sections. This probability is calculated using the established
dose/response relationship and assumes a probit (probability unit)
dose/response relationship. This analysis is present below.

Action Area

For listed species assessment purposes, the action area is considered to
be the area potentially affected directly or indirectly by the Federal
action and not merely the immediate area involved in the action.  At the
initial screening-level, the risk assessment considers broadly described
taxonomic groups and so conservatively assumes that listed species
within those broad groups are co-located with the pesticide treatment
area.  This means that terrestrial plants and wildlife are assumed to be
located on or adjacent to the treated site and aquatic animals are
assumed to be located in a surface water body adjacent to the treated
site.  The assessment also assumes that the listed species are located
within an assumed area that has the relatively highest potential
exposure to the pesticide, and that exposures are likely to decrease
with distance from the treatment area.

If the assumptions associated with the screening-level action area
result in RQs that are below the listed species LOCs, a "no effect"
determination conclusion is made with respect to listed species in that
taxa, and no further refinement of the action area is necessary.
Furthermore, RQs below the listed species LOCs for a given taxonomic
group indicate no concern for indirect effects upon listed species that
depend upon the taxonomic group covered by the RQ as a resource.
However, in situations where the screening assumptions lead to RQs in
excess of the listed species LOCs for a given taxonomic group, a
potential for a "may affect" conclusion exists and may be associated
with direct effects on listed species belonging to that taxonomic group
or may extend to indirect effects upon listed species that depend upon
that taxonomic group as a resource.  In such cases, additional
information on the biology of listed species, the locations of these
species, and the locations of use sites and could be considered along
with available information on the fate and transport properties of the
pesticide to determine the extent to which screening assumptions
regarding an action area apply to a particular listed organism.  These
subsequent refinement steps could consider how this information would
impact the action area for a particular listed organism and may
potentially include areas of exposure that are downwind and downstream
of the pesticide use site.

The results of this screening risk assessment indicate that direct
effects to plant species could present an indirect risk at the higher
levels of organization (i.e. population, trophic level, community, and
ecosystem).  The distance from the treated area that risks could extend
is greater than 900 feet based on AgDRIFT spray drift modeling.
Therefore, an action area for endangered species cannot be defined at
this time for this assessment.  We note that, while the AgDISP model
with Gaussian extension model is available for extending predictions of
deposition from spray drift beyond 1000 feet the exceedances of levels
of concern for non-target plants are likely to extend well beyond 1000
feet given the trends observed with AgDRIFT up to 900 feet.  This is
evident from the risk quotient calculations for terrestrial plants
exposed to spray drift in   REF _Ref182204239 \h  \* MERGEFORMAT  Table
52  ( the RQ range at 900 feet ranged from 22 to 12626 using different
ground and aerial application condition and equipment assumptions).

Taxonomic Groups Potentially at Risk

This screening level risk assessment for endangered species indicates
that sulfometuron methyl exceeds the Endangered Species LOCs for the
specified use scenario for the following taxonomic groups:

- Terrestrial plants: monocots and dicots adjacent to treated areas,
semi-aquatic areas, and drift for turf use at a single application rate
of 0.375 lbs ai/A via ground or aerial spray.

- Freshwater, estuarine and marine aquatic vascular and nonvascular
plants adjacent to treated areas receiving a combination of runoff and
spray drift at a single application rate of 0.375 lbs ai/A.

No LOCs were exceeded for birds, mammals, reptiles, terrestrial-phase
amphibians, fish, invertebrates, or aquatic-phase amphibians.

Discussion of Risk Quotients. For a screening level risk assessment,
EFED determines what endangered species may be affected by performing a
screening level assessment.  If the RQs from this assessment do not
exceed the listed species LOCs, endangered species may not be affected.
However, the Agency’s LOC for endangered aquatic plants and
terrestrial plants is exceeded for the uses of sulfometuron methyl as
outlined in previous sections.  Should estimated exposure levels occur
in proximity to listed resources, the available screening level
information suggests a potential concern for direct effects on listed
terrestrial and aquatic vascular plants and species that rely on these
taxa for survival, growth, or reproduction.

Probit Dose Response Relationship.  A probit dose response analysis is
usually performed for aquatic and terrestrial animal toxicity studies
for which slopes with 95% confidence intervals are available.   SEQ
CHAPTER \h \r 1 The probit slope response relationship is evaluated to
calculate the chance of an individual event corresponding to the listed
species acute LOCs. It is important to note that the IEC model output
can go as high as 1 x 1016 or as low as 1 x 10-16 in estimating the
event probability. This cut-off is a limit in the Excel spreadsheet
environment and is not to be interpreted as an agreed upon upper or
lower bound threshold for concern for individual effects in any given
listed species. To accomplish this interpretation, the Agency would use
(1) the slope of the dose response relationship available from the
toxicity study used to establish the acute toxicity measurement
endpoints for each animal taxonomic group;  (2) an assumption of a
probit dose response relationship; (3) a mean estimate of slope
consistent with current Agency statistical procedures; and (4) a lower
limit to the estimate of individual effect chance based on what could be
calculated by Excel spreadsheet "Normdist" function. .  In cases where
dose-response curves are unavailable, event probabilities are calculated
for the listed species LOC based on a default slope assumption of 4.5 as
per original Agency assumptions of typical slope cited in Urban and Cook
(1986).

For sulfometuron methyl, LC50 or EC50 values were not achieved in any of
the aquatic or terrestrial animal acute toxicity studies.  Therefore, it
is not possible to estimate the slope and confidence limits directly
from these studies.  In lieu of such information, EFED default values
are used for the slope (4.5) and confidence intervals (2 to 9) and
applied to the LOC values.  Probability of an individual effect from
sulfometuron methyl was estimated at the acute endangered species LOC
for aquatic and terrestrial animals. This analysis is presented in the
following table.

Taxa	Probit Slope	Endangered Species LOC	Estimated Probability of an
Individual Effect at the Endangered Species LOC	Comment

Fish	4.5 (2 – 9)	0.05	1 in 4 x 108

(1 in 2 x 102 to 1 in 2 x 1031)	Data insufficient to allow for probit
slope derivation; therefore, the default slope of 4.5 with lower and
upper bounds of 2 – 9 was used.

Aquatic Invertebrates	4.5 (2 – 9)

	0.05	1 in 4 x 108

(1 in 2 x 102 to 1 in 2 x 1031)

	Birds	4.5 (2 – 9)	0.1	1 in 2.9x 105 (1 in 44 to

1 in 9 x 1018)

	Mammals	4.5 (2 – 9)

	0.1	1 in 2.9x 105 (1 in 44 to

1 in 9 x 1018)

For aquatic organisms, the LOC for endangered species is 0.05.  The RQ
is the ratio of exposure to toxicity, so at the point where that ratio
equals 0.05, there is a 1 in 418 million chance of an individual being
affected.  The uncertainty in this number lies primarily in whether the
actual exposure of sensitive species is likely to equal that modeled.
For birds, terrestrial-phase amphibians, reptiles and mammals, the
endangered species LOC is 0.1.  The chance of one individual being
affected at an RQ equal to the LOC is 1 in 294,000

Because the screening level risk assessment indicates that sulfometuron
methyl uses exceed the endangered species LOC for terrestrial and
aquatic plants, a ‘may affect’ designation can not be precluded
based on this assessment.  Additionally, the acute level of concern for
terrestrial and aquatic vascular plants is exceeded.  The Agency
considers this to be indicative of a potential for adverse effects to
those listed species that rely either on a specific plant species (plant
species obligate) or multiple plant species (plant dependant) for some
important aspect of their life cycle.  Further analysis regarding the
overlap of individual species with each use site is required prior to
determining the likelihood of potential impact to listed species.  Such
a refinement is outlined in the following sections.

