Reregistration Eligibility
Decision for
DCNA (Dicloran)
June 14, 2006
-------
PA
United States Prevention, Pesticides EPA-738-F-05-003
Environmental Protection And Toxic Substances June 2006
Agency (7508C)
Reregistration Eligibility
Decision
DCNA (Dicloran)
-------
Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) Document
for DCNA (Dicloran)
Approved by: [s[
Debra Edwards, Ph. D.
Director
Special Review and Reregistration Division
Date:
June 14. 2005
-------
Table of Contents
I. Introduction 4
II. Chemical Overview 5
A. Regulatory History 5
B. Chemical Identification 5
C. Use Profile 6
D. Estimated Usage of Pesticide 7
III. Summary of DCNA Risk Assessments 7
A. Human Health Risk Assessment 8
1. Toxicity of DCNA 8
2. Residue Information 11
3. Dietary (Food + Water) Exposure and Risk 12
4. Residential Exposure and Risk 14
5. Aggregate Risk 14
6. Occupational Risk 14
7. Human Incident Data 19
B. Environmental Risk Assessment 20
1. Environmental Exposure 20
2. Environmental Effects (Hazard) 21
3. Ecological Risk Estimation (RQs) 24
4. Ecological Incidents 27
IV. Risk Management, Reregistration, and Tolerance Reassessment Decision 27
A. Determination of Reregistration Eligibility 27
B. Public Comments and Responses 28
C. Regulatory Position 28
1. Food Quality Protection Act Findings 28
2. Tolerance Summary 30
D. Regulatory Rationale 33
1. Human Health Risk Management 33
2. Environmental Risk Mitigation 36
3. Other Labeling 36
4. Endangered Species Program 37
V. What Registrants Need to Do 37
A. Manufacturing Use Products 38
1. Additional Generic Data Requirements 38
2. Labeling for Manufacturing Use Products 39
B. End-Use Products 39
1. Additional Product-Specific Data Requirements 39
2. Labeling for End-Use Products 39
3
-------
DCNA Reregistration Eligibility Decision Team
Office of Pesticide Programs:
Biological and Economic Analysis Assessment
Jihad Alsadek
Margaret Ervin
Alan Halvorson
Jenna Carter
Jin Kim
Timothy Kiely
Leonard Yourman
Tara Chandgoyal
Steve Jarboe
Environmental Fate and Effects Risk Assessment
Cheryl A. Sutton
Christopher J. Salice
Kevin Costello
John Ravenscroft
Health Effects Risk Assessment
Toiya Goodlow
Byong-Han Chin
Christine L. Olinger
Mathew G. Lloyd
Timothy Dole
Registration Support
Mary Waller
Risk Management
James Parker
Kelly Sherman
1
-------
Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations
AGDCI
ai
aPAD
AR
BCF
CFR
cPAD
CSF
CSFII
DCI
DEEM
DFR
DWLOC
EC
EEC
EPA
EUP
FDA
FIFRA
FFDCA
FQPA
FOB
G
GENEEC
GLN
HAFT
IR
LC50
LD
50
LOC
LOD
LOAEL
MATC
#g/g
Og/L
mg/kg/day
mg/L
MOE
Agricultural Data Call-In
Active Ingredient
Acute Population Adjusted Dose
Anticipated Residue
Bioconcentration Factor
Code of Federal Regulations
Chronic Population Adjusted Dose
Confidential Statement of Formula
USD A Continuing Surveys for Food Intake by Individuals
Data Call-In
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model
Dislodgeable Foliar Residue
Drinking Water Level of Comparison.
Emulsifiable Concentrate Formulation
Estimated Environmental Concentration
Environmental Protection Agency
End-Use Product
Food and Drug Administration
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
Food Quality Protection Act
Functional Observation Battery
Granular Formulation
Tier I Surface Water Computer Model
Guideline Number
Highest Average Field Trial
Index Reservoir
Median Lethal Concentration. A statistically derived concentration of a
substance that can be expected to cause death in 50% of test animals. It is
usually expressed as the weight of substance per weight or volume of
water, air or feed, e.g., mg/1, mg/kg or ppm.
Median Lethal Dose. A statistically derived single dose that can be
expected to cause death in 50% of the test animals when administered by
the route indicated (oral, dermal, inhalation). It is expressed as a weight of
substance per unit weight of animal, e.g., mg/kg.
Level of Concern
Limit of Detection
Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level
Maximum Acceptable Toxicant Concentration
Micrograms Per Gram
Micrograms Per Liter
Milligram Per Kilogram Per Day
Milligrams Per Liter
Margin of Exposure
2
-------
MRID
Master Record Identification (number). EPA's system of recording and
tracking studies submitted.
MUP
Manufacturing-Use Product
NA
Not Applicable
NAWQA
USGS National Water Quality Assessment
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NR
Not Required
NOAEL
No Observed Adverse Effect Level
OP
Organophosphate
OPP
EPA Office of Pesticide Programs
OPPTS
EPA Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances
PAD
Population Adjusted Dose
PCA
Percent Crop Area
PDP
USD A Pesticide Data Program
PHED
Pesticide Handler's Exposure Data
PHI
Preharvest Interval
ppb
Parts Per Billion
PPE
Personal Protective Equipment
ppm
Parts Per Million
PRZM/EXAMS
Tier II Surface Water Computer Model
Qi*
The Carcinogenic Potential of a Compound, Quantified by the EPA's
Cancer Risk Model
RAC
Raw Agriculture Commodity
RED
Reregi strati on Eligibility Decision
REI
Restricted Entry Interval
RfD
Reference Dose
RQ
Risk Quotient
SCI-GROW
Tier I Ground Water Computer Model
SAP
Science Advisory Panel
SF
Safety Factor
SLC
Single Layer Clothing
SLN
Special Local Need (Registrations Under Section 24(c) of FIFRA)
TCPSA
2,3,3-trichloroprop-2-ene sulfonic acid (nitrapyrin Metabolite)
TGAI
Technical Grade Active Ingredient
TRR
Total Radioactive Residue
USD A
United States Department of Agriculture
USGS
United States Geological Survey
UF
Uncertainty Factor
uv
Ultraviolet
WPS
Worker Protection Standard
3
-------
I. Introduction
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) was amended in 1988
to accelerate the reregistration of products with active ingredients registered prior to November
1, 1984. The amended Act calls for the development and submission of data to support the
reregistration of an active ingredient, as well as a review of all submitted data by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (hereafter referred to as EPA or the Agency). Reregistration
involves a thorough review of the scientific database underlying a pesticide's registration. The
purpose of the Agency's review is to reassess the potential risks arising from the currently
registered uses of the pesticide, to determine the need for additional data on health and
environmental effects, and to determine whether or not the pesticide meets the "no unreasonable
adverse effects" criteria of FIFRA.
On August 3, 1996, the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA) was signed into
law. This Act amends FIFRA to require reassessment of all tolerances in effect on the day
before it was enacted. EPA decided that, for those chemicals that have tolerances and are
undergoing reregistration, tolerance reassessment will be accomplished through the reregistration
process. FQPA also amended the FFDCA to require a safety finding in tolerance reassessment
based on factors that include an assessment of cumulative effects of chemicals with a common
mechanism of toxicity.
FQPA requires that 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. The reason for consideration of other substances is due to the possibility that low-
level exposures to multiple chemical substances that cause a common toxic effect by a common
mechanism of toxicity could lead to the same adverse health effect that would occur at a higher
level of exposure to any of the substances individually. 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 for DCNA and any other substances, and
DCNA does not appear to produce a toxic metabolite produced by other substances. For the
purposes of this action, therefore, EPA has not assumed that DCNA shares a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA'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/oppsrrdl/cumulative/.
This document presents EPA's revised human health and ecological risk assessments and
its progress toward tolerance reassessment, and the reregistration eligibility decision for DCNA.
The document consists of six sections: section I contains the regulatory framework for
reregistration/tolerance reassessment; section II provides a profile of the use and usage of the
chemical; section III gives an overview of the revised human health and environmental effects
risk assessments based on data, public comments, and other information received in response to
the preliminary risk assessments, section IV presents the Agency's reregistration eligibility and
4
-------
risk management decisions; section V summarizes label changes necessary to implement the risk
mitigation measures outlined in Section IV; and section VI provides information on how to
access related documents. Finally, the Appendices list related and supporting documents and
Data Call-In (DCI) information. The revised risk assessment documents and related addenda are
not included in this document, but are available in the Public Docket under docket number EPA-
HQ-2005-0265 located on-line in the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at
http://www.regulations.gov.
II. Chemical Overview
A. Regulatory History
DCNA was first registered for use in the United States in 1961. A Registration Standard
for DCNA was completed in 1983, and Data Call-Ins (DCIs) were issued in 1983, 1994 and
1995. This Reregi strati on Eligibility Decision (RED) reflects a reassessment of all data
submitted to date, and presents the Agency's assessment of risks from all currently registered
uses.
B. Chemical Identification
Figure A. Chemical structure of DCNA
nh2
no2
Common Name:
DCNA (Dicloran)
Chemical Name:
2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline (IUPAC)
2,6-dichloro-4-nitrobenzenamine (CAS)
Chemical Class:
Substituted Aniline
Empirical Formula: C6H4CI2N2O2
CAS Registry Number: 99-30-9
Case Number:
0113
5
-------
OPP Chemical Code:
031301
Molecular weight:
Vapor Pressure:
Basic Manufacturer:
207
2.61 x 10"4 mm Hg at 25° C
Gowan Company
Technical DCNA is a yellow powder with a melting point range of 193.3-194.8°C.
DCNA is practically insoluble in water and other compounds with a water solubility of 31.0
mg/L at 25 °C. DCNA is a member of the substituted aniline group of fungicides.
C.
Use Profile
The following is information on the currently registered uses of DCNA, including an
overview of use sites and application methods. A detailed table of the uses of DCNA eligible for
reregi strati on is contained in Appendix A.
Type of Pesticide:
Summary of Use:
Food uses:
Formulation Type:
Manufacturer:
Application Methods:
Fungicide
Preventative and curative fungal spore germination inhibitor
Currently registered food uses include apricots, beans (snap),
carrots, celery, cherries, cucumber, endive (escarole), fennel,
garlic, grapes, lettuce (head and leaf), nectarines, onions,
peaches, plums, potatoes (white/Irish), prunes, rhubarb,
shallots, sweet potatoes and tomatoes. Proposed new uses
include peanuts, tomatoes (post-harvest), and carrots (pre-
harvest). Also registered for use in greenhouses on cucumbers,
lettuce, rhubarb, seed potatoes or transplants, and tomatoes.
The major pre-harvest crop uses include celery, lettuce, snap
beans, and grapes; the major post-harvest use is on sweet
potatoes.
Liquid flowable, wettable powder (with and without water soluble
bags), and dust
Gowan Company
Aerial spray, airblast, groundboom, chemigation, hand application
methods (handwands and backpack sprayers), dip tanks, and sprinkler
irrigation
6
-------
Application Rates:
Application Timing:
Use Classification:
Current maximum application rates range from 0.0172 to 4.5 lb
ai/acre. Sweet potato seed pieces may be treated at 2.8 lb ai/1,000
square feet of plantbed.
The maximum yearly application rate for all crops is 4 lb ai/acre
(except for potatoes at 7.5 lb ai/acre/year, and celery and fennel at 5 lb
ai/acre/year).
Current label requirements specify 12-hour restricted-entry intervals
(REIs) and 1 to 14 day preharvest intervals (PHIs).
Pre-plant, at plant, post-plant, and/or post-harvest
General
D. Estimated Usage of Pesticide
Over 200,000 pounds of DCNA is applied annually throughout the United States.
DCNA's primary uses are on celery, lettuce, and grapes. EPA's use data indicate that the
percent of crop treated with DCNA is less than 2.5 percent for all crops except for celery (40 to
60 percent crop treated), lettuce (10 to 15 percent crop treated), grapes (5 to 15 percent crop
treated, and snap beans (1 to 5 percent crop treated). DCNA is primarily used in California and
the Pacific Northwest.
III. Summary of DCNA Risk Assessments
This section summarizes EPA's human health and ecological risk findings and
conclusions for DCNA. This information is presented in greater detail in the following
documents:
• "Dicloran: Revised HED Chapter of the Reregistration Eligibility Decision
Document (RED) " (Goodlow, 05/11/06);
• "Dicloran: Revised Occupational and Residential Exposure Assessment for the
Reregistration Eligibility Decision Document" (Lloyd, 6/13/06);
• "Dicloran (DCNA) Revised Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessments for the
Reregistration Eligibility Decision (Phase 3) " (Olinger, 3/23/06);
• "Dicloran (DCNA) Residue Chemistry Considerations for the Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (RED) Document. Summary of Analytical Chemistry and Residue
Data" (Olinger, 8/09/05)
• "DCNA (Dicloran): Revised Tier I Drinking Water EDWC 's for Use in the Human
Health Risk Assessment" (Sutton, 01/24/06); and
• "Revised Ecological Risk Assessment in Support of the Reregistration Eligibility
Decision on DCNA (Dicloran) " (Sutton, 2/07/06).
7
-------
During the reregi strati on process, the technical registrant, Gowan Company, agreed to
revise its manufacturing use and end-use products to limit the total amount of product that may
be applied to a crop per year. This change was intended to decrease the ecological risks
associated with DCNA. The ecological risk assessment was conducted using these limits on
annual application amounts, and thus these limits are a required restriction on all DCNA
products. The revised maximum yearly application limits are as follows:
• 4 pounds active ingredient per year (lb ai/acre/year) for all crops except for
potatoes, celery, and fennel;
• 7.5 lb ai/acre/year for potatoes; and
• 5 lb ai/acre/year for celery and fennel.
The purpose of this section is to highlight the key features and findings of the risk
assessments in order to help the reader better understand the risk management decisions reached
by the Agency. While the risk assessments and related addenda are not included in this
document, they are available in the OPP Public Docket (docket number EPA-HQ-2005-0265)
and may be accessed on the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
A. Human Health Risk Assessment
1. Toxicity of DCNA
DCNA has low acute toxicity, but it is a potential skin sensitizer. The acute toxicity of
DCNA is summarized below in Table 1.
Table 1. Acute Toxicity of DCNA
(iuirii'liiK'
Nil in her
Siiulj Tj|K'
MRU)
Number
Komi lis
Toxicity
(';ik'ii 2000 mg/kg
III
870.1300
Acute Inhalation
Not Available
Not available
N/A
870.2400
Primary Eye Irritation
00086892
Mild ocular irritant
III
870.5200
Primary Skin Irritation
00086893
Not a dermal irritant
IV
870.2600
Dermal Sensitization
00082721
Potential dermal sensitizer
N/A
The toxicological database on DCNA is adequate, with the exception of a developmental
neurotoxicity (DNT) study in rats and a 28-day inhalation toxicity study in rats. The target
organs for DCNA include the liver, kidney, spleen and hematopoietic system, particularly red
blood cells. DCNA does not appear to be a reproductive toxicant, with no reproductive effects
observed in studies. The developmental toxicity study in rats showed increased incidences of
8
-------
supernumerary rudimentary ribs and also decreased fetal weights in the presence of maternal
toxic dose.
The available data did not demonstrate neurotoxicity with subchronic dosing at doses
lower than 25 mg/kg/day. However, neuropathology was seen in a long-term rat study. Also,
neuropathology was seen in a chronic dog study at lower levels than the neuropathology seen in
the long-term rat study.
A two-year combined chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity study in rats showed that
DCNA caused reduced body weight, reduced body weight gain, and histopathologic lesions in
the brain and spinal cord of both sexes, lesions in the optic nerve in females, and Ley dig cell
hyperplasia in the testes in males. The incidence of Ley dig cell tumors was significantly
increased in high-dose male rats compared with controls, and the incidence of endometrial
adenocarcinoma was marginally increased in high-dose female rats. An 18-month mouse
carcinogenicity study showed no treatment-related increase in tumor incidence. Based on these
studies, EPA determined that DCNA should be classified as "Suggestive Evidence of
Carcinogenic Potential" but concluded that no quantification of cancer risk is required.
A developmental rat study, a one-year dog study, and a 90-day oral dog study were the
primary studies used for the human health assessment. In the studies reviewed, the dog is the
most sensitive species to DCNA, with effects occurring at considerably lower doses than those
noted for the rat or mouse.
For the acute dietary assessment, EPA used a rat developmental study (MRID 46447501)
to assess risks for the population group of females 13-49 years of age. A developmental study is
appropriate for assessing acute risks because developmental effects are presumed to occur as a
result of a single dose at a critical time during gestation. In the risk assessment, EPA used the
developmental no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 50 mg/kg/day based on increased
incidences of supernumerary rudimentary ribs and also decreased fetal weights at 100 mg/kg/day
(the lowest observed adverse effect level [LOAEL]). EPA did not assess the acute dietary risks
to other population subgroups because there were no other effects observed in oral toxicity
studies with DCNA that are attributable to a single exposure.
For the chronic dietary assessment, EPA used a one-year chronic toxicity study in dogs
(MRID 45610801). EPA used a NOAEL of 2.5 mg/kg/day based on clinical chemistry
(increased alkaline phosphatase in both sexes and increased cholesterol in males), increased liver
weights, hepatocyte hypertrophy, vacuolar alterations of the brain and spinal cord, prostate
atrophy, degeneration of the seminiferous tubules, and hypospermia in the epididymides at the
LOAEL of 25 mg/kg/day.
For the occupational risk assessment, EPA used a 21-day dermal toxicity study in rabbits
(MRID 40555101) to estimate occupational risks from dermal exposure. EPA selected a
NOAEL of 120 mg/kg/day based on increased adrenal weights in males at the LOAEL of 1200
mg/kg/day. This finding was corroborated by the histopathological changes observed in the
adrenals at 150 mg/kg/day in the 90-day feeding study in rats (MRIDs 00029056 and 00082718).
9
-------
To estimate occupational risks from inhalation exposure, EPA used a 90-day oral toxicity
study in dogs (MRID 000029056, 00026810), and assumed 100% absorption to account for
route-to-route extrapolation, because there are no appropriate inhalation toxicity studies on
DCNA. EPA selected a NOAEL of 2.5 mg/kg/day based on changes in hematological
(decreased hemoglobin and hematocrit at 4, 8, and 14 weeks) and clinical biochemistry
parameters, reduced body weight gain, increased liver, spleen and kidney weights, and
histopathological changes in the liver at the LOAEL of 75 mg/kg/day.
FQPA Safety Factor
FQPA directs EPA, in setting pesticide tolerances, to use an additional tenfold margin of
safety to protect infants and children, taking into account the potential for pre- and post-natal
toxicity and the completeness of the toxicology and exposure databases. The statute authorizes
EPA to modify this tenfold FQPA safety factor only if reliable data demonstrate that the
resulting level of exposure will be safe for infants and children.
The toxicity database for DCNA includes acceptable developmental and reproductive
toxicity studies, and these studies showed no increase in susceptibility in fetuses and pups with in
utero and post-natal exposure. However, EPA has determined that the FQPA safety factor must
be retained to account for database uncertainties.
DCNA appears to elicit neuropathology (vacuolation in the brain) at doses of 25-75
mg/kg following exposures greater than 90 days. The neuropathological effects were greater in
four-week-old rats than seven-week old rats, indicating that age could be an important variable in
this neurotoxicity. Therefore, a developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) study is necessary to fully
characterize potential fetal neurotoxicity and neuropathology. Since the DCNA database does
not include a DNT study, an FQPA database uncertainty factor must be retained for scenarios in
which exposure to children or pregnant women is expected. Furthermore, a DNT study is
required for DCNA.
The size of the FQPA database uncertainty factor is based on an analysis of DNT studies
previously submitted to the Agency which suggests that NOAELs from a DNT study could be
lower than the lowest dose tested in the studies currently used in the risk assessment. For
DCNA, a lOx FQPA database uncertainty factor is retained for both the acute and chronic dietary
risk assessments because it is possible that the DNT could yield a NOAEL of up to ten times
lower than the ones currently used for the risk assessment.
The toxicological endpoints and uncertainty factors used in the human health risk
assessment for DCNA are listed below, in Table 2.
10
-------
Table 2. Siimman of Doses. Toxicological Futlpniiils. and T iicci'l;iinl> Faelors for PCX A
l-lxposure
Scenario
Dose and I iieerlainl> l-'aelor
Smdj and Toxicological I'.ITeels
Acute Dietary
(females 13-49)
Developmental NOAEL=50 mg/kg/day
UF = 1000 (lOx interspecies
extrapolation, lOx intraspecies variation,
and lOx FQPA Safety Factor)
aPAD = NOAEL - UF
aPAD = 0.05 mg/kg/day
Developmental toxicity study in rats (MRID
46447501)
Developmental LOAEL =100 mg/kg/day based on
increased incidences of supernumerary rudimentary
ribs and decreased fetal weights
Acute Dietary
(general
population
including
infants and
children)
A dose and endpoint were not selected for this population group because there were no effects
observed in oral toxicology studies, including maternal toxicity in the developmental toxicity
studies in rats and rabbits, which are attributable to a single exposure.
