[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 239 (Thursday, December 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64142-64145]
[FR Doc No: 2018-26943]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2018-0002]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: New or modified Base (1-percent annual chance) Flood
Elevations (BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA)
boundaries or zone designations, and/or regulatory floodways
(hereinafter referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on
the indicated Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities
listed in the table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood
Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance
Study (FIS) reports, currently in effect for the listed communities.
The flood hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to
calculate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their
contents.

DATES: Each LOMR was finalized as in the table below.

ADDRESSES: Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the
LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these
modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers
of local circulation and 90 days have elapsed since that publication.
The Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation has
resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to
section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.
    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is
shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.
    The new or modified flood hazard information is the basis for the
floodplain management measures that the community is required either to
adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order to remain
qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP).
    This new or modified flood hazard information, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.
    This new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet
the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and are used to
calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new
buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in
flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the final flood hazard information available at the address
cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service
Center at https://msc.fema.gov.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

David I. Maurstad,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation, Department
of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Chief executive                                                                 Community
         State and county           Location and case No.  officer of community   Community map repository        Date of modification           No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama:
    Shelby (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Helena (18-04- The Honorable Mark    City Hall, 816 State       Nov. 10, 2018..................       010294
     1848).                          2020P).                R. Hall, Mayor,       Route 82, Helena, AL
                                                            City of Helena, 816   35080.
                                                            Highway 52 East,
                                                            Helena, AL 35080.
    Shelby (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Montevallo     The Honorable Hollie  City Hall, 541 Main        Oct. 25, 2018..................       010349
     1845).                          (18-04-1231P).         Cost, Mayor, City     Street, Montevallo, AL
                                                            of Montevallo, 541    35115.
                                                            Main Street,
                                                            Montevallo, AL
                                                            35115.
    Shelby (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated Areas   The Honorable Jon     Shelby County Engineering  Oct. 25, 2018..................       010191
     1845).                          of Shelby County (18-  Parker, Chairman,     Department, 506 Highway
                                     04-1231P).             Shelby County Board   70, Columbiana, AL 35051.
                                                            of Commissioners,
                                                            200 West College
                                                            Street, Columbiana,
                                                            AL 35051.
Colorado:

    Boulder (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Boulder (17-   The Honorable         City Hall, 1777 Broadway   Nov. 5, 2018...................       080024
     1848).                          08-1389P).             Suzanne Jones,        Street, Boulder, CO
                                                            Mayor, City of        80302.
                                                            Boulder, P.O. Box
                                                            791, Boulder, CO
                                                            80306.
    Boulder (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Boulder (18-   The Honorable         City Hall, 1777 Broadway   Nov. 2, 2018...................       080024
     1845).                          08-0256P).             Suzanne Jones,        Street, Boulder, CO
                                                            Mayor, City of        80302.
                                                            Boulder, 1777
                                                            Broadway Street,
                                                            Boulder, CO 80302.
    Boulder (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Cindy   Boulder County             Nov. 5, 2018...................       080023
     1848).                          of Boulder County      Domenico, Chair,      Transportation
                                     (17-08-1389P).         Boulder County        Department, 2525 13th
                                                            Board of              Street, Suite 203,
                                                            Commissioners, P.O.   Boulder, CO 80304.
                                                            Box 471, Boulder,
                                                            CO 80306.
    Douglas (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Lora    Douglas County Public      Nov. 9, 2018...................       080049
     1848).                          of Douglas County      Thomas, Chair,        Works Department,
                                     (17-08-1321P).         Douglas County        Engineering Division,
                                                            Board of              100 3rd Street, Castle
                                                            Commissioners, 100    Rock, CO 80104.
                                                            3rd Street, Castle
                                                            Rock, CO 80104.
    Montrose (FEMA Docket No.: B-   City of Montrose (17-  Mr. William Bell,     Engineering Department,    Nov. 9, 2018...................       080125
     1852).                          08-1374P).             City Manager, City    1221 6450 Road,
                                                            of Montrose, P.O.     Montrose, CO 81401.
                                                            Box 790, Montrose,
                                                            CO 81402.
    Montrose (FEMA Docket No.: B-   Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Keith   Montrose County Public     Nov. 9, 2018...................       080124
     1852).                          of Montrose County     Caddy, Chairman,      Works Department, 949
                                     (17-08-1374P).         Montrose County       North 2nd Street,
                                                            Board of              Montrose, CO 81401.
                                                            Commissioners, 317
                                                            South 2nd Street,
                                                            Montrose, CO 81401.
Connecticut: Fairfield (FEMA        Town of Darien (18-01- The Honorable Jayme   Planning and Zoning        Nov. 13, 2018..................       090005
 Docket No.: B-1848)                 1237P).                J. Stevenson, First   Department, 2 Renshaw
                                                            Selectwoman, Town     Road, Darien, CT 06820.
                                                            of Darien Board of
                                                            Selectmen, 2
                                                            Renshaw Road,
                                                            Darien, CT 06820.
Florida:
    Collier (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Naples (18-04- The Honorable Bill    Building Department, 295   Nov. 9, 2018...................       125130
     1852).                          4561P).                Barnett, Mayor,       Riverside Circle,
                                                            City of Naples, 735   Naples, FL 34102.
                                                            8th Street South,
                                                            Naples, FL 34102.
    Duval (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Atlantic       The Honorable Ellen   City Hall, 800 Seminole    Nov. 5, 2018...................       120075
     1845).                          Beach (17-04-4155P).   E. Glasser, Mayor,    Road, Atlantic Beach, FL
                                                            City of Atlantic      32233.
                                                            Beach, 800 Seminole
                                                            Road, Atlantic
                                                            Beach, FL 32233.
    Duval (FEMA Docket No.: B-      City of Jacksonville   The Honorable Lenny   City Hall, 214 North       Nov. 5, 2018...................       120077
     1845).                          (17-04-4155P).         Curry, Mayor, City    Hogan Street, Suite
                                                            of Jacksonville,      2100, Jacksonville, FL
                                                            117 West Duval        32202.
                                                            Street, Suite 400,
                                                            Jacksonville, FL
                                                            32202.
    Lee (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845).  City of Sanibel (18-   The Honorable Kevin   Planning Department, 800   Oct. 25, 2018..................       120402
                                     04-3742P).             Ruane, Mayor, City    Dunlop Road, Sanibel, FL
                                                            of Sanibel, 800       33957.
                                                            Dunlop Road,
                                                            Sanibel, FL 33957.
    Lee (FEMA Docket No.: B-1845).  City of Sanibel (18-   The Honorable Kevin   Planning Department, 800   Oct. 26, 2018..................       120402
                                     04-3819P).             Ruane, Mayor, City    Dunlop Road, Sanibel, FL
                                                            of Sanibel, 800       33957.
                                                            Dunlop Road,
                                                            Sanibel, FL 33957.
    Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas   The Honorable David   Monroe County Building     Oct. 22, 2018..................       125129
     1845).                          of Monroe County (18-  Rice, Mayor, Monroe   Department, 2798
                                     04-3568P).             County Board of       Overseas Highway, Suite
                                                            Commissioners, 1100   300, Marathon, FL 33050.
                                                            Simonton Street,
                                                            Key West, FL 33040.
    Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas   The Honorable David   Monroe County Building     Oct. 31, 2018..................       125129
     1848).                          of Monroe County (18-  Rice, Mayor, Monroe   Department, 2798
                                     04-4286P).             County Board of       Overseas Highway, Suite
                                                            Commissioners, 9400   300, Marathon, FL 33050.
                                                            Overseas Highway,
                                                            Suite 210,
                                                            Marathon, FL 33050.
    Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas   The Honorable David   Monroe County Building     Nov. 13, 2018..................       125129
     1848).                          of Monroe County (18-  Rice, Mayor, Monroe   Department, 2798
                                     04-4294P).             County Board of       Overseas Highway, Suite
                                                            Commissioners, 9400   300, Marathon, FL 33050.
                                                            Overseas Highway,
                                                            Suite 210,
                                                            Marathon, FL 33050.
    Monroe (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Village of Islamorada  The Honorable Chris   Planning and Development   Oct. 26, 2018..................       120424
     1845).                          (18-04-3795P).         Sante, Mayor,         Department, 86800
                                                            Village of            Overseas Highway,
                                                            Islamorada, 86800     Islamorada, FL 33036.
                                                            Overseas Highway,
                                                            Islamorada, FL
                                                            33036.
    Orange (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Orlando (17-   The Honorable Buddy   Information Technology     Nov. 9, 2018...................       120186
     1848).                          04-3097P).             Dyer, Mayor, City     Division, 400 South
                                                            of Orlando, P.O.      Orange Avenue, 8th
                                                            Box 4990, Orlando,    Floor, Orlando, FL 32801.
                                                            FL 32802.