Data Related to Under-represented Taxa.  Data are not available to
evaluate effects to under-represented taxa.

Implications of Sublethal Effects.  Sublethal effects were not observed
in acute aquatic and terrestrial animal studies.  Chronic studies were
available for freshwater invertebrates, but not fish, birds or mammals.
The chronic RQ for freshwater invertebrates did not exceed the chronic
LOC. Similarly for fish, a chronic RQ, calculated from an NOAEC
estimated using acute-chronic ratio, did not exceed the chronic LOC.
For birds, analysis of reproductive NOAECs from other sulfonylurea
herbicides suggests that while potential chronic risks from sulfometuron
methyl cannot be ruled out, they are considered unlikely.  For mammals,
results from a developmental toxicity test indicate the RQ does not
exceed the chronic LOC, however, no data were available on the chronic,
reproductive effects of sulfometuron methyl to mammals.

Indirect Effects Analysis.   The non-endangered and endangered species
LOCs for non-target plants were exceeded for both terrestrial (monocots
and dicots) and aquatic plants (vascular, nonvascular) located adjacent
to treated areas, in semi-aquatic areas, and by spray drift for the
scenarios analyzed.  The guideline plant studies indicate direct adverse
effects to seedling emergence, vegetative vigor, and aquatic vascular
and non-vascular plants, as well as non-lethal effects such as
chlorosis, growth retardation, necrosis, and unusual pigmentation.

Damage to non-target plants may be sufficient to prevent the plant from
competing successfully with other plants for resources and water.
Sulfometuron methyl may increase a plant’s susceptibility to disease
and can disrupt nutrient cycling in soil by inhibiting the ability of
enzymes to break down cellulose and thereby, decompose plant material.
Endangered species may be especially impacted by exposure to
sulfometuron methyl because of the impact of the loss of a few
individuals to the population. There is a potential concern for listed
species with either broad or narrow dependencies on impacted plant
species/populations/communities for habitat, feeding or cover
requirements. In terrestrial and shallow-water aquatic communities,
plants are the primary producers upon which the succeeding trophic
levels depend. If the available plant material is impacted due to the
effects of sulfometuron methyl, this may have negative effects not only
on the herbivores, but also throughout the food chain. In addition,
depending on the severity of impacts to the plant community [i.e.,
forest, wetlands, ecotones (edge and riparian habitats)], assemblages
and ecosystem may be altered (i.e., reduced bird populations in edge
habitats, reduced riparian vegetation resulting in increased light
penetration and temperature in aquatic habitats, loss of cover and food
for fish).

Critical Habitat.   In the evaluation of pesticide effects on designated
critical habitat, consideration is given to the physical and biological
features (constituent elements) of a critical habitat identified by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Services as
essential to the conservation of a listed species and which may require
special management considerations or protection.   The evaluation of
impacts for a screening level pesticide risk assessment focuses on the
biological features that are constituent elements and is accomplished
using the screening-level taxonomic analysis (risk quotients, RQs) and
listed species levels of concern (LOCs) that are used to evaluate direct
and indirect effects to listed animals.

The screening-level risk assessment has identified potential concerns
for indirect effects on listed species for those animals dependant upon
aquatic plants, and terrestrial and semi-aquatic plants.  In light of
the potential for indirect effects, the next step for EPA and the
Service(s) is to identify which listed species and critical habitat are
potentially implicated.  Analytically, the identification of such
species and critical habitat can occur in either of two ways.  First,
the agencies could determine whether the action area overlaps critical
habitat or the occupied range of any listed species.  If so, EPA would
examine whether the pesticide's potential impacts on non-endangered
species would affect the listed species indirectly or directly affect a
constituent element of the critical habitat.  Alternatively, the
agencies could determine which listed species depend on biological
resources, or have constituent elements that fall into, the taxa that
may be directly or indirectly impacted by the pesticide.  Then EPA would
determine whether use of the pesticide overlaps the critical habitat or
the occupied range of those listed species.  At present, the information
reviewed by EPA does not permit use of either analytical approach to
make a definitive identification of species that are potentially
impacted indirectly or critical habitats that is potentially impacted
directly by the use of the pesticide.  EPA and the Service(s) are
working together to conduct the necessary analysis.

This screening-level risk assessment for critical habitat provides a
listing of potential biological features that, if they are constituent
elements of one or more critical habitats, would be of potential
concern.  These correspond to the taxa identified above as being of
potential concern for indirect effects and include the following:
aquatic plants, and terrestrial and semi-aquatic plants.  This list
should serve as an initial step in problem formulation for further
assessment of critical habitat impacts outlined above, should additional
work be necessary.

Direct Effect Co-occurrence Analysis.  Because the Endangered Species
LOC for terrestrial and aquatic plants is exceeded for the proposed use
of sulfometuron methyl, LOCATES would usually be run for all listed
terrestrial and aquatic plants (monocots, dicots, ferns, lichen and
conf/cycds) to determine the potential for co-occurrence of listed plant
species location with areas of expected pesticide use. However, no
preliminary analysis was performed for non-crop uses of sulfometuron
methyl because the LOCATES tool does not include county-level location
information for the proposed non-crop uses of sulfometuron methyl.
Consequently, based on the information available at this step in the
assessment process, it is presumed that all listed plant species are
potentially directly affected from the broad range of sulfometuron
methyl proposed uses which include vegetative management in railroad,
utility, and roadside rights-of-ways, forestry, tree plantations,
industrial sites, and road construction.  These uses do not have a
geographically distinct attribute which can be used to define the
co-occurrence of listed species in the LOCATES database.  Additional
analysis of listed plant locations, refinement of the action area
associated with sulfometuron methyl, and the biology of the potentially
affected species would be needed before an effects determination can be
made for any of the co-located species identified by this assessment.

Indirect Effect Co-occurrence Analysis.  The screening-level RQ for
terrestrial monocots and dicots and aquatic nonvascular and vascular
plants exceeds the LOC for endangered species. In accordance with
established procedures such findings suggest a potential concern for
indirect effects to listed animal species with both narrow (i.e.,
species that are obligates or have very specific habitat or feeding
requirements) and general dependencies (i.e., cover type requirements)
on plants as a resource or important habitat component. LOCATES would
usually be used to preliminarily identify listed animal species that are
located within the counties in USA where sulfometuron methyl could be
used. This analysis would consider all animal taxonomic groups (i.e.,
birds, mammals, terrestrial and aquatic-phase amphibians, reptiles,
insects, fish, bivalves, crustaceans, arachnids, and gastropods).
However, no preliminary analysis was available for non-crop use of
sulfometuron methyl because the LOCATES tool does not include
county-level location information for the non-crop uses of sulfometuron
methyl. Consequently, based on the information available at this step in
the assessment process, it is presumed that all listed plant species are
potentially directly affected from the broad range of sulfometuron
methyl proposed uses which include vegetative management in railroad,
utility, and roadside rights of ways, forestry, tree plantations,
industrial sites, and road construction.  These uses do not have a
geographically distinct attribute which can be used to define the
co-occurrence of listed species in the LOCATES database.  Additional
analysis of listed plant locations, refinement of the action area
associated with sulfometuron methyl, and the biology of the potentially
affected species would be needed before an effects determination can be
made for any of the co-located species identified by this assessment.

The following table provides listed taxonomic groups that may be at risk
from direct or indirect effects due to applications of sulfometuron
methyl for vegetative management uses nationwide.