Chronic Dietary
(All
populations)
NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/day
UF = 1000 (lOx interspecies
extrapolation, lOx intraspecies variation,
and lOx FQPA Safety Factor)
cPAD = NOAEL - UF
cPAD = 0.0025 mg/kg/day
One-year chronic toxicity study in dogs (MRID
45610801)
LOAEL = 25 mg/kg/day based on clinical chemistry
(increased alkaline phosphatase in both sexes and
increased cholesterol in males), increased liver
weights, hepatocyte hypertrophy, vacuolar alterations
of the brain and spinal cord, prostate atrophy,
degeneration of the seminiferous tubules, and
hypospermia in the epididymides
Short- (1-30
days) and
Intermediate-
Term (1-6
months)
Occupational
Dermal
NOAEL =120 mg/kg/day
UF = 100 (lOx interspecies extrapolation
and lOx intraspecies variation)
Occupational level of concern (LOC) =
MOE of 100
21-day dermal toxicity study in rabbits (MRID
40555101)
LOAEL = 1200 mg/kg/day based on increased adrenal
weights in males
Short- (1-30
days) and
Intermediate-
Term (1-6
months)
Occupational
Inhalation
Oral NOAEL = 2.5 mg/kg/day
(Inhalation absorption rate assumed to
be 100%)
Occupational LOC = MOE of 100
90-Day feeding study in dogs (MRIDs 00029056,
00026810)
LOAEL = 75 mg/kg/day based on hematological
(decreased hemoglobin and hematocrit at 4, 8, and 14
weeks) and clinical biochemistry parameters, reduced
body weight gain, increased liver, spleen and kidney
weights and histopathological changes in the liver
Cancer
Classified as "Suggestive Evidence of Carcinogenic Potential," but no quantification of cancer
risk is required.
2. Residue Information
EPA has concluded that the parent compound should be included in the tolerance
expression for enforcement purposes since residues of the parent are sufficient to include
pesticidal misuse.
11
-------
For the risk assessments, EPA included 2,6-dichloro-4-hydroxyaniline (DCHA) and a
group of metabolites designated as Unknown 1 in the residue profile. Unknown 1 was found to
form only in the metabolism study on potatoes and adjustment factors were established to
include DCHA and Unknown 1 in the risk assessment for various crops. For more information
on the adjustment factors and how they apply to the risk assessment, please see "Dicloran:
Revised HED Chapter of the Rerezistration Eligibility Decision Document (RED), " (T.
Goodlow, 5/11/06).
3. Dietary (Food + Water) Exposure and Risk
EPA conducted acute and chronic dietary exposure assessments for DCNA using the
Dietary Exposure Evaluation Model software with the Food Commodity Intake Database
(DEEM-FCID, Version 2.03), which incorporates consumption data from USDA's
Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals (CSFII), 1994-1996 and 1998, as well as
monitoring data from USDA's Pesticide Data Program (PDP), and processing/cooking
factors, where appropriate.
(a) Acute and Chronic Dietary Risk from Food
The dietary assessment for DCNA considers residues from both DCNA and DCHA for
all crops except potatoes. For potatoes, it includes residues of DCNA, DCHA, and Unknown 1.
EPA applied the toxicity adjustment factors to account for residues of the metabolites of concern.
Exposure estimates are reported in milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day, and risk is
expressed as a percent of the acute Population Adjusted Dose (aPAD) or chronic Population
Adjusted Dose (cPAD). A risk estimate that is less than 100% of the PAD does not exceed
EPA's level of concern.
EPA conducted refined (Tier II and III) acute and chronic dietary assessments using
USD A Pesticide Data Program (PDP) monitoring data for all commodities except rhubarb,
assuming non-detectable residues were at the limit of detection. EPA assumed tolerance-level
residues for rhubarb because no PDP data are available for rhubarb. As conservative
assumptions, the Agency assumed 100 percent crop treated and limit of quantitation residues in
all commodities.
At the 99.9th percentile of exposure, the estimated acute exposure for food was 9.9% of
the aPAD for females aged 13-49, which is below the Agency's level of concern. For chronic
risks, the population subgroup with the greatest exposure was children (1-2 years old) at 13% of
the cPAD, which is below Agency's level of concern. A summary of the acute and chronic
dietary (food only) risk estimates is presented in Table 3.
12
-------
Table 3. Dietary (Food Only) Exposure and Risk
Population Subgroup
Exposure, mji/kii/daj
I'M)
Acute Dietary Estimates (99.9th Percentile)
Females 13-49 years
0.0049
9.9
Chronic Dietary Estimates
U.S. Population
0.00015
6.0
Children 1-2 yrs
0.00032
13
(b) Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure and Risk from Drinking
Water
The Agency calculated estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) for surface
water using the FQPA Index Reservoir Screening Tool (FIRST), Version 1.0. EPA used the
SCI-GROW model, Version 2.3, to calculate ground water EDWCs. Both the surface water and
ground water EDWCs are based on DCNA applied in a single aerial application to apricots at
the rate of 4.0 lb ai/acre. The 4.0 lb ai/acre rate is the highest single application rate except for a
Section 24(c) Special Local Need (SLN) label for potatoes that allows a maximum rate of 4.5 lb
ai/acre. The SLN potato use is a minor use for DCNA and would generate lower EDWCs than
aerial application to apricots because potatoes are treated with a directed spray application. The
models are not site-dependent, and therefore the EDWCs determined for apricots are applicable
to other crops receiving 4 lb ai/acre by aerial application.
The environmental fate database showed that there are no major degradates of concern
for DCNA found in water. Thus, the surface and ground water assessment includes the parent
compound only. The surface and ground water EDWCs for DCNA are presented in Table 4,
below.
Table 4. Surface and Ground Water EDWCs for DCNA
Acute EDWC
Chronic EDWC
Surface Water
172.8 ppb
1.8 ppb
Ground Water
1.3 ppb
1.3 ppb
(c) Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure and Risk from Food plus
Drinking Water
EPA conducted an acute and chronic aggregate dietary assessment using DEEM-FCID™.
Food exposures and EDWCs from modeled values for surface water sources of drinking water
were included. Surface water EDWCs were used rather than ground water EDWCs because
modeling results predicted that surface water residues would be highest.
At the 99.9th percentile of exposure, the estimated food and water exposure for females
13-49 years old was 52% of the aPAD, which is below the Agency's level of concern. For
13
-------
chronic exposures, the most highly-exposed subgroup was children 1-2 years old, with exposures
accounting for 15% of the cPAD, which is below the Agency's level of concern. A summary of
the acute and chronic dietary (food plus drinking water) risk estimates is presented in Table 5.
Table 5. Dietary (Food + Drinking Water) Exposure and Risk
Population Subgroup
Exposure. mg/kg/da>
I'M)
Acute Dietary Estimates (99.9th Percentile)
Females 13-49 years
0.026
52
Chronic Dietary Estimates
U.S. Population
0.00019
7.5
Children 1-2 yrs
0.00038
15
4. Residential Exposure and Risk
EPA did not conduct a residential assessment because there are no residential uses of
DCNA.
5. Aggregate Risk
The Food Quality Protection Act amendments to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA, Section 408(b)(2)(A)(iii)) require that "that there is a reasonable certainty that no
harm will result from aggregate exposure to pesticide chemical residue, including all anticipated
dietary exposures for which there is reliable information." Aggregate exposure will typically
include exposures from food, drinking water, residential uses of a pesticide, and other non-
occupational sources of exposure. There are no residential uses of DCNA, nor other non-
occupational sources of exposure. Therefore, when addressing aggregate exposures, the Agency
considered only the aggregate dietary pathways of food and drinking water.
As noted above, acute and chronic aggregate exposure estimates for food and drinking
water are below EPA's level of concern for all population subgroups. At the 99.9th percentile of
exposure, the estimated food and water exposure for females 13-49 years old accounted for 52%
of the aPAD. For chronic exposures, the most highly-exposed subgroup was children 1-2 years
old, with exposures accounting for 15% of the cPAD.
6. Occupational Risk
(For a complete discussion, see Section 2.0 of the Revised DCNA Occupational and
Residential Exposure HED Risk Assessment for Reregi strati on Eligibility Document (RED) by
M. Lloyd dated 6/13/06).
Non-cancer risk estimates are expressed as a margin of exposure (MOE) which is a ratio
of the dose from a toxicological study selected for risk assessment, typically a NOAEL, to the
predicted exposure. Estimated MOEs are compared to a level of concern which reflects the dose
14
-------
selected for risk assessment and uncertainty factors (UFs) applied to that dose. The standard UF
is lOOx which includes lOx for interspecies extrapolation (to account for differences between
laboratory animals and humans) and lOx for intraspecies variation (to account for differences
between humans). Additional uncertainty or safety factors may also be applied. In the case of
DCNA, EPA's level of concern for occupational exposures is an MOE of 100 which includes
lOx for interspecies extrapolation and lOx for intraspecies variation.
Most occupational exposures are expected to occur in short-term periods (up to 30 days),
but some intermediate-term exposures are anticipated in some handler exposure scenarios,
particularly those involving applications by commercial applicators to large-acreage crops.
Chronic exposures are those that would result from use of a pesticide for more than several
months a year.
For DCNA, the Agency determined that pesticide handlers and applicators are likely to
be exposed in short- (one day to one month) and intermediate-term (one to six month) durations.
Chronic exposures (longer than six months) are not expected because DCNA would be used for
controlling disease outbreaks only during the growing season.
EPA assessed the occupational handler scenarios using the short- and intermediate-term
endpoints for dermal and inhalation exposures. The short- and intermediate-term dermal
endpoint is a NOAEL of 120 mg/kg/day, from a 21-day dermal study in rabbits with a LOAEL
of 1200 mg/kg/day based on increased adrenal weights in males (MRID 40555101). The short-
and intermediate-term inhalation endpoint is a NOAEL of 2.5 mg/kg/day from a 90-day oral dog
study with a LOAEL of 75 mg/kg/day based on hematological changes (MRIDs 00029056,
00026810). The dermal and inhalation endpoints are based on different toxicological effects on
different organs, and therefore the Agency did not calculate combined dermal-inhalation MOEs.
(a) Occupational Handler Summary
Based on the labels and registered use patterns, EPA has identified six major handler
exposure scenarios for DCNA.
1) Mixing/Loading wettable powders, dusts or liquids
2) Applying via aerial, groundboom, airblast, turfgun or high-pressure handwand
application methods
3) Mixing/Loading/Applying wettable powders with a low-pressure (LP) handwand,
backpack sprayer or turfgun
4) Mixing/Loading/Applying liquids with a LP handwand, backpack sprayer or turfgun
5) Mixing/Loading/Applying dusts with a handheld power duster
6) Flagging for aerial application liquids or dusts
No chemical-specific handler exposure data were submitted on DCNA, so short-term and
intermediate-term dermal and inhalation exposures for handlers were developed using the
Pesticide Handler Exposure Database (PHED) Version 1.1. Furthermore, for this risk
assessment, the Agency used standard values for daily acres treated in agriculture in order to
develop daily exposure estimates.
15
-------
The calculations of short- and intermediate-term dermal and inhalation risks to handlers
indicate that most DCNA occupational handler risks are below the Agency's level of concern
(i.e., MOEs are greater than 100) at some level of personal protective equipment (PPE) and/or
engineering controls. Tables 6 and 7, below, present the short- and intermediate-term dermal
and inhalation MOEs for all agricultural handler scenarios.
Table 6. DCNA Short/Intermediate Term Dermal MOEs for Agricultural Handlers
Exposure Scenario
Max. Rate
(lb ai/acre)
Acres
per Day
Level of Personal
Protective Equipment
Engineering
Controls4
Baseline1
Single
Layer2
Double
Layer3
Mixing and loading dust to support
aerial application5
4.0
350
2
35
46
N/A
Mixing and loading dust to support
ground application
4.0
40
14
310
400
N/A
Mixing and loading wettable
powder to support aerial application
or chemigation
4.5
350
1
31
41
>610
Mixing and loading wettable
powder to support groundboom
application
1206
3
6
140
180
>1000
4.5
80
6
140
180
>1000
Mixing and loading wettable
powder to support airblast
application
4.0
40
14
310
400
>1000
Mixing and loading wettable
powder to support high-pressure
handwand application
2.5
10
94
>1000
>1000
>1000
Mixing and loading liquid to
support aerial application or
chemigation
4.0
350
2
260
350
700
Mixing and loading liquid to
support groundboom application
4.0
80
9
>1000
>1000
>1000
Mixing and loading liquid to
support airblast application
4.0
40
18
>1000
>1000
>1000
Applying aerially
4.5
350
N/A - It was assumed that only
engineering controls are used
>1000
Applying with groundboom
equipment
4.5
80
>1000
>1000
>1000
>1000
1206
3
>1000
>1000
>1000
>1000
Applying with airblast equipment
4.0
40
150
220
240
>1000
Applying with a high-pressure
handwand
2.5
10
260
>1000
>1000
No data
Mixing, loading, and applying
wettable powder with a low-
pressure handwand
2.5
0.4
No Data
>490
>680
No Data
Mixing, loading, and applying
liquid with a low-pressure
handwand
2.5
0.4
No data
16
-------
Exposure Scenario
Max. Rate
(lb ai/acre)
Acres
per Day
Level of Personal
Protective Equipment
Engineering
Controls4
Baseline1
Single
Layer2
Double
Layer3
Mixing, loading, and applying
liquids with a backpack sprayer
2.5
0.4
84
>1000
>1000
No data
Flagging activities to support aerial
application
4.5
350
480
No Data
530
>1000
1 Baseline PPE includes typical work clothing (i.e., a long-sleeved shirt, long pants, shoes, socks, and no respiratory
protection). It does not include chemical-resistant gloves.
2 Single layer PPE includes chemical-resistant gloves in addition to baseline clothing.
3 Double layer PPE adds coveralls to single layer PPE.
4 Engineering controls includes enclosed tractor cab, enclosed cockpit, water soluble bags, or closed loading
systems.
5 PHED data for mixing and loading wettable powders were used to calculate dermal exposure for mixing and
loading dust.
6 Sweet potato plantbeds may be sprayed with DCNA at a maximum rate of 2.8 lb ai per 1,000 square feet of plant
bed. This rate is equivalent to 120 lb ai/acre, with an assumption of a maximum of 3 acres treated per day.
Table 7. DCNA Short/Intermediate Term Inhalation MOEs for Agricultural Handlers
Exposure Scenario
Max. Rate
(lb ai/acre)
Acres
per Day
Level of Personal
Protective Equipment
Engineering
Controls4
Baseline1
PF52
PF103
Mixing and loading dust to support
aerial application5
4.0
350
3
15
29
N/A
Mixing and loading dust to support
ground application
4.0
40
25
130
250
N/A
Mixing and loading wettable
powder to support aerial application
or chemigation
4.5
350
3
13
26
>460
Mixing and loading wettable
powder to support groundboom
application
1206
3
11
57
110
>1000
4.5
80
11
57
110
>1000
Mixing and loading wettable
powder to support airblast
application
4.0
40
25
130
250
>1000
Mixing and loading wettable
powder to support high-pressure
handwand application
2.5
10
160
>1000
>1000
>1000
Mixing and loading liquid to
support aerial application or
chemigation
4.0
350
100
520
1000
>1000
Mixing and loading liquid to
support groundboom application
4.5
80
410
>1000
>1000
>1000
Mixing and loading liquid to
support airblast application
4
40
910
>1000
>1000
>1000
Applying aerially
4.5
350
N/A - It was assumed that only
engineering controls are used
>1000
Applying with groundboom
equipment
1206
3
>660
>1000
>1000
>1000
4.5
80
>660
>1000
>1000
>1000
17
-------
Exposure Scenario
Max. Rate
(lb ai/acre)
Acres
per Day
Level of Personal
Protective Equipment
Engineering
Controls4
Baseline1
PF52
PF103
Applying with airblast equipment
4.0
40
240
>1000
>1000
>1000
Applying with a high-pressure
handwand
2.5
10
>1000
>1000
>1000
ND
Mixing, loading, and applying
wettable powder with a low-
pressure handwand
2.5
0.4
160
>1000
>1000
No Data
Mixing, loading, and applying
liquid with a low-pressure
handwand
2.5
0.4
No Data
Mixing, loading, and applying
liquids with a backpack sprayer
2.5
0.4
>1000
>1000
>1000
No Data
Flagging activities to support aerial
application
4.5
350
320
>1000
>1000
>1000
1 Baseline PPE includes typical work clothing and no respiratory protection.
2 A PF5 respirator is a filtering facepiece respirator (i.e., a dust mask) with a protection factor of 5.
3 A PF10 respirator is a half-face cartridge respirator with a protection facor of 10.
4 Engineering controls includes enclosed tractor cab, enclosed cockpit, or water soluble bags.
5 PHED data for mixing and loading wettable powders were used to calculate inhalation exposure for mixing and
loading dust.
6 Sweet potato plantbeds may be sprayed with DCNA at a maximum rate of 2.8 lb ai per 1,000 square feet of plant
bed. This rate is equivalent to 120 lb ai/acre, with an assumption of a maximum of 3 acres treated per day.
(b) Post-Application Occupational Risk
EPA considered exposure to DCNA to workers entering treated fields and orchards in its
post-application occupational risk assessment. Restricted-entry intervals (REIs) are calculated to
determine the minimum length of time required before workers can safely reenter (i.e., when
MOEs would be greater than or equal to 100). Potential exposure scenarios include key tasks
such as harvesting, thinning, and pruning, as well as secondary tasks, such as scouting, irrigating,
and hand weeding. The use of PPE or other types of equipment to reduce exposures for post-
application workers is not considered a viable alternative to mitigate post-application risks.
For the post-application exposure assessment, EPA used a dislodgeable foliar residue
(DFR) study conducted on snap beans with groundboom application of Botran 75W, a 75%
wettable powder formulation. The Agency extrapolated the available DFR data to other crops,
and adjusted the data for differences in application rate using a simple proportional approach.
Risks were calculated using generic transfer coefficients that represent many different types of
cultural practices which were associated with each crop group.
The post-application risks for DCNA are summarized in Table 8, below. Within each
crop group, differing transfer coefficients were used to represent different types of cultural
practices which were applicable to each crop group. Most of the MOEs for DCNA are below the
Agency's level of concern (i.e., are greater than 100) at the currently labeled REI of 12 hours for
short- and intermediate-term risks. For some crops, however, longer REIs or decreased
application rates are required to achieve MOEs greater than or equal to 100.
18
-------
Table 8. - DCNA Post-application Short- and Intermediate-Term Risks
Crop (.roup
Application
Kale
(II) a.i/acrc)
MOI. lor llic lli»hcs(
Posl-Applicalion
l-lxpoMire Acli\il\
l)a\s iimil
moi: > ion
Field/Row Crops, Low/Medium
3
64
13
Cut Flowers
0.75
1
130
94
0 (12 hours)
2
Ornamentals, Potted Plants
0.75
1590
0 (12 hours)
Vegetable, Cucurbit
1
190
0 (12 hours)
Vegetable, Fruiting
0.75
640
0 (12 hours)
Tree, Fruit, Deciduous
4
40
30
Tree, Fruit, Evergreen
2
80
7
Vegetable, Leafy, Greenhouse
2
95
3
Vegetable, Leafy, Outdoors (celery, lettuce)
(endive)
4
2
o £
00
7
2
Vegetable, Root (onions, garlic shallots)
4
80
7
(potatoes)
4.5
70
10
(sweet potatoes)
2.8
570
0 (12 hours)
Vine/Trellis grapes
3.5
14
55
1 When DCNA is applied to celery at the maximum application rate of 4 lb ai/acre, it is applied as a direct spray to
the base of the plant and adjacent soil. When DCNA is applied to lettuce at the maximum application rate of 4 lb
ai/acre, it is applied as a basal soil drench immediately after thinning. The MOE of 80 corresponds to the highest
exposure activity expected to follow these types of applications to celery and lettuce (thinning and weeding).
7. Human Incident Data
EPA consulted the following databases for poisoning incident data on DCNA: OPP
Incident Data System (IDS), Poison Control Centers, California Department of Pesticide
Regulation, National Pesticide Information Center (NPIC), and the National Institute of
Occupational Safety and Health's Sentinel Event Notification System for Occupational Risks
(NIOSH SENSOR). There were no poisoning reports due to DCNA exposure in the OPP IDS,
California Department of Pesticide Regulation (1982-2002), NPIC (1984-1991), and NIOSH
SENSOR (1998-2002) databases. Additionally, there were no incidents of poisoning or other
human health effects related to DCNA found in scientific literature.
A total of seven poisoning cases were reported in the Poison Control Center records from
1993 through 2001. Two involved children under the age of six, one involved an individual who
was exposed in an occupational setting, and the remaining four involved adults exposed in non-
occupational settings. Only one of these seven cases resulted in a medical symptoms, which
19
-------
were characterized as minor dermal symptoms. Based on the small number of incidents and the
lack of severity of these incidents, the Agency has concluded that there is no evidence of
significant harm.
B. Environmental Risk Assessment
1. Environmental Exposure
(a) Environmental Fate and Transport
DNCA has low volatility and is expected to be persistent and have low mobility in soil,
although mobility will be increased in coarser soils. Degradation of DCNA is faster under
anaerobic soil conditions than under aerobic soil conditions. In aerobic mineral soils, the half-
life ranged from six to eighteen months. In anaerobic sandy soils, the half-life ranged from
twenty-four to thirty-eight days.
DCNA has a moderate potential to bio-accumulate in fish tissue based on a
bioconcentration study which indicated a 136X bioconcentration factor (BCF) in whole fish
tissue. However, the bioaccumulated residues were almost completely eliminated from fish
tissues (86-98%) during a 7-14 day depuration period.
(b) Aquatic Organism Exposure
For exposure to fish and aquatic invertebrates, EPA considers surface water only, since
most aquatic organisms are not found in groundwater. The Agency used PRZM (version 3.12
beta)/EXAMS (version 2.98.04) to estimate exposure to aquatic animals. Unlike the drinking
water assessment described in the human health risk assessment section of this document, the
ecological water resource assessment does not include the Index Reservoir (IR) and Percent-
Crop Area (PCA) factor refinements. The IR and PCA factors represent a drinking water
reservoir, not the variety of aquatic habitats, such as ponds adjacent to treated fields, relevant to a
risk assessment for aquatic animals. Therefore, the Estimated Environmental Concentration
(EEC) values used to assess exposure to aquatic animals are not the same as the values used to
assess human dietary exposure from drinking water sources.