Kentucky: Jefferson (FEMA Docket    Louisville-Jefferson   The Honorable Greg    Louisville-Jefferson       Nov. 13, 2018..................       210120
 No.: B-1848)                        County Metro           Fischer, Mayor,       County Metropolitan
                                     Government (18-04-     Louisville-Jefferso   Sewer District, 700 West
                                     3582P).                n County Metro,       Liberty Street,
                                                            Government, 527       Louisville, KY 40203.
                                                            West Jefferson
                                                            Street, Louisville,
                                                            KY 40202.
Maryland: Prince George's (FEMA     Unincorporated areas   The Honorable         Prince George's County     Nov. 2, 2018...................       245208
 Docket No.: B-1845)                 of Prince George's     Rushern L. Baker,     Department of
                                     County (18-03-0330P).  III, Prince           Environment, 1801
                                                            George's County       McCormick Drive, Suite
                                                            Executive, 14741      500, Largo, MD 20774.
                                                            Governor Oden Bowie
                                                            Drive, Upper
                                                            Marlboro, MD 20772.
Massachusetts: Norfolk (FEMA        City of Quincy (18-01- The Honorable Thomas  City Hall, 1305 Hancock    Nov. 9, 2018...................       255219
 Docket No.: B-1848)                 0033P).                P. Koch, Mayor,       Street, Quincy, MA 02169.
                                                            City of Quincy,
                                                            1305 Hancock
                                                            Street, Quincy, MA
                                                            02169.
New Hampshire: Rockingham (FEMA     Town of Exeter (18-01- The Honorable Julie   Building Department, 10    Nov. 5, 2018...................       330130
 Docket No.: B-1845)                 0144P).                Gilman, Chair, Town   Front Street, Exeter, NH
                                                            of Exeter Select      03833.
                                                            Board, 10 Front
                                                            Street, Exeter, NH
                                                            03833.
New Mexico: Santa Fe (FEMA Docket   Unincorporated areas   Ms. Katherine         Santa Fe County Building   Nov. 13, 2018..................       350069
 No.: B-1848)                        of Santa Fe County     Miller, Manager,      and Development Services
                                     (18-06-0707P).         Santa Fe County,      Department, 102 Grant
                                                            102 Grant Avenue,     Avenue, Santa Fe, NM
                                                            Santa Fe, NM 87501.   87501.
North Carolina: Duplin (FEMA        Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Jesse   Duplin County Planning     Oct. 26, 2018..................       370083
 Docket, No.: B-1848)                of Duplin County (18-  Dowe, Chairman,       Department, 117 Beasley
                                     04-2016P).             Duplin County Board   Street, Kenansville, NC
                                                            of Commissioners,     28349.
                                                            224 Seminary
                                                            Street,
                                                            Kenansville, NC
                                                            28349.
Pennsylvania:
    Lebanon (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Township of Jackson    The Honorable Thomas  Township Hall, 60 North    Nov. 2, 2018...................       421805
     1848).                          (18-03-1094P).         M. Houtz, Chairman,   Ramona Road, Myerstown,
                                                            Township of Jackson   PA 17067.
                                                            Board of
                                                            Supervisors, 60
                                                            North Ramona Road,
                                                            Myerstown, PA 17067.
    Lebanon (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Township of Millcreek  The Honorable Donald  Township Hall, 81 East     Nov. 2, 2018...................       420574
     1848).                          (18-03-1094P).         Leibig, Chairman,     Alumni Avenue,
                                                            Township of           Newmanstown, PA 17073.
                                                            Millcreek Board of
                                                            Supervisors, 81
                                                            East Alumni Avenue,
                                                            Newmanstown, PA
                                                            17073.
South Dakota:
    Codington (FEMA Docket No.: B-  City of Watertown (17- The Honorable Sarah   Planning and Zoning        Nov. 5, 2018...................       460016
     1845).                          08-0664P).             Caron, Mayor, City    Department, 23 2nd
                                                            of Watertown, 23      Street Northeast,
                                                            2nd Street            Watertown, SD 57201.
                                                            Northeast,
                                                            Watertown, SD 57201.
    Pennington (FEMA Docket No.: B- City of Rapid City     The Honorable Steve   Public Works Department,   Nov. 2, 2018...................       465420
     1848).                          (18-08-0082P).         Allender, Mayor,      Engineering Services
                                                            City of Rapid City,   Division, 300 6th
                                                            300 6th Street,       Street, Rapid City, SD
                                                            Rapid City, SD        57701.
                                                            57701.
    Pennington (FEMA Docket No.: B- Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Lloyd   Pennington County          Nov. 2, 2018...................       460064
     1848).                          of Pennington County   LaCroix, Chairman,    Planning Department, 130
                                     (18-08-0082P).         Pennington County     Kansas City Street,
                                                            Board of              Suite 200, Rapid City,
                                                            Commissioners, 130    SD 57701.
                                                            Kansas City Street,
                                                            Suite 100, Rapid
                                                            City, SD 57701.
Texas:
    Bexar (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Nelson  Bexar County Public Works  Nov. 5, 2018...................       480035
     1848).                          of Bexar County (18-   W. Wolff, Bexar       Department, 233 North
                                     06-2600X).             County Judge, 101     Pecas-La Trinidad
                                                            West Nueva Street,    Street, Suite 420, San
                                                            10th Floor, San       Antonio, TX 78207.
                                                            Antonio, TX 78205.
    Dallas (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of University     The Honorable Olin    Peek Service Center, 4420  Nov. 5, 2018...................       480189
     1848).                          Park (18-06-0033P).    Burnett Lane, Jr.,    Worcola Street, Dallas,
                                                            Mayor, City of        TX 75206.
                                                            University Park,
                                                            3800 University
                                                            Boulevard,
                                                            University Park, TX
                                                            75205.
    Dallas (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Town of Highland Park  The Honorable Margo   Engineering Department,    Nov. 5, 2018...................       480178
     1848).                          (18-06-0033P).         Goodwin, Mayor,       4700 Drexel Drive,
                                                            Town of Highland      Highland Park, TX 75205.
                                                            Park, 4700 Drexel
                                                            Drive, Highland
                                                            Park, TX 75205.
    Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Denton (18-06- The Honorable Chris   Engineering Services       Nov. 7, 2018...................       480194
     1848).                          0017P).                A. Watts, Mayor,      Department, 901-A Texas
                                                            City of Denton, 215   Street, Denton, TX 76509.
                                                            East McKinney
                                                            Street, Suite 100,
                                                            Denton, TX 76201.
    Denton (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Sanger (18-06- The Honorable Thomas  City Hall, 201 Bolivar     Nov. 9, 2018...................       480786
     1852).                          0546P).                Muir, Mayor, City     Street, Sanger, TX 76266.
                                                            of Sanger, P.O. Box
                                                            1729, Sanger, TX
                                                            76266.
    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Edward  Harris County Permit       Oct. 29, 2018..................       480287
     1848).                          of Harris County (18-  M. Emmett, Harris     Department, 10555
                                     06-0774P).             County Judge, 1001    Northwest Freeway, Suite
                                                            Preston Street,       120, Houston, TX 77002.
                                                            Suite 911, Houston,
                                                            TX 77002.

    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Edward  Harris County Permit       Oct. 29, 2018..................       480287
     1848).                          of Harris County (18-  M. Emmett, Harris     Department, 10555
                                     06-1830P).             County Judge, 1001    Northwest Freeway, Suite
                                                            Preston Street,       120, Houston, TX 77002.
                                                            Suite 911, Houston,
                                                            TX 77002.
    McLennan (FEMA Docket No.: B-   City of Waco (17-06-   Mr. Wiley Stem III,   Public Works Department,   Nov. 13, 2018..................       480461
     1848).                          4092P).                Manager, City of      300 Austin Avenue, Waco,
                                                            Waco, 300 Austin      TX 76702.
                                                            Avenue, Waco, TX
                                                            76702.
    Midland (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Midland (18-   Mr. Courtney Sharp,   City Hall, 300 North       Nov. 5, 2018...................       480477
     1848).                          06-1903P).             Manager, City of      Loraine Street, Midland,
                                                            Midland, 300 North    TX 79701.
                                                            Loraine Street,
                                                            Midland, TX 79701.
    Midland (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas   The Honorable         Midland County Department  Nov. 5, 2018...................       481239
     1848).                          of Midland County      Michael R.            of Emergency Management,
                                     (18-06-1903P).         Bradford, Midland     500 North Loraine
                                                            County Judge, 500     Street, Suite 1100,
                                                            North Loraine         Midland, TX 79701.
                                                            Street, Suite 1100,
                                                            Midland, TX 79701.
    Montgomery (FEMA Docket No.: B- Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Craig   Montgomery County          Oct. 29, 2018..................       480483
     1848).                          of Montgomery County   B. Doyal,             Commissioners Court
                                     (18-06-1830P).         Montgomery County     Building, 501 North
                                                            Judge, 501 North      Thompson Street, Suite
                                                            Thompson Street,      103, Conroe, TX 77301.
                                                            Suite 401, Conroe,
                                                            TX 77301.
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Fort Worth     The Honorable Betsy   Transportation and Public  Nov. 13, 2018..................       480596
     1852).                          (18-06-1306P).         Price, Mayor, City    Works Engineering
                                                            of Fort Worth, 200    Department, 200 Texas
                                                            Texas Street, Fort    Street, Fort Worth, TX
                                                            Worth, TX 76102.      76102.
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas   The Honorable B.      Tarrant County             Nov. 13, 2018..................       480582
     1852).                          of Tarrant County      Glen Whitley,         Engineering Department,
                                     (18-06-1306P).         Tarrant County        100 East Weatherford
                                                            Judge, 100 East       Street, Fort Worth, TX
                                                            Weatherford Street,   76196.
                                                            Fort Worth, TX
                                                            76196.
Wyoming: Teton (FEMA Docket No.: B- Unincorporated areas   The Honorable Mark    Teton County Public Works  Nov. 1, 2018...................       560094
 1848)                               of Teton County (18-   Newcomb, Chairman,    Department, 320 South
                                     08-0225P).             Teton County Board    King Street, Jackson, WY
                                                            of Commissioners,     83001.
                                                            P.O. Box 3594,
                                                            Jackson, WY 83001.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2018-26943 Filed 12-12-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON D. C., 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES October 25, 2005 PC Code: 109702 DP Barcode: D293410 MEMORANDUM Subject: Revised EFED Risk Assessment for the Reregistration Eligibility Decision ( RED) on Cypermethrin After 30 Day " Error Only" Comment Period To: Veronique LaCapre, Chemical Review Manager Yan Donovan, Chemical Review Manager Margaret Rice, Branch Chief Reregistration Branch II Special Review and Reregistration Division ( 7505C)