Table   SEQ Table \* ARABIC  53 .  Listed Taxonomic Groups Potentially
at Risk from Direct or Indirect Effects of Sulfometuron Methyl
Application for Vegetative Management Throughout the U.S.

Listed Taxon	Direct Effects	Basis for Direct Effects Concern	Indirect
Effects	Basis for Indirect Effects Concern

Terrestrial and Semi-Aquatic Plants – monocots and dicots	Yes	The
endangered species LOC is exceeded for terrestrial plants. 	Yes
Potential concerns from shifts in plant community structure and function
due to from selective impacts on plant species.

Terrestrial Invertebrates	No	Sulfometuron methyl is practically nontoxic
to honeybees, suggesting no direct effect concerns for terrestrial
invertebrates.	Yes	Potential concerns for terrestrial invertebrates that
use plants for habitat, feeding, or cover requirements.

Birds and Reptiles(1)	No	The LOC is not exceeded	Yes	Potential concerns
for birds and reptiles use plants for habitat, feeding, or cover
requirements.

Terrestrial-phase Amphibians(1)	No	The LOC is not exceeded 	Yes
Potential concerns for terrestrial-phase amphibians that use plants for
habitat, feeding, or cover requirements.

Mammals

	No	The LOC is not exceeded 	Yes	Potential concerns for mammals that use
plants for habitat, feeding, or cover requirements.

Aquatic Vascular Plants and Nonvascular Plants	Yes	The endangered
species LOC is exceeded for aquatic vascular and nonvascular plants. 	No
Potential concerns from shifts in plant community structure and function
due to from selective impacts on plant species.

Freshwater and Marine/Estuarine fish and Aquatic-phase Amphibians(2)	No
The LOC is not exceeded	Yes	Potential concerns for fish and
aquatic-phase amphibians that use plants for habitat, feeding, or cover
requirements.

Freshwater and Marine/Estuarine Crustaceans	No	The LOC is not exceeded
Yes	Potential concerns for crustaceans that use plants for habitat,
feeding, or cover requirements.

Mollusks	No	The LOC is not exceeded	Yes	Potential concerns for mollusks
that use plants for habitat, feeding, or cover requirements.

(1)  Birds are used as surrogate species for terrestrial-phase
amphibians and reptiles; therefore, potential direct and indirect
effects to endangered avian, terrestrial-phase amphibians and reptilian
species are considered equivalent.

(2) Fish are used as a surrogate for aquatic phase amphibians;
therefore, potential direct and indirect effects to endangered fish and
aquatic-phase amphibian species are considered equivalent.

Description of Assumptions, Limitations, Uncertainties, and Data Gaps

Assumptions and Limitations Related to Effects on all Species

Indirect Effects.  Perhaps one of the largest uncertainties associated
with the effects assessment for sulfometuron methyl is the inability to
adequately quantify potential indirect effects resulting from adverse
effects on aquatic and terrestrial plants.  Specifically, direct effects
to plant species could present an indirect risk at the higher levels of
organization (i.e. population, trophic level, community, and ecosystem).
 Field studies are not available to quantify actual risk to plant and
animal communities in forest/edge and wetland/riparian habitats.
However, in terrestrial and shallow-water aquatic communities, plants
are the primary producers upon which the succeeding trophic levels
depend.  If the available plant material is impacted due to the effects
of sulfometuron methyl, this may have negative effects not only on the
herbivores, but throughout the food chain.  Also, depending on the
severity of impacts to the plant communities [i.e., forests, wetlands,
ecotones (edge and riparian habitats)], community assemblages and
ecosystem stability may be altered (i.e. reduced bird populations in
edge habitats; reduced riparian vegetation resulting in increased light
penetration and temperature in aquatic habitats, loss of cover and food
for fish).  In addition, riparian vegetation, which is a significant
component of the food supply for aquatic herbivores and detritivores
provides habitat (i.e. leaf packs, materials for case-building for
invertebrates) may also be affected.

Toxicity of Degradation Products.  In this screening level ecological
risk assessment, the lack of data on major degradates is considered one
of the primary limitations and uncertainty regarding the overall risk
associated with one of the registered use of sulfometuron methyl.  Since
the chemical structure and environmental behavior of the major
degradates differ substantially from the parent molecule (i.e.,
degradation involves cleavage of the sulfonylurea bridge, essentially
splitting the molecule in half), it could not be assumed with reasonable
confidence that the degradates were equivalent in toxicity to the parent
compound.  Limited toxicity data was available for one major degradation
product: saccharin.  However, this information was oriented towards
human health concerns and lacked endpoints of ecological relevance that
would be considered useful in this ecological risk assessment.  This
finding is somewhat expected since saccharin is used as a sugar
substitute in the U.S. food supply.

Variability in Species Sensitivity.  Although the screening risk
assessment relies on a selected toxicity endpoint from the most
sensitive species tested, it does not necessarily mean that the selected
toxicity endpoints reflect sensitivity of the most sensitive species
existing in a given environment. The relative position of the most
sensitive species tested in the distribution of all possible species is
a function of the overall variability among species to a particular
chemical. In the case of listed species, there is uncertainty regarding
the relationship of the listed species’ sensitivity and the most
sensitive species tested.  For terrestrial and aquatic animals,
uncertainty associated with the limited quantification of interspecies
variability in sensitivity to sulfometuron methyl would probably not
impact the risk assessment results substantially, given that
sulfometuron methyl is practically nontoxic to animals.  For aquatic and
terrestrial plants, variability in sensitivity across species could
substantially alter the risk assessment results (e.g., higher RQs if
more sensitive species were tested).  However, toxicity data were
available for 5 species of aquatic plants and 10 species of terrestrial
plants distributed broadly across taxonomic groups, which suggests that
at least a reasonable range of plant sensitivity to sulfometuron methyl
was captured in this risk assessment.

Effects of Pesticide Mixtures:  This assessment considered only exposure
to the active ingredient sulfometuron methyl.  However, simultaneous
exposures to multiple chemical and physical stressors are likely to
occur in the environment.  No acceptable data were located that
evaluated potential additive, synergistic, or antagonistic interactions
between sulfometuron methyl and other chemical stressors.  If such
interactions occur, then risks could be under or over-estimated.

Assumptions and Limitations Related to Effects on Aquatic Species

Study Quality and Data Gaps.  Several studies did not meet guideline
requirements and therefore were classified as either supplemental or
unacceptable.  Specifically, all acute toxicity data for marine and
estuarine organisms were classified as supplemental due to uncertainty
associated with the bioavailability of sulfometuron methyl in these
tests. However, conclusions of this risk assessment would not likely
change with submission of additional acute toxicity data for marine and
estuarine organisms because EECs were several orders of magnitude below
reported toxicity limits.  The freshwater chronic test with fathead
minnow was found to be unacceptable, again because of uncertainty and
variability associated with measurement of soluble (bioavailable)
sulfometuron methyl.  To address this data gap, acute-chronic ratios
were applied to estimate chronic toxicity to freshwater fish.  Results
indicate that even with conservative assumptions regarding the selection
of the ACR, risks from direct effects of chronic sulfometuron methyl
exposure to freshwater fish are not likely.

Assumptions and Limitations Related to Effects on Terrestrial Species

Study Quality and Data Gaps.  Lack of toxicity data was noted for the
effect of sulfometuron methyl on avian and mammalian reproduction.  For
mammals, the NOAEL of 300 mg ai/kg-bw/d was used from a developmental
toxicity study to rabbits.  While providing some information on the
effect of sulfometuron methyl on mammalian development during
gestational exposure, results from this study do not capture the
potential effects of sulfometuron methyl on reproductive endpoints
including courtship, mating, sex ratios and offspring survival, growth
and development.

