary
of
RQ
evaluation.
RQs
in
bold
indicate
potential
risk..
Lindane
Seed
Conc
(per
label)
Dose
(mg
ai
consumed
per
day
/kg
mammal)
RQ
=Dose/
LD50
RQ=
Seed
concentration/
LC5
Calculated
dietary
effect
concentration
crop
example
label
#
lb
ai/
100
lb
seed
mg
ai/
kg
seed
0.015
kg
mammal
(FI
=
0.00218
kg/
day)
a
0.035
kg
mammal
(FI
=
0.00437
kg/
day)
a
1
kg
mammal
(FI
=
0.0687
kg/
day)
a
0.015
kg
mammal
LD50=88
mg/
kg)
0.035
kg
mammal
(LD50=88
mg/
kg)
1
kg
mammal
(LD50=88
mg/
kg)
419
ppm
587
ppm
1760
ppm
barley
34704­
658
0.0375
375
54
47
26
0.62
0.53
0.29
0.90
0.64
0.21
corn
71096­
2
0.
125
1250
181
156
86
2.1
1.
8
0.98
3.00
2.13
0.71
LOW
rate
corn
proposed
0.
0558
558
81
70
38
0.92
0.79
0.44
1.33
0.95
0.32
oats
2935­
0492
0.0313
313
45
39
21
0.51
0.44
0.24
0.75
0.53
0.18
radish
7501­
16
0.0323
323
47
40
22
0.53
0.45
0.25
0.77
0.55
0.18
rye
2935­
0492
0.0328
328
47
41
23
0.54
0.46
0.26
0.78
0.56
0.19
sorghum
8660­
53
0.0628
628
91
78
43
1.0
0.
89
0.49
1.50
1.07
0.36
wheat
555­
144
0.0426
426
62
53
29
0.70
0.60
0.33
1.02
0.73
0.24
Canola
(proposed
maximum
rate)
proposed
1.
456
14560
2116
1818
1000
24
21
11
34.75
24.80
8.27
Canola
½
rate
proposed
0.
72
7200
1046
899
495
12
10
6
17.18
12.27
4.09
a
Dose
=
seed
concentration
x
food
intake
rate,
where
food
intake
rate
(FI)
is
based
on
Nagy
equation
(see
text).
Weights
were
chosen
to
represent
typical
small
mammals.
All
calculated
LD50s
andLC50s
were
based
on
the
LD50
(88
mg/
kg)
data
for
the
rat.
RQ
=
EEC
(mg/
kg)
LD50
(mg/
kg)/
%
Body
Weight
Consumed
where
the
%
body
weight
consumed
varies
with
body
size:
Granivores:
21%
for
15
g
wt;
15%
for
35
g
wt;
5%
for
1000
g
wt.

Chronic
To
determine
chronic
risk
to
mammals,
the
concentration
on
the
food
item
(seeds)
was
determined
from
the
the
label.
Chronic
RQ
was
calculated
using
the
following
equation:
RQ
=
Concentration
on
seeds
/
NOAEC.
The
NOAEC
for
the
rat
(20
mg/
kg)
was
used
as
an
approximation
for
all
mammals.
Results
are
given
in
the
table
below
and
indicate
a
potential
for
chronic
reproductive
risk
to
mammalian
species
from
the
use
of
lindane­
treated
seed.

Table
summary
of
chronic
RQ
evaluation.
RQs
in
bold
indicate
potential
risk..
Lindane
Seed
Conc
(per
label)
RQ
=Seed
Concentration/
NOAEC
crop
example
label
#
lb
ai/
100
lb
seed
mg
ai/
kg
seed
rat
(NOAEC=
20
mg/
kg)

barley
34704­
658
0.0375
375
19
corn
71096­
2
0.
125
1250
63
LOW
rate
corn
proposed
0.
0558
558
28
oats
2935­
0492
0.0313
313
16
radish
7501­
16
0.0323
323
16
rye
2935­
0492
0.0328
328
16
sorghum
8660­
53
0.0628
628
31
wheat
555­
144
0.0426
426
21
Canola
(proposed
maximum
rate)
proposed
1.
456
14560
728
Canola
½
rate
proposed
0.
72
7200
360
Aquatic
Assessment
EFED
uses
GENEEC
2
to
calculate
Tier
I
aquatic
EECs
and
assumed
that
100%
of
the
compound
will
disassociate
from
the
seed
surface.
A
1.
2
inch
incorporation
depth
was
used
for
wheat
and
1
inch
for
canola.
Input
parameters
and
the
resulting
EECs
for
wheat
and
canola
are
tabulated
below:

GENEEC
2
input
parameters
and
results
for
wheat
and
canola.