Several crop scenarios were assessed in the ecological risk assessment, including
California (iceberg) lettuce, California grapes (Northern and Southern), Idaho potatoes,
California onions, Oregon vegetables (snap beans), and North Carolina peanuts. The modeled
potato use scenario reflects the maximum annual application rate allowed on the labels. This use
rate is associated with the Special Local Need (SLN; Section 24C) uses allowed only in Idaho,
California, Oregon and Washington. While the single maximum rate for potatoes (4.5 lb ai/acre)
is higher than for any other crop, preliminary modeling indicated that the use of the maximum
annual rate (7.5 lb ai/acre, applied in five applications of 1.5 lb ai/acre) yielded higher acute and
chronic EECs than the single maximum rate.
20
-------
The EEC values used to assess exposure to aquatic animals are provided in Table 9,
below.
Table 9. Surface water EECs for ecological exposure based on DCNA use on multiple crops
Crop
Acule(ppb)
l-in-10 Year 2l-da\
( oncciilralion (ppb)
1 -in -10 Year
( oncciilralion (ppb)
CA lettuce
42.3
22.9
11.0
CA grapes
9.8
3.4
1.6
ID potatoes
11.2
5.4
3.1
CA onions
0.2
0.1
0.05
OR snapbeans
28.9
19.7
12.9
NC peanuts
34.1
10.9
5.3
(c) Terrestrial Organism Exposure
The Agency assessed exposure to terrestrial organisms by first predicting the amount of
DCNA residues found on animal food items and then using information on typical food
consumption by various species of birds and mammals to determine the amount of pesticide
consumed. Current labels allow a single application of 4.0 lb ai/acre for various crops, and five
applications per year for potatoes at a rate of 1.5 lbs ai/acre, for an annual maximum application
rate of 7.5 lbs ai/acre/year.
Terrestrial exposure estimates for avian and mammalian risk assessments were derived
using the TREX model (Version 1.1), which calculates the decay of a chemical applied to
surfaces of food items as single or multiple applications. A complete list of the EEC values used
to assess exposure to terrestrial animals can be found in the ecological risk assessment.
2. Environmental Effects (Hazard)
(a) Toxicity to Aquatic Organisms
i. Freshwater and Estuarine/Marine Fish
DCNA (technical grade) is classified as highly toxic to freshwater fish in acute toxicity
tests with rainbow trout and bluegill sunfish (the median lethan concentration (LC50) values are
0.9 and 1.1 mg ai/L, respectively). An acute toxicity test with the formulated product, Botran
50W, resulted in 96-hr LC50 values of 4.1 and 7.0 mg/L (parts per million (ppm)) for bluegill and
rainbow trout, respectively. This DCNA formulation is classified as moderately toxic to
freshwater fish. To assess chronic risk, EPA used a non-guideline study in which growth of
juvenile fish exposed to DCNA was evaluated (NOAEC = 0.049 mg ai/L).
21
-------
DCNA is moderately to highly toxic to freshwater fish based on acute exposures in
rainbow trout (iOncorhynchus mykiss) and bluegill sunfish {Lepomis macrochirus). The results
of these studies are provided in Table 10, below. Guideline studies are not available to assess
chronic toxicity of DCNA to freshwater fish, and acute and chronic toxicity to estuarine/marine
fish.
Table 10. Freshwater Fish Toxicity Estimates using DCNA
Species
Acute Toxicity
Chronic Toxicity
96-hr LCS0
(mg/L)
Acute Toxicity
Category
NOAEC / LOAEC1
(mg/L)
Affected
Endpoints
Rainbow Trout
Oncorhynchus mykiss
(TGAI)
0.9
Highly Toxic
(MRID 00096064)
0.049/0.155
Juvenile Growth
(MRID 46657102)
Bluegill Sunfish
Lepomis macrochirus
(Botran 50W)
4.1
Moderately Toxic
(MRID 00096062)
--
--
'No observed adverse effect concentration/ lowest observed adverse effect concentration
ii. Freshwater and Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates
DNCA is classified as moderately toxic to freshwater invertebrates under acute exposure
based on a study with Daphnia magna (the effective concentration (EC50) is 2.1 mg/L). To
assess chronic toxicity, EPA used a 21-day toxicity study on Daphnia magna, which showed a
NOAEC of 0.03 mg ai/L. A supplemental freshwater 28-day sediment dwelling toxicity study
(on Chironomus riparius) showed no significant effects from DCNA. The study results are
provided in Table 11.
Table 11. Freshwater Invertebrate Toxicity Estimates using DCNA
Species
AciiU
4S-|lOII 1' IK
(mg ai/l.)
Toxicity
Acme To\ici(\
C hremi
NOAI'.C/ I.OAI'.C2
(mg/l.)
; lo\ici(\
AITcclcd I'.ndpoinls
Water flea
(Daphnia magna)
2.1
(NOEC= 1.0)
Moderately Toxic
(MRID 40583102)
0.03/0.10
Reproduction (offspring
per parent)
(MRID 46657103)
Midge
(Chironomus riparius)
--
--
2.4 / >2.4 (water)
1.2 / >1.2 (sediment)
No Significant Effects
(MRID 46657104)
1 Effective concentration
2 No observed adverse effect concentration / lowest observed adverse effect concentration
iii. Aquatic Plants
In a 72-hour green algae (Scenedesmus subspicatus) toxicity study, DCNA produced
significant effects on algal cell density, growth rate and biomass at all tested concentrations. As
22
-------
a result, the NOEC and LOEC were <0.135 mg/L and 0.135 mg/L (the lowest tested
concentration). The lowest EC50 was was 0.12 mg/L for effects on biomass.
b. Toxicity to Terrestrial Organisms
i. Birds
In acute avian toxicity tests, DCNA is classified as slightly toxic to bobwhite quail (LC50
= 900 mg/kg bw) and practically non-toxic to mallard ducks. In a sub-acute study with bobwhite
quail, the LC50 was 1219 mg/L. To assess chronic toxicity, EPA used a bobwhite quail
reproduction study with a NOAEC of 387 mg/kg-feed. The results of these studies are provided
in Table 12, below.
Table 12. Avian Toxicity Estimates using DCNA
Species
It*,1
(m j»/kj»-bw)
Acule
Aculc Oral
Toxicity
(MRU))
Toxicity
X-I);i\
K;„
(lllg/1.)
Subacute Diclan
Toxicity (MRU))
( lir
NOAI'.C/
1 .().\i-:c"
(mg/kg)
inic I'oxicil>
AITcclcd
I'lndpoinls
Northern
bobwhite quail
(Colinus
virginianus)
900
Slightly
Toxic
(MRID
43755101)
1219
Slightly Toxic
(MRID 43115501)
387 / 967
Growth and
Reproduction
(MRID 46218900)
1 Median lethal concentration
2 No observed adverse effect concentration / lowest observed adverse effect concentration
ii. Mammals
DCNA is classified as practically non-toxic to mammals on an acute oral basis (median
lethal dose (LD50) is 3400 mg/kg-bw). To assess chronic toxicity, EPA used a two-generation
reproduction study in rats. A parental and reproductive NOAEC of 250 ppm was observed, with
decreased pup weights observed at the LOAEC of 1250 mg/L. See Table 13, below, for a
summary of the data.
Table 13. Mammalian Toxicity Endpoints for DCNA
Species
Acute Toxicity
Chronic Toxicity
LCso1
(mg/kg-bw)
Acute Oral
Toxicity
NOAEC/LOAEC2
(mg/L)
Affected
Endpoints
Rat
(Rattus
norvegicus)
3400
(48.8% formulation)
Practically Non-Toxic
(MRID 000242341)
250/ 1250
(MRIDs 44233803,
44474101)
Decreased Pup
Weights
1 Median lethal concentration
2 No observed adverse effect concentration / lowest observed adverse effect concentration
23
-------
iii. Non- Targe t Insects
There is a potential for honey bee exposure due to DCNA foliar applications. A honey
bee acute toxicity study showed that DCNA is practically non-toxic to the honey bees with an
LD50 greater than 181 micrograms per bee.
iv. Non-target Terrestrial Plants
No acute or chronic non-target terrestrial or semi-aquatic plant data were presented.
Therefore, risks to non-target terrestrial plants cannot be assessed.
3. Ecological Risk Estimation (RQs)
The Agency's ecological risk assessment compares toxicity endpoints from ecological
toxicity studies to EECs which are based on environmental fate characteristics and pesticide use
data. To evaluate the potential risk to non-target organisms from the use of DCNA products, the
Agency calculates a risk quotient (RQ), which is the ratio of the EEC to the most sensitive
toxicity endpoint values, such as the median lethal dose (LD50) or the median lethal
concentration (LC50). These RQ values are then compared to the Agency's levels of concern
(LOCs), which indicate whether a pesticide, when used as directed, has the potential to cause
adverse effects to non-target organisms. When the RQ exceeds the LOC for a particular
category, the Agency presumes a risk of concern for that category. These risks of concern may
be addressed by further refinements to the risk assessment or mitigation. Use, toxicity, fate, and
exposure are considered when characterizing the risk, as well as the levels of certainty and
uncertainty in the assessment. EPA further characterizes ecological risk based on any reported
incidents to non-target terrestrial or aquatic organisms in the field (e.g., fish or bird kills). The
Agency's levels of concern are provided in Table 14.
Table 14. EPA's Levels of Concern and Associated Risk Presumptions
Risk Presumption
LOC for
Tcrrcstria
1 Animals
LOC for
Aquatic
Animals
LOC
for
Plants
Acute Risk - there is potential for acute risk
0.5
0.5
1
Acute Endangered Species - endangered species may be
adversely affected
0.1
0.05
1
Chronic Risk - there is potential for chronic risk
1
1
N/A
a. Risk to Aquatic Organisms
i. Fish and Aquatic Invertebrates
No acute or chronic RQs exceeded the LOCs for freshwater fish or invertebrates, with the
exception of the use of DCNA on celery (modeled with lettuce scenario) in which the RQ
24
-------
exceeded the listed-species acute risk LOC for freshwater fish at the peak predicted EEC. No
acute or chronic toxicity data are currently available for estuarine/marine fish or invertebrates,
and therefore risks to estuarine/marine species could not be assessed. However, no risks would
be expected for estuarine animals based on the low risks to freshwater animals.
ii. Aquatic Plants
The RQs for non-vascular plants did not exceed the acute risk LOCs. No toxicity data
are available for aquatic vascular plants, and therefore risks to these species cannot be assessed.
However, based on the lack of adverse effects to aquatic non-vascular plants, the Agency does
not expect adverse effects in aquatic vascular plants from DCNA exposure.
b. Risk to Non-target Terrestrial Organisms
i. Birds
In this screening-level assessment, avian RQs were calculated based on maximum
residues on forage items, using a bobwhite quail LD50 of 900 mg/kg-bw from an acute oral study
and a NOAEC of 387 ppm from an avian reproduction study. At the single application rate of 4
lbs ai/A, the highest acute RQ is for small birds feeding on short grass (RQ = 1.72). Following
multiple applications of DCNA (5 applications of 1.5 lbs ai/A to potatoes), the acute risk LOC
(0.5) is exceeded for all food types (the highest RQ is 2.49, for small birds feeding on short
grass). Endangered species LOCs are exceeded for birds for many of the uses in this screening-
level assessment (RQs range from 0.1 to 2.49).
The chronic LOCs are also exceeded for all modeled food categories at maximum
residues and based on a bobwhite quail avian reproduction study (NOAEC of 387 ppm). RQs
range from 0.2 to 3.6. The screening-level assessment assumes that 100 percent of the diet is
comprised of single food types with maximum residues. This assumption may not be realistic
for chronic exposures, because diets are likely to vary over a longer period of time. Table 15,
below summarizes the maximum acute and chronic avian RQs across different weights of birds
and various food items.
Table 15. Summary of Estimated Avian Acute and Chronic Risk Quotients for Selected DCNA Uses
Silo
Application
Kale
I Ills. ai/A)
Nilmher of
Application
lnler\al. in
dajs
Ranjic of UQs
Applications
Acule
Chronic
Carrots
2
2
7
0.01 - 1.6
0.2-2.3
Celery, Carrots
Lettuce, Peanuts
4
1
N/A
0.1 - 1.7
0.2-2.4
Potatoes
1.5
5
7
0.02-2.5
0.2-3.6
Snap beans
3.75
1
N/A
0.01 - 1.6
0.2-2.3
25
-------
ii. Mammals
The acute mammalian risk assessment is based on a rat acute oral LD50 of 3400 mg/kg.
The dose-based RQs are calculated using a body weight-adjusted and consumption-weight
equivalent dose. Acute dose-based RQ values for mammals do not exceed the acute LOC
following single or multiple applications of DCNA. The RQs exceed the listed-species acute
risk LOC (0.1) for small- and intermediate-sized (15- and 100-gram) mammals that feed on short
grass.
Chronic RQs exceed the chronic risk LOC for all modeled food types except for seeds,
based on a chronic and reproductive study with a NOAEC of 250 mg/kg-diet (RQs range from
0.2 to 48). The screening-level assessment assumes that 100 percent of the diet is comprised of
single food types foraged only from treated fields. The assumption of 100 percent diet from a
single food type may not be realistic for chronic exposures because diets are likely to be more
variable over longer periods of time depending on size and forage range of animals. Table 16,
below, provides the predicted chronic mammalian RQs.
Table 16. Summary Estimated Chronic Mammalian RQs from Single and Multiple Applications of DCNA
App. Kale Ills.
Number of
Application
Range of
ai/A
Applications
Inlcnal. in da\s
Chronic RQs
Carrots
2
2
7
0.2-31
Celery, Carrots
4
1
N/A
0.2-33
Lettuce, Peanuts
Potatoes
1.5
5
7
0.3-48
Snap beans
3.75
1
N/A
0.2-31
iii. Non- Targe t Insects
EPA does not currently quantify risks to terrestrial non-target insects. RQs are therefore
not calculated for these organisms. Since DCNA is practically non-toxic to bees on a contact
exposure basis (LD50 of >181.29 |j,g/bee), the potential for DCNA to have adverse effects on
pollinators and other beneficial insects is low.
iv. Terrestrial Plants
No acute or chronic non-target terrestrial or semi-aquatic plant data were presented;
therefore risks to non-target terrestrial plants cannot be assessed. However, the Agency believes
that the potential for non-target terrestrial plant risk is low. DCNA is applied directly to a variety
of growth stages of terrestrial plants and to potato seed pieces with no reported adverse
phytotoxicity effects. Tier 1 terrestrial plant toxicity data will be required to confirm this
assumption of low terrestrial plant risk.
26
-------
4. Ecological Incidents
The Agency has received no reports of ecological incidents for DCNA.
5. Endangered Species Concerns
The Agency's screening level ecological risk assessment for endangered species results
in the determination that DCNA will have no direct acute effects on threatened and endangered
freshwater aquatic invertebrates or aquatic plants. The assessment indicates that DCNA has the
potential to affect listed freshwater fish, birds, and mammals should exposures occur at the
estimated levels. These findings are based solely on EPA's screening level assessment and do
not constitute "may effect" findings under the Endangered Species Act.
At this time, the Agency cannot quantitatively predict potential effects to endangered and
threatened marine/estuarine aquatic organisms or terrestrial plants due to a lack of toxicity
studies on these organisms. Further, potential indirect effect to any species dependent upon a
species that experiences effects cannot be precluded from use of DCNA.
IV. Risk Management, Reregistration, and Tolerance Reassessment Decision
A. Determination of Reregistration Eligibility
Section 4(g)(2)(A) of FIFRA calls for the Agency to determine, after submission of
relevant data concerning an active ingredient, whether or not products containing the active
ingredient are eligible for reregistration. The Agency has previously identified and required the
submission of the generic (i.e., active ingredient-specific) data to support reregistration of
products containing DCNA (dicloran) as an active ingredient.
The Agency has completed its review of submitted data and its assessment of the human
health risk, occupational exposure and risk, and ecological risk associated with the use of
pesticide products containing the active ingredient DCNA. Based on a review of these data, the
Agency has sufficient information on the human health and ecological effects of DCNA to make
decisions as part of the tolerance reassessment process under FFDCA and the reregistration
process under FIFRA, as amended by FQPA. The Agency has determined that DCNA-
containing products are eligible for reregistration provided that: (i) required product-specific data
are submitted; (ii) the risk mitigation measures outlined in this document are adopted; and (iii)
label amendments are made to reflect these measures. Label changes are described in Section V.
Appendix A summarizes the uses of DCNA that are eligible for reregistration. Appendix B
identifies the generic data that the Agency reviewed as part of its determination for reregistration
eligibility of DCNA, and lists the submitted studies that the Agency found acceptable.
Based on its evaluation of DCNA, the Agency has determined that DCNA products,
unless labeled and used as specified in this document, would present risks inconsistent with
27
-------
FIFRA and FFDCA. Accordingly, should a registrant fail to implement any of the risk
mitigation measures identified in this document, the Agency may take regulatory action to
address the risk concerns from the use of DCNA. If all changes outlined in this document are
incorporated into the product labels, then all current risks for DCNA will be adequately
mitigated for the purposes of this determination under FIFRA. Once the endangered species
assessment is completed, further changes to these registrations may be necessary as explained in
section IV.D.4.
B. Public Comments and Responses
Through the Agency's public participation process, EPA worked with stakeholders and
the public to reach the regulatory decisions for DCNA. During the public comment period on
the risk assessments, which closed on January 17, 2006, the Agency received comments from
one private citizen and the technical registrant, Gowan Company. These comments are available
in the public docket (EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0265) at http://www.regulations.gov. A Response to
Comments document is available in the public docket as well.
The RED and technical supporting documents for DCNA are available to the public
through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets, under docket
identification (ID) number EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0265. The public may access EPA Dockets at
http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic-relll/component/main. In addition, the DCNA RED
may be downloaded or viewed through the Agency's website at
http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/reregistration/status.htm.
C. Regulatory Position
1. Food Quality Protection Act Findings
a. "Risk Cup" Determination
As part of the FQPA tolerance reassessment process, EPA assessed the risks associated
with DCNA. EPA has determined that risk from dietary (food plus drinking water) exposure to
DCNA fits within its own "risk cup." An aggregate assessment was conducted for exposures
through food and drinking water uses (DCNA is not registered for residential use), and the
Agency has determined that the human health risks from these combined exposures are within
acceptable levels. In other words, EPA has concluded that the tolerances for DCNA meet FQPA
safety standards. In reaching this determination, EPA has considered the available information
on the special sensitivity of infants and children, as well as aggregate exposure from food and
water.
b. Determination of Safety to the U.S. Population
The Agency has determined that the established tolerances for DCNA meet the safety
standards under the FQPA amendments to section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA, and that there is
28
-------
a reasonable certainty no harm will result to the general population, infants, and children, or any
other population subgroups from the use of DCNA. In reaching this conclusion, the Agency has
considered all available information on the toxicity, use practices and exposure scenarios, and
the environmental behavior of DCNA. As discussed in section 3, the total acute and chronic
dietary (food plus water) risks are below the Agency's level of concern (< 100% of the PAD) for
the general population and all subgroups. The highest exposed population subgroups (when
assessing the aggregate dietary exposure) were females (13-49 years old) at 52% of the aPAD
and children (1-2 years old) at 15% of the cPAD.
c. Determination of Safety to Infants and Children
The Agency has determined that the established tolerances for DCNA meet the safety
standards under the FQPA amendments to section 408(b)(2)(D) of the FFDCA, and that there is
a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to infants and children. The safety determination
for infants and children considers the toxicity, use practices, and environmental behavior noted
for the general population, but also takes into account the possibility of increased dietary
exposure due to the specific consumption patterns of infants and children, as well as the
possibility of increased susceptibility to the toxic effects of DCNA residues in this population
subgroup.
In determining whether or not infants and children are particularly susceptible to toxic
effects from DCNA residues, the Agency considered the completeness of the database for
developmental and reproductive effects, the nature of the effects observed, and other
information. The lOx FQPA safety factor has been retained for acute and chronic exposures due
to a lack of a DNT study in the toxicology database for DCNA.
As discussed in section 3, the total acute and chronic dietary (food plus water) risks are
below the Agency's level of concern (< 100% of the PAD) for the general population and all
subgroups.
d. Endocrine Disruptor Effects
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 endocrine effects as the Administrator may designate." Following
recommendations of its Endocrine Disruptor Screening 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 EPA include evaluations of potential
effects in wildlife. In regards to pesticides, 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. Furthermore, as the science develops and resources
allow, screening of additional hormone systems may be added to the Endocrine Disruptor
Screening Program (EDSP) and DCNA may be subject to additional screening.
29
-------
e. Cumulative Risks
Risks summarized in this document are those that result only from the use of DCNA.
The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) requires that 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." The reason for consideration of other
substances is due to the possibility that low-level exposures to multiple chemical substances that
cause a common toxic effect by a common toxic mechanism could lead to the same adverse
health effect as would a higher level of exposure to any of the substances individually. 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 for DCNA.
Therefore, for the purposes of this decision, EPA has not assumed that DCNA shares a common
mechanism of toxicity with other substances. For information regarding EPA'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/.
2. Tolerance Summary
Tolerances for DCNA in/on plant and livestock commodities (40 CFR § 180.200) are
presently expressed in terms of the parent compound in all registered or rotated crops.
a. Tolerances Currently Listed Under 40 CFR §180.200
Tolerances are currently established under 40 CFR §180.200 for residues of DCNA [2,6-
dichloro-4-nitrobenzenamine (CAS) 99-30-9] per se in/on the following raw agricultural
commodities. Unless otherwise specified, the tolerances in Table 17 provide for residues from
pre-harvest applications. The Agency has concluded that the residue of concern for tolerance
enforcement purposes is DCNA only.
Additional residue data are necessary to establish certain revised DCNA tolerance values.
EPA notes that while additional data are needed to support these revised tolerances, there are no
dietary risks associated with these tolerances and EPA considers them reassessed at the current
levels.