Vascular Plant Reproduction.  Terrestrial and aquatic plants appear most
sensitive to sulfometuron methyl exposure.  While toxicity data were
available for endpoints related to systemic growth, seedling emergence
and visual injury, these guideline studies are not designed to capture
reproductive endpoints.  Therefore, to the extent that plant
reproduction is more sensitive to sulfometuron methyl exposure compared
to growth or visual injury-related endpoints, risks to aquatic and
terrestrial plants may be underestimated.

Use of Maximum Pesticide Application Rate.  In this screening level
analysis, risks of sulfometuron methyl to non-target plants and animals
was evaluated using the maximum label application rate (0.375 lb ai/A).
This was performed in concordance with the goals of a screening
assessment: to rule out receptors and exposure pathways and identify
those pathways where potential risks are evident.  Other label
application rates are available for sulfometuron methyl as identified in
see Section   REF _Ref178494916 \r \h  \* MERGEFORMAT  3.1  (Use
Characterization).  The lower range of application rates are mostly
within a factor of 10 of the maximum application rates.  Given that RQs
for terrestrial and aquatic plants predicted using the maximum
application rate are well above a factor of 10, use of the lower
application rates would not likely change the risk assessment
conclusions.

Literature Cited

Battaglin, WA, Furlongb, ET,  Burkhardt, MR, Peter, CJ. 2000. Occurrence
of sulfonylurea, sulfonamide, imidazolinone, and other herbicides in
rivers, reservoirs and ground water in the Midwestern United States.
Sci. Tot. Environ. 248: 123-133

Blomquist, J.D., Denis, J.M., Hetrick, J.A., Jones, R.D., and
Birchfield, N.B. (2001) Pesticides in selected water-supply reservoirs
and finished drinking water, 1999-2000; summary of results from a pilot
monitoring program: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 01-0456, 65
p.  See: md.water.usgs.gov/nawqa/OFR_01-456.pdf .

Boyle, C and Walters, D. 2005. Induction of Systemic Protection Against
Rust Infection in Broad Bean by Saccharin:  Effects on Plant Growth and
Development.  New Phytol. 167:  607-612.

Bruce, RD and DJ Versteeg.  1992.  A Statistical Procedure For Modeling
Continuous Toxicity Data.  Env. Tox. and Chem. 11:1485-1494

Bureau of Land Management. 2005. Sulfometuron Methyl Ecological Risk
Assessment; Final Report. Bureau of Land Management Contract No.
NAD010156, Reno, NV. November.

Busse, MD, Fiddler, GO, and Ratcliff, AW. 2004. Ectomycorrhizal
Formation in Herbicide-Treated Soils of Differing Clay and Organic
Matter Content.  Water Air Soil Pollut. 152: 23-34.

Byl, TD, Sutton, HD, and Klaine, SJ. 1994. Evaluation of Peroxidase as a
Biochemical Indicator of Toxic Chemical Exposure in the Aquatic Plant
Hydrilla verticillata, Royle.  Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 13: 509-515.

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.

Fletcher, JS, Pfleeger, TG, Ratsch, HC. 1993. Potential Environmental
Risks Associated With The New Sulfonylurea Herbicides.  Environ. Sci.

 Fort, DJ, Rogers, R, Copley, H, Bruning, L, Stover, EL, and Rapaport,
D. 1999. Effect of Sulfometuron Methyl and Nicrosulfuron on Development
and Metamorphosis in Xenopus laevis:  Impact of Purity.  Environ. Tox.
Chem. 18: 2934-2940.

McCall, P.J., R.L. Swann, and D.A. Laskowski. 1983. Partition Models for
Equilibrium Distribution of Chemicals in Environmental Compartments. In
R.L. Swann and A. Eschenroder (eds.). Fate of Chemicals in the
Environment. American Chemical Society. pp. 105-123.

McKelvey, RA. 1995. Influence of Sulfometuron Methyl (DPZ-T5648) on
Seedling Emergence and Vegetative Vigor of Several Terrestrial Plants.
Study No. AMR 2871-93. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co., Wilmington, DE
19880.

Naqvi, SM and Hawkins, RH 1989. Responses and LC50 Values for Selected
Microcrustaceans Exposed to Spartan, Malathion, Sonar, Weedtrine-D, and
Oust Pesticides.  Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 43: 386-393.

Neary, DG, Conde, LF, and Smith, JE. 1984. Effects of Sulfometuron
Methyl on Six Important Competing Species in Coastal Plain Flatwoods.
Proc.South Weed Sci.Soc. 37: 193-199.

Raimondo, S, Montague, BJ, Barron, MG. (2007). Determinants of
Variability in Acute-Chronic Ratios for Invertebrates and Fish. Environ.
Tox. Chem. 26(9):

Romaire, RP. 1984. Acute Toxicity of Krenite and Oust to Juvenile Red
Swamp Crawfish, Procambarus clarkia. (Decapoda, Cambaridae). Louisiana
State University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Baton Rouge, LA.
Prepared for C.Wood, E.I. DuPont Corporation, Haskell Laboratory, New
Ark, Delaware. 19pp.

Teske, M.E and H.W. Thistle 2004. Aerial application model extension
into the far field. Biosystems Engineering 89(1) 29-36.

Thistle, HW,  ME Teske, JG Droppo, CJ Allwine, SL Bird, and RJ
Londergan. 2005.

AGDISP as a Source Term in Far Field Atmospheric Transport Modeling and
Near Field Geometric Assumptions. Amer. Soc. Agric. and Biol. Engineers,
St. Joseph, Michigan;   HYPERLINK "http://www.asabe.org"  www.asabe.org
.

USDA. 2004. Sulfometuron Methyl- Human and Ecological Risk Assessment:
Final Report.  Prepared for: U.S. Dept. Agriculture, Forest Service.
Contract No. GS-10F-0082F.

USEPA.  1998.  Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Risk Assessment Forum, Washington, DC,
EPA/630/R095/002F

USEPA. 2004. Overview of the Ecological Risk Assessment Process in the
Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Endangered and Threatened Species Effects Determinations.  Office of
Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide
Programs, Washington, D.C.  January 23, 2004.

USEPA. 2007. Ecological Risk Assessment: Flazasulforon. Office of
Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects Division, Washington,
DC.

Weber, J.B., G.G. Wilkersona and C.F. Reinhardt. 2004 Calculating
pesticide sorption coefficients (Kd) using selected soil properties.
Chemosphere 55:157–166

William A. Battaglin, Edward T. Furlong, Mark R. Burkhardt, C. John
Peter. (2000).

Occurrence of Sulfonylurea, Sulfonamide, Imidazolinone, and other
Herbicides in

Midwestern Rivers, Reservoirs, and Ground Water. The Science of the
Total Environment 248: 123-133

Willis, G. H. and L..L. McDowell, 1987.  Pesticide Persistence on
Foliage. in Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology.
100:23-73.