From: Miachel Rexrode, Ph. D., Fishery Biologist José Luis Meléndez, Chemist Environmental Risk Branch V Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( 7507C)

Through: Mah Shamim, Ph. D., Chief Environmental Risk Branch V Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( 7507C)

The registrants of cypermethrin, Valent BioSciences Corporation, FMC Corporation and Syngenta Crop Protection provided error correction comments on the Draft of the EFED Chapter of the Reregistration Elegibility Document ( RED) for Cypermethrin. The purpose of this memorandum is to address those comments. The revised science chapter and appendices are issued under DP Barcode D293412.

In general, the EFED addressed the errors only comments. Those from FMC Corporation and Syngenta Crop Protection, were addressed first, using the original comments that they provided in a table format, with the responses added. Valent BioSciences Corporation provided a one page table with comments ( image provided in this review). Those comments are addressed at the end of this document. 2 FMC Corporation and Syngenta Crop Protection Error Correction Comments and Responses:

Note: Typographical errors were noted in a separate pdf file. They are not listed in this review.

Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Uncertainties: Environmental Fate Page iii, 4 The paragraph describes model uncertainty. Please reword the second sentence for clarity. " The results of a simplistic analysis of spray drift and buffer zones  indicated that the concentrations resulting from actual applications of cypermethrin could be higher or lower depending upon actual application practices." RESPONSE: THE SENTENCE WAS MODIFIED SLIGHTLY FOR CLARITY, BUT NOT ACCORDING TO THE REGISTRANT'S RECOMMENDATION. Table of Contents General comments 1) Supplementary tables are not listed in the Table of Contents. 2) Most of the Figures are not listed in the table of contents. 3) The table of contents needs to be updated to reflect actual page numbers in the document. RESPONSE: THESE WERE CORRECTED. Page vi, leachingadsorption desorption MRID 42129002 RESPONSE: AGREE, CORRECTED. Table I 1, Cypermethrin Table of Environmental Fate Data Requirements Page vi, aquatic field dissipation MRID 44876107 needs to be added to references. RESPONSE: AGREE, ADDED. Page x. 72 4, MRID 89047 is a 21 day daphnia magna not a marine study but freshwater study RESPONSE: AGREED, THIS HAS BEEN CHANGED Page x, aquatic invertebrate life cycle ( freshwater) MRID 45121822 needs to be referenced RESPONSE: CORRECTED Table I 2, Ecological Effects Data Requirements for Cypermethrin Page xi MRID 40274001 residues on foliage honeybee toxicity test needs to be referenced RESPONSE: CORRECTED Table of Contents iii, B. 1. d Page xiii ` d.' should be bioaccumulation and ` e' should be Field Studies. RESPONSE: AGREE, CORRECTED. Table of Contents IV, A. 1. C. Page xiv ` c.' should be ` use of buffer zones' and ` d.' should be aquatic plants RESPONSE: AGREE, CORRECTED. Table of Contents IV, B., 5., e. Page xv Co occurrence Analysis  These sections do not appear to be in the text: ( 2) Probit dose Response Relationship, ( 3). Data Related to Under represented Taxa and ( 4). Implications of Sublethal Effects and c Indirect Effects Analysis. RESPONSE: AGREE, THEY WERE DELETED FROM THE TABLE OF CONTENTS. 3 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments B. Potential Risk to Non target Organisms Page 1; 2 Where is the Tier I evaluation of the six crop scenarios? Using GENEEC for NC cotton yields EECs less than the Tier II PRZM/ EXAMS EECs. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT IS NOT AN ERROR, IT WILL BE ADDRESSED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. Page 2, paragraph 1 of this section 1 st bullet, parenthesis should also include a category of marine/ estuarine fish. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Risk to Aquatic Organisms Page 2, paragraph 2 of this section 2 nd bullet, there is a typo, the sentence should read "  exceed the LOC for freshwater and marine/ estuarine fish, and marine/ estuarine invertebrates". RESPONSE: CORRECTED C. Conclusions Exposure Characterizations Page 3, paragraph 1 3 Page 4, paragraph 2 Please utilize the following e fate parameter when assessing exposure from here and throughout the entire document in Tables and verbiage:   161 1 Aqueous Photolysis value is 30.1 days.   161 3 Soil Photolysis value is 165 days.   162 1 Aerobic Soil Metabolism value is 39.2 days [ mean + confidence limit ( CL)].   162 2 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism value is 165 days [ mean + CL].   162 4 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism value is 10.6 days [ mean + CL].   162 3 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism value is 22.2 days [ mean + CL].   163 1 The Koc value is 310,000.   165 4 The bioconcentration factor based on fish whole body analysis is 597. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR, THIS COMMENT WILL BE ADDRESSED IN A SUSEQUENT PHASE. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments C. Conclusions Exposure Characterizations Page 4; 5 According the cypermethrin label, the risk assessment should only be conducted with the following buffers: The label of cypermethrin requires the following buffer zones: 25 ft for ground applications; 150 ft for aerial applications; and 450 ft for ultra low volume ( ULV) aircraft application. A vegetative filter strip is also required ( 10 ft) to protect any aquatic area from runoff. RESPONSE: THE SENTENCE WAS MODIFIED TO INDICATE THAT A 150 ft BUFFER ZONE IS IMPOSED ( AS OPPOSED TO " PROPOSED"), FOR AERIAL APPLICATIONS. D. Conclusions Page 5. Last sentence in 1 st paragraph in section, does not seem to belong, delete entire sentence. RESPONSE: CORRECTED 4 Last sentence on page, add " LOAEC" before 0.33 ug ai/ L. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page 6 1 st string of words on page; complete the sentence by including    produced NOAEC at 0.78ng ai/ L based on 1 st generation mortality, a NOEC of 1.5 ng ai/ L was observed based on survival and reproduction. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page 6, 2 nd full paragraph States avian repro studies were incomplete because LOAEC was not determined however on page E 61 both studies are classified as Acceptable and in the 4 th line above the table it is stated that " The guideline ( 71 4) is fulfilled." RESPONSE: CORRECTED AND CHANGED TO SUMMENTAL. AVIAN REPORDUCTION STUDY MUST BE REPEATED IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH LOAEC. Page 7. Section II. A. 1 Source and Intensity. This assessment only addressed the risks from agricultural uses of cypermethrin. RESPONSE: THIS COMMENT IS NOT AN ERROR; THE FIRST SENTENCE OF SECTION IB ALREADY STATES THAT THE FOCUS OF THE ASSESSMENT IS ON AGRICULTURAL APPLICATIONS. Page 8 1 st sentence in section, RED should cite Koc of 310000 ( based on extensive work from PWG) RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY, PLEASE SEE ABOVE ( pp. 3 4). Problem Formulation Page 8. Section II. A. 2 (" Physical/ Chemical/ fate and transport properties"). EFED refer to a Koc value of 20,800. As EFED are aware, there is a published peer reviewed review of pyrethroid fate properties, including those of cypermethrin ( Laskowski, MRID 45169501) containing all the quality ranked data on soil sorption. The Laskowski publication provides a thorough assessment of soil sorption properties and proposes that best estimate for the Koc of cypermethrin is 310,000, indicating that the value referred to by EFED is an underestimate. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY, PLEASE SEE ABOVE ( pp. 3 4). Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Problem Formulation Page 9, Table 1 Log Kow should be 6.54 not 6.4 RESPONSE: AGREE, CORRECTED. 5 Page 12. Section II. B. 3 (" Ecosystems at Risk") Reiterates ecological effects and tries to justify assessment endpoints, but doesn't say anything about which ecosystems are potentially at risk, nor about the protection goals for those ecosystems. In the first paragraph it is stated " in order to protect threatened and endangered species, all assessment endpoints are measured at the individual level and provide insight about risks at higher levels of biological organization ( e. g., populations and communities)." Does this sentence apply only to T& E species  i. e., protection is applied at the individual level? RESPONSE: CORRECTED. This applies to engangered and threatened species.  Or is this intended to link the individual based measures of effect to the population and community based assessment endpoints for non T& E species as well? The statement, " pesticide effects on individual survivorship have important implications for   habitat carrying capacity" is questionable; habitat carrying capacity sets the limit to population abundance, but how is the habitat's carrying capacity for a population influenced by individual survivorship within that population? RESPONSE: AGREED AND CHANGED. 10 4. Overview  2 nd paragraph ( last in section), clarify the bifenthrin RED reference and update reference section. RESPONSE: THIS SENTENCE WAS INACURATE AND WAS DELETED. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Page 13. Section II. C (" Assessment Endpoints" of Table 3). The attributes listed in the left column aren't clearly defined assessment endpoints. For example, item 1 is " abundance ( i. e., survival, reproduction, and growth) of individuals and populations of birds." First, is there a difference between abundance of individuals and abundance of populations? Second, survival, reproduction, and growth are not equivalent to population abundance ( the " i. e." is inappropriate); rather they are factors that may influence population abundance, and in this case are also used as measures of effect. Why is " abundance" shown as the assessment endpoint for birds, mammals, and earthworms, but only " survival and reproduction" for fish and invertebrates and " survival of   populations" for beneficial insects? This is an attempt to fulfill the Guidelines by categorizing the potential effects of concern, but it is vague and inconsistent about actual endpoints and doesn't say anything specific about protection goals. ? RESPONSE: AGREED AND CHANGED. 6 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments E. Analysis Plan Page 18 2 nd sentence, reference USEPA 1998 missing in Ref list and the name of the document ( Guidance for Ecological Risk Assessment) is missing from the text. RESPONSE: CORRECTED. c. Measures of ecosystem  Page 21 Last sentence   delete the word " small" birds. Since 3 sizes of birds are being represented, not just the small ones. RESPONSE: CORRECTED. Analysis ( Section III) Page 22 As EFED are aware, the Pyrethroid Working Group is progressing a program of work agreed with EFED including the development of refined exposure estimates based on the best available usage data, generation of additional acute and chronic ecotoxicity data for sediment dwellers and the compilation of a comprehensive ecotoxicity data review for the synthetic pyrethroids. These new data and assessments, which will be available over the coming months, will be relevant to the environmental risk assessment for cypermethrin. RESPONSE: AGREED. AT THE TIME THAT THE DOCUMENT WAS BEING PRODUCED THIS DATA WAS NOT AVAILABLE. HOWEVER, THE ACUTE SEDIMENT STUDIES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED AND ARE BEING REVIEWED BY EPA . Head Lettuce ( interval not specified rather than 7 days). RESPONSE: AGREE. Table 4 Page 22 The Leafy Brassica listing should be as follows: includes broccoli Raab, collards, kale, mustard greens, mustard spinach, and rape greens. RESPONSE: IN ADDITION, CHINESE CABAGGE. Figures L 2   L 5 Pages 25 30 Figures are not legible. RESPONSE: THE FIGURES ARE CLEAR IN THE ORIGINAL COPIES ISSUED BY THE EFED. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE TRANSFERENCE FROM WORD PERFECT TO PDF FORMAT COULD HAVE CAUSED THE PROBLEM. THE EFED DEFERS THE ISSUE TO THE SRRD, TO PROVIDE HARD COPIES TO THE REGISTRANT. Page 27 Page is blank. RESPONSE: THIS COULD BE CAUSED BY THE USE OF A DIFFERENT PRINTER THAN THE ONE FROM WHICH THE DOCUMENT IS PRODUCED. THE EFED WILL TAKE PRECAUTIONS TO AVOID THE PROBLEM IN THIS PHASE. Page 29 Page is blank. RESPONSE: SAME AS ABOVE. 7 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Page 31. We question why the Agency has taken some of the representative properties values for cypermethrin from the review by ( Laskowski, MRID 45169501) but ignored others, e. g. kinetic parameters, Koc and BCF. If EFED plans to include any modeling, it is important that they cover available published peer reviewed papers   including data from the Laskowski publication. RESPONSE: THIS IS A SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE, NOT AN " ERROR ONLY," IT WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE NEXT PHASE.