30
-------
Table 17. Tolerance Summary for DCNA
( iilllllkidlls
1 isiahlishal 1 oleiance
ippim
k eassessetll n le i a i ice
ippim
Coninieiils (coiiecl a
-------
( iilllllkidlls
1 isiahlishal 1 oleiance
ippim
k eassessetll n le i a i ice
ippim
Coninieiils (coiiecl a
-------
(\
1 isiahlishal Tulcnincc
ippim
k eassessetll n le ia i ice
ippim
Coninieiils (coiiecl a
-------
b. Aggregate Risk Mitigation
EPA must consider and aggregate pesticide exposures and risks from three major sources:
food, drinking water, and residential. DCNA has no residential uses. Therefore, the aggregate
assessments for DNCA consider exposures and risks from food and drinking water.
Acute and chronic aggregate exposure estimates for food and drinking water are below
EPA's level of concern for all population subgroups. At the 99.9th percentile of exposure, the
estimated food and water exposure for females 13-49 years old accounted for 52% of the aPAD.
For chronic exposures, the most highly-exposed subgroup was children 1-2 years old, with
exposures accounting for 15% of the cPAD. Therefore, no mitigation is required.
c. Occupational Risk Mitigation
i. Handler Exposure
EPA completes handler exposure assessments by using a baseline (long-sleeved shirt and
long pants) exposure scenario. If required, increasing levels of mitigation such as personal
protective equipment (PPE) and engineering controls are incorporated to achieve an adequate
margin of exposure (MOE). Most DCNA handler scenarios yield MOEs greater than 100 with
single layer PPE (long-sleeved shirt, long pants, and chemical-resistant gloves). In particular, no
additional mitigation beyond single layer PPE is required for the DCNA liquid formulations.
However, additional mitigation is required for the DCNA dust products and the wettable-powder
formulations that are not packaged in water-soluble bags, in order to achieve MOEs greater than
100.
To reduce risks of concern associated with the DCNA dust products, all dust products
except for Botran 6% Dust (EPA Reg 10163-188) will be voluntarily cancelled. Furthermore,
the following additional mitigation is required for the Botran 6% Dust product:
• Aerial application is prohibited;
• PF10 respirators are required for mixers and loaders; and
• Enclosed cabs that provide both dermal and inhalation protection are required for
ground application equipment.
• Alternatively, standard enclosed cabs providing only dermal protection may be
used if applicators wear PF10 respirators within the cab.
For the DCNA wettable-powder formulations, no additional mitigation is required for
products that are incorporated in water-soluble bags. However, in order to reduce risks of
concern associated with the DCNA wettable powder products that are not packaged in water-
soluble bags, the following mitigation is required:
• Aerial and chemigation methods of application are prohibited; and
• PF10 respirators are required for mixers and loaders.
34
-------
ii. Post-application Risk Mitigation
EPA is requiring lower maximum application rates for the following crops to mitigate
post-application risks: grapes, snap beans, evergreen trees, and deciduous tree fruit (apricots,
peaches, nectarines, plums, prunes, and sweet cherries). The required rate reductions will result
in acceptable MOEs for all crops except for grapes. Table 18, below, lists the new rates for these
crops.
For grapes, a longer REI is required. The new REI for grapes is 14 days, based on risk
estimates for the exposure activities of leaf pulling, thinning, pruning, training, and tying, which
are the highest exposure activities following cane turning and girdling (please see the discussion
below regarding additional mitigation for the cane turning and girdling). The MOE for leaf
pulling, thinning, pruning, training, and tying is 64 on day zero, and is above 100 within 13 days
of application. Based on the risk estimates, EPA has determined that an REI of 14 days for
grapes will protect workers from unacceptable post-application risks. In addition, the Agency is
requiring a dislodgeable foliar residue (DFR) study on grapes treated with Botran 6% Dust to
confirm the Agency's decision about potential post-application risks to workers from grapes.
For grapes, in addition to requiring a lower maximum application rate and longer REI,
the post-application activities of cane turning and girdling are prohibited for 30 days following
application of DCNA. The high-exposure activities of cane turning and girdling result in
unacceptable risks to workers who perform the tasks within 30 days of DCNA application (the
MOE for cane turning and girdling grapes is 32 at day zero, and it does not reach 100 until 32
days after application). Based on the risk estimates, cane turning and girdling grapes is
prohibited for 30 days following the application of DCNA.
Table 18, below, lists the crops for which lower maximum application rates and/or longer
REIs are required, and provides the MOEs that result from the mitigation.
Table 18. New Maximum Application Rates and REIs for Crops Requiring Post-Application Risk Mitigation
and Resulting MOEs for the Highest Exposure Activity i
('nip Group
('nips
( II ITCH I
Max. Kale
(II) ai/acrc)
New
Max. Kale
(II) ai/acrc)
MOF. al
l)a\ /.cm
Nilmher of
l)a\s I mil
MOr.'lOO
( IIITCIII
ki:i
New
Kll
Grapes
Grapes
3.5
1.5
641
13
12 hours
14 days
Tree, Fruit,
Deciduous
Apricots,
peaches,
nectarines,
plums, prunes,
sweet cherries
4
1.5
106
n/a
12 hours
Field/Row
Crops,
Low/Medium
Snap Beans
3
2
95
2
12 hours
Evergreen
Trees
Conifers,
Christmas Trees
2
1.5
110
n/a
12 hours
1 The MOE of 64 on day zero corresponds to the post-application activities of leaf pulling, thinning, pruning,
training, and tying. For the higher-exposure activities of cane turning and girdling, the MOE=32 on day zero, and
the MOEs remain below 100 until 32 days after application. Based on these risk estimates, the Agency is
prohibiting cane turning and girdling grapes for 30 days following application of DCNA.
35
-------
The Agency's post-application exposure assessment resulted in MOEs below 100 at day
zero for potatoes (MOE=70), celery (MOE=80), lettuce (MOE=80), onions (MOE=80), garlic
(MOE=80), shallots (MOE=80), and snap beans (MOE=95). The Agency has concluded that it
is likely that the post-application exposure assessment overestimates the post-application risks
from DCNA due to the underlying toxicity endpoint. The post-application exposure assessment
is based on a 21-day dermal study in rabbits (MRID 40555101) with a NOAEL of 120
mg/kg/day and a LOAEL of 1200 mg/kg/day, which is above the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg/day.
The nature of the effects observed at the LOAEL (a 13 percent increase in adrenal weight
relative to control) was not severe, and was observed only in males. Due to the widely-spaced
dosing regime in this study, it is likely that that true NOAEL is higher than 120 mg/kg/day. If,
for example, the true NOAEL is 150 mg/kg/day, then the MOEs for celery, lettuce, onions,
garlic, and shallots would be 100 on day zero. Recognizing that the true NOAEL is likely to be
at least 150 mg/kg/day given the ten-fold difference between the NOAEL and LOAEL, the
Agency has concluded that no post-application risk mitigation is required for root vegetables
(potatoes, onions, garlic, and shallots), leafy vegetables (celery and lettuce), or low/medium
field/row crops (snap beans).
The Agency is currently reviewing additional data developed by the Agricultural Reentry
Task Force (ARTF) that may help to further refine the post-application exposure assessment for
DCNA. Preliminary indications are that the post-application risk estimates for several exposure
scenarios may be lower using the new ARTF data.
Current DCNA labels specify a REI of 12 hours. The current REIs will remain the same
for all DCNA uses except for grapes. The required new REI for grapes is 14 days, to mitigate
post-application risks, as discussed above.
2. Environmental Risk Mitigation
EPA's screening level ecological risk assessment shows some exceedances of the acute
and chronic LOCs for birds and the chronic LOCs for mammals. The reductions in application
rates associated with the occupational risk mitigation will result in lower ecological exposures
for some uses. Some screening level exceedances will remain, but the Agency is not requiring
additional mitigation at this time.
3. Other Labeling
In order to be eligible for reregi strati on, various use and safety information will be
included in the labeling of all end-use products containing DCNA. For the specific labeling
statements and a list of outstanding data, refer to Section V of this RED document.
36
-------
4. Endangered Species Program
The Agency's screening level ecological risk assessment for endangered species results
in the determination that DCNA will have no direct acute effects on threatened and endangered
freshwater aquatic invertebrates or aquatic plants. However, the Agency's level of concern was
exceeded for endangered freshwater fish, birds, mammals, and non-target terrestrial plants.
Further, potential indirect effect to any species dependent upon a species that experiences effect
cannot be precluded from use of DCNA. These findings are based solely on EPA's screening
level assessment and do not constitute "may effect" findings under the Endangered Species Act.
The Agency has developed the Endangered Species Protection Program to identify
pesticides whose use may cause adverse impacts on endangered and threatened species, and to
implement mitigation measures that address these impacts. The Endangered Species Act (ESA)
requires federal agencies to ensure that their actions are not likely to jeopardize listed species or
adversely modify designated critical habitat. To analyze the potential of registered pesticide uses
that may affect any particular species, EPA uses basic toxicity and exposure data developed for
the REDs and considers it in relation to individual species and their locations by evaluating
important ecological parameters, pesticide use information, geographic relationships between
specific pesticide uses and species locations, and biological requirements and behavioral aspects
of the particular species, as part of a refined species-specific analysis. When conducted, this
species-specific analysis will take into consideration any regulatory changes recommended in
this RED that are being implemented at that time.
Following this future species-specific analysis, a determination that there is a likelihood
of potential impact to a listed species or its critical habitat may result in limitations on the use of
DCNA, other measures to mitigate any potential impact, or consultations with the Fish and
Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service as necessary. If the Agency
determines use of DCNA "may affect" listed species or their designated critical habitat, EPA will
employ the provisions in the Services' regulations (50 CFR Part 402). Until that species-specific
analysis is completed, the risk mitigation measures being implemented through this RED will
reduce the likelihood that endangered and threatened species may be exposed to DCNA at levels
of concern. EPA is not requiring specific DCNA label language at the present time relative to
threatened and endangered species. If, in the future, specific measures are necessary for the
protection of listed species, the Agency will implement them through the Endangered Species
Protection Program.
V. What Registrants Need to Do
The Agency has determined that DCNA is eligible for reregi strati on provided that
product-specific data are submitted and the mitigation measures stated in this document are
included in upcoming label submissions. In the near future, the Agency intends to issue Data
Call-In (DCI) notices requiring product-specific data and generic confirmatory data. Generally,
registrants will have 90 days from receipt of a DCI to complete and submit response forms or
request time extensions and/or waivers with a full written justification. For product-specific
37
-------
data, the registrant will have 8 months to submit data and amended labels. For generic data, due
dates can vary depending on the specific studies being required. Listed below are the additional
generic data that the Agency intends to require.
A. Manufacturing Use Products
1. Additional Generic Data Requirements
The generic data base supporting the reregi strati on of DCNA for the above eligible uses has been
reviewed and determined to be substantially complete. However, the data listed below, in Tables
19 and 20, are necessary to confirm the reregi strati on eligibility decision documented in this
RED.
Table 19. Toxicology, Residue Chemistry, and Occupational Exposure Data Requirements
Siudj Required
(¦iiideline Number
1 )evelopmental Neurotoxicity Study (rats)
870.6300
28-day Inhalation Toxicity Study (rats)
870.3465
Nature of the Residue, Livestock (Storage stability data only)
860.1300
Residue Analytical Methods, Plant and Livestock*
860.1340
Multi-residue Method*
860.1360
Storage Stability Data, Plant, for DCHA
860.1380
Meat/Milk/Poultry/Eggs (Ruminant feeding study)
860.1480
Crop Field Trials monitoring for residues of DCNA and DCHA
• Additional data are required for the reassessment or establishment of
tolerances for apricot, cherry (sweet), fennel, garlic, onion, peach,
plum, rhubarb, shallot, sweet potato, and tomato
• Limited magnitude of the residue studies are required for all
registered crops
• The potato field trials must also monitor for residues of Unknown 1
860.1500
Processed Food/Feed
860.1520
Field Accumulation in Rotational Crops
860.1900
Dislodgeable Foliar Residue Study on Grapes with Botran 10% Dust
formulation
875.2100
* Reserved pending results of ruminant feeding study
Table 20. Environmental Fate and Ecological Toxicity Data Requirements
Siudj Required
(¦iiideline Number
Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism
835.4300
Aquatic Field Dissipation
835.6200
Accumulation - Aquatic Non-target Organisms
850.1950
Droplet Size Spectrum
840.1100
Drift Field Evaluation
840.1200
38
-------
Sluclj Ko(|iiiml
(iiiidoliiu* Number
Yvian Reproduction Mallard duck
850.2300
Estuarine/Marine Fish Acute LC50 (Sheepshead minnow)
850.1075
Estuarine/Marine Acute Invertebrate LC50 (Mysid)
850.1025
Freshwater Fish Early Life Stage (Rainbow Trout)
850.1300
Estuarine/Marine Life Cycle (Mysid)
850.1450
Freshwater Fish full Life Cycle (Fathead Minnow)
850.1500
Tier I Terrestrial Plant
850.4025
2. Labeling for Manufacturing Use Products
To ensure compliance with FIFRA, manufacturing use product (MUP) labeling should be
revised to comply with all current EPA regulations, PR Notices, and applicable policies. The
MUP labeling should bear the labeling outlined in Table 21.
B. End-Use Products
1. Additional Product-Specific Data Requirements
Section 4(g)(2)(B) of FIFRA calls for the Agency to obtain any needed product-specific
data regarding the pesticide after a determination of eligibility has been made. The Registrant
must review previous data submissions to ensure that they meet current EPA acceptance criteria
and if not, commit to conduct new studies. If a registrant believes that previously submitted data
meet current testing standards, then the study MRID numbers should be cited according to the
instructions in the Requirement Status and Registrants Response Form provided for each
product.
A product-specific data call-in, outlining specific data requirements, accompanies this
RED.
2. Labeling for End-Use Products
Labeling changes are necessary to implement measures outlined in Section IV above.
Table 21 describes the required labeling changes.
39
-------
Labeling Changes Summary Table [Attachment III]
In order to be eligible for reregi strati on, amend all product labels to incorporate the risk mitigation measures outlined in Section IV.
The following table describes how language on the labels should be amended.
Table 21: Summary of Labeling Changes for DCNA (Dicloran)
Description
Amended Labeling Language
Placement 011 Label
Manufacturing Use Products
For all Manufacturing
Use Products
"Only for formulation into a fungicide for the following pre-harvest uses
apricots, beans (snap), celery, cherries (sweet), cucumbers, endive
(escarole), fennel, garlic, grapes, lettuce (head and leaf), nectarines,
onions, peaches, plums (fresh prunes), potatoes, rhubarb, shallots,
tomatoes, Christmas trees, conifers, and potted plants/ornamentals. p0st-
harvest uses include carrots and sweet potatoes."
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
"This product is toxic to fish."
"Do not discharge effluent containing this product into lakes, streams,
ponds, estuaries, oceans, or other waters unless in accordance with the
Precautionary Statements
40
-------
Description
Amended l.nheliii"
I'liKTIlKMll Oil l.ilhel
requirements of a National Pollution 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. Do not contaminate water when disposing
of equipment and washwaters."
End Use Products Intended for Occupational Use
"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."
PPE Requirements
Established by the
RED1
For Wettable Powder
Formulations Not
Packaged in Water-
Soluble Bags
"Mixers, loaders, applicators and other handlers must wear:
long-sleeve shirt and long pants, chemical-resistant gloves (except
applicators using motorized ground equipment, flaggers and pilots),
shoes plus socks."
"Mixer/loaders supporting groundboom and airblast applications must
wear at least a half-face NIOSH-approved respirator with:
• a dust/mist filter with MSHA/NIOSH approval number prefix TC-
21C; or
• a canister approved for pesticides (MSHA/NIOSH approval number
prefix TC-14g; or
• a cartridge or canister with any N, R, P, or HE filter.
A quarter-face cup-style dust/mist filtering respirator is not permitted."
"See engineering controls for additional requirements"
Immediately following/below
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to
Humans and Domestic Animals
41
-------
Description
Amended l.nheliii"
I'liKTIlKMll Oil l.ilhel
PPE Requirements
Established by the
RED1
For Wettable Powder
Formulations packaged
in Water Soluble Bags
"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."
"Mixer, loaders, applicators and other handlers must wear:
Long-sleeve shirt and long pants, chemical-resistant gloves (except for
applicators using motorized ground equipment, flaggers and pilots), and
shoes plus socks."
"See engineering controls for additional requirements"
Immediately following/below
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to
Humans and Domestic Animals
PPE Requirements
Established by the
RED1
For Dust 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."
"All loaders, applicators and other handlers must wear: Long-sleeve shirt
and long pants, chemical-resistant gloves (except for applicators using
ground equipment), shoes plus socks. In addition, loaders supporting
ground equipment applications must wear a NIOSH-approved half-face,
full-face or hood-style respirator with:
• a dust/mist filter with MSHA/NIOSH approval number prefix TC-
21C; or
• a canister approved for pesticides (MSHA/NIOSH approval number
prefix TC-14G); or
• a cartridge or canister with any N, R, P, or HE filter."
Immediately following/below
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to
Humans and Domestic Animals
42
-------
Description
Amended l.nheliii"
I'liKTIlKMll Oil l.ilhel
"See Engineering controls for additional requirements"
PPE Requirements
Established by the
RED1
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."
"All mixers, loaders, applicators and other handlers must wear: long-
sleeve shirt and long pants, chemical-resistant gloves (except for
applicators using motorized ground equipment, flaggers and pilots),
shoes plus socks."
"See Engineering controls for additional requirements"
Immediately following/below
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to
Humans and Domestic Animals
User Safety
Requirements
"Discard clothing and other absorbent materials that have been drenched
or heavily contaminated with this product's concentrate. Do not reuse
them."
"Follow manufacturer's instructions for cleaning/maintaining PPE. jf no
such instructions for washables exist, use detergent and hot water. Keep
and wash PPE separately from other laundry."
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to
Humans and Domestic Animals
immediately following the PPE
requirements
Engineering Control
Statements for
Wettable Powder
Products Not Packaged
in Water Soluble Bags
are not required.
Engineering Controls
"Engineering Controls
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to
43
-------
Description
Amended l.nheliii"
I'liKTIlKMll Oil l.ilhel
For Wettable Powder
Formulations in Water
Soluble bags
Pilots must use an enclosed cockpit that meets the requirements listed in
the Worker Protection Standard (WPS) for agricultural pesticides [40
CFR 170.240(d)(6)],
Water-soluble packets when used correctly qualify as a closed
mixing/loading system under the Worker Protection Standard for
Agricultural Pesticides [40 CFR 170.240(d)(4)], Mixers and loaders
using water-soluble packets must:
• wear the personal protective equipment required in the PPE section
of this labeling for mixers and loaders; and
• be provided, and must have immediately available for use in an
emergency such as a broken package, spill, or equipment breakdown:
chemical-resistant footwear and the respirator type specified in the
PPE section of this label."
Humans and Domestic Animals
(Immediately following PPE and User
Safety Requirements.)
Engineering Controls
For Dust Formulations
"Engineering Controls
Applicators using motorized ground equipment must use an enclosed cab
that meets the definition in the Worker Protection Standard for
Agricultural Pesticides [40 CFR 170.240(d)(5)] for dermal protection. In
addition, applicators must:
• wear long-sleeve shirt, long pants, shoes, socks; and
• either wear a half face NIOSH-approved dust/mist filtering respirator
with MSHA/NIOSH approval number prefix TC-21C or a NIOSH-
approved respirator with any N, R, P or HE filter or use an enclosed
cab that is declared in writing by the manufacturer or by a
government agency to provide at least as much respiratory protection
as the respirator specified above;
• be provided and have immediately available for use in an emergency
when they must exit the cab in treated area: chemical-resistant gloves
and, if using an enclosed cab that provides respiratory protection, a
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to
Humans and Domestic Animals
(Immediately following PPE and User
Safety Requirements.)
44
-------
Description
Amended l.nheliii"
I'liKTIlKMll Oil l.ilhel
respirator of the type specified above;
• take off any PPE that was worn in the treated area before reentering
the cab; and
• store all such PPE in a chemical-resistant container, such as a plastic
bag, to prevent contamination of the inside of the cab."
Engineering Controls
For Liquid
Formulations
"Engineering Controls
Pilots must use an enclosed cockpit that meets the requirements listed in
the Worker Protection Standard (WPS) for agricultural pesticides [40
CFR 170.240(d)(6)]."
Precautionary Statements: Hazards to
Humans and Domestic Animals
(Immediately following PPE and User
Safety Requirements.)
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
"This pesticide is toxic to fish.
This product may contaminate water through runoff. This product has a
high potential for runoff for several months or more after application.
Poorly draining soils and soils with shallow water tables are more prone
to produce runoff that contains this product."
"Do not apply directly to water, to areas where surface water is present or
to intertidal areas below the mean high water mark. Drift and runoff may
Precautionary Statements
immediately following the User
Safety Recommendations
45
-------
Description
Amended l.nheliii" Language
Placement on l.ahcl
be hazardous to aquatic organisms in water adjacent to treated areas. d0
not contaminate water when disposing of equipment, washwaters or
rinsate."
"For products applied as sprays, add the following in addition to the
above: This chemical can contaminate surface water through spray or
dust applications. Under some conditions, it may also have a potential
for runoff into surface water after application."
Restricted-Entry
Intervals
Grapes:
"Do not enter or allow worker entry into treated areas during the
restricted entry interval of 14 days when applied to grapes. Notify
workers of the application by warning them orally and by posting
warning signs at the entrances to treated area. Cane turning and girdling
grapes is prohibited for 30 days following application of DCNA."
All of other crops and use patterns:
"For all other crops and use patterns, do not enter or allow worker entry
during the restricted entry interval of 12 hours."