Zhu QZ, Degelmann P, Niessner R, Knopp D. Selective trace analysis of
sulfonylurea herbicides in water and soil samples based on solid-phase
extraction using a molecularly imprinted polymer. Environ Sci Technol.
2002 Dec 15;36(24):5411-20

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Structures and Chemical Names of Sulfometuron methyl
Metabolites

Chemical Structures

Trivial or common names

Company id or similar alternate names

Full chemical names

Sulfometuron methyl

DPX-T5648; DPX-5648; IN-T5648; IN T5648-18

Methyl 2-(4,6-dimethylpyrimidin-2-ylcarbamoylsulfamoyl)benzoate

Saccharin

IN-581

1,2-Benzisothiazol-3(2H)-one, 1,1-dioxide

Sulfometuron pyrimidine amine

IN-X0993; IN-X993; PA

4,6-Dimethyl-2-pyrimidinamine

4,6-dimethyl-2-pyrimidinamine

Sulfometuron sulfonamide

IN-D5803; SA; methyl phenylsulfonamide

Methyl 2-(aminosulfonyl)benzoate.

2-(Aminosulfonyl)-benzoic acid, methyl ester

Pyrimidine-ol

IN-11859

4,6-Dimethyl-2-pyrimidinol

Sulfometuron free acid

FA-SM; IN-T6385

2-[[[[(4,6-Dimethyl-2-pyrimidinyl)amino]carbonyl]amino]sulfonyl]-benzoic
acid

0Free acid Sulfonamide

FA-Sulfonamide; Free acid; IN-D5119

2-(Aminosulfonyl)benzoic acid

APPENDIX B: Environmental Fate Data Requirements

Environmental Fate Data Requirements for Sulfometuron Methyl

Guideline

Data Requirement

Test Material

MRID

Study Classification	Data Requirement Met? 	More Data Needed?

[161-1]

	Hydrolysis

sulfometuron methyl	42715201	Acceptable	Yes	No

[161-2]	Direct photolysis in water

sulfometuron methyl	42182401

43174101	Acceptable	Yes	No

[161-3]	Photolysis on soil

sulfometuron methyl	41420601	Acceptable	Yes	No

[161-4]

Photodegradation in Air	NA	NA	not required	NA	NA

[162-1]

	Aerobic soil metabolism

	sulfometuron methyl	42091401	Acceptable	Yes	No

[162-1]

	Aerobic soil metabolism

	sulfometuron methyl	43174102 and 245375	Acceptable	Yes	No

[162-2]

Anaerobic Soil Metabolism	NA	NA	ref 162-3	Yes	No

[162-3]	Anaerobic aquatic metabolism

	sulfometuron methyl	42091402 and 43188601	Acceptable	Yes	No

[162-3]	Anaerobic aquatic metabolism

	sulfometuron methyl	4413010-20 (143540)	Acceptable	Yes	No

[162-4]	Aerobic aquatic metabolism

	sulfometuron methyl	42091403 and 43174103	Acceptable	Yes	No

[163-1]	Adsorption/

Desorption

	sulfometuron methyl	42789301	Acceptable	Yes	No

[163-1]	Adsorption/

Desorption

	Pyrimidine amine	42789301	Acceptable	Yes	No

[163-1]	Adsorption/

Desorption

	saccharin	42789301	Acceptable	Yes	No

[163-2]

Laboratory Volatility	NA	NA	not required	NA	NA

[163-3]

Field Volatility	NA	NA	not required	NA	NA

[164-1]	Terrestrial Field

Dissipation	Sulfometuron methyl	43212101 and 43637101	Acceptable	Yes	No

[164-2]

Aquatic Field Dissipation	No study	NA

	NA	NA	NA

[164-3]	Forestry Dissipation	Sulfometuron methyl	42091404 and  43174104

	Acceptable	Yes	No

[165-4]

Accumulation in Fish	Waived	NA	NA	NA	NA

[165-5]

Accumulation in aquatic non-target organism (crayfish)	Waived	NA	NA	NA
NA

[166-1]

Ground Water- small

scale prospective	No Study (not required)	NA	NA	NA	NA

APPENDIX C:  Ecological Aquatic Exposure Modeling

Multiple PRZM-EXAMS runs at single sites using different application
date assumptions: Summary tables and sample input files

PRZM / EXAMS multiple application date assumption modeling: Sorted (by
21-day exposure estimates) List of 1 in 10 year return frequency for
Various Exposure Durations - Aerial application using the Texas / Barton
Springs Salamander scenario and Port Arthur Texas meteorological data.

DATE	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly	30-Year

09-10	49.472	47.733	43.139	33.437	27.192	7.450	4.065

12-05	36.060	34.879	30.054	20.981	16.522	4.884	2.415

30-08	32.625	31.363	27.061	21.239	17.805	5.586	2.992

20-08	30.949	29.903	25.886	19.000	15.626	4.967	2.808

10-08	30.601	29.743	25.451	18.437	15.009	5.118	2.625

29-09	29.668	28.637	25.585	20.158	16.479	5.638	3.434

19-10	27.970	27.134	24.748	20.222	14.168	5.007	3.257

21-06	27.622	26.773	22.849	16.110	12.749	3.867	1.986

19-09	27.223	26.413	23.585	18.717	15.510	4.768	3.042

31-07	26.516	25.765	22.706	16.344	13.286	4.136	2.180

29-10	25.269	24.619	22.258	17.629	13.919	4.750	3.091

01-07	22.932	22.383	19.082	13.514	10.730	3.479	2.005

09-09	22.903	22.276	19.198	14.672	12.353	4.305	2.653

02-05	21.703	20.976	18.837	13.835	11.003	3.254	1.923

11-06	21.795	20.881	17.461	12.414	9.917	3.114	2.057

11-07	21.572	20.696	17.817	12.818	10.264	3.220	1.900

01-06	21.430	20.570	17.539	12.484	9.849	2.948	1.944

12-04	20.368	19.822	17.811	13.507	10.822	3.210	1.767

22-05	20.277	19.455	16.521	12.017	9.476	2.927	1.730

21-07	20.064	19.205	16.126	11.487	9.199	2.939	1.960

23-03	18.931	18.470	17.070	13.343	10.972	3.333	1.469

22-04	18.700	18.253	15.762	11.875	9.712	2.980	1.705

21-02	17.801	17.397	16.164	13.272	11.138	3.448	1.372

02-04	17.776	17.228	15.491	11.441	9.083	2.691	1.492

13-03	13.882	13.555	12.579	9.934	8.174	2.522	1.361

01-02	10.387	10.157	9.247	7.440	6.303	2.010	1.164

11-02	9.156	8.956	8.476	6.885	5.827	1.856	1.028

03-03	8.483	8.348	7.965	6.554	5.458	1.673	1.031

Sample input file, Texas Rights of Way Scenario, multi-run

Output File: Sfmt_TXrway3_03-13_19-10

Metfile:	w12917.dvf

PRZM scenario:	RightOfWayBSS.txt

EXAMS environment file:	pond298.exv

Chemical Name:	Sulfometuron Methyl

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	364.38	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry	 	atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5.40E-16	torr

Solubility	sol	2.44E+02	mg/L

Kd	Kd	 	mg/L

Koc	Koc	47.5	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	0	days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	292	days	Half-life

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	76	days	Half-life

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	61	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	8.8	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	139	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	224	days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	2	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	4	cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	0.42	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.95	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT	0.05	fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	19-10	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

 	IPSCND	1

 	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

 	PLDKRT

 	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	EPA Pond

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	none	none, monthly or total

PRZM / EXAMS multiple application date assumption modeling: Sorted (by
21-day exposure estimates) List of 1 in 10 year return frequency for
Various Exposure Durations - Ground application using the Texas / Barton
Springs Salamander scenario and Port Arthur Texas meteorological data.