Application
Rate:
wheat
canola
1
x
0.
051
lb
ai/
A
1
x
0.
116
lb
ai/
A
Aerobic
Soil
Half
Life
980
days
(single
value)

Aerobic
Aquatic
Half
Life
1960
days
(aerobic
soil
T1/
2
x
2)

Incorporation
depth
1.2
inches
for
wheat
and
1
inch
for
canola
Hydrolysis
stable
Photolysis
stable
Spray
Drift
incorporated
seed
treatment
=
0
Organic
Carbon
Partitioning
Coefficient
(Koc)
942
mL/
g
(lowest
value)

Solubility
7
mg/
L
Expected
EEC's
Wheat
Canola
Peak
1.09
µg/
L
2.57
µg/
L
4­
day
average
1.08
µg/
L
2.56
µg/
L
21­
day
average
1.06
µg/
L
2.49
µg/
L
60­
day
average
1.00
µg/
L
2.36
µg/
L
I.
Freshwater
Fish
Acute
and
chronic
risk
quotients
are
tabulated
below.

Risk
Quotients
for
Freshwater
Fish
Based
On
a
brown
trout
LC50
of
1.7
ppb
and
a
rainbow
trout
NOAEC
of
2.9
ppb.

Site
LC50
(ppb)
NOAEC
(ppb)
EEC
Initial/
Peak
(ppb)
EEC
56
or
60­
Day
Ave.
(ppb)
Acute
RQ
(EEC/
LC50)
Chronic
RQ
(EEC/
NOAEC)

wheat
0.
05
1.
7
2.
9
0.
94
0.
86
0.55
0.30
Canola
0.116
1.7
2.
9
2.57
2.36
1.51
0.81
An
analysis
of
the
results
indicate
that
acute,
restricted
use
and
endangered
species
LOC's
are
exceeded
for
freshwater
fish.
No
chronic
LOC's
are
exceeded
for
freshwater
fish.

II.
Freshwater
Invertebrates
The
acute
and
chronic
risk
quotients
are
tabulated
below.

Risk
Quotients
for
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Based
On
a
stonefly
EC50/
LC50
of
1.0
ppb
and
a
daphnia
NOAEC
of
54
ppb.

Site
LC50
(ppb)
21
day
NOAEC
(ppb)
EEC
Initial/
Peak
(ppb)
EEC
21­
Day
Average
Acute
RQ
(EEC/
LC50)
Chronic
RQ
(EEC/
NOAEC)

Wheat
0.
05
1.
0
54
0.94
0.91
0.94
0.02
Canola
0.116
1.0
54
2.
57
2.
49
2.57
0.05
An
analysis
of
the
results
indicate
that
the
acute,
restricted
use
and
endangered
species
LOCs
are
exceeded
for
freshwater
invertebrates
at
maximum
use
rates.
No
chronic
LOC's
are
exceeded
for
freshwater
invertebrates.

III.
Estuarine
and
Marine
Fish
The
acute
and
chronic
risk
quotients
are
tabulated
below.

Risk
Quotients
for
estuarine/
marine
fish
based
on
a
striped
mullet
LC50
of
23
ppb.
No
data
was
submitted
to
assess
chronic
risk
to
estuarine/
marine
fish.

Site
LC50
(ppb)
NOAEC
(ppb)
EEC
Initial/
Peak
(ppb)
EEC
56­
Day
Average
Acute
RQ
(EEC/
LC50)
Chronic
RQ
(EEC/
NOAEC)

Wheat
0.
05
23
N/
A
0.94
0.86
0.04
N/
A
Canola
0.116
23
N/
A
2.
57
2.
36
0.
11
N/
A
An
analysis
of
the
results
indicate
that
acute
restricted
and
endangered
species
LOCs
were
exceeded
for
canola
for
estuarine/
marine
fish.

IV.
Estuarine
and
Marine
Invertebrates
Risk
Quotients
for
Estuarine/
Marine
Aquatic
Invertebrates
Based
on
a
pink
shrimp
LC50/
EC50
of
0.
077
ppb.
No
data
was
submitted
to
assess
chronic
risk
to
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.

Site/
Application
LC50
(ppb)
NOAEC/
(ppb)
EEC
Initial/
EEC
21­
Day
Acute
RQ
(EEC/
LC50)
Chronic
RQ
(EEC/
NOAEC)

Wheat
0.
05
0.
077
N/
A
0.
94
0.
91
12.20
N/
A
Canola
0.116
0.077
N/
A
2.
57
2.
49
33.40
N/
A
An
analysis
of
the
results
indicate
that
acute,
restricted
use
and
endangered
species
LOC's
were
exceeded
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
Chronic
risk
to
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
could
not
be
assessed
due
to
a
lack
of
toxicity
data.
APPENDIX
I:
Water
Resource
Model
Results
GENEEC
2
for
Canola
RUN
No.
1
FOR
Lindane
ON
Canola
*
INPUT
VALUES
*
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

RATE
(#/
AC)
No.
APPS
&
SOIL
SOLUBIL
APPL
TYPE
NO­
SPRAY
INCORP
ONE(
MULT)
INTERVAL
Koc
(PPM
)
(%
DRIFT)
(FT)
(IN)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

.116(
.116)
1
1
942.0
7.0
GRANUL(
.0)
.0
1.2
FIELD
AND
STANDARD
POND
HALFLIFE
VALUES
(DAYS)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

METABOLIC
DAYS
UNTIL
HYDROLYSIS
PHOTOLYSIS
METABOLIC
COMBINED
(FIELD)
RAIN/
RUNOFF
(POND)
(POND­
EFF)
(POND)
(POND)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