Directions for Use,
Agricultural Use Requirements Box
Early Entry Personal
Protective Equipment
"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 plants, soil, or water, is:
Coveralls,
Shoes plus socks,
Chemical-resistant gloves made of any waterproof material."
Direction for Use
Agricultural Use Requirements box
General Application
Restrictions
"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 directly
above the Agricultural Use Box
46
-------
Description
Amended Labeling Language
Placement on l.iihel
Other Application
Restrictions (Risk
Mitigation)
Dust formulation:
"Aerial application is prohibited."
"Application by handheld equipment is prohibited."
Wettable Powder formulation not packaged in water soluble
bags/packets:
"Aerial application is prohibited."
"Chemigation is prohibited."
All formulations:
Labels must be amended to reflect the following new maximum single
application rates:
Crop Group
Crops
Maximum Single
Application Rate
(pounds active
ingredient per acre;
lb ai/acre)
Grapes
Grapes
1.5
Tree, Fruit,
Deciduous
Apricots, peaches,
nectarines, plums,
prunes, sweet cherries
1.5
Field/Row Crops,
Low/Medium
Snap Beans
2
Evergreen Trees
Conifers, Christmas
Trees
1.5
Directions for Use
47
-------
Description
Amended Labeling Language
Placement on l.iihel
Labels must be amended to reflect the following maximum annual
application rates (i.e., new limits on the amount that may be applied per
year):
Crop
Maximum Annual
Application Rate
(lb ai/acre/year)
Potatoes
7.5
Celery, fennel
5
All other crops
4.0
Products labeled for use on grapes:
"Cane turning and girdling grapes is prohibited for 30 days following
application of DCNA."
Spray Drift Label
Language for Products
Applied as a Spray
"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."
"Do not make any type of application into temperature inversions."
"WIND SPEED:"
"Do not apply at wind speeds greater than 10 mph at the application site."
"DROPLET SIZE:"
"Apply as a medium or coarser spray (ASAE standard 572)."
Directions for Use
48
-------
Description
Amended l.;ibelin» l.;in»u;i
-------
Appendix A:
Use Patterns Eligible for Reregistration
Pre-Harvest Uses
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmikilion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
r i: i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Held Row Crops (Simp 1 ieans)
Ground Equipment
Dust
2.0
4.0
2
12
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
not packaged in
water soluble
bags (non-WSB)
2.0
4.0
2
12
Aerial, Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
packaged in water
soluble bags
(WSB)
2.0
4.0
2
12
Aerial,
Chemigation, Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable
2.0
4.0
2
12
50
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmikilion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
ri:i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
X'eueliihle. 1'i iiilinu ('
omaloes)
Ground Equipment
Dust
0.75
4.0
10
12
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
0.75
4.0
10
12
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable
0.75
4.0
10
12
Tree. I rnil. Deciduous (Plums. Prunes)
51
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmikilion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
ri:i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
1.5
4.0
10
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
1.5
4.0
10
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Liquid Flowable
1.5
4.0
10
12
Chemigation, Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Tree. ITuii. Deciduous (Apricots. IVachc
v Nectarines. Sued Cherries)
Ground Equipment
Dust
1.5
4.0
10
12
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
1.5
4.0
10
12
52
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmikilion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
Rl.l
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
1.5
4.0
10
12
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable
1.5
4.0
10
12
Yege
able. Cuivuibil (Cucumber)
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
1.0
4.0
1
12
53
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmikilion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
r i: i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
1.0
4.0
1
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Yeui
.¦table. Cuiviiibit (Rhubarb)
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
1.0
4.0
3
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
1.0
4.0
3
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Vegetable. I.l
aly. Greenhouse (1 .clliice. leal"only)
Ground Equipment
Dust
4.0
4.0
14
12
54
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmilalion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
Rl.l
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
4.0
4.0
14
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
4.0
4.0
14
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Liquid Flowable
4.0
4.0
14
12
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Vegetable. I.ealy. (Celery)
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
4.0
5.0
7
12
55
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmilalion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
Rl.l
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Com mails
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
4.0
5.0
7
12
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable
4.0
5.0
7
12
l.ealy. YegelaMe d'erniel. Moreno.-)
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
4.0
4.0
7
12
56
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmilalion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
ri:i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
4.0
4.0
7
12
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable
4.0
4.0
7
12
l.ealy. Vegetable (l\ndi\e)
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
2.0
4.0
14
12
Aerial,
Wettable Powder
2.0
4.0
14
12
57
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmilation
Max Single
App.
Rate (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
r i: i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
(WSB)
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable
2.0
4.0
14
12
Vegetable. Root (Sweet Potatoes)
Seed Dip
Liquid Flowable,
Wettable Powder
120
120
N/A
12
Plantbed spray
120
120
N/A
12
Vegetables potatoes
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
4.5
7.5
14-20
12
58
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmikilion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
r i: i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
4.5
7.5
14-20
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Liquid Flowable
4.5
7.5
14-20
12
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Vegetable
. Root (Onions. (
iailic. Shallots)
Ground Equipment
Dust
4.0
4.0
14
12
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
4.0
4.0
14
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Wettable Powder
4.0
4.0
14
12
59
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmikilion
Max Si utile
Seasonal
I'lll
ri:i
Restrictions
App.
Rale (lbs
Max
(lbs
(days)
(1 lours)
Comments
ai/A)
ai A Yr)
Chemigation,
(WSB)
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Liquid Flowable
4.0
4.0
14
12
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Vine I
"el 1 is (Cnapes (\ aiious types))
Ground Equipment
Dust
1.5
4.0
14
14 days
Groundboom,
Wettable Powder
1.5
4.0
14
14 days
Airblast,
(non-WSB)
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Wettable Powder
1.5
4.0
14
14 days
Chemigation,
(WSB)
60
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmilalion
Max Si utile
Seasonal
I'lll
r i: i
Restrictions
App.
Rale (lbs
Max
(lbs
(days)
(1 lours)
Comments
ai/A)
ai A Yr)
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Liquid Flowable
1.5
4.0
14
14 days
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
(Hi Mowers (Chrysanthemums Roses. 1 lydianueas)
Ground Equipment
Dust
0.75
4.0
N/A
12
Groundboom,
Wettable Powder
0.75
4.0
N/A
12
Airblast,
(non-WSB)
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Wettable Powder
0.75
4.0
N/A
12
Chemigation,
(WSB)
Groundboom,
61
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
I'onmilalion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
ri:i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable
0.75
4.0
N/A
12
Ornamentals. Polled Plants (Geraniums)
Ground Equipment
Dust
0.75
4.0
N/A
12
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
(non-WSB)
0.75
4.0
N/A
12
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Low Pressure handwand,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
0.75
4.0
N/A
12
62
-------
Applicalion Type. Ia|iiipmenl
romnilalion
Max Single
App.
Rale (lbs
ai/A)
Seasonal
Max
(lbs
ai A Yr)
I'lll
(days)
Rl.l
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Groundboom,
Airblast,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable
0.75
4.0
N/A
12
63
-------
'ost-harvest Uses
Application Type.
1 lt|Lii pnienl
formulation
Maximum Annual Application Rate
(lb ai A year)
r i: i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
free. fruit. Deciduous (Apricots . Peaches. Nectarines. Plums. Prunes. Cherries)
Processing line Operations,
Spraying,
Plant Dipping,
Brushes,
Hydrocooler
Wettable powder
1.5
12
Vegetable. Root (Sweet Potatoes)
Groundboom,
Plant Dipping
Wettable powder,
4.0
12
Aerial,
Chemigation,
Plant Dipping
Liquid Flowable,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
( lit flowers (Chrysanthemums. Roses. Hydrangeas, (iladiolns)
Ground Equipment
Dust
0.75
12
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable powder,
Liquid Flowable
Tree. l-\ergreen (Conifer. Christmas trees)
64
-------
Application Type.
1 lt|Lii pnienl
I'oniHilalion
Maximum Annual Application Rate
(lb ai A year)
r i: i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Aerial,
Low Pressure handwand,
Backpack sprayer,
High Pressure Handwand
Plant Dipping
Liquid Flowable,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
1.5
12
Airblast,
Plant Dipping
Wettable Powder,
Vcucta
">lc. ("iiicLiihit (Cucumber. Rhubarb)
Low pressure handwand,
High pressure Handwand,
Backpack Sprayer
Wettable Powder,
Liquid Flowable
l.U
12
65
-------
Greenhouse and Hothouse Uses
Application Type.
1 lt|Lii pnienl
formulation
Maximum Annual Application Rate
(lit ai A year)
r i: i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Vcucta
¦>lc. ('iii'cui'bil (Cucumber. Rhubarb)
Low Pressure Handwand,
High Pressure Handwand,
Backpack Sprayer
Wettable Powder,
Liquid Flowable,
1.0
12
Vegetable. Lealy. Greenhouse (l.cllncc. leal"only)
Ground Equipment
Dust
4.0
12
Groundboom,
High Pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder
Aerial,
Chemigation,
High Pressure Handwand
Liquid Flowable,
Wettable Powder
(WSB)
Given
louse Seed Potatoes or Transplants
Low Pressure Handwand,
High pressure Handwand,
Backpack Sprayer
Wettable Powder,
Liquid Flowable
4.0
12
VcuclaMc. fruiting (Tomatoes)
Ground Equipment
Dust
0.75
12
66
-------
Application Type.
1 lt|Lii pnienl
I'oniHikilion
Maximum Annual Application Rale
(lit ai A year)
r i: i
(1 lours)
Restrictions
Comments
Backpack Sprayer,
Low pressure Handwand,
High pressure Handwand
Wettable Powder,
Liquid Flowable
67
-------
Appendix B:
Data Supporting Guideline Requirements for the Reregistration of DCNA use on Field/Row
crops, Tree and Vine crops, Ornamentals, Conifers and Greenhouse Vegetables.
UI'.Ql IRIMIYI
( 11 \ l lON(S)
o( (i PATioYxi./Rr.sidi:\ti.\i. i:\posi ki:
New Guideline
Number
Old
Guideline
Number
Description
875.2100
132-1A
Foliar (Dislodgeable) Residue Dissipation
45062001
icolocicai. i:i i i.( is
850.2100
71-1
Avian Acute Oral Toxicity Test (LD50), Bobwhite
Quail or Duck
43755101,40583103
850.2200
71-2
Avian Acute Dietary Toxicity Test (LC50) Bobwhite
Quail and Mallard Duck
405088-12, 43115501, 40508811,
43115502
850.2300
71-4
Avian Reproduction Test, Bobwhite Quail
46218900
850.1075
72-1
Fish Acute Toxicity Test, Freshwater Rainbow Trout
and Bluegill Sunfish
00096064, 00096058
850.1010
72-2
Invertebrate Acute Toxicity Test, Daphnia Magna
40583102
850.1035
72-3c
Estuarine/marine acute invertebrate LC50 (Mollusk)
00087031
850.1300
72-4a
Daphnid Chronic Toxicity Test (early life stage in
fish)
850.1350
72-4b
Mysid (Shrimp) Chronic Toxicity Test (life cycle in
aquatic invertebrates)
46657103
850.1450
850.3020
72-4d
Early-life Stage Estuarine
141-1
Honey Bee Acute Contact Toxicity
00036935
850.4400
123-2
Aquatic Plant Toxicity Test Using Lemma Spp.,
46657105
870.1100
81-1
Acute Oral Toxicity Test, Rat
00086879, 00064581
870.3800
83-4
2-generation Reproduction and Fertility Effects, Rat
44414101
TOXICOLOGY
X~u. 11(10
81-1
Acute Oral Toxicity Testing, Rat
00086879
870.1200
81-2
Acute Dermal (Skin) Toxicity Test, Rabbit/rat
00086894
870.2400
81-4
Acute (Primary) Eye Irritation, Rabbit
00086892
870.2500
81-5
Acute (Primary) Dermal (Skin) Irritation
00086893
870.2600
81-6
Dermal (Skin) Sensitization
00082721
870.4300
83-5
Combined Chronic Toxicity/carcinogenicity
46360701
870.4200b
83-2b
Carcinogenicity (Oncogenicity), Mouse
40977101
870.4100b
83-lb
Chronic Feeding Toxicity Study, Non-rodent
00029056,00082718, 00026810,
45610801
870.3800
83-4
2-generation Reproduction and Fertility Effects, Rat
44233803,44414101
870.3700a
83-3a
Prenatal Developmental Toxicity (Teratogenicity), Rat
46447501
870.3700b
83-3b
Prenatal Developmental Toxicity (Teratogenicity),
Rabbit
43952101
870.3100
82-la
Subchronic Oral Toxicity Test (90-day Feeding,
Rodent)
00029056,00082718, 46360702
1
-------
Data Supporting Guideline Requirements for the Reregistration of DCNA use on Field/Row
crops, Tree and Vine crops, Ornamentals, Conifers and Greenhouse Vegetables.
UI'.Ql IKI.MI.M
( 11 \ l lON(S)
870.3150
82-lb
Subchronic Oral Toxicity Test (90-day Feeding, Non-
Rodent)
00029056,00026810, 00082718
870.3200
82-2
Repeated Dose Dermal Toxicity Test (21 Day,
Rabbit/rat)
40555101
870.7485
85-1
Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics (General
Metabolism)
44061001,43255401, 43255402
870.5265
Reverse Gene Mutation Assay
40508801, 00046435, 00046436,
00087018
870.5375
84-2b
In Vitro Mammalian Cytogenetics Tests (Structural
Chromosomal Aberration Test)
40508802
870.5550
84-2
Unscheduled DNA Synthesis in Mammalian Cells in
Culture
40619001
I NMKONMI N I \l. I-A l l.
835.2120
161-1
Hydrolysis of Parent and Degradates as a Function of
pH at 25°C (Hydrolysis)
144957 (Acc. No. 253963)
835.2240
161-2
Direct Photolysis Rate in Water by Sunlight
(Photodegradation in sunlight)
43891901, 40508809
835.2410
161-3
Photodegradation of Parent and Degradates in Soil
(Photodegradation in soil)
43893601,40508810
835.4100
162-1
Aerobic Soil Metabolism Study
40894801,00086942
835.4200
162-2
Anaerobic Soil Metabolism Study
40894801
835.4400
162-3
Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Study
46216001,46657101, 43866501
835.4300
162-4
Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Study
46216001, 46657101
835.1240/1230
163-1
Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Study
40538202,40538201, 43809001,
40863001,00065859
835.6100
164-1
Terrestrial Field Dissipation Study
44414201,40583101, 00086953,
00086955, 00082668
850.1730
165-4
Fish BCF (aquatic organism accumulation study)
43782001, 40508808
835.7100
166-1
Small Scale Prospective Ground Water Monitoring
Study
45237401
RISIIM 1 (IIIMISTRY
860.1300
171-4A
Nature of Residue - Plants
00029049, 00077903, 00086923,
00086924, 00095972, 40982301,
41180801, 44237801, 44245201
860.1300
171-4B
Nature of Residue - Livestock
00096027,00127891, 4050884,
4050884,40508806, 40645401,
41382401, 44050201, 44071901
860.1340
171-4C
Residue Analytical Method - Plants
00029037,00029041, 00029043,
00029048,00046626, 00078882,
00079872,00081770, 00083534,
00086910, 00086912, 00086914,
00095984, 00095988, 00096004,
40508814, 440993011
2
-------
Data Supporting Guideline Requirements for the Reregistration of DCNA use on Field/Row
crops, Tree and Vine crops, Ornamentals, Conifers and Greenhouse Vegetables.
UI'.Ql IKI.MI.M
( 11 \ l lON(S)
X(.U 1340
171-4D
Residue Analytical Method - Animals
40785401, 41687401, 45492601
860.1360
171-4M
Multiresidue Method
43508901
860.1380
171-4E
Storage Stability Data - Plant
00082667, 00095978, 00095998,
43975401, 44258801, 45159801
860.1380
171-4E
Storage Stability Data - Animal
00086897,00087015, 00095934
00098563,41149701, 41852401
860.1480
171-4J
Magnitude of Residues in Meat, Milk, Poultry and
Eggs
00086897, 00087015, 00095934,
00098563
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Carrot)
44020701
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Potato)
00141160
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Onion)
40508817
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Celery)
00096021,00096035
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Rhubarb)
00029052
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Lettuce)
00029048,00086916, 00095970
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Beans, snap, succulent)
00096026
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Tomato)
00029046,00029055, 00046625
00046626, 00068494, 00078882
00082658,00086045, 00095971
00095992,00095995, 45265001
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Cucumber)
00096023
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Apricot)
00029043
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Cherry, Sweet)
00029043, 00082705
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Nectarine)
00081771,00096052, 00096801
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Peach)
0002904, 40508815, 43952102
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Plum)
00071489, 00086917, 00086962
00095963,00095973, 00095974
00096007,00096016, 00096019
00096024,40508816, 43933001
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Cotton, undelinted seed and gin
byproducts)
00061543,00092439, 00095964
00095997,00096022
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Grape)
00080893,00095963, 00095994
860.1500
171-4K
Crop Field Trails (Kiwifruit)
00046626, 00078881, 00078882
00096077,00140141, 00140142
860.1520
171-4L
Magnitude of Residue in Processed Food/Feed -
Grape
40508819,
43954601
860.1520
171-4L
Magnitude of Residue in Processed Food/Feed - Plum
43952104
860.1520
171-4L
Magnitude of Residue in Processed Food/Feed -
Potato
43928001
860.1520
171-4L
Magnitude of Residue in Processed Food/Feed -
Tomato
43952103
3
-------
Data Supporting Guideline Requirements for the Reregistration of DCNA use on Field/Row
crops, Tree and Vine crops, Ornamentals, Conifers and Greenhouse Vegetables.
UI'.Ql IKI.MI.M
( 11 \ l lON(S)
X(.U 1850
165-1
Confined Accumulation in Rotational Crops Study
44348201
860.1900
165-2
Field Accumulation in Rotational Crops Study
45159801
4
-------
Appendix C:
Technical Support Documents
Additional documentation in support of this RED is maintained in the OPP
docket, located in 2777 Crystal Drive (One Potomac Yard) Arlington, VA 22202. It is
open Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays, from 8:30 AM to 4:30 PM.
The docket initially contained preliminary human health and ecological effects
risk assessments and related documents that were published November 16, 2005. The
public comment period closed sixty (60) days later on January 16, 2006. The EPA then
considered comments and revised the risk assessments where appropriate. Final human
health, and ecological risk assessments, as well as additional support documents, will be
published in the docket with this RED. These documents include the following:
HED Documents:
- Dicloran: Revised Chapter of the Reregi strati on Eligibility Decision
Document (RED). (Toiya Goodlow, Byong-Han Chin, Christine L. Olinger,
Timothy Dole and Matthew G. Lloyd, 5/11/2006)
- Revised Occupational and Residential Exposure and Risk Assessment for the
Reregi strati on Eligibility Decision. (Matthew G. Lloyd and Timothy Dole,
06/13/2006)
- Dicloran (DCNA) Revised Acute and Chronic Dietary Exposure Assessment
for Reregi strati on Eligibility Decision (Christine L Olinger, 03/23/2006)
- Dicloran (DCNA). Residue Chemistry Considerations for the Reregi strati on
Eligibility Decision (RED) Document. Summary of Analytical Chemistry and
Residue Data (Christine L. Olinger, 08/09/2005)
EFED Documents:
- Revised Ecological Risk Assessment in Support of the Reregi strati on
Eligibility Decision on DCNA (Dicloran) (Cheryl A. Sutton and Christopher
J. Salice (02/07/2006)
DCNA (Dicloran): Revised Tier I Drinking Water EDWC's for Use in the
Human Health Risk Assessment (Cheryl A. Sutton, 01/24/2006)
5
-------
Appendix D.
Citations Considered to be Part of the Database Supporting the Reregistration
Eligibility Decision (Bibliography)
Open Literature
Books
Dean, J.A. (ed). Lange's Handbook of Chemistry. 13 ed. New York, NY: Mc Graw-Hill
Book Co., 1985.
Franke, C. etal. 1994. Chemosphere 29:1501-14.
Dicloran. Hazardous Substances Data Bank. 2004. http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov.
Kevric. 12/15/2000. Market Analysis of Postharvest Pesticide Use.
Fletcher, J.S., J.E. Nellessen, and T.G. Pfleeger. 1994 Literature review and evaluation
of the EPA food chain (Kenaga) nomogram, an instrument for estimating pesticide
residues on plants. Environ. Tox. Chem. 13:1383-1391
Hoerger, F., and E.E. Kenaga. 1972. Pesticide residues on plants: Correlation of
representative data as a basis for estimation of their magnitude in the environment. In F.
Coulston and F. Korte, eds., Environmental Quality and Safety: Chemistry, Toxicology,
and Technology, Georg Thieme Publ, Stuttgart, West Germany, pp. 9-28.
Keese, R.J., Camper, N.D., Whitwell, T. Riley, M.B. and Wilson, P.C., 1994. Herbicide
Runoff from Ornamental Container Nurseries. J. Environ. Qual. 23:320 - 324.
Mineau, P, B.T. Collins, and A. Baril, 1996. On the use of scaling factors to improve
interspecies extrapolation of acute toxicity in birds. Regulatory Toxicology and
Pharmacology. 24: 24- 29.
Nagy, K.A. 1987. Field metabolic rate and food requirement scaling in mammals and
birds. Ecological Monographs 57:111-128.
Willis, Guye H., and Lesle. L. Mc Dowell, 1987. Pesticide Persistence on Foliage. In
Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 100:23-73.
USEPA 1995. Great Lakes Water Quality Technical Support Document for Wildlife
Criteria. Washington DC Office of Water. Document Number EPA-820-B095-009
Beute, M. K., Porter, D.M., and Hadley, B.A. (1975). Sclerotinia Blight of Peanut Nut
North Carolina and Virginia and Its Chemical Control. PlantDis. Rep. 59:697-701
6
-------
Brenneman, T.B., Phipps, P.M., and Stipes, R.J. (1987). Control of Sclerotinia Blight of
Peanut: Sensitivity and Resistance of Sclerotinia minor to Vinclozolin, Iprodione,
Dicloran and PCNB. Plant Dis. 71: 87-90.