DATE	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly	30-Year

09-10	39.996	38.810	34.507	27.791	21.603	6.172	2.769

30-08	27.463	26.544	22.992	16.878	13.881	3.981	1.858

10-08	26.457	25.737	21.998	15.903	12.933	4.017	1.582

20-08	25.924	24.975	21.491	15.348	12.142	3.568	1.734

12-05	24.414	23.588	20.408	14.954	12.292	3.887	1.786

29-09	22.197	21.464	18.230	12.916	10.207	3.063	1.297

21-02	19.582	19.078	17.362	14.267	9.967	3.834	2.171

19-09	20.200	19.568	17.226	13.829	11.935	3.896	2.025

23-03	18.665	18.003	16.757	12.319	9.776	2.873	1.427

21-06	19.217	18.836	16.746	13.167	9.414	3.404	2.094

29-10	19.558	18.836	16.599	12.734	10.828	3.451	1.788

12-04	20.279	19.472	16.553	11.997	9.737	2.922	1.350

02-05	18.100	17.658	16.324	12.773	10.517	3.192	1.213

31-07	17.670	17.268	16.064	13.203	11.090	3.430	1.271

19-10	17.914	17.355	15.893	12.284	9.832	2.912	1.344

09-09	18.029	17.253	14.468	10.227	8.170	2.563	1.316

11-07	17.639	16.926	14.442	10.422	8.227	2.487	1.340

11-06	17.352	16.770	14.329	10.381	8.286	2.588	1.210

21-07	16.643	16.227	14.228	10.881	9.213	2.866	1.560

22-04	15.884	15.392	13.645	9.657	7.589	2.260	1.105

13-03	16.502	15.962	13.631	9.510	7.553	2.318	1.371

22-05	14.795	14.375	13.013	9.882	7.969	2.400	1.258

01-07	15.183	14.562	12.420	9.190	7.325	2.219	1.299

01-06	12.986	12.623	12.026	9.563	7.867	2.421	1.183

02-04	13.375	12.975	11.704	8.802	7.076	2.106	1.148

01-02	9.992	9.763	8.891	7.158	6.070	1.927	1.043

11-02	8.705	8.496	8.064	6.565	5.558	1.766	0.907

03-03	8.054	7.928	7.533	6.214	5.176	1.580	0.902

PRZM / EXAMS multiple application date assumption modeling: Sorted (by
21-day exposure estimates) List of 1 in 10 year return frequency for
Various Exposure Durations  - Aerial application using the California
Red-Legged Frog  scenario and Astoria, Oregon meteorological data.

DATE	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly	30-Year

13-03	11.346	11.125	10.256	8.581	7.493	2.779	1.194

29-10	11.134	10.934	10.233	8.604	6.248	2.715	1.610

19-10	11.046	10.854	10.202	8.547	6.635	2.788	1.629

11-02	10.995	10.813	10.059	8.418	7.375	2.811	1.648

01-02	10.284	10.105	9.405	7.891	6.932	2.696	1.317

23-03	9.964	9.816	9.119	7.570	6.591	2.455	1.145

21-02	9.996	9.786	9.049	7.574	6.639	2.528	1.351

22-04	9.587	9.432	8.660	7.130	6.146	2.227	0.826

03-03	8.919	8.739	8.146	6.838	5.990	2.250	1.360

12-04	8.775	8.674	8.055	6.686	5.789	2.111	0.859

09-10	8.495	8.366	7.783	6.526	5.464	1.963	1.081

19-09	8.390	8.237	7.550	6.240	5.484	1.987	0.998

12-05	7.639	7.473	6.855	5.553	4.763	1.709	0.563

09-09	7.313	7.145	6.531	5.356	4.704	1.549	0.913

02-04	6.253	6.167	5.795	4.808	4.167	1.544	0.867

02-05	6.182	6.045	5.514	4.535	3.905	1.417	0.765

01-06	5.513	5.389	5.037	4.131	3.543	1.272	0.749

29-09	5.466	5.382	4.939	4.118	3.627	1.094	0.754

20-08	5.518	5.387	4.841	3.886	3.353	1.394	0.683

30-08	4.742	4.628	4.216	3.437	2.999	1.026	0.695

22-05	4.562	4.466	4.086	3.335	2.859	1.049	0.509

21-06	4.304	4.211	3.833	3.084	2.643	0.980	0.554

01-07	3.938	3.853	3.516	2.863	2.437	0.866	0.466

10-08	3.738	3.644	3.277	2.627	2.265	0.911	0.542

21-07	3.677	3.584	3.273	2.643	2.281	0.855	0.490

11-07	3.705	3.607	3.250	2.577	2.200	0.802	0.505

11-06	3.351	3.273	2.999	2.427	2.072	0.750	0.461

31-07	3.347	3.266	2.936	2.353	2.028	0.856	0.538

Sample Input Files:

Output File: Sfmt_CArway4_02-04

Metfile:	w94224.dvf

PRZM scenario:	CArightofwayRLF.txt

EXAMS environment file:	pond298.exv

Chemical Name:	Sulfometuron Methyl

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	364.38	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry	 	atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5.40E-16	torr

Solubility	sol	2.44E+02	mg/L

Kd	Kd	 	mg/L

Koc	Koc	47.5	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	0	days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	292	days	Half-life

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	76	days	Half-life

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	61	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	8.8	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	139	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	224	days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	2	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	4	cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	0.42	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.95	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT	0.05	fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	April 2	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

 	IPSCND	1

 	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

 	PLDKRT

 	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	EPA Pond

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	none	none, monthly or total

Single PRZM-EXAMS runs for different sites: Sample EEC Summary tables
and sample input files

Florida Citrus scenario

Sorted results

Prob.	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

0.0323	1.642	1.592	1.403	1.072	1.000	0.340

0.0645	1.490	1.446	1.300	1.026	0.942	0.318

0.0968	1.487	1.446	1.279	1.020	0.864	0.292

0.1290	1.338	1.297	1.143	0.933	0.848	0.260

0.1613	1.199	1.172	1.056	0.918	0.782	0.248

0.1935	1.057	1.038	0.939	0.787	0.676	0.216

0.2258	1.057	1.028	0.928	0.767	0.666	0.210

0.2581	1.056	1.027	0.924	0.756	0.636	0.203

0.2903	1.056	1.026	0.921	0.731	0.606	0.198

0.3226	1.054	1.026	0.921	0.724	0.601	0.188

0.3548	1.053	1.025	0.921	0.721	0.600	0.187

0.3871	1.053	1.025	0.916	0.720	0.600	0.186

0.4194	1.053	1.025	0.915	0.720	0.595	0.185

0.4516	1.053	1.025	0.914	0.717	0.594	0.184

0.4839	1.053	1.024	0.914	0.714	0.593	0.184

0.5161	1.053	1.024	0.911	0.713	0.591	0.183

0.5484	1.053	1.024	0.910	0.709	0.587	0.182

0.5806	1.053	1.024	0.909	0.704	0.583	0.182

0.6129	1.053	1.024	0.908	0.703	0.579	0.181

0.6452	1.053	1.023	0.907	0.700	0.578	0.179

0.6774	1.053	1.023	0.907	0.700	0.578	0.177

0.7097	1.053	1.023	0.906	0.697	0.576	0.177

0.7419	1.052	1.023	0.905	0.695	0.573	0.177

0.7742	1.052	1.022	0.904	0.694	0.570	0.176

0.8065	1.052	1.022	0.904	0.694	0.570	0.175

0.8387	1.052	1.021	0.902	0.693	0.570	0.175

0.8710	1.052	1.021	0.902	0.691	0.570	0.174

0.9032	1.052	1.021	0.901	0.688	0.567	0.174

0.9355	1.052	1.020	0.900	0.688	0.566	0.173

0.9677	1.050	1.019	0.899	0.687	0.565	0.172

0.1000	1.472	1.431	1.265	1.011	0.863	0.28865

	Average of yearly averages:	0.20175

Output File: Sfmt_FLcitrus1

Metfile:	w12844.dvf

PRZM scenario:	FLcitrusSTD.txt

EXAMS environment file:	pond298.exv

Chemical Name:	Sulfometuron Methyl

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	364.38	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry	 	atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5.40E-16	torr