Also, although the risk assessment includes estuarine and marine ecosystems, there is no attempt to derive an EEC for estuarine and marine habitats. Use of the high exposure farmpond scenario as a surrogate for estuarine and marine environments is extremely conservative. RESPONSE: THIS IS CORRECT. HOWEVER, THIS IS A SUBSTANTIVE CORRECTION AND WILL BE ADDRESSED LATER.

Page 32. Soil adsorption: Table 5 shows results of just one batch equilibrium adsorption study with cypermethrin ( MRID 42129003, Froelich, 1991). For the PRZM/ EXAMS runs, EFED used the value of 141,700 for Koc, which is claimed to be the average Koc from the four values reported by Froleich, 1991. Laskowski ( 2002) finds that a more recent sorption study ( Goggin et al., 1996) is more reliable than that of Froelich 1991. This is because the presence of cosolvent in the Froelich study could have resulted in an underestimation of cypermethrin sorption in this case. RESPONSE: THIS IS A SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE, IT WILL BE ADDRESSED IN A SUBSEQUENT REVISION PHASE. Exposure Characterization ( Section III B)

Page 32. Section 1. a. Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization. First sentence "  zeta cypermethrin, one of the isomers of cypermethrin." This is incorrect. Zetacypermethrin is made up of the same eight isomers that define cypermethrin, except they are in different ratios for the two products. RESPONSE: THE PARAGRAPH WAS SIMPLIFIED, TO AVOID CONFUSION. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments 8 Page 32. Section 1. a. Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization/ Summary of Empirical Data. It is stated here that " If released to water, cypermethrin will rapidly partition to the sediment compartment which acts as an environmental sink for this compound." In natural water bodies, cypermethrin will rapidly partition into organic matter containing substrates, which in addition to bed sediment, include phytoplankton, other suspended particles and aquatic plants in the water column. The relative extent to which cypermethrin reaching surface water will partition to sediment will depend on the relative densities of these other substrates in the water body. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR ONLY; HOWEVER, A BRIEF SENTENCE WAS ADDED TO ADDRESS THE MATTER. 9 Exposure Characterization ( Section III B) Page 34. Section 1. e. Field Studies. No mentioned is made here of the aquatic field studies with cypermethrin, although two of these studies are referred to in Section C. Ecological Effects Characterization. For example, the following field aquatic studies area available:

Crossland ( 1982). Aquatic toxicology of cypermethrin. II. Fate and biological effects in pond experiments. Aquatic Toxicol. 2: 205 222.

Crossland et al. ( 1982). Aquatic toxicology of cypermethrin. III. Fate and biological effects of spray drift deposits in fresh water adjacent to agricultural land. Aquatic Toxicol. 2: 253 270.

Farmer et al. ( 1995). A comparison of the fate and effects of two pyrethroid insecticides ( lambda cyhalothrin and cypermethrin) in pond mesocosms. Ecotoxicology, 4: 219 244.

Shires & Bennett D ( 1985). Contamination and effects in freshwater ditches resulting from aerial application of cypermethrin. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety, 9: 145 158.

Getty et al. ( 1983). Cypermethrin: effects of multiple low application rate applications on experimental ponds. ICI Plant Protection Division, Bracknell, Berks, UK. Report No. RJ0182B. MRID 152737.

Jaber and Hawk ( 1983). Cypermethrin: aquatic ecological effects under field use conditions in cotton, Selma, Alabama, 1980. ICI Americas, Inc., Goldsboro, NC. Report No. TMUE0026/ B. MRID 128704.

Palmieri et al. ( 1992). An evaluation of the impact of cypermethrin exposure on managed aquatic ecosystems. FMC Corporation Study No. A89 2847. MRID 42148201.

Rea et al. ( 1988). Cypermethrin: evaluation of the impact of aerially sprayed cypermethrin on the aquatic ecosystem of a farm pond in the drainage basin of a cotton crop; 1987. ICI Agrochemicals, Bracknell, Berks, UK Report No. RJ0629B. MRID 40804501.