Burton, D.T. and Fisher, D.J. (1990). Acute Toxicity of Cadmium, Copper, Zinc,
Ammonia, 3,3'-Dichlorobenzidine, 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline, Methylene Chloride, and
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol to Juvenile Grass Shrimp and Killifish. Bull. Environ. Contam.
Toxicol. 44: 776-783.
Gallo, M.A., Bachmann, E., and Golberg, L. (1976). Mitochondrial Effects of 2,6-
Dichloro-4-Nitroaniline and Its Metabolites. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 35: 51-61.
Hutton, K.E. and Kable, P.F. (1970). Evaluation of Fungicides for Control of Peach
Brown Rot in New South Wales. Plant Dis. Rep. 54: 776-780.
Kim, D.G. and Riggs, R.D. (1998). Effects of Some Pesticides on the Growth of ARF18
and Its Pathogenicity to Heterodera glycines. J. Nematol. 30:201-205
7
-------
Bibliography
PC Code: 031301
MRID Citation Reference
3151
Mamadou, D. (1976) Evaluation of a Soil-Plate Screening Technique in Developing
Fungicidal Control for Southern Stem Rot of Pea- nuts. Master's thesis, North Carolina
State Univ., Dept. of Plant Pathology. (Unpublished study including abstract, received
Sep 13, 1976 under 400-129; submitted by Uniroyal Chemo- cal, Bethany, Conn.;
CDL225604-AA)
26810
Kakuk, T.J.; Weddon, T.W.; Thomas, R.W.; et al. (1979) Reevaluation of Potential
Hepatic Effects of Botran in Beagle Dogs-Supple- mental Report: Technical Report
No. 001-9610-79-005. (Unpublished study received Dec 19, 1979 under 1023-51;
prepared in cooperation with Woodward Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL241511-A)
29037
Boyack, G.A.; Boot, D.H. (1962) Specificity of the Kilgore Assay of 2,6-Dichloro-4-
nitroaniline (DCNA). (Unpublished study received Jun 1, 1963 under PP0375;
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kala- mazoo, Mich.; CDL090404-B)
29041
Kilgore, W.W.; Cheng, K.N.; Ogawa, J.M. (1961?) Extraction and De- termination of
2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline in Processed Fruits. (Unpublished study received Jun 1,
1963 under PP0375; prepared by Univ. of California-Davis, Dept. of Plant Pathology,
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL090404-H)
29043
Boyack, G.A.; Boot, D.H.; Grube, D. (1962) ?Residues of DCNA on Apricot, Peach,
Nectarine and Cherry|. (Unpublished study received Jun 1, 1963 under PP0375;
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kala- mazoo, Mich.; CDL090404-J)
29046
Boyack, G.A.; Boot, D.H. (1962) 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline (DCNA) on Tomato in
Treated Soil. (Unpublished study received Jun 1, 1963 under PP0375; submitted by
Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL090404-M)
29048
Boyack, G.A.; Boot, D.H. (1962) ?Residues from DCNA on Lettuce|. (Unpublished
study received Jun 1, 1963 under PP0375; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo,
Mich.; CDL090404-P)
29049
Lemin, A.J.; Moe, L.D.; Smith, G.H. (1963) The Metabolism of 2,6- Dichloro-4-
nitroaniline by Bibb Lettuce. (Unpublished study received Jun 1, 1963 under PP0375;
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kala- mazoo, Mich.; CDL090404-Q)
29052
Boyack, G.A.; Boot, D.H. (1962) 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline (DCNA) on Treated
Rhubarb. (Unpublished study received Jun 1, 1963 under PP0375; submitted by
Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL: 090404-U)
29055
Boyack, G.A.; Boot, D.H. (1962) Assay for 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroani- line on Treated
Tomato Grown in the Greenhouse and Outdoors. (Unpublished study received Jun 1,
1963 under PP0375; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL090404-X)
29056
Woodard, G.; Cronin, M.T.I. (1962) U-2069: Interim Report (13 Weeks): Safety
Evaluation by Oral Administration to Rats and Dogs for 104 Weeks. (Unpublished
study received Jun 1, 1963 under PP0375; prepared by Woodard Research Corp.,
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL090404-Z)
32482
Pennwalt Corporation (1961) ?ldentity~Decco Salt No. 22; Physical and Chemical
Properties~Botran|. (Unpublished study received Apr 23, 1980 under 4581-341;
prepared in cooperation with Upjohn Co.; CDL242341-A)
8
-------
32483
Anon. (19??) Names:~Dicloran~?, Botran, Allisan, DCNA, Ditranil, CNA, Resisan.
Pages 94-95In~AgricuItural Chemicals: Book IV. By ? Thomson. N.P.
(Also~ln~unpublished submission received Apr 23, 1980 under 4581-341; submitted
by Pennwalt Corp., Agchem Div., King of Prussia, Pa.; CDL242341-B)
32484
Latven, A.R. (1974) Tops in Botran Mixture (24.41% Methyl thiophan- ate + 48.82%
DCNA): A Fine Yellow Powder. (Unpublished study received Apr 23, 1980 under
4581-341; prepared by Pharmacology Research, Inc., submitted by Pennwalt Corp.,
Agchem Div., King of Prussia, Pa.; CDL242341-C)
32485
Pennwalt Corporation (19??) Residues. (Unpublished study received Apr 23, 1980
under 4581-341; CDL242341-D)
32486
Pennwalt Corporation (19??) Analytical Method for Residues of DCNA (2,6-Dichloro-4-
nitroaniline). (Unpublished study received Apr 23, 1980 under 4581-341; CDL242341-
E)
32488
Pennwalt Corporation (1971) Stability Studies on Decco Salt No. 22. (Unpublished
study received Apr 23, 1980 under 4581-341; CDL: 242341-G)
32489
Pennwalt Corporation (19??) Method for the Determination of DCNA and TM in
Mixtures of Wettable Powders. (Unpublished study received Apr 23, 1980 under 4581-
341; CDL242341-H)
32490
Martin, F., Jr. (1974) Summary of Efficacy Data. (Unpublished study received Apr 23,
1980 under 4581-341; submitted by Penn- wait Corp., Agchem Div., King of Prussia,
Pa.; CDL242341-I)
36935
Atkins, E.L.; Greywood, E.A.; Macdonald, R.L. (1975) Toxicity of Pesticides and Other
Agricultural Chemicals to Honey Bees: Laboratory Studies. By University of California,
Dept. of Entomology. ?: UC, Cooperative Extension. (Leaflet 2287; published study.)
46435
Shirasu, Y.; Moriya, M.; Kato, K.; et al. (1976) Mutagenicity screening of pesticides in
the microbial system. Mutation Re- search 40(? ):19-30. (Also in unpublished
submission received May 28, 1980 under 1023-57; submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL242524-A)
46436
Everest, R.P.; Tuplin, J.A. (1977) Dicloran, Pure Reference Sample: Mutagenicity
Testing in Bacterial~in~vitro~Systems. (Unpublished study received May 28, 1980
under 1023-57; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:242524-B)
46625
Upjohn Company (1977) Analytical Procedure for DCNA (Botran) and Tomatoes.
(Unpublished study received Sep 16, 1980 under 1023- 36; CDL:099631-B)
46626
Ewing, C. (1979) Botran (DCNA) Residue on Kiwi or Tomatoes. Method dated Jul 10,
1979. (Unpublished study received Sep 16, 1980 under 1023-36; prepared by
Pennwalt Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:099631-C)
61543
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Residues of Botran on Cotton|. (Compilation; unpublished
study received Jun 17, 1976 under 1023-19; CDL:225966-D)
64581
Bottoms, J. (1980) Oral Toxicity: Laboratory No. 16557. (Unpublished study received
Nov 24, 1980 under 4581-341; prepared by Applied Biological Sciences Laboratory,
Inc., submitted by Pennwalt Corp., Philadelphia, Pa.; CDL:243798-A)
65859
Helling, C.S.; Dennison, D.G.; Kaufman, D.D. (1974) Fungicide movement in soils.
Phytopathology 64(8):1091-1100. (duplicate of MRID 5001190)
68494
Chastagner, G.A.; Ogawa, J.M.; Manji, B.T. (1966) Postharvest ?~Botrytis
9
-------
71489
77903
78881
78882
79872
80893
81770
81771
82658
82667
82668
82705
82718
cinerea~Decay Control on Fresh Market Tomatoes with DCNA-wax treatments.
(Unpublished study received Jun 21, 1977 under unknown admin, no.; prepared by
Univ. of California- Davis, Dept. of Plant Pathology, submitted by Upjohn Co., Kala-
mazoo, Mich.; CDL230776-A)
Johnson, R.J. (1980) Letter sent to B. Dave dated Dec 4, 1980: 1980 Thiophanate-
methyl (TM) and DCNA residue data on stone fruits. (Unpublished study received Dec
10, 1980 under 4581- 341; submitted by Pennwalt Corp., Philadelphia, Pa.; CDL:
244200-A)
Moe, L.D.; Lemin, A.J. (1963) The Metabolism of 2,6-Dichloro-4- nitroaniline by Bibb
Lettuce, Paper II. (Unpublished study received Nov 8, 1965 under unknown admin,
no.; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:109751-Z)
Dave, B.; Heggen, B. (1979) 1979 Residue Tests on Kiwi Fruits. (Unpublished study
received May 23, 1980 under 0F2368; submitted by Decco Tilbert, Monrovia, Calif.;
CDL099445-C)
Ewing, C. (1979) Botran (DCNA) Residue on Kiwi or Tomatoes. Method dated Jul 10,
1979. (Unpublished study received May 23, 1980 under 0F2368; submitted by Decco
Tilbert, Monrovia, Calif.; CDL: 099445-D)
Staten, F.W.; Wright, W.M. (1964) Colorimetric Analysis for 2,6- Dichloro-4-nitroaniline
Residue in Plant Tissues. (Unpublished study received Apr 30, 1969 under 1023-EX-
26; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:126549-D)
Upjohn Company (1965) ?DCNA Residues~Grapes|. (Compilation; unpublished study
received on unknown date under 5F0434; CDL: 090471-D)
Wright, W.M. (1968) Letter sent to A.W. Neff dated Mar 22, 1968: Modification of
method for Botran determination on waxed nectarines: 211-9760-13. (Unpublished
study received Feb 17, 1970 under 0F0973; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo,
Mich.; CDL: 091675-E)
Upjohn Company (1970) Residue Determination for DCNA on Nectarines.
(Compilation; unpublished study, including report nos. 211-9760- 14,211-9760-15,
211-9760-16..., received Feb 17, 1970 under 0F0973; CDL091675-F)
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Botran Residues~Tomatoes|. (Unpublished study received
Mar 29, 1965 under 5F0434; CDL090471-K)
Upjohn Company (1964) Stability of 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline (DCNA) in Frozen
Macerated Plant Tissues. (Unpublished study received Mar 29, 1965 under 5F0434;
CDL090471-T)
Upjohn Company (1964) Persistence of 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline (DCNA) in Soil
(Michigan, 1964). (Unpublished study received Mar 29, 1965 under 5F0434;
CDL090471-U)
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Residue Study of DCNA on Peach, Cherry and Various
Other Crops|. (Compilation; unpublished study received on unknown date under
5F0434; CDL097519-A)
Woodard, M.W.; Cockrell, K.O.; Woodard, G. (1964) U-2069: Safety Evaluation by
Oral Administration to Rats and Dogs for 104 Weeks. Final rept. (Unpublished study,
including letter dated Feb 3, 1964 from G. Woodard to R.L. Johnston, received 1964
under 5F0434; prepared by Woodard Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:097520-A)
10
-------
82719
82721
83534
86045
86879
86892
86893
86894
86896
86897
86910
86912
Evans, J.S.; Mengel, G.D.; Bostwick, L. (1963) Letter sent to W.M. Klomparens dated
Dec 23, 1963: Botran (U-2069): Effect of oral administration final report, four month's
study. (Unpublished study received 1964 under 5F0434; submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL097520-B)
Johnston, R.L.; Schwikert, R.S. (1963) Letter sent to E.S. Feenstra dated Feb 21,
1963: U-2069: 2,6-dichloro-4-nitro aniline, or Botran: Skin sensitization in guinea pigs:
Ref. 5567-64-RLJ- 106B. (Unpublished study received 1964 under 5F0434; submitted
by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:097520-D)
Roburn, J. (1959) Determination of Microgram Quantities of 2:6- Dichloro-4-
nitroaniline: Report No. 218D. (Unpublished study received Jun 21, 1961 under
PP0323; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:092604-I)
Chastagner, G.A.; Ogawa, J.M.; Manji, R.T. (1976) Postharvest ?~Botrytis
cinerea~Decay Control on Fresh Market Tomatoes with DCNA-wax Treatments.
(Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-EX-44; prepared by Univ. of
California-Davis, Dept. of Plant Pathology, submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo,
Mich.; CDL246339-A)
Wesley, M.M.; Weddon, T.E.; Kakuk, T.J. (1980) Toxicologic Profile of Botran (2,6-
Dichloro-4-nitroaniline) in Animals and Man: Technical Report No. 218-9610-80-005.
(Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:070501-C)
Raczniak, T.J.; Wood, D.R. (1980) Primary Eye Irritation Evaluation in New Zealand
White Rabbits with Botran Technical (U-2069): Technical Report No. 218-9610-80-
001. (Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by Upjohn
Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:070501-S)
Raczniak, T.J.; Wood, D.R. (1980) Primary Dermal Irritation Study in New Zealand
White Rabbits with Botran Technical (U-2069): Technical Report No. 218-9610-80-
002. (Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by Upjohn
Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:070501-T)
Raczniak, T.J.; Wood, D.R. (1980) Acute Dermal Toxicity Screen in New Zealand
White Rabbits with Botran Technical (U-2069): Technical Report No. 218-9610-80-
003. (Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by Upjohn
Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:070501-U)
Seaman, W.J.; Weddon, T.E.; Kakuk, T.J. (1980) Three-week Inhalation Study in
Rats, Rabbits and Dogs with BotranA(R) I: Technical Report No. 218-9610-80-004.
(Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:070501-Y)
Banerjee, B.N.; Imming, R.; Woodard, M.W.; et al. (1968) Botran: Safety Evaluation by
a Preliminary Dosage Range-finding Study in Dairy Cows for Five Days. (Unpublished
study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; prepared by Woodard Research Corp.,
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:070501-Z)
Roburn, J. (1961) Colorimetric determination of 2,6-dichloro-4- nitroaniline in plants
and soil. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 12(Nov):766-772.
(Also~ln~unpublished submission received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by
Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:070503-G)
Kilgore, W.W.; Cheng, K.W.; Ogawa, J.M. (1962) Extraction and de- termination of 26-
dichloro-4-nitroaniline in processed fruits. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
10(5):399-401. (Also ?~ln~unpublished submission received Nov 17, 1981 under
11
-------
1023-36; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070503-I)
86914
Staten, F.W.; Wright, W.M. (1964) Colorimetric Analysis for 2,6- Dichloro-4-nitroaniline
Residue in Plant Tissues. (Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36;
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070503-K)
86916
Upjohn Company (1964) ?Residue of 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline- Lettuce|.
(Compilation; unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; CDL070503-
M)
86917
Upjohn Company (1965) ?2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline Residue- Various Fruits|.
(Compilation; unpublished study, including ref. 6986 JHS 39, ref. 6986 JHS 55, 56, ref.
6986 JHS 41-44..., received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; CDL070503-N)
86923
Lemin, A.J. (1965) Translocation and metabolism of 2,6-Dichloro- 4-nitroaniline by
lettuce and tomato. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 13(6):557-560. (Also in
unpublished sub- mission received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by Upjohn
Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070503-T)
86924
Groves, K.; Chough, K.S. (1970) Fate of the fungicide, 2,6-di- chloro-4-nitroaniline
(DCNA) in Plants and Soils. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 18(6):1127-
1128. (Also~ln~ unpublished submission received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36;
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070503-U)
86931
Knott, W.; Scott, W.J. (1968) Comparison of enide (N,N-dimethyl- 2,2-
diphenylacetamide) and botran (2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline) with DDT with respect to
toxicity to fish and wildlife. Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 12:286.
(Also~ln~unpublished submission received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by
Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070503-AB)
86942
Van Alfen, N.K.; Kosuge, T. (1976) Metabolism of the Fungicide 2, 6-dichloro-4-
nitroaniline in soil. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 24:584-588. (Also in
unpublished submission received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; submitted by Upjohn
Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070503-AW)
86953
Dunn, G.H.; Jaglan, P.S. (1978) Residue Method for Botran (U-2069) ?2,6-Dichloro-4-
nitroaniline| in Peanut, Peanut Hay, and Soil: Report Code No. 217-78-9760-002.
Method dated Aug 15, 1978. (Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1978 under 1023-
36; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070498-F)
86955
Upjohn Company (1978) ?DCNA Residues in Soil from Peanut Fields|. (Compilation;
unpublished study, including reports nos. 217- 9760-8, 217-9760-9, 217-9760-10, ...,
received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; CDL070499-B)
86962
Upjohn Company (1969) DCNA Residues in Or on Plums Resulting from BotranA(R)l
75W Applications. (Compilation; unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under
1023-36; CDL070499-I)
87015
Imming, R.J.; Banerjee, B.N.; Woodard, M.W.; et al. (1968) Botran: Tissue Residues
and Safety Evaluation in Calves Fed This Material in the Diet for 28 to 30 Days.
(Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; prepared by Woodard
Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070502-K)
87018
Everest, R.P.; Tuplin, J.A. (1977?) Dicloran, Pure Reference Sample: Mutagenicity
Testing in Bacterial in vitro~Systems: TX77024. (Unpublished study received Nov 17,
1981 under 1023- 36; prepared by Boots Pure Drug Co., Ltd., England, submitted by
Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070502-0)
12
-------
87027
Beliles, R.P.; Scott, W.; Knott, W.; et al. (1965) Botran: Subacute Toxicity in Mallard
Ducks. (Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; prepared by
Woodard Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070502-
AD)
87028
Beliles, R.P.; Scott, W.; Knott, W.; et al. (1965) Botran: Acute Toxicity in Rainbow
Trout. (Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; prepared by
Woodard Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070502-
AE)
87029
Beliles, R.P.; Scott, W.; Knott, W.; et al. (1965) Botran: Acute Toxicity in Goldfish.
(Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; prepared by Woodard
Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070502-AF)
87030
Beliles, R.P.; Scott, W.; Knott, W.; et al. (1965) Botran: Acute Toxicity in Sunfish.
(Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; prepared by Woodard
Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070502-AG)
87031
Beliles, R.P.; Scott, W.; Knott, W.; et al. (1965) Botran: Effect on Shell Growth of
Oysters. (Unpublished study received Nov 17, 1981 under 1023-36; prepared by
Woodard Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070502-
AH)
87032
Beliles, R.P.; Scott, W.; Knott, W.; et al. (1965) Botran: Summary of Safety Evaluation
on Fish and Wldlife. Summary of studies 070502-Q and 070502-AD through 070502-
AH. (Unpublished study, including submitter summary, received Nov 17, 1981 under
1023- 36; prepared by Woodard Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL070502-AI)
92439
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Analysis of Cottonseed for 2,6-Dichloro-4- nitroaniline
(DCNA) Residue|. Includes methods dated Dec 7, 1964 and Dec 2, 1964.
(Compilation; unpublished study received Jan 30, 1966 under 6F0490; CDL090558-
A)
95934
Bannerjee, B.N.; Imming, R.; Woodard, M.W.; et al. (1968) Botran: Safety Evaluation
by a Preliminary Dosage Range-finding Study in Dairy Cows for Five Days.
(Unpublished study received Feb 26, 1969 under 1023-18; prepared by Woodard
Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL005456-A)
95963
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Residues of Botran in Plums and Grapes|. (Compilation;
unpublished study, including ref. 7615WMW42, 45, 47, FWS, BLC, ref. 7615WMW41
and ref. 7615WMW40, received May 24, 1965 under 5F0434; CDL092722-D)
95964
Upjohn Company (1966) ?Residues of DCNA on Cotton Seed and Lint|. (Compilation;
unpublished study received May 6, 1966 under 6F0490; CDL092779-A)
95970
Boyack, G.A.; Boot, D.H. (1962) DCNA on Dusted Greenhouse Leaf Lettuce: W.C.H.
Experiment No. 2. (Unpublished study received Jan 11, 1963 under PP0375;
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:095057-D)
95971
Boyack, G.A.; Boot, D.H. (1962) 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline (DCNA) on Tomato in
Treated Soil. (Unpublished study received Jan 11, 1963 under PP0375; submitted by
Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:095057-E)
95972
Lemin, A.J.; Moe, L.D.; Smith, G.H. (1963) The Metabolism of 2,6- dichloro-4-
nitroaniline by Bibb Lettuce. (Unpublished study received Jan 11, 1963 under PP0375;
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:095057-F)
13
-------
95973
Upjohn Company (1970) ?Botran: Residues in Fruit|. Includes method dated Dec 7,
1964. (Compilation; unpublished study received Apr 17, 1970 under 0F0973;
CDL091674-A)
95974
Ogawa, J.M.; Clason, G.W.; Kilgore, W.W.; et al. (1966) Post- harvest Decay Control
of Fresh Market Peaches, Nectarines, and Plums with Botran and Other Fungicides-
1965. (Unpublished study received Apr 17, 1970 under 0F0973; submitted by Upjohn
Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL091674-B)
95978
Boyack, G.A. (1963) Stability of 2,6-dichloro-4-nitroaniline (DCNA) in Macerated
Frozen Bing Cherry. (Unpublished study, including letter dated Mar 26, 1963 from G.A.