980.00
2
N/
A
.00­
.00
******
1960.00
GENERIC
EECs
(IN
MICROGRAMS/
LITER
(PPB))
Version
2.0
Aug
1,
2001
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

PEAK
MAX
4
DAY
MAX
21
DAY
MAX
60
DAY
MAX
90
DAY
GEEC
AVG
GEEC
AVG
GEEC
AVG
GEEC
AVG
GEEC
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

2.57
2.56
2.49
2.36
GENEEC
2
for
Wheat
RUN
No.
3
FOR
Lindane
ON
Wheat
*
INPUT
VALUES
*
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

RATE
(#/
AC)
No.
APPS
&
SOIL
SOLUBIL
APPL
TYPE
NO­
SPRAY
INCORP
ONE(
MULT)
INTERVAL
Koc
(PPM
)
(%
DRIFT)
(FT)
(IN)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

.051(
.051)
1
1
942.0
7.0
GRANUL(
.0)
.0
1.2
FIELD
AND
STANDARD
POND
HALFLIFE
VALUES
(DAYS)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

METABOLIC
DAYS
UNTIL
HYDROLYSIS
PHOTOLYSIS
METABOLIC
COMBINED
(FIELD)
RAIN/
RUNOFF
(POND)
(POND­
EFF)
(POND)
(POND)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

980.00
2
N/
A
.00­
.00
******
1960.00
GENERIC
EECs
(IN
NANOGRAMS/
LITER
(PPB)
Version
2.0
Aug
1,
2001
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

PEAK
MAX
4
DAY
MAX
21
DAY
MAX
60
DAY
MAX
90
DAY
GEEC
AVG
GEEC
AVG
GEEC
AVG
GEEC
AVG
GEEC
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

0.941
0.937
0.914
0.864
0.829
SCI­
GROW
for
Canola
(Ground
Water
Assessment)

RUN
No.
1
FOR
Lindane
INPUT
VALUES
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

APPL
(#/
AC)
APPL.
URATE
SOIL
SOIL
AEROBIC
RATE
NO.
(#/
AC/
YR)
KOC
METABOLISM
(DAYS)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

0.116
1
0.116
1367.0
980.0
GROUND­
WATER
SCREENING
CONCENTRATIONS
IN
PPB
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

.024907
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

A=
975.000
B=
1372.000
C=
2.989
D=
3.137
RILP=
2.578
F=
­.
668
G=
.215
URATE=
.116
GWSC=
.024907
First
Output
(Surface
Water
Assessment)
for
Wheat
RUN
No.
1
FOR
Lindane
ON
Wheat
*
INPUT
VALUES
*
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

RATE
(#/
AC)
No.
APPS
&
SOIL
SOLUBIL
APPL
TYPE
%CROPPED
INCORP
ONE(
MULT)
INTERVAL
Koc
(PPM
)
(%
DRIFT)
AREA
(IN)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

.051(
0.051)
1
1
942.0
7.0
GRANUL(
.0)
56.0
1.2
FIELD
AND
RESERVOIR
HALFLIFE
VALUES
(DAYS)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

METABOLIC
DAYS
UNTIL
HYDROLYSIS
PHOTOLYSIS
METABOLIC
COMBINED
(FIELD)
RAIN/
RUNOFF
(RESERVOIR)
(RES.­
EFF)
(RESER.)
(RESER.)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

980.00
2
N/
A
.00­
.00
******
1960.00
UNTREATED
WATER
CONC
(MICROGRAMS/
LITER
(PPB))
Ver
1.0
AUG
1,
2001
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

PEAK
DAY
(ACUTE)
ANNUAL
AVERAGE
(CHRONIC)
CONCENTRATION
CONCENTRATION
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

0.98
0.46
First
Output
for
Canola
(Surface
Water
Assessment)

RUN
No.
1
FOR
Lindane
ON
Canola
*
INPUT
VALUES
*
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

RATE
(#/
AC)
No.
APPS
&
SOIL
SOLUBIL
APPL
TYPE
%CROPPED
INCORP
ONE(
MULT)
INTERVAL
Koc
(PPM
)
(%
DRIFT)
AREA
(IN)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

.116(
0.116)
1
1
942.0
7.0
GRANUL(
.0)
87.0
1.0
FIELD
AND
RESERVOIR
HALFLIFE
VALUES
(DAYS)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

METABOLIC
DAYS
UNTIL
HYDROLYSIS
PHOTOLYSIS
METABOLIC
COMBINED
(FIELD)
RAIN/
RUNOFF
(RESERVOIR)
(RES.­
EFF)
(RESER.)
(RESER.)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

980.00
2
N/
A
.00­
.00
******
1960.00
UNTREATED
WATER
CONC
(MICROGRAMS/
LITER
(PPB))
Ver
1.0
AUG
1,
2001
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

PEAK
DAY
(ACUTE)
ANNUAL
AVERAGE
(CHRONIC)
CONCENTRATION
CONCENTRATION
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

4.16
1.95