Solubility	sol	244	mg/L

Kd	Kd	 	mg/L

Koc	Koc	47.5	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	0	days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	292	days	Half-life

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	76	days	Half-life

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	61	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	8.8	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	139	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	224	days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	2	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	4	cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	0.42	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.95	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT	0.05	fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	3-Jan	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

 	IPSCND	1

 	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

 	PLDKRT

 	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	EPA Pond

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	none	none, monthly or total

Florida Turf Scenario

Sorted results

Prob.	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

0.032	0.707	0.686	0.604	0.457	0.372	0.128

0.065	0.639	0.622	0.558	0.429	0.354	0.109

0.097	0.464	0.451	0.398	0.303	0.259	0.090

0.129	0.379	0.367	0.323	0.255	0.221	0.076

0.161	0.360	0.353	0.318	0.244	0.218	0.071

0.194	0.226	0.220	0.200	0.168	0.150	0.048

0.226	0.213	0.207	0.186	0.162	0.141	0.045

0.258	0.212	0.206	0.185	0.153	0.130	0.042

0.290	0.212	0.206	0.184	0.147	0.125	0.041

0.323	0.212	0.206	0.184	0.146	0.121	0.039

0.355	0.211	0.206	0.184	0.145	0.120	0.037

0.387	0.211	0.206	0.184	0.144	0.120	0.037

0.419	0.211	0.205	0.183	0.144	0.119	0.037

0.452	0.211	0.205	0.183	0.144	0.119	0.037

0.484	0.211	0.205	0.183	0.143	0.119	0.037

0.516	0.211	0.205	0.183	0.143	0.119	0.037

0.548	0.211	0.205	0.182	0.142	0.117	0.037

0.581	0.211	0.205	0.182	0.141	0.117	0.036

0.613	0.211	0.205	0.182	0.141	0.117	0.036

0.645	0.211	0.205	0.182	0.141	0.116	0.036

0.677	0.211	0.205	0.182	0.141	0.116	0.036

0.710	0.211	0.205	0.181	0.140	0.115	0.036

0.742	0.211	0.205	0.181	0.139	0.115	0.035

0.774	0.211	0.204	0.181	0.139	0.114	0.035

0.806	0.211	0.204	0.181	0.139	0.114	0.035

0.839	0.211	0.204	0.181	0.139	0.114	0.035

0.871	0.210	0.204	0.180	0.138	0.114	0.035

0.903	0.210	0.204	0.180	0.138	0.113	0.035

0.935	0.210	0.204	0.180	0.138	0.113	0.035

0.968	0.210	0.204	0.180	0.138	0.113	0.034

0.100	0.456	0.442	0.391	0.298	0.255	0.089

	Average of yearly averages:	0.046883

Inputs generated by pe5.pl - November 2006

	Data used for this run:

Output File: Sfmt_FLturf2

Metfile:	w12834.dvf

PRZM scenario:	FLturfSTD.txt

EXAMS environment file:	pond298.exv

Chemical Name:	Sulfometuron Methyl

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	364.38	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry

atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5.40E-16	Torr

Solubility	sol	244	mg/L

Kd	Kd

mg/L

Koc	Koc	47.5	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	0	Days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	292	Days	Half-life

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	109	Days	Half-life

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	61	Days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	8.8	Days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	139	Days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	224	Days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	1	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	0	Cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	0.42	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.99	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT	0.01	fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	3-Jan	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

	IPSCND	1

	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

	PLDKRT

	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	EPA Pond

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	none	none, monthly or total(average of
entire run)

Inputs generated by pe5.pl - November 2006

Data used for this run:

Output File: Sfmt_FLturf1

Metfile:	w12834.dvf

PRZM scenario:	FLturfSTD.txt

EXAMS environment file:	pond298.exv

Chemical Name:	Sulfometuron Methyl

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	364.38	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry	 	atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5.40E-16	Torr

Solubility	sol	2.44E+02	mg/L

Kd	Kd	 	mg/L

Koc	Koc	47.5	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	0	Days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	292	Days	Half-life

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	76	Days	Half-life

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	61	Days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	8.8	Days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	139	Days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	224	Days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	2	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	4	cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	0.42	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.95	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT	0.05	fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	3-Jan	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

 	IPSCND	1

 	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

 	PLDKRT

 	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	EPA Pond

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	none	none, monthly or total(average of
entire run)

APPENDIX D:  Terrplant Spreadsheet

(TerrPlant Version 1.2.2)

Table D-1. Chemical Identity.

Chemical Name	Sulfometuron Methyl

PC code	122001

Use	non-crop vegetative management, forestry, rights of way

Application Method	ground

Application Form	water dispersible granule

	Solubility in Water (ppm)	244 (pH 7)

Table D-2. Input parameters used to derive EECs.

	Input Parameter	Symbol	Value	Units

Application Rate	A	0.375	lb a.i./A

Incorporation	I	1	none

Runoff Fraction	R	0.05	none

Drift Fraction	D	0.01	none

Table D-3. EECs for Sulfometuron Methyl.  Units in lb a.i./A.

	Description

Equation	EEC

Runoff to dry areas

(A/I)*R	0.01875

Runoff to semi-aquatic areas

(A/I)*R*10	0.1875

Spray drift

A*D	0.00375

Total for dry areas

((A/I)*R)+(A*D)	0.0225

Total for semi-aquatic areas	((A/I)*R*10)+(A*D)	0.19125

Table D-4. Plant survival and growth data used for RQ derivation. Units
are in lb a.i./A.

 	Seedling Emergence	Vegetative Vigor

Plant type	EC25	NOAEC 	EC25	NOAEC

Monocot	1.90E-04	4.30E-05	3.70E-05	8.40E-06

Dicot	3.20E-05	2.90E-05	1.80E-05	9.90E-07

Table D-5. RQ values for plants in dry and semi-aquatic areas exposed to
Sulfometuron Methyl through runoff and/or spray drift.*

Plant Type	Listed Status	Dry 	Semi-Aquatic	Spray Drift

Monocot	non-listed	118.42	1006.58	101.35

Monocot	listed	523.26	4447.67	446.43

Dicot	non-listed	703.13	5976.56	208.33

Dicot	listed 	775.86	6594.83	3787.88

*If RQ > 1.0, the LOC is exceeded, resulting in potential for risk to
that plant group.