Boyack to William Stokes, received on unknown date under PP0375; submitted by
Upjohn Co.; Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL092658-A)
95984
Kubiak, E.J. (1966) Letter sent to A.J. Taraszka dated Jan 11, 1966: Gas
chromatographic analyses of 2,6-dichloro-4-nitro- aniline and related compounds.
(Unpublished study received Apr 13, 1970 under 0F0973; submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL093283-B)
95988
Kilgore, W.W.; Cheng, K.W.; Ogawa, J.M. (1961) Extraction and Determination of 2,6-
Dichloro-4-nitroaniline in Processed Fruits. (Unpublished study received 1961 under
5F0434; prepared by Univ. of California-Davis, Dept. of Plant Pathology and Pesticide
Residue Research, submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL098114-B)
95992
Upjohn Company (1962) ?Residues of DCNA in Tomatoes|. (Compilation; unpublished
study received on unknown date under 5F0434; CDL098114-H)
95994
Upjohn Company (1964)? Residues of DCNA in Grapes and Strawberries|.
(Compilation; unpublished study received on unknown date under 5F0434;
CDL098115-B)
95995
Upjohn Company (1964) ?Residues of DCNA in Tomatoes|. (Compilation; unpublished
study received on unknown date under 5F0434; CDL098115-C)
95997
Upjohn Company (1964) ?Residues of DCNA in Cotton Seed|. (Compilation;
unpublished study received on unknown date under 5F0434; CDL098115-E)
95998
Upjohn Company (1964) 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline (DCNA) in Frozen Macerated
Produce. (Unpublished study received on unknown date under 5F0434; CDL098115-
F)
95999
Upjohn Company (1964) Persistence of 2,6-Dichloro-4-nitroaniline (DCNA) in Soil
(Michigan, 1964). (Unpublished study received on unknown date under 5F0434;
CDL098115-N)
96004
Wright, W.M. (1968) Letter sent to A.W. Neff dated Mar 22, 1968: Modification of
method for Botran determination on waxed nectarines: 211-9760-13. (Unpublished
study received on unknown date under 3F1365; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo,
Mich.; CDL093646-D)
96007
Upjohn Company (19??) Summary of DCNA Residues in or on Plums Resulting from
Postharvest Application of Botran 75Win Wax Preparations. (Unpublished study
received Mar 8, 1973 under 3E1365; CDL:093645-B)
96016
Upjohn Company (1966) ?Determination of Residues of Botran and Other Fungicides
on Fruits|. (Compilation; unpublished study, including ref. 7401RRL6, 8, received Feb
9, 1966 under 6F0474; CDL092764-G)
96019
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Analyses for DCNA Residues in Fruits|. (Compilation;
14
-------
unpublished study, including ref. 761SWMW122, 761SWMW119,127,
761SWMW118..., received Jan 6, 1966 under 6F0474; CDL090528-B)
96021
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Analyses of Celery and Spinach for DCNA Residues|.
(Compilation; unpublished study, including ref. 7615WMW106, 7615WMW14,
7615WMW128..., received Jan 6, 1966 under 6F0474; CDL090528-D)
96022
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Residue Determination for DCNA on Cotton- seed|.
Includes method dated Dec 7, 1964. (Compilation; un- published study, including ref.
7601WMW135, 7301WMW135, 7301WMW137..., received Jan 6, 1966 under
6F0474; CDL090528-E)
96023
Upjohn Company (1966)? Residue Determination for DCNA and Diphenamid on
Cucumbers|. (Compilation; unpublished study, including ref. 7615-WMW-39,
7615WMW15, 7615WMW44..., received on unknown date under 6F0474;
CDL090528-F)
96024
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Residue Determination for DCNA on Peaches, Plums and
Prunes|. (Compilation; unpublished study, including ref. 7301WMW116,
7301WMW121,123, 7301WMW95..., received Jan 6, 1966 under6F0474;
CDL090528-G)
96026
Upjohn Company (1965) ?Analyses for DCNA Residues in Beans|. (Compilation;
unpublished study, including ref. 7615WMW92,102, 7301WMW71,
7301WMW101,102,103..., received Jan 6, 1966 under 6F0474; CDL090528-I)
96027
Eberts, F.S.; Meeks, R.C.; Vliek, R.W. (1963) Letter sent to A.A. Forist dated Oct 14,
1963: Monthly summary report, July-August, 1963: (Botran metabolism (rat)).
(Unpublished study received Feb 7, 1963 under 7F0558; submitted by Upjohn Co.,
Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL098676-B)
96035
Upjohn Company (1966) ?Residue Studies of DCNA on Celery|. (Compilation;
Unpublished study, including analyst references 8073- WMW-16 and 7615WMW106,
received Aug 16, 1966 under 1023-39; CDL101573-A)
96052
Upjohn Company (1968) ?DCNA Residues in Nectarines|. (Compilation; unpublished
study, including report nos. 211-9760-13, 211-9760-14, 211-9760-15,..., received Mar
29, 1968 under 1023-EX-23; CDL126545-C)
96058
Pitcher, F.A.; McCann, J.A. (1974)? Botran Technical: Bluegill (L macrochirus)|: Test
No. 742. (U.S. Agricultural Re- search Service, Chemical & Biological Investigations
Branch, Technical Services Div., Animal Biology Laboratory; unpublished study;
CDL127912-A)
96061
Beliles, R.P.; Scott, W.; Knott, W.; et al. (1965) Botran Safety Evaluation on Fish and
Wildlife: (Bobwhite Quail, Mallard Ducks, Rainbow Trout, Goldfish, Sunfish, Oysters).
(Unpublished study received Aug 5, 1965 under 1023-18; prepared by Woodard
Research Corp., submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL:131798-A)
96062
McCann, J.A. (1971)? Botran 50W: Bluegill (Lepomis macro~chirus)|: Test No. 330.
(U.S. Agricultural Research Service, Pesticides Regulation Div., Animal Biology
Laboratory; un- published study; CDL:130652-A)
96063
McCann, J.A. (1971) Botran 50W: Rainbow Trout (Salmo gaird~nairi): Test No. 338.
(U.S. Agricultural Research Service, Pesticides Regulation Div., Animal Biology
Laboratory; unpublished study; CDL:130652-B)
96064
Pitcher, F.G.; McCann, J.A. (1974) ?Botran Technical: Rainbow Trout|. (U.S.
15
-------
Environmental Protection Agency, Chemical & Bio- logical Investigations Branch,
Technical Services Div., Animal Biology Laboratory; unpublished study; CDL165061-
A)
96077
Pennwalt Corporation (1979) ?Residue Tests on Kiwi Fruits|. Includes methods dated
Mar 13, 1979; May 10, 1978; May 9, 1978; and others. (Compilation, unpublished
study received May 16, 1979 under 4581-EX-33; CDL238537-A)
96801
Bowers, R.C. (1969) Residue Determination for DCNA on Nectarines (California,
1968): Report No. 912-9760-31. (Unpublished study received on unknown date under
1023-EX-23; submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL126545-A)
98563
Banerjee, B.N.; Imming, R.; Woodard, M.W.; et al. (1968) Botran Safety Evaluation by
a Preliminary Dosage Range-finding Study in Dairy Cows for Five Days. (Unpublished
study received Apr 15, 1982 under 1023-36; prepared by Woodard Research Corp.,
submitted by Upjohn Co., Kalamazoo, Mich.; CDL247253-A)
114179
Wang, C.; Broadbent, F. (1973) Effect of Soil Treatments on Losses of Two
Chloronitrobenzene Fungicides. J. Environ. Quality 2(4): 511-515. (Submitter 3370;
also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258-517; submitted by
Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL248281-M)
114180
Wang, C.; Broadbent, F. (1972) Kinetics of losses of PCNB and DCNA in three
California soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 36(5):742-745.
(Submitter 3370; also In unpublished submission received Sep 7, 1982 under 1258-
517; submitted by Olin Corp., Stamford, CT; CDL:248281-N)
127891
Upjohn Co. (1983) Botran 75W Fungicide: Peanuts: Book IV: Residue Chemistry.
(Compilation; unpublished study received Apr 21, 1983 under 1023-36; CDL:071568-
A)
128155
Upjohn Co. (1982) ?DCNA Residues in Soil: Botran 75W Fungicide|. (Compilation;
unpublished study received Apr 21, 1983 under 1023-36; CDL:071566-E)
140141
Interregional Research Project No. 4 (1979) The Results of Tests on the Amount of
DCNA Residues Remaining in or on Kiwifruit Including a Description of the Analytical
Method Used. (Compilation; unpublished study received Sep 14, 1979 under 9E2268;
CDL: 098991-A)
140142
Interregional Research Project No. 4 (1979) The Results of Tests on the Amount of
OPP Residues Remaining in or on Kiwifruit Including a Description of the Analytical
Method Used. (Compilation; unpublished study received Sep 14, 1979 under 9E2269;
CDL: 098992-A)
141160
Upjohn Co. (1983) DCNA Residues in or on Potatoes Resulting from Botran 75 W
Applications. Unpublished compilation. 195 p.
144957
Jaglon, P.; Arnold, T. (1983) Hydrolysis Study of (Carbon Radiola- belled)-dichloran in
Aqueous Buffered Solutions at 25 degrees Celsius: Technical Report No. 218-9760-
83-002. Unpublished study prepared by Upjohn Co. 15 p.
5001190
Helling, C.S.; Dennison, D.G.; Kaufman, D.D. (1974) Fungicide movement in soils.
Phytopathology 64(8): 1091 -1100.
40508801
Jones, E.; Fenner, L. (1987) T103 Technical Dicloran: Ames Bacterial Mutagenicity
Test: Project ID: TOX/87/199-85. Unpublished study prepared by Schering
Agrochemicals Ltd. 20 p.
40508802
Allen, J. (1988) T105 Technical Dicloran: Metaphase Chromosome Analysis of Human
16
-------
Lymphocytes Cultured in vitro: Project ID: TOX 87/199-188. Unpublished study
prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre. 23 p.
40508804
Jaglan, P.; Arnold, T.; Gosline, R. (1985) M33 Comparative Metabol- ism of (Carbon
14)|-Dichloran ... in Rats and Goats: Project ID: 218-9760-85-001. Unpublished study
prepared by Upjohn Co. 72 p .
40508805
Jaglan, P.; Arnold, T. (1985) M34 Comparative Metabolism of ?Carbon 14|- Dicloran
(...) in Goats and Rats. Nature of Liver Residues: Project ID: 218-9760-85-002.
Unpublished study pre- pared by Upjohn Co. 10 p.
40508806
Jaglan, P.; Arnold, T. (1985) M35 Nature of Muscle Residue from the Treatment of A
Goat with ?Carbon|-Dicloran (2,6-Dichloror-4-nit- oaniline): Project ID: 218-9760-85-
005. Unpublished study pre- pared by Upjohn Co. 9 p.
40508808
Hill, R. (1986) W35 Dicloran: Determination of the Accumulation and Elimination of
?Carbon 14|-Dicloran in Bluegill Sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus): Project No.
METAB/86/40. Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals Ltd. 31 p.
40508809
Brehm, M. (1987) W40 Dicloran-The Photolysis of Dicloran (...) in Aqueous Solution:
Project ID: APC 43/87. Unpublished study pre- pared by Schering AG. 51 p.
40508810
Brehm, M. (1987) W38 Dicloran: The Photodegradation of Dicloran (...) on Soil
Surfaces: Project ID: APC 32/87. Unpublished study prepared by Schering AG. 45 p.
40508811
Roberts, N. (1987) W39 Technical Dicloran: Subacute Dietary Toxicity to the Mallard
Duck: Project ID: TOX 87/199-86. Unpublished study prepared by Huntingdon
Research Centre. 41 p.
40508812
Roberts, N.; Phillips, C.; Hakin, B. (1987) W36 Technical Dicloran: Subacute Dietary
Toxicity to the Bobwhite Quail: Project ID: Tox 87/199-87. Unpublished study prepared
by Huntingdon Research Centre. 40 p.
40508814
Bardalaye, P. (1988) R413 Dicloran: Analytical Method for the De- termination of
Residues of Dicloran in Potato Dice, Potato Chips Potato Flesh and Vegetable Oil
Used for Potato Processing: Project ID: 66008. Unpublished study prepared by NOR-
AM Chemical Co. 26 p.
40508815
Bardalaye, P. (1988) R414 Dicloran Residues in Peaches Following Combined Pre-
harvest and Post-harvest Treatment at Maximum Use Rates: Project ID: 66004.
Unpublished study prepared by Nor-Am Co. 23 p.
40508816
Bardalaye, P. (1988) R415 Dicloran Residues in Plums Following Combined Pre-
harvest and Post-harvest Treatment at Maximum Use Rates: Project ID: 66005.
Unpublished study prepared by Nor-Am Co. 27 p.
40508817
Bardalaye, P. (1988) R416 Dicloran Residues in Onions Treated at Maximum Use
Rates: Project ID: 66003. Unpublished study prepared by Nor-Am Co. 29 p.
40508819
Brown, R. (1987) R404-Dicloran: Residue of Dicloran in Grapes and in Juice, Wet
Pomace, Unprocessed Raisins and Raisin Waste Following Processing of Botran
Treated Grapes: Project ID: 66007. Unpublished study prepared by Nor-Am Chemical
Co. 33 p.
40538201
Fortsch, A. (1988) W41 Dicloran: Mobility of Dicloran in Four Soils: Project ID: UPSR
8/88. Unpublished study prepared by Schering AG. 32 p.
40538202
Bruhl, R. (1988) W42 Dicloran: Adsorption to and Desorption from Soil: Project ID:
UPSR/12/88. Unpublished study prepared by Schering AG. 52 p.
17
-------
40555101
Elliot, P.; Smith, C. (1988) T106 Technical Dicloran: Twenty-one Day Dermal Toxicity
Study in Rabbits: Rept. No. SMS/60/871292; TOX 86095. Unpublished study prepared
by Huntingdon Research Centre. 102 p.
40583101
Bardalaye, P.; Kelly, I. (1988) Dissipation of Dicloran in Soil following Maximum Use
Rates in the USA: Proj. No. 66006. Unpublished study prepared by NOR-AM
Chemical Co. 118 p.
40583102
Hill, R.; Moffat, A.; Comber, M. (1988) W43 Dicloran Technical: De- termination of
Acute Toxicity to Daphnia magna: Rept. No. BL/B/ 3242. Unpublished study prepared
by Imperial Chemical Industries, Ltd., Brixham Laboratory. 25 p.
40583103
Roberts, N.; Phillips, C.; Hakin, B.; et al. (1988) W44 Technical Dicloran: Acute Oral
Toxicity to the Mallard Duck: HRC Rept. No. SMS 48/88147. Unpublished study
prepared by Huntingdon Research Centre. 26 p.
40619001
Jackson, C. (1988) T108 Technical Dicloran: Assessment of Unscheduled DNA
Synthesis Using Rat Hepatocyte Cultures: Laboratory Project ID TOX 87224.
Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals Ltd. 107 p.
40645401
Needham, D. (1988) M43 Dicloran: Metabolism & Residues of Dicloran in the Laying
Hen: Project ID: Envir/88/26. Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals
Limited. 32 p.
40785401
Bright, J.; Ditchman, A. (1988) R418 Dicloran: Analytical Method for Residues of
Dicloran in Animal Tissues, Eggs and Milk by Gas Liquid Chromatography: Project ID:
RESID/88/37. Unpublished study prepared by Nor-Am Chemical Co. 33p.
40863001
Arnold, D.; Barrett, K. (1988) W47 Dichloran: The Mobility of ?Carbon 14|-Dicloran
'Aged' in Sand and Sandy Loam Soils: Laboratory Project ID ENVIR/88/27.
Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals Ltd. 35 p.
40894801
Arnold, D.; Allen, R. (1988) W48 Dicloran: The Degradation of ?Car- bon 14|-Dicloran
in Sand and Loam Soils under Aerobic and Flood- ed Conditions: Laboratory Project
ID: ENVIR/88/36. Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals Limited. 58
P-
40977101
Mallyon, B.; Markham, L. (1989) T104 Technical Dicloran: Oncogenicity Study in the
Mouse (Final Report): Proj. ID Tox/86006. Unpublished study prepared by Schering
Agrochemicals Limited. 1117 p.
40982301
Hawkins, D.; Kirkpatrick, D.; Shaw, D. (1988) M42 Dicloran: The Metabolism of
?Carbon 14|-Dicloran in Peaches: Analysis of Samples: Laboratory Project ID
ENVIR/7U. Unpublished study pre- pared by Schering Agrochemicals Ltd. 67 p.
41149701
Bright, J. (1989) R436 Dicloran: Stability of Dicloran Residues in Animal Tissues and
Eggs During Deep Freeze Storage: Project ID: RESID/89/32. Unpublished study
prepared by Schering Agrochemicals Ltd. 27 p.
41176202
Bright, A. (1987) C64-Dicloran: Determination of the Partition Coefficient of Dicloran
Between N-Octanol and Water at 25 (degree)C: Project ID No. CHEM/86/91.
Unpublished study pre- pared by Schering Agrochemicals Ltd. 22 p.
41180801
Smith, S. (1989) M46 Dicloran: Metabolism of ?Carbon 14|-Dicloran in Peaches under
Field and Glasshouse Conditions: Laboratory Project ID: ENVIR/89/12: Study No. 7U.
Unpublished study pre- pared by Schering Agrochemicals Limited. 83 p.
41382401
Dawson, J. (1990) M47 Dicloran: The Residues of Dicloran in the Edible Tissues of
Pig Following Oral Administration of Dicloran for Three Days at Approximately The
18
-------
Theoretical Maximum Daily Intake (25mg/day-1): Study No. 10U, TOX 89362: Report
No. TOX/ 89/199-92. Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals Ltd. 120
P-
41687401
Godfrey, T.; Peatman, M.; Snowdon, P. (1990) R447 Dicloran: Analytical Method for
the Determination of Residues of Dicloran and Metabolites in Poultry Tissues by Gas
Chromatography: Lab Project Number: RESID/90/127. Unpublished study prepared by
Schering Agrochemicals Ltd. 64 p.
41852401
Peatman, M.; Snowdon, P. (1991) Dicloran R448: Stability of Dicloran and Metabolites
in Poultry Tissues and Eggs During Deep Freeze Storage: Lab Project Number:
RESID/90/143: 083/02/002. Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals
Ltd. 43 p.
43115501
Bright, J. (1987) W36A Dicloran: Determination of Dicloran Dietary Concentrations for
an LC50 Dietary Study in the Bobwhite Quail: Lab Project Number: RESID/87/87.
Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals Limited. 14 p.
43115502
Bright, J. (1987) W37A Dicloran: Determination of Dicloran Dietary Concentrations for
an LC50 Dietary Study in the Mallard Duck: Lab Project Number: RESID/87/86.
Unpublished study prepared by Schering Agrochemicals Limited. 14 p.
43255401
O'Boyle, F.; Challis, I. (1991) The Excretion and Distribution of Radiolabeled Residues
in the Rat Following Oral Dosing with (carbon 14) Dicloran at 5 mg/kg Bodyweight:
Lab Project Number: TOX/89364: M48: DICLORAN/M48. Unpublished study prepared
by Schering Chesterford Park Research Station. 48 p.
43255402
O'Boyle, F.; Challis, I. (1991) The Excretion and Distribution of Radiolabeled Residues
in the Rat Following Oral Dosing with (carbon 14) Dicloran at 500 mg/kg Bodyweight:
Lab Project Number: TOX/89365: M49: DICLORAN/M49. Unpublished study prepared
by Schering Chesterford Park Research Station. 48 p.
43508901
Hawk, R. (1995) Dicloran: Analysis by FDA Multiresidue Methodology: Lab Project
Number: G9501. Unpublished study prepared by Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
23 p.
43755101
Rodgers, M. (1995) Dicloran Technical: Acute Oral Toxicity (LD50) to the Bobwhite
Quail: Lab Project Number: GWN 2: GWN 2/951332. Unpublished study prepared by
Huntingdon Research Centre Ltd. 27 p.
43782001
Schocken, M. (1995) Bioconcentration/Metabolism Study With (Carbon 14)DCNA in
Bluegill Sunfish: Final Report: Lab Project Numbers: 95-6-5940:
12791.0494.6102.140. Unpublished study prepared by Springborn Labs., Inc. 132 p.
43809001
Wisocky, M. (1995) Aged Leaching of (carbon 14) Dicloran in Four Soils: Lab Project
Number: XBL94112: RPT00236: F94146-015. Unpublished study prepared by
XenoBiotic Labs, Inc. 209 p.
43866501
Wisocky, M. (1995) Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism of (carbon 14)- Dicloran: Lab
Project Number: XBL94111: RPT00235. Unpublished study prepared by XenoBiotic
Labs, Inc. 153 p.
43891901
Misra, B. (1995) 2,6-Dichloro-4-Nitroaniline (DCNA): Photodegradation of DCNA in an
Aqueous Buffered Solution Under Artificial Sunlight: Final Report: Lab Project Number:
ME 9500194. Unpublished study prepared by Pittsburgh Environmental Research Lab,
Inc. 84 p.
43893601
Misra, B. (1995) 2,6-Dichloro-4-Nitroaniline (DCNA): Photodegradation of DCNA on
19
-------
Soil Under Artificial Sunlight: Final Report: Lab Project Number: ME 9500193.
Unpublished study prepared by Pittsburgh Environmental Research Lab, Inc. 85 p.
43928001
Kliskey, E. (1996) Determination of the Magnitude of Residues of Dicloran (DCNA) in
Potato Processed Fractions Resulting from Foliar Applications of Botran 75W: Lab
Project Number: 95013: 66008. Unpublished study prepared by Compliance Services
Int'l.; Agivse Laboratories; and Wm. J. Englar & Associates, Inc. 148 p.