RESPONSE: THIS IS A SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE, NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION. IF THESE FIELD STUDIES HAVE ENVIRONMENTAL FATE INFORMATION, THEY MAY BE ADDED IN THIS SECTION IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. 10 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Page 46 Last paragraph, last sentence should read " These scenarios are summarized in Supplementary Table A." RESPONSE: AGREE, CORRECTED. Spray drift/ Buffer zone Analysis Page 49 The paragraph above Table D references CA fruits ( stone fruits), which are not included in this assessment. In addition, cypermethrin is not registered on stone fruits. RESPONSE: AGREE, CORRECTED. Supplementary Tables D and E Page 49 It is unclear why higher tiers of refinement result in increasing rather than decreasing estimated peak concentrations. The 0% drift peak value ( 2.155) is greater than the peak value used in the 5% drift PRZM/ EXAMS runs ( 2.01). To be consistent ( and follow EFED policy), the 1 in 10 year exceedence value should be used in Tables D and E, especially since RQ values are calculated and apparently used in the assessment. RESPONSE: THE PEAK VALUE FOR 5% DRIFT IS 2.385 ppb. EFED REVISED ALL THE PEAK VALUES AND FOUND THAT ALL OF THEM WERE CORRECTLY REPORTED. The high end conservative drift scenario includes a release height of 15 ft. The Ammo label states those applications more than 10 ft above the crop canopy should be avoided. RESPONSE: IT SHOULD BE AVOIDED, BUT IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE APPLICATOR WOULD EXCEED THIS LIMIT. Page 49 The very conservative drift scenario is unrealistic. The use of fine droplets with a wind speed of 15 mph is unlikely. RESPONSE: THIS SCENARIO IS ALSO POSSIBLE. Page 51; 1, last sentence Please change " but it is more meaningful for the high end drift scenario" to " but had a greater impact for the high end drift scenario". RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION; HOWEVER, THE SENTENCE WAS REWORDED FOR CLARITY, BUT NOT ACCORDING TO THE REGISTRANT'S RECOMMENDATION. Supplementary Table E 51, 2, first sentence Please change " has certain uncertainties" to " specific uncertainties". RESPONSE: AGREE. Aq Exposure Monitoring and Field Data Page 52; 1, Sentence 2 Please insert " with log Pow of 5.0" after " cypermethrin is very hydrophobic". RESPONSE: DISAGREE. THIS PHRASE DOES NOT ADD TO THE MESSAGE OF THE PARAGRAPH. IN ADDITION THE VALUE FOR log Pow APPEARS TO BE INCORRECT. 11 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments 12 Ecological Effects Characterization ( Section III C) Page 54 a. For the acute and chronic toxicity reference values for fish and invertebrates, EFED has selected the lowest single endpoints. In this way, EFED are not taking advantage of the wealth of information contained within the numerous acceptable studies available with cypermethrin and fish and invertebrate species. Using geometric means from all of the acceptable study endpoints would provide more robust endpoints for risk assessment. RESPONSE: THIS IS A SUBSTANTIVE COMMENT AND WILL BE ADDRESSED LATER.

b. The acute fish and acute freshwater invertebrate endpoints selected by EFED are values for beta cypermethrin. Beta cypermethrin has an enhanced isomer composition, with an increased in the content of active isomers relative to cypermethrin. EFED have not explained or demonstrated why the ecotoxicity of beta cypermethrin is considered to be equivalent to that of cypermethrin. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME RANGE AS CYPERMETHRIN c. For the same reasons given in point 5. b. above, some rationale is needed to justify EFED's comparison of the acute fish and invertebrate endpoints from tests with betacypermethrin with endpoints from tests with formulated cypermethrin.

RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME RANGE AS CYPERMETHRIN d. EFED have estimated a NOAEC for Daphnia magna to be compared with a 21 day EEC, based on the acute to chronic ratio for the mysid shrimp ( 96h LC50/ 28 d NOAEC). The 21 day NOEC for Daphnia magna, available from the study by Edwards et al.( 1981) is considered to be more reliable than the estimate obtained by EFED. RESPONSE: THIS STUDY WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO EPA AND WILL BE ADDRESSED AT A LATER TIME.

e. EFED have calculated a 10 d LC50 in pore water for benthic organisms based on the lowest available sediment value ( Hyalella azteca in 1% o C sediment). EFED have used a Koc value of 141,700 for this calculation. As discussed in points 1 and 4 b, this Koc value is likely to be an underestimate. JOSE f. EFED have estimated a chronic endpoint for benthic organisms based on the acute to chronic ratio for the mysid shrimp ( 96h LC50/ 28 d NOAEC). As EFED are aware, the Pyrethroid Working group is progressing a ( comments continued from previous page) program of work agreed with EFED including generation of additional acute and chronic ecotoxicity data for sediment dwellers. These new data, which will be available over the coming months, will be relevant to the environmental risk assessment for 13 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Cypermethrin Toxicity Reference Values Page 57, Table 12 Acute rainbow trout 96 hr study ( MRID 44546027) is a beta Cypermethrin study beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating the risk to cypermethrin. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME RANGE AS CYPERMETHRIN Page 57 Daphnia acute study MRID 44546031 is stated to be a beta cypermethrin study in Appendix E ( p E16). beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating the risk to cypermethrin. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME RANGE AS CYPERMETHRIN Table 12 Page 58, estuarine/ marine invertebrates; Acute, mysid shrimp Accession. No. 070562 is an oyster study according to Table E 6 on page E 37. The Reference should be MRID 42444601 RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page 60, 1 st sentence Remove 0.39 ug/ L for trout, that study ( MRID 44546027) is a beta cypermethrin study. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN ADDRESSED EARLIER. Page 60, paragraph 2, 2 nd sentence Need to mention GFU 061 ( 36 %), which is mentioned in the next sentence. RESPONSE: THIS HAS BEEN CORRECTED. Page 60, 2 nd paragraph, 6 th line It is unclear where the 3.3 value is derived from in Table E 1b. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page 60, 4 th paragraph Remove 0.42 ug/ L for daphnia that study ( MRID 4456031) is a beta cypermethrin study. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME RANGE AS CYPERMETHRIN a. ( 1) Acute Effects Page 61, paragraph under Estuarine/ Marine Fish , 1 st sentence Table E 5 page E 33 list the Atlantic salmon LC50 value as 2.0 and the reference should be 41068003 not 41968212. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page 66; 1 MRID 44546031 is a beta Cypermethrin study. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME RANGE AS CYPERMETHRIN ( 3) Sublethal Effects 66, 1 st full paragraph LC50 in rainbow trout should be mentioned ( 13 ug/ L). Sublethal effects for the formulated material are not similar to the technical material. There are not orders of magnitude differences between the NOAEC and the LC50 value for the formulated material. RESPONSE: CORRECTED. There was a units mistake in table E 1a 14 66, 4 th line under Estuarine/ Marine Fish  MRID number 44546034 is a beta cypermethrin study. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME RANGE AS CYPERMETHRIN 66, first line under Benthic Organisms Table E 5 should be E 4. 15 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Section III C ( 4) field studies Page 67. The open literature paper Kedwards et al.( 1999a) provides further statistical analyses of the study reported by Rea et al. ( 1988) and the paper Kedwards et al.( 1999b) provides further statistical analyses of the study reported by Farmer et al. ( 1995). EFED have included a summary of the study by Farmer et al. ( 1995) in Table E 8, however EFED have not summarized the study by Rea et al.( 1988) ICI report number RJ0629B, MRID 40804501. RESPONSE: THIS IS A SUBSTANTIVE COMMENT AND WILL BE ADDRESSED LATER. Chronic rat study   The acceptable MRID# 00112912 should be used for endpoint comparisons in place of the unacceptable / supplemental study currently being used in this assessment ( MRID 00090040). Change throughout the text and use the correct endpoint for calculating the RQs RESPONSE: EFED POLICY IS TO USE THE MOST SENATIVE ORGANISMS. SUPLLEMENTAL DATA IS ACCEPTABLE FOR RISK ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENT. MRID 44546024 a beta study. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: THIS HAS BEEN ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY. Table 13 Page 69 Acute dietary avian the actual reported LC50 was > 20,000 ppm rather than the reported repellent effect concentration of > 2,634 ppm in the text. Change throughout the text and use the correct endpoint (> 20, 000) for calculating the RQs. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Terrestrial Invertebrates Page 70 MRID 44544208 is a beta cypermethrin study for honeybees ( last sentence in this section). beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME RANGE AS CYPERMETHRIN Page 72. Page is blank.

REFER TO RESPONSE TO THIS ISSUE ABOVE. 16 Risk Characterization ( Section IV) Page 73 As EFED are aware, the Pyrethroid Working group is progressing a program of work agreed with EFED including the development of refined exposure estimates based on the best available usage data, generation of additional acute and chronic ecotoxicity data for sediment dwellers and the compilation of a comprehensive ecotoxicity data review for the synthetic pyrethroids. These new data and assessments, which will be available over the coming months, will be relevant to the environmental risk assessment for cypermethrin.

RESPONSE: THE AGENCY IS AWARE OF PWG'S EFFORTS, ESPECIALLY, THEIR SEDIMENT TOXICITY STUDIES.

Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments 1. Non target aquatic  Page 74 The 21 day EEC is being used solely to calculate RQs and it is recommended that other values as listed below be included in RQ calculations ( i. e. daphnia 21 days, fish + 28 days). RESPONSE: EFED HAS CHANGED THE CHRONIC RQ VALUES TO REFLECT THE EEC FOR 60 DAYS IN ORDER TO CALCULATE CHRONIC RQS FOR FISH. Table 15 Page 76 The freshwater invertebrate chronic RQ for TX cotton should be 0.9 and not 1.1. This means that the RQ does not exceed the LOC for chronic risk. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Supplementary Table H Page 77 The values used here should be the 1 in 10 year exceedence EECs, just like those used for the RQ calculations previously. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. THE CORRECT VALUES WERE REPORTED. Page 77 Should include a freshwater species also to compare buffer zones. RESPONSE: THIS IS A SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE, NOT AN ERROR, IT WILL BE CONSIDERED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. The 1 in 10 year exceedence values should be used for RQ comparisons. RESPONSE ALREADY PROVIDED. The RQs calculated here ( based upon peak concentrations) should not be compared to the LOCs if they are used to study the impact of spray drift on concentrations. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION, THIS ISSUE WILL BE ADDRESSED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. c. Use of buffer zones Page 78 The text should note that a 150 foot buffer zone is required by the label, and that the values presented only take into account reduction of spray drift, and not runoff and sediment transport, which are significant. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR; HOWEVER, THE EFED ADDED A FOOTNOTE IN SUPPLEMENTARY TABLE I. 17 Table 17 Page 81 The footnotes reference T REX output in Appendix D, but the output was not included in the appendix. ( Microsoft Excel spreadsheets not included ( Page D 1) RESPONSE: CORRECTED c. Risk to Terrestrial Invertebrates Page 85 Remove reference to beta cypermethrin 10EC. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments 18 Risk Description ( Section IV B) Page 85 a. EFED refers to available field studies and claims that these show that adverse effects on sediment dwelling populations can occur. Giddings ( 1997) carried out a thorough review of the available field data on pyrethroids ( Springborn Report number 97 6 7014) and this report we also published ( Giddings et al., 2001. Probabilistic risk assessment of cotton pyrethroids: ii. Aquatic mesocosm and field studies. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 660  668). The findings of this review were that the abundance of macroinvertebrates in sediments was highly variable in space and time and could not be characterized precisely for most species. Additionally, concentrations of pyrethroids in sediments showed high special variability, even following uniform dosing of experimental ponds. The review revealed that areas of low or negligible pyrethroid concentration in the sediment can serve as refuges for sediment dwellers and serve as sources for population recolonization. Overall, effects of pyrethroids observed in the mesocosms were correlated with maximum concentrations in the water column, not with concentrations in the sediment. Although some of the groups of organisms affected by pyrethroid application spend time in the sediment surface, their most relevant route of exposure would be via the water column.

b. EFED express concerns about the potential for bioaccumulation in aquatic organisms and trophic transfer. The PWG carried out a program of work to investigate the partitioning, bioavailability and toxicity of cypermethrin on aquatic systems ( PWG Report number RC0007; MRID 44074407). This work was also published ( Maund et al., 2002. Partitioning, bioavailability and toxicity of the pyrethroid insecticide cypermethrin in sediments. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 21 ( 1), pp. 9 15). These studies showed that in watersediment systems the vast majority of the cypermethrin (> 99%) is sorbed to the sediment. However, the concentration of cypermethrin in the sediment is not a good predictor of the amount that is bioavailable. The best predictor of the bioavailable fraction was the concentration in the pore water, supporting the equilibrium partitioning theory. Bioconcentration factors for Daphnia and Chironomus, based on the extractable concentration of cypermethrin in sediment were similar and very low (< 1), indicating that the proportion of the cypermethrin adsorbed to the sediment that is available to aquatic organisms is very low, for both water column and benthic organisms. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments 19 Page 88, paragraph 2 Hill et al 1973 and Dianne ( change to Dionne) 1998 are incomplete references and are not in the reference section on page 113. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION. THE ISSUE WILL BE CONSIDERED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. b. Aquatic Animals ( Water )

Page 89, 1 st partial paragraph, 8 th line from bottom The sentence beginning with " effects include" is confusing and contains incomplete MRID # 15. RESPONSE: CORRECTED c. Aquatic Animals ( Sediment ) Page 88, 1 st sentence in last paragraph Refer to Table E 8 ( page E 46) here. RESPONSE: CORRECTED E. Other special  Page 89, last sentence that extends to page 90 The sentence is confusing. Please reword. RESPONSE: EVEN THOUGH THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION, THE REVIEWER MODIFIED THE SENTENCE FOR CLARITY. Page 90; 1 " All scenarios showed that the RQ exceeded by far all the LOCs." It is suggested that sentence be omitted. The exercise was to look at the impact of drift on EECs. The EECs from the drift exercise were higher than those with the standard 5% drift. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION. THE ISSUE WILL BE CONSIDERED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. e. Other Special Considerations for Evaluating Aquatic Risk ( Buffer Zones)

Page 90; 3 This entire paragraph should be amended to not include RQ values since this was not the purpose of the drift evaluation. SAME RESPONSE AS ABOVE. Summary of Risk to Aquatic Systems ( IV. B. 1. f) Pages 90 91. The final section of the aquatic risk assessment is entirely speculative and out of place as the summary of a careful quantitative screening level risk assessment. None of the toxicological or ecological phenomena invoked here is specific to cypermethrin or indeed to pesticides in general. For example, EFED states, " Possible chronic effects to aquatic life may also be a concern where an initial permethrin exposure may be affective [ sic] in causing reproductive effects 21 days to 60 days later." The potential for latent effects is a source of uncertainty in most chemical risk assessments. Another example: " Toxic exposure of cypermethrin in the sediment can present a more far reaching impact to a multitude of organisms than impact from the water column" because many aquatic species interact with the sediment or with sediment dwelling organisms. Or: " Chronic toxicant loads in sediments may drive populations toward a limited set of tolerant genotypes over time." Such speculations are boundless; one can use basic ecological mechanisms to hypothesize about indirect effects, which are rarely, if ever, observed in field experiments. None of the factors mentioned in this paragraph are supported or suggested by the findings of the Science Chapter   they should have been addressed in the Problem Formulation. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION. THE ISSUE WILL BE CONSIDERED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. 20 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments 3. Review of Incident Data Page 93, 1 st full sentence EPA lists 5 categories here, but on pages J1 and J2 the Agency lists 6 categories in the certainty index. Category 3 ( probably)   may need to be eliminated. RESPONSE: CORRECTED a. Incidents Involving Aquatic Organisms. Page 93, 3 rd sentence Related to above comment. Table J 1 on page J2 does not reflect what is stated here. Footnote a ( certainty index) has a 3 as probably. This throws the tally in this sentence off. If probably is removed from the table, the number of various incidents reflects what is stated in this sentence RESPONSE: CORRECTED b. Incidents Involving Terrestrial Organisms Page 93, 3 rd sentence Similar to above comment. Table J 1 on page J 1 has the ` probably' in the footnote that makes this sentence inaccurate. Footnote in table J 1 needs to be corrected. RESPONSE: CORRECTED 4. Endocrine effects Page 93 94 Current EFED work is ongoing to determine potential endocrine effects from pesticides. Conclusions about potential effects at this point are premature for cypermethrin. RESPONSE: THE AGENCY CONCLUDES THAT AT THIS SCREENING LEVEL CYPERMETHRIN MAY HAVE THE POTENTIAL FOR ENDOCRINE EFFECTS ( E. G., REPRODUCTION EFFECTS IN AQUATIC ORGANISMS. WHEN APPROPRIATE SCREENING AND TESTING PROTOCOLS ARE DEVELOPED CYPERMETHRIN MAY BE SUBJECTED TO ADDITIONAL SCREENING. Endocrine Effects Page 93 a. EFED states that observed reproductive effects in aquatic species are considered evidence of detrimental effects on the endocrine system. The science behind this assumption is not revealed. RESPONSE: THIS HAS BEEN REVISED TO SHOW THAT CYPERMETHRIN MAY HAVE EFFECTS ON THE ENDROCRINE SYSTEM.

b. Reproductive effects were observed only for M. bahia, based on the toxicity data presented in Appendix E. This estuarine/ marine invertebrate was the most sensitive species to cypermethrin. However, for M. bahia the lowest chronic endpoint was reduced growth in the males. RESPONSE: REPRODUCTIVE EFFECTS ( GROWTH, ETC) ARE CONSIDERED AS REFLECTIVE OF POSSIBLE EFFECTS TO THE ENDOCRINE SYSTEM. 5. Threatened & Endangered ., b. Taxonomic Groups  thru to d. Critical Habitat Pages 94 98 There appears to be several sections missing including, ( 2) Probit Dose Response Relationship, ( 3) Data Related to Under represented Taxa and ( 4). Implications of Sublethal Effects. Also c. Indirect Effects Analysis. RESPONSE: AGREE, THESE WERE DELETED 21 FROM THE TABLE OF CONTENTS. Threatened and Endangered Species Page 94 Syngenta and FMC acknowledge the data requirement for endangered species to provide information on the proximity of federally listed endangered species to pesticide use sites. Syngenta, FMC and other registrants responding to this data requirement should provide this endangered species information using the FIFRA Endangered Species Task Force ( FESTF) Information Management System ( IMS). FESTF has developed the IMS to assist its member companies in meeting legal obligations to submit data required by EPA OPP under FIFRA ( as described in Pesticide Registration Notice 2000 2) to support the members' registration and reregistration actions. The purpose of the IMS is to meet the data requirements in a manner that significantly improves the consistency, quality, availability and use of existing information on threatened and endangered species and pesticide use. On March 01, 2005 FESTF submitted the work products detailed in PR Notice 2000 2, including IMS 2.0 and access to NatureServe data on endangered species in response to the requirements described in that notice1. Use of the IMS by registrants in response to their endangered species data requirement for cypermethrin will provide a means of conserving EPA OPP resources and providing documentation and consistency throughout to produce a high quality effects determination for cypermethrin.