43933001
Kliskey, E. (1996) Determination of the Magnitude of Residues of DCNA in Plum
RAC's Resulting from Foliar Applications of Botran 75WPIus Post-Harvest Sprays of
Allisan: Lab Project Number: 95008: 66009. Unpublished study prepared by
Compliance Services Int'l. and Research for Hire, Inc. 134 p.
43952101
Wilcox, S.; Barton, S. (1996) Dicloran: Developmental Toxicity Study in Rabbits: Lab
Project Number: 11379: 491294: IRI 491294. Unpublished study prepared by Inveresk
Research International. 68 p.
43952102
Kliskey, E. (1996) Determination of the Magnitude of the Residues of DCNA in Peach
RAC's Resulting from Foliar Applications of Botran 75WPIus a Post-Harvest Dip of
Allisan: Lab Project Number: 95007: 95007-CA1: 95007-NC1. Unpublished study
prepared by Compliance Services International. 172 p.
43952103
Kliskey, E. (1996) Determination of the Magnitude of the Residues of DCNA in Tomato
Processed Fractions Resulting from Foliar Applications of Botran 75Wto Tomato
Plants: Lab Project Number: 95010: 95010-CA1. Unpublished study prepared by
Compliance Services International. 166 p.
43952104
Kliskey, E. (1996) Determination of the Magnitude of the Residues of DCNA in Dried
Prune Processed Fractions Resulting from Foliar Applications of Botran 75W: Lab
Project Number: 95011: 95011-CA1. Unpublished study prepared by Compliance
Services International. 150 p.
43953401
Coody, P. (1996) Candidate Site Selection Study: Botran: Field Scale Groundwater
Monitoring: Lab Project Number: 112217-20-4187: 113260-16-4187: JOB# H5054.
Unpublished study prepared by Weber, Hayes, and Associates. 95 p.
43954601
Kliskey, E. (1996) Determination of the Magnitude of Residue of Dicloran (DCNA) in
Grape Processed Fractions Resulting from Foliar Applications of Botran 75W: Lab
Project Number: 95012: 66009: 95012-CA1. Unpublished study prepared by
Compliance Services International. 190 p.
43975401
Kemman, R. (1996) Determination of the Frozen Stability of DCNA in Lettuce and
Carrot Roots: Six-month Interim Report: Lab Project Number: 95033: CSI 95033.
Unpublished study prepared by Compliance Services Int'l. 81 p.
44020701
Kliskey, E. (1996) Determination of the Magnitude of Residues of Dicloran (DCNA) in
Carrot RAC's Resulting from Foliar Applications of Botran 75W: Lab Project Number:
95031: CSI-020-01: 66009. Unpublished study prepared by Compliance Services Int'l.
268 p.
44020702
Upjohn (1984) Residue Determination forU-2069 (Dichloran) in Carrots (California):
Lab Project Number: R 251: R251: 217-9760-154. Unpublished study. 21 p.
44020703
Upjohn (1983) Residue Determination for DCNA (2,6-Dichloro- 4-nitroaniline) in
Carrots Treated with Botran 75W: Lab Project Number: R 238: R238: 24852.
Unpublished study. 18 p.
44050200
Gowan Co. (1996) Submission of Metabolism Data in Support of Registration
20
-------
Standard for DCNA (Dicloran). Transmittal of 1 Study.
44050201
Cheng, T. (1996) Nature of the Residue of (carbon 14)-Dicloran (BOTRAN
TECHNICAL) in Laying Hens: Final Report: Lab Project Number: HWI 6564-100: AM
022. Unpublished study prepared by Hazleton Wisconsin, Inc. 143 p.
44055801
Hansen, M. (1985) DCNA: Residue Chemistry: Carrot Fungicide Trial 1983-1984
(California): Lab Project Number: R254. Unpublished study prepared by Tuco Div. of
Upjohn Co. 18 p.
44061001
Cheng, T. (1996) Metabolism of (carbon-14)-Dicloran (Botran Technical) in Rats: Final
Report: Lab Project Number: HWI 6564-108. Unpublished study prepared by Hazleton
Wsconsin, Inc. 123 p.
44068001
Hayes, J.; Hoban, P.; Bierman, A. (1996) Small Scale Prospective Groundwater Study
for BOTRAN 75W (DCNA) Applied to Head Lettuce in Monterey County, California:
Phase I: Site Characterization and Conceptual Model: Lab Project Number: 961:
H5054: H5054.B. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL East, Inc. and Weber, Hayes
and Associates. 196 p.
44071901
Cheng, T. (1996) The Nature of the Residue of (carbon-14)-Dicloran (Botran
Technical) in Lactating Goats: Final Report: Lab Project Number: HWI 6564-102:
6564-102. Unpublished study prepared by Hazleton Wsconsin, Inc. 121 p.
44099301
Jacobson, S. (1996) Independent Laboratory Confirmation of Analytical Method R-
450.2 for Residues of DCNA in Various Crops: Final Report: Lab Project Number:
95036. Unpublished study prepared by Compliance Services International. 107 p.
44215401
Coody, P. (1997) Small Scale Prospective Ground Water Study for Botran 75W
(DCNA) Applied to Head Lettuce in Monterey County, California: First Quarterly
Report: Lab Project Number: 961: 1939. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL East,
Inc. and Weber, Hayes & Assoc. 124 p.
44233803
Wlcox, S.; Barton, S. (1996) Dicloran Preliminary Reproduction Toxicity Study in Rats:
Lab Project Number: 11522: 491509. Unpublished study prepared by Inveresk
Research International. 45 p.
44237801
O'Neal, S. (1997) Metabolic Fate and Distribution of (carbon 14)-Dicloran in Potatoes:
(Final Report): Lab Project Number: 857: 1947. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL
East, Inc. 154 p.
44245201
O'Neal, S. (1997) Metabolic Fate and Distribution of (carbon 14)-Dicloran in Lettuce:
(Final Report): Lab Project Number: 856: 1949. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL
East, Inc. 134 p.
44258801
Kemman, R. (1997) Determination of the Frozen Stability of DCNA in Lettuce and
Carrot Roots: Final Report: Lab Project Number: 95033: 66009. Unpublished study
prepared by Compliance Services International. 129 p.
44348201
O'Neal, S. (1997) A Confined Rotational Crop Study with (carbon 14)-Dicloran: (Final
Report): Lab Project Number: 858: 1960. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL East,
Inc. 253 p.
44350101
Coody, P. (1997) Small Scale Prospective Ground Water Study for Botran 75W
(DCNA) Applied to Head Lettuce in Monterey County, California: Second Quarterly
Report: Lab Project Number: 961: 1939. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL East,
Inc. and Weber, Hayes & Associates. 22 p.
44414101
Wlcox, S.; Barton, S. (1997) Dicloran: Two Generation Reproduction Study in Rats:
21
-------
Lab Project Number: 491514: 14271. Unpublished study prepared by Inveresk
Research. 363 p.
44414201
Kliskey, E. (1997) Determination of the Dissipation of Residues of 2,6-Dichloro-4-
nitroaniline (Dicloran) and its Metabolites in a California Bare Ground Field Treated
with Botran: Lab Project Number: GOWN-9321: F94084-207: GOWN-9321-CA1.
Unpublished study prepared by Compliance Services International. 418 p.
44533001
Howard, J. (1998) Small Scale Prospective Ground Water Study for Botran 75W
(DCNA) Applied to Head Lettuce in Monterey County, California: Third Quarterly
Report: Lab Project Number: 961: 2000. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL East,
Inc. and Weber, Hayes & Assoc. 50 p.
44694301
Howard, J. (1998) Small Scale Prospective Ground Water Study for BOTRAN 75 W
(DCNA) Applied to Head Lettuce in Monterey County, California: Fourth Quarterly
Report: Lab Project Number: 961: 2020. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL East,
Inc. and Weber, Hayes, and Associates. 97 p.
44474101
Wnorowski, G. (1997) Acute Oral Toxicity Limit Test (in Rats): (Hospital Broad Band
Disinfectant): Lab Project Number: 5382: P320. Unpublished study prepared by
Product Safety Labs. 15 p.
44842101
Howard, J. (1999) Small Scale Prospective Ground Water Study for Botran 75W
(DCNA) Applied to Head Lettuce in Monterey County, California: Lab Project Number:
961: 2041. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL East, Inc. and Weber, Hayes &
Associates. 217 p.
45062001
Howell, C. (2000) Dissipation of Dislodgeable Foliar Dichloran (DCNA) Residues from
Snap Beans Following 5 Applications of Botran 75W: Lab Project Number: 99793:
45433. Unpublished study prepared by ABC Labs. 140 p. {OPPTS 875.2100}
45159801
Mickelson, K. (2000) Dicloran: Field Rotational Crop Study: Lab Project Number:
AA980602: 97-0065. Unpublished study prepared by American Agricultural Services,
Inc. and EN-CAS Analytical Laboratories. 355 p. {OPPTS 860.1900}
45237401
Howard, J.; White, J. (2000) Small Scale Prospective Ground Water Study for
BOTRAN 75W (DCNA) Applied to Head Lettuce in Monterey County, California: Final
Report: Lab Project Number: 961: 2103: 2000. Unpublished study prepared by PTRL
East, Inc. and Weber, Hayes & Associates. 806 p.
45265001
Wartanessian, S. (1996) Magnitude of Residues in/on Fresh Tomatoes after Post-
Harvest Treatment with Dicloran: Lab Project Number: DICLORAN TOM95.
Unpublished study prepared by Elf Atochem North America, Inc. 20 p.
45333301
Hawk, R. (2001) Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism of (carbon 14)-Dicloran: Addendum 1:
Lab Project Number: XBL94111: RPT00235. Unpublished study prepared by
Xenobiotic Labs., Inc. 23 p.
45397001
Jaglan, P.; Arnold, T. (1985) Dicloran (DCNA): Photolysis of (Carbon-14)-Dicloran
from Aqueous Solutions: Preliminary Study. Lab Project Number: 218-9760-85-005.
Unpublished study prepared by The Upjohn Company. 31 p.
45492601
Teeter, D. (1998) Validation of Methods for the Determination of Dicloran Using Eggs
and Tissues and Milk From Laying Hen and Lactating Goat Metabolism Studies: Final
Report: Lab Project Number: 6564-113. Unpublished study prepared by Covance
Laboratories. 61 p. {OPPTS 860.1340}
45525801
Hawk, R.; Winkler, V. (2001) Dicloran (DCNA) Environmental Fate Studies: Lab
22
-------
Project Number: GEC101. Unpublished study prepared by Gowan Company. 288 p.
45575001
Hawk, R.; Winkler, V. (2001) Dicloran (DCNA) Environmental Fate Studies: Lab
Project Number: GEC101. Unpublished study prepared by Gowan Company. 446 p.
45610801
Killeen, J. (2002) A 52-Week Oral Toxicity Study in Dogs with Dicloran: Lab Project
Number: 012260-1. Unpublished study prepared by Ricerca, LLC. 329 p.
46216001
Volkl, S. (2003) (Carbon 14)-Dicloran: Route and Rate of Degradation in Aerobic
Aquatic Systems. Project Number: 843085, 714/001. Unpublished study prepared by
RCC Umweltchemie Ag and SCC Scientific Consulting Company. 171 p.
46218900
Gowan Company (2004) Submission of Toxicity Data in Support of the Reregistration
of Dicloran. Transmittal of 1 Study.
46218901
Frey, L.; Martin, K.; Beavers, J.; et. al. (2003) Dicloran: A Reproduction Study with the
Northern Bobwhite: Final Report. Project Number: 813/001, 90000308, 555/104.
Unpublished study prepared by Wldlife International, Ltd. 190 p.
46360701
Ramesh, E. (2004) Combined Chronic Toxicity and Carcinogenicity Study with
Dicloran in Wstar Rats. Project Number: 3080/00, 1835, 1807. Unpublished study
prepared by Rallis Research Centre, Rallis India. 1381 p.
46360702
Ramesh, E. (2001) Dicloran: 90- Day Dietary Dose Range Finding Study in Wstar
Rats. Project Number: 3080/01. Unpublished study prepared by Rallis Research
Centre, Rallis India. 92 p.
46447501
Gerspach, R. (2003) Dicloran: Prenatal Developmental Toxicity Study in the Rat.
Project Number: 843083. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Ltd. 318 p.
46657101
Volkl, S. (2003) (Carbon 14)-Dicloran: Route and Rate of Degradation in Aerobic
Aquatic Systems. Project Number: 90000270, 714/001, 843085. Unpublished study
prepared by RCC Umweltchemie Ag. 171 p.
46657102
Peither, A. (2003) Sublethal Toxic Effects of Dicloran to Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus
mykiss) in a Fish Juvenile Growth Test Over 28 Days. Project Number: 843088,
826/002, 90000297. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Umweltchemie Ag. 69 p.
46657103
Peither, A. (2003) Influence of Dicloran on Survival and Reproduction of Daphnia
magna in a Semi-Static Test Over Three Weeks. Project Number: 843091, 90000290,
827/001. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Umweltchemie Ag. 60 p.
46657104
Schmidt, T. (2003) Effects of Dicloran on the Development of Sediment-Dwelling
Larvae of Chironomus riparius in a Water-Sediment System. Project Number:
90000305, 846095, 843096. Unpublished study prepared by RCC Umweltchemie Ag.
116 p.
46657105
Seyfried, B. (2003) Toxicity of Dicloran to Scenedesmus subspicatus in a 72-Hour
Algal Growth Inhibition Test. Project Number: 90000295, 823/001, 843093.
Unpublished study prepared by RCC Umweltchemie Ag. 62 p.
23
-------
Appendix E.
Generic Data Call-In
The Generic Data Call-In will be posted at a later date. See Chapter V of the
DCNA
RED for a list of studies required.
24
-------
Appendix F.
Product Specific Data Call-In
The product specific Data Call-In will be posted at a later date.
25
-------
Appendix G.
EPA's Batching of DCNA Products for Meeting Acute Toxicity Data Requirements
for Reregistration
EPA'S BATCHING OF DICLORAN PRODUCTS FOR MEETING ACUTE 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 DICLORAN
as the active ingredient, 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 batched products as "substantially similar"
since some products within a 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 today's standards (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 is generated or existing data is
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
26
-------
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'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.
Ten products were found which contain DCNA as the active ingredient. These products
have been placed in one batch and a no batch group in accordance with the active and
inert ingredients and type of formulation.
Batching Instructions:
NOTE: The technical acute toxicity values included in this document are for
informational purposes only. The data supporting these values may or may not meet the
current acceptance criteria.
Batch 1
EPA Reg. No.
Percent Active Ingredient
10163-189
75.0
10163-207
75.0
No Batch
EPA Reg. No.
Percent Active Ingredient
2935-529
6.0
10163-188
6.0
10163-195
95.0
10163-221
43.0
10163-226
46.0
10163-239
65.0
10951-13
6.0
10951-14
Dicloran: 6.0
Sulfur: 25.0
27
-------
Appendix H.
List of Registrants Sent This Data Call-In
A list of registrants sent this Data Call-In will be posted at a later date.
28
-------
Appendix I.
List of Available Related Documents and Electronically Available Forms
Pesticide Registration Forms are available at the following EPA internet site:
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/
Pesticide Registration Forms (These forms are in PDF format and require the Acrobat
reader)
Instructions
1. Print out and complete the forms. (Note: Form numbers that are bolded can be
filled out on your computer then printed.)
2. The completed form(s) should be submitted in hardcopy in accord with the
existing policy.
3. Mail the forms, along with any additional documents necessary to comply with
EPA regulations covering your request, to the address below for the Document
Processing Desk.
DO NOT fax or e-mail any form containing 'Confidential Business Information' or
'Sensitive Information.'
If you have any problems accessing these forms, please contact Nicole Williams at (703)
308-5551 or by e-mail atwilliams.nicole@epa.gov.
The following Agency Pesticide Registration Forms are currently available via the
internet:
at the following locations:
8570-1
Application for Pesticide
Regi strati on/ Amendment
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/8570-
l.pdf
8570-4
Confidential Statement of Formula
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/8570-
4.pdf
8570-5
Notice of Supplemental Registration
of Distribution of a Registered
Pesticide Product
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/8570-
5.pdf
8570-17
Application for an Experimental Use
Permit
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/8570-
17.pdf
8570-25
Application for/Notification of State
Registration of a Pesticide To Meet a
Special Local Need
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/8570-
25.pdf
8570-27
Formulator's Exemption Statement
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/8570-
27.pdf
29
-------
8570-28
Certification of Compliance with
Data Gap Procedures
httD://www.eDa.gov/oDDrd001/forms/8570-
28.pdf
8570-30
Pesticide Registration Maintenance
Fee Filing
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/8570-
30.odf
8570-32
Certification of Attempt to Enter into
an Agreement with other Registrants
for Development of Data
http://www.epa.gov/opprd001/forms/8570-
32.pdf
8570-34
Certification with Respect to
Citations of Data (PR Notice 98-5)
httD://www.eDa.gov/oDDDmsdl/PR Notices/
pr98-5.pdf
8570-35
Data Matrix (PR Notice 98-5)
httD://www.eDa.gov/oDDDmsdl/PR Notices/
pr98-5.pdf
8570-36
Summary of the Physical/Chemical
Properties (PR Notice 98-1)
httD://www.eDa.gov/oDDDmsdl/PR Notices/
pr98-l.pdf
8570-37
Self-Certification Statement for the
Physical/Chemical Properties (PR
Notice 98-1)
httD://www.eDa.gov/oDDDmsdl/PR Notices/
pr98-l.pdf
Pesticide Registration Kit www.epa.gov/pesticides/registrationkit/
Dear Registrant:
For your convenience, we have assembled an online registration kit which
contains the following pertinent forms and information needed to register a pesticide
product with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Pesticide Programs
(OPP):
1. The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) as Amended by the Food Quality Protection
Act (FQPA) of 1996.
2. Pesticide Registration (PR) Notices
a. 83-3 Label Improvement Program - Storage and Disposal Statements
b. 84-1 Clarification of Label Improvement Program
c. 86-5 Standard Format for Data Submitted under FIFRA
d. 87-1 Label Improvement Program for Pesticides Applied Through
Irrigation Systems (Chemigation)
e. 87-6 Inert Ingredients in Pesticide Products Policy Statement
f. 90-1 Inert Ingredients in Pesticide Products; Revised Policy Statement
g. 95-2 Notifications, Non-notifications, and Minor Formulation
Amendments
h. 98-1 Self Certification of Product Chemistry Data with Attachments (This
document is in PDF format and requires Acrobat reader.)
30
-------
Other PR Notices can be found at
http://www.epa.gov/opppmsdl/PR NoticesPesticide Product Registration Application
Forms (These forms are in PDF format and will require the Acrobat reader).
a. EPA Form No. 8570-1, Application for Pesticide Registration/Amendment
b. EPA Form No. 8570-4, Confidential Statement of Formula
c. EPA Form No. 8570-27, Formulator's Exemption Statement
d. EPA Form No. 8570-34, Certification with Respect to Citations of Data
e. EPA Form No. 8570-35, Data Matrix
4. General Pesticide Information (Some of these forms are in PDF format and will
require the Acrobat reader).
a. Registration Division Personnel Contact List
b. Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (BPPD) Contacts
c. Antimicrobials Division Organizational Structure/Contact List
d. 53 F.R. 15952, Pesticide Registration Procedures; Pesticide Data
Requirements (PDF format)
e. 40 CFR Part 156, Labeling Requirements for Pesticides and Devices (PDF
format)
f. 40 CFR Part 158, Data Requirements for Registration (PDF format)
g.. 50 F.R. 48833, Disclosure of Reviews of Pesticide Data (November 27,
1985)
Before submitting your application for registration, you may wish to consult some
additional sources of information. These include:
1. The Office of Pesticide Programs' website.
2. The booklet "General Information on Applying for Registration of Pesticides in
the United States", PB92-221811, available through the National Technical
Information Service (NTIS) at the following address:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
The telephone number for NTIS is (703) 605-6000.
3. The National Pesticide Information Retrieval System (NPIRS) of Purdue
University's Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems. This
service does charge a fee for subscriptions and custom searches. You can contact
NPIRS by telephone at (765) 494-6614 or through their website.
4. The National Pesticide Telecommunications Network (NPTN) can provide
information on active ingredients, uses, toxicology, and chemistry of pesticides.
You can contact NPTN by telephone at (800) 858-7378 or through their website:
ace. or st. edu/info/nptn.
31
-------
The Agency will return a notice of receipt of an application for registration or
amended registration, experimental use permit, or amendment to a petition if the
applicant or petitioner encloses with his submission a stamped, self-addressed
postcard. The postcard must contain the following entries to be completed by OPP:
1. Date of receipt;
2. EPA identifying number; and
3. Product Manager assignment.
Other identifying information may be included by the applicant to link the
acknowledgment of receipt to the specific application submitted. EPA will stamp the
date of receipt and provide the EPA identifying file symbol or petition number for the
new submission. The identifying number should be used whenever you contact the
Agency concerning an application for registration, experimental use permit, or
tolerance petition.
To assist us in ensuring that all data you have submitted for the chemical are
properly coded and assigned to your company, please include a list of all synonyms,
common and trade names, company experimental codes, and other names which
identify the chemical (including "blind" codes used when a sample was submitted for
testing by commercial or academic facilities). Please provide a chemical abstract
system (CAS) number if one has been assigned.
Documents Associated with this RED
The following documents are part of the Administrative Record for this RED
document and may be included in the EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs Public Docket.
Copies of these documents are not available electronically, but may be obtained by
contacting the person listed on the respective Chemical Status Sheet.
1. Health Effects Division and Environmental Fate and Effects Division Science
Chapters, which include the complete risk assessments and supporting documents.
2. Detailed Label Usage Information System (LUIS) Report.
i. DP Barcode D265094, T. Bloem, 4/20/00.
32
------- |