EPA has provided an explanation of the trigger for the endangered species data requirement, i. e., LOCs for endangered species that are exceeded in screening level risk assessments. However, EPA does not clearly articulate the data requirement for endangered species. RESPONSE: THERE ARE NO SPECIFIC ENDANGERED SPECIES DATA REQUIREMENTS. THE AGENCY USES AVAILABLE DATA AND EXTRAPOLATED INFORMATION TO SCREEN OUT THE LIKELYHOOD OF NO EFFECT. EXCEEDANCE OF THE ENDANGERED LOC TRIGGERS SCREENING LEVEL CONCERNS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED.

Participation in FESTF through membership or citation to FESTF work products provides a registrant with access to excellent tools necessary to complete a high quality endangered species assessment but does not provide specific information on the proximity of listed species to cypermethrin uses. EPA needs to provide better ( comments continued from previous page) 22 guidance on what the registrants need to deliver.

EPA needs to outline its plans for refinements to the screening level risk assessment for cypermethrin. Refinements to the screening level assessment that reduce the scope of the effects determination for endangered species should be a high priority ( e. g., terrestrial vertebrates).

EPA needs to clarify exactly what taxonomic groups of relevance to Federally listed species trigger a species specific refinement. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION. THE ISSUE WILL BE CONSIDERED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. Footnote: 1 1) The development and submission by FESTF of an Information Management System ( IMS) that EPA can use to screen pesticide applications when their applications trigger potential endangered species issues; 2) funding by the FESTF through a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement ( CRADA) of a state by state species access program to be undertaken by EPA that will enable EPA to access high quality species locality data to validate the IMS ( replaced by FESTF's direct contract with NatureServe for EPA's access to these data); and 3) a quality test of the IMS, based in part upon information collected by EPA pursuant to the CRADA ( NatureServe data). Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments b. ( 1) Discussion of RQ Page 95 Last sentence is misleading. Should read instead as "  level I screening assessment show that listed species for several taxa are located in regions where cypermethrin may be used based on crop location." Misleading to state that the RQs are above the LOC, because this appears to exaggerate the RQs from terrestrial species ( only a potential " short grass" risk). RESPONSE: AGENCY DISAGREES. THE STATEMENT IS GENERAL AND STATES THAT THE EXCEEDANCE OF THE LISTED LOC SUGGESTS THAT SEVERAL LISTED TAXA MAY BE AT RISK. Probit Slope Analysis Page 97 It was unclear how the results of the probit analysis were calculated. Provide an example so that the calculations can be verified. Urban and Cook 1986 is not in the reference section. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Based on the information provided, it is not possible to determine how the slopes, mortality probabilities, or their respective bound estimates were calculated. The Agency should provide the data used for this analysis to improve the transparency of the document. 23 d. Critical Habitats Page 98, 2 nd paragraph, 1 st sentence It appears that invertebrate and vertebrate are inverted in the sentence. RESPONSE: APPENDIX GIVES AN EXAMPLE CALCULATION FOR FRESHWATER FISH.

The EPA should refine the risk assessment for those groups where potential concerns have been identified prior to conducting any indirect effects analysis on critical habitat. RESPONSE: THIS RED IS A SCREENING LEVEL ASSESSMENT. 2. Assumptions. for Aquatic Species Page 99, 2 of this section " There are no monitoring studies for cypermethrin in freshwater or marine, " Should this end with " the marine environment". RESPONSE: CORRECTED 24 Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Section C. Description of Assumptions, Uncertainties, Strengths and Limitations Page 99 Presumably this section is a place holder   many obvious and significant assumptions and uncertainties are not yet described. This section needs to be put into the context of the entire risk characterization. For example some routes of exposure are significantly more probable and therefore important to the risk characterization than others e. g., water column for aquatics and dietary for terrestrial animals. This should be addressed in the Problem Formulation stage. Rather than a discussion on endless sources of uncertainty many of which may not be significantly important in the risk characterization, EFED should constructively address its plans to refine the screening level risk assessment presented. Refinements to the screening level assessment that reduce the scope of the effects determination for endangered species should be a high priority e. g., terrestrial vertebrates. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION. THE ISSUE WILL BE CONSIDERED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Environmental Fate MRID Studies  Page 106 Froelich study should be MRID 42129003 and Curry study should be MRID 42129002. MRID 42868203 should be Giroir and Stuerman, not Sherman. RESPONSE: AGREE. V. Literature Cited. Ecological Effects MRID Studies Submitted to EPA. Page 108. Clarification on cited MRID 62793: MRID 62793. Edwards, P. J., Brown, S. M., and A. S. Sapiets. ( February 1980). Cypermethrin ( PP383): Toxicity of technical and formulated material to first instar Daphnia magna. ICI Plant Protection Division. RJ011OB.

MRID 92027014 Hamer, M. ( 1990) ICI Americas Inc. Phase 3 Summary of MRID 00062793. Cypermethrin ( PP383): Toxicity of Technical and Formulated Material to First Instar Daphnia magna: Report No.: RJ011OB; Study No.: PP383/ CN/ 01. Prepared by ICI Agrochemicals, Jealott's Hill Research Station 17 p. RESPONSE: CORRECTED V. Literature Cited. Ecological Effects MRID Studies Submitted to EPA. Page 109. Correct date for MRID 90040: delete " 1972?" and replace with " February 1979". RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix A 161 2 Aqueous Photolysis Page A 1 Aqueous Photolysis value is 30.1 days. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. pp 52. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. 25 Appendix A 161 3 Soil Photolysis Page A 1 Soil Photolysis value is 165 days. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. pp 52. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Appendix A 162 1 Aerobic Soil Metabolism Page A 2 Aerobic Soil Metabolism value is 39.2 days [ mean + confidence limit ( CL)]. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. pp 92 RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Appendix A 162 2 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism Page A 2 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism value is 165 days [ mean + CL]. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. pp 93. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Appendix A 162 4 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Page A 3 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism value is 10.6 days [ mean + CL]. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. pp 94. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Appendix A 162 3 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Page A 3 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism value is 22.2 days [ mean + CL]. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. pp 95. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Appendix A 163 1 Mobility   Leaching and Ad/ Des Page A 4 The Koc value is 310,000. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. pp 52. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Appendix A Pages A1 A7 Aerobic Aq, Anaerobic Aq Metabolism and Aq Field Dissipation studies support a zetacypermethrin rice registration. These studies are not relevant for cypermethrin. RESPONSE: THIS IS NOT AN ERROR CORRECTION. THE ISSUE WILL BE CONSIDERED IN A SUBSEQUENT PHASE Page A 15. Page is blank. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. 26 Appendix A 165 4 Bioaccumulation in Fish Page A 8 The bioconcentration factor based on fish wholebody analysis is 597. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. pp 52 & 85. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Page B 1 The use of the 1 in 10 year probability is a very conservative and protective methodology. However, it is most appropriate to chose the 1   in 10 year distributional value that corresponds to the toxicology end point study length, i. e. 96 hour, 21 day, etc. as opposed to the peak value. RESPONSE: The Agency does point estimates in the Tier I Risk Assessment. We also use the concentration corresponding to the particular endpoint of concern ( e. g. peak for acute, 21 day for invertebrate chronic, and 65 days for fish chronic. The use of peak values is more protective. This is a policy issue, not an error. Appendix B 1. 1   in 10 year Probability Page B1 Helsel and Hirsch 1993 reference missing from any reference list. RESPONSE: REFERENCE WAS ADDED. Page C2. Page is blank. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Appendix B 2. PRZM/ EXAMS Modeling Results Pages B 2 through B 51 Please use the appropriate e fate inputs as corrected by registrants in Appendix A for all modeling runs. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Page D 1 Please provide the attached Microsoft Excel spreadsheets as indicated in the IRED. ° Cypermethrin_ T REX_ cotton_ v1.12. xls ° Cypermethrin_ T REX_ lettuce_ v1.12. xls ° Cypermethrin_ T REX_ pecans_ v1.12. xls Rape is not registered  remove Cypermethrin_ TREX rape_ v1.12. xls   Page D 4 Please add the T REX model to the reference list. Appendix D T REX Model Inputs, Results, Output Page D 4 1 st paragraph   provide the graphs. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Page E 3, 1 st full paragraph, 2 nd line % ai for GFU 061 is 36%. Update the (% ai not reported) in the text to reflect this change. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E 3, 1 st full paragraph, 5 th sentence" Based on these results . The sentence appears to be incomplete. Also, formations should be formulations. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E8 MRID 44546027 is a beta cypermethrin. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY Appendix E Ecological Effects Database Page E 14, 1 st full sentence The sentence appears to be incomplete. Also, formations should be formulations. RESPONSE: CORRECTED 27 Page E 27. "???" in percent a. i. column: Radio labeled technical, therefore "???" should read " Technical". RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E16 MRID 44546031 is a beta cypermethrin study. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. Page E 31, line 6 of 1st paragraph 4.3 ug ai/ L should be 3.42 ug ai/ L RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E 31 MRID is 41068003 not 41968212. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E 39 Table E 6, MRID 070562 mysid shrimp, the 24 hr LC50 is = 44.7 pptr not > 24 pptr RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E 39 40 MRID 44561209  beta cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED. Page E41 Table E7, study MRID 070562, chronic mysid shrimp, the MATC is greater than 0.44 ng/ L but less than 0.64 ng/ L. This is not captured within the table descriptions. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E44 MRID 44546035 is a beta cypermethrin study. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED Page E56. Page is blank. Page E57 Endpoints need correcting   LD50 male is > 10,248 not > 9520 mg ai/ kg bw; female LD50 is > 12,085 not > 11, 227 mg ai/ kg bw. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E57 58 MRID 44546024 is a beta cypermethrin study. Beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Page E 58, paragraph below table, 7 th sentence MRID 445460261 should read MRID 44546026 RESPONSE: CORRECTED Acute dietary avian studies, MRID 90071 and 90072, LC50 is > 20,000 ppm for both not > 2,634 ppm and > 3,951 ppm. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page E59 MRID 90071 and 90072 toxic category ids " practically non toxic" not " slightly toxic". RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix E Ecological Effects Database Page E60 Remove referenced beta cypermethrin studies from the list ( MRID 44546025 and MRID 44546026). RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME 28 Page E65 MRID 44544208 studies are beta cypermethrin studies. Beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME Page E66 Two studies listed, the purity is 36.8% not 37.2%. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix F The Risk Quotient  Concern s Page F 1 The RQ equation is superimposed on the text in both the electronic and paper copies. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix G Table G 4 Page G 3 The 21 day EEC for TX cotton is 0.060 ug/ L, which also changes the chronic RQ to 0.9, below the LOC. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix G Table G 6 Page G 5 The 21 day EEC for TX cotton is 0.060 ug/ L. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix G Table G 9 Page G 7 The peak EEC for CA lettuce is 30.5 ug/ kg. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix G Table G 10 Page G 8 The peak EEC for TX cotton is 0.0073 ug/ L. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix G Page G 9 The page is blank. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Appendix G Tables G 13 to G 24 Pages G 12 to G 20 The T REX output was not included in Appendix D, so the RQs could not be checked.

Appendix H Page H1 Please provide an anticipated timeline for the ES assessment ( if available). Response: The Agency will not be providing a list of species relative to use sites, at this time. Page H2. Page is blank. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments 29 Table I 1, Page I 1   161 1 Aqueous Photolysis value is 30.1 days.   161 3 Soil Photolysis value is 165 days.   162 1 Aerobic Soil Metabolism value is 39.2 days [ mean + confidence limit ( CL)].   162 2 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism value is 165 days [ mean + CL].   162 4 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism value is 10.6 days [ mean + CL].   162 3 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism value is 22.2 days [ mean + CL].   163 1 The Koc value is 310,000.   165 4 The bioconcentration factor based on fish whole body analysis is 597. Reference: Laskowski, D. 2002. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicity. Volume 174. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED.

MRID 42124002 is a typo 42129002 ( ad/ des) RESPONSE: AGREE. Appendix I Data Requirement Tables   Environmental Fate and Effects Pages I3, I5, I6 It is unclear why one entry is highlighted in blue. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page I5, 72 3( d) It is unclear why one entry is highlighted in blue. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page I5 72 4, MRID 89047 is a 21 day daphnia magna not a marine study but freshwater study. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix I Data Requirement Tables ( Ecological Effects)

Page I6, 72 7 It is unclear why one entry is highlighted in blue. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page J 1 Certainty Index, remove zeros after the decimal. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix J Page J 1 J1 ( J2?); the Certainty Index do not match those listed on p 93 RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix K Page K 1 Provide Excel files   they are not attached. Which 10 publications? Provide list.

Header pdf Version Page #; Paragraph # Comments Pages L 1 through L 8 Numbers are very difficult to read on both electronic and paper copies. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Page L 2 Page is unreadable. Map is cutoff and text is overlapping on both electronic and paper copies. Pages L 4 and L 6. Pages are blank. RESPONSE: THIS ISSUE WAS PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED. Appendix L Use Characterization Maps Page L 8 Text is overlapping base map on both electronic and paper copies. Figure 6 and figure 7 embedded on each other. One of the figures is missing. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Appendix M Equilibrium Partitioning and Page M 1 Please define benthos ( as the bottom of a pond) for the general public. RESPONSE: CORRECTED 30 Page M 3 Cannot find Table 3.7 in this document. This reference should be Tables 7 9 ( pages 42 44). RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page M 3 The range of EECs in benthic pore water by PRZM/ EXAMS is 0.0044  0.0304 ug/ L. The highest EECs are for the NC Cotton scenario. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page M 4 There are two appendices titled Appendix N. The Environmental Fate bibliography is on pages M 4 to M 7 in the second Appendix N. Rename appendices and renumber pages as appropriate. RESPONSE: CORRECTED. Page M 6 For MRID 42868203, the authors are E. Giroir and L. Stuerman, not L. Sherman. RESPONSE: AGREE, CORRECTED. Appendix N. Environmental Fate and Monitoring Bibliography Page M 6 For MRID 44876105, the author is A. Ramsey and the report date is 1998. For clarity, the Lab study number is 194E2697E1, and the report number is P 3329. RESPONSE: THE STUDY AUTHOR WAS CORRECTED. Appendix N. Ecological Effects MRID Studies Submitted to EPA Page N 1 Reference Accession No. 070562: Replace with full reference: " Stephenson, R. R.; Sherwood, C. M.; Bennett, D.; et al. ( 1980) The Acute Toxicity of WL 43467 to Some Freshwater Invertebrates in Static Water Tests: Group Research Report TLGR. 80.040. ( Un published study received Dec 30, 1981 under 10182 64; prepared by Shell Research, Ltd., England, submitted by ICI Americas, Inc., Wilmington, Del.; CDL: 070562 F)". RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page N 2 Clarify MRID 62793 as follows:

MRID 62793. Edwards, P. J., Brown, S. M., and A. S. Sapiets. ( February 1980). Cypermethrin ( PP383): Toxicity of technical and formulated material to first instar Daphnia magna. ICI Plant Protection Division. RJ011OB.

MRID 92027014 Hamer, M. ( 1990) ICI Americas Inc. Phase 3 Summary of MRID 00062793. Cypermethrin ( PP383): Toxicity of Technical and Formulated Material to First Instar Daphnia magna: Report No.: RJ011OB; Study No.: PP383/ CN/ 01. Prepared by ICI Agrochemicals, Jealott's Hill Research Station 17 p. RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page N 3 Correct MRID 65812 as follows: Delete author ICI and replace with " Hill, R. W.".; insert report number " ICI Brixham BL/ B/ 2011". RESPONSE: CORRECTED Page N 5 Correct date for MRID 90040: delete " 1972?" and replace with " February 1979". RESPONSE: CORRECTED 31 Pages N 10   N11 References for beta cypermethrin are listed. beta Cypermethrin studies should not be used in estimating cypermethrin risk. RESPONSE: BETA CYPERMETHRIN INFORMATION WAS USED AS BRIDGING DATA. TOXICITY IS IN THE SAME Valent BioScience Error Correction Comments: 32 EFED Responses:

xii; xvi; 45; 1st paragraph; 46, 3rd paragraph, last sentence; A 11 thru A 14; A 15; G 9; H 2; L 2; L 4, L 6; L 8  Responses to these items were provided earlier in this report ( refer to comments and responses above).

47, Footnote  Font in the footnote is different   this comment is not an error. 33 86 thru remaining text   It was found that the same font and font size were used, the difference was the line height. This minor problem was resolved.

95, Table 20   Table was corrected.

E 20

H 1

M 4; M 4 thru M 7; N 1; N 7 to N 8, N 9 to N 10; O 1   Various comments   All these problems were corrected. The EFED will try to avoid confusion with the printouts of the maps. The numbering of the appendices was corrected.