APPENDIX E: Adverse Ecological Incidents Associated with Sulfometuron
Methyl Use

Incident ID	Use Site	Start Date	Legality	Certainty	State	County	Year
Total Magnitude	Appl. Rate	Appl. Method	Affected Species	Product

I011666-001	Municpal operation	01-Nov-00	Registered use	Highly Probable
ID

2000	Thousands Of Acres	1 Oz/Acre	Aerial	1	OUST

I013086-001	Right-of-way, rail	15-Jun-02	Registered use	Probable	WA
Kittitas	2002	Unknown	3 Oz Per 15 Gallons	Spray	1	Oust

I009556-043	Agricultural area	15-May-92	Registered use	Probable	CO
Costilla	1992	$4,400,000 Damages	N/R	Spray	1	OUST

I005972-001	PLANT SITE	01-Sep-97	Registered use	Probable	TX

1997

N/A	N/R	1	OUST

I006010-003	Utility plant	19-Aug-97	Misuse (accidental)	Probable	MS

1997	Unknown

RUN-OFF	1

	I000903-005	Forest	01-Sep-91	Misuse (accidental)	Probable	TX	Anderson
1991	N/R	500 Oz/ 3000 Acres	Spray	1	OUST

I000903-002	Agricultural area	01-Jan-94	Registered use	Probable	TX
Cherokee	1994	N/R	N/R	Spray	1	OUST

I006010-001	Right-of-way, road	20-Aug-97	Misuse (accidental)	Probable	LA

1997	Unknown	N/R	N/R	1

	I000903-003	Agricultural Area	01-Jan-94	Registered use	Probable	TX

1994	N/R	N/R	Spray	2,3,4	OUST

I000903-001	Agricultural area	01-Sep-91	Registered use	Probable	TX
Anderson	1991	N/R	2 Oz/25-30 Gal Water	Spray	1	OUST

I006010-002	Agricultural area	20-Aug-97	Misuse (accidental)	Probable	TX

1997	Unknown	N/R	N/R	1

	I007269-001	Agricultural area	21-May-98	Registered use	Probable	CA
Fresno	1998	All	N/R	N/R	1	OUST

I007269-002	YARD	29-May-98	Registered use	Probable	TN	Davidson	1998	All
N/R	N/R	1	OUST

I015217-001	Forest	21-May-04	Registered use	Probable	OH	Gallia	2004	8000
Sq Ft	3 Oz/Acre	Spray	1	Oust herbicide

I015832-001	Right-of-way, road	14-Dec-04	Registered use	Probable	LA
Lafayette	2004

N/R	Spray	1	Oust

I017481-001	Turf, residential	24-May-06	Undetermined	Probable	WI
Waukesha	2006	Unknown	Unknown	N/R	1	DuPont Oust

I015576-001	Right-of-way, road	01-Apr-04	Registered use	Probable	OR
Multnomah	2004	$40,000	N/R	N/R	1	Landmark MP

I016302-001	Right-of-way, road	23-May-05	Registered use	Probable	WA
Grant	2005	Less Than An Acre	N/R	Spray	1	Oust

I016429-001	Industrial site	13-Jun-05	Registered use	Probable	WA	Grant
2005	$90,000 Damage	5 Oz/Acre	Spray	1	Oust

I015440-001	Right-of-way, utility	01-Jun-03	Misuse (accidental)	Probable
MN	Benton	2003	2 Acres	5 Oz/Acre	Spray	1	Oust

I013194-001	Right-of-way, rail	02-Jul-02	Registered use	Probable	ND
Walsh	2002	10 Acres	3 Oz/15 Gals Water	Spray	1	OUST

I014409-011	Right-of-way, road	03-Jun-92	Registered use	Possible	WA
Walla Walla	1992	Not Given

	1

	B000601-010	Right-of-way	25-May-84	Registered use	Possible	CA	Fresno
1984	N/R

Spray	1	Oust

I015796-001	Right-of-way, utility	08-Nov-04	Registered use	Possible	KY
Jessamine	2004	1-4 Acres	3 Oz/Acre	Nr	1	Oust XP Herbicide

B000601-011	N/R	16-May-88	Registered use	Possible	CA	Kern	1988	N/R

	1	Oust

I000071-001	Peach	01-Jan-92	Registered use	Possible	SC	Saluda	1992
Numerous Trees	N/R	N/R	1	OUST

B000601-009	N/R	23-May-85	Undetermined	Possible	LA	Acadia	1985	Less Than
50 Acres

Spray	1	Oust

I015265-001	Seedling	01-Mar-04	Registered use	Possible	TX	Cass	2004
Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	1	Oustar

I016680-001	Right-of-way	06-Apr-05	Undetermined	Possible	OR	Douglas	2005
13 Acres

Spray	1

	I009556-005	Agricultural area

Misuse (accidental)	Possible	NC

0	Unknown	N/R	N/R	1	OUST

B000601-001	N/R	04-May-88	Undetermined	Possible	CA	Kern	1988

NR	NR	1	Oust

I016312-001	Forest	01-Apr-05	Undetermined	Possible	OR	Benton	2005	300
Acres	2 Lb/Acre	Spray	1	Westar

B000601-008	Right-of-way, road	23-May-85	Registered use	Possible	LA
Acadia	1985	Nr

Spray	1	Oust

B000601-007	Right-of-way, road	23-May-85	Registered use	Possible	NE
Scotts Bluff	1985	Nr	2 Oz/Acre

1	Oust

	Source: USEPA, OPP Ecological Incident Information System, October,
2007.

	Affected Species: 1 = terrestrial plants, 2 = aquatic plants, 3 =
terrestrial animals, 4= aquatic animals

APPENDIX F: T-REX Output

Table F-1. T-REX Model Inputs Used for Sulfometuron Methyl

TREX MODEL INPUTS

Chemical Name:	Sulfometuron methyl

	      Use:	non-crop; forest, rights-of-way

	Product name and form:	Oust (et al): water dispersible graunule

	% A.I. (leading zero must be entered for formulations <1% a.i.):
100.00%

	Application Rate (lbs/A): 	0.375

	Half-life (days):	35

	Application Interval (days):

	Number of Applications:	1

	Note: Sources of wildlife diet are assumed to be available for less
than one year for this model.

	Endpoints

	 Avian 	Indicate test species below

 	LD50 (mg/kg-bw)	4650.00	2 (mallard)

 	LC50 (mg/kg-diet)	4600.00	2 (mallard)

 	NOAEL (mg/kg-bw)	 	2

 	NOAEC (mg/kg-diet)	 	1

 	Enter the Mineau et al. Scaling Factor	1.15

 Mammals

 	LD50 (mg/kg-bw)	5000.00	 Rat

 	LC50 (mg/kg-diet)

Reported Chronic Endpoint (mg/kg-bw/d)	549.00	Scaled to 350 g from
Rabbit Developmental Tox Study

Is dietary concentration (mg/kg-diet) reported from the available
chronic mammal study? (yes or no)	no

Enter dietary concentration (mg/kg-diet)

Estimated Chronic Diet Concentration Equivalent to Reported Chronic
Daily Dose	10980	mg/kg-diet based on standard FDA lab rat conversion

Table F-2. T-REX Output: Upper Bound Kenaga, Acute Avian Dose-Based Risk
Quotients

Size Class

(grams)

Adjusted

LD50	EECs and RQs

Short Grass	Tall Grass

Broadleaf Plants/

Small Insects	Fruits/Pods/

Seeds/

Large Insects

EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ

20	2414.40	102.50	0.04	46.98	0.02	57.66	0.02	6.41	0.00

100	3073.65	58.45	0.02	26.79	0.01	32.88	0.01	3.65	0.00

1000	4341.65	26.17	0.01	11.99	0.00	14.72	0.00	1.64	0.00

Table F-3.  T-REX Output: Upper Bound Kenaga, Subacute Avian Dietary
Based Risk Quotients

LC50	EECs and RQs

	Short Grass	Tall Grass	Broadleaf Plants/

Small Insects	Fruits/Pods/

Seeds/

Large Insects

	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ

4600	90.00	0.02	41.25	0.01	50.63	0.01	5.63	0.00

Size class not used for dietary risk quotients

Table F-4. T-REX Output: Upper Bound Kenaga, Acute  Mammalian Dose-Based
 Risk Quotients

Size Class

(grams)

Adjusted

LD50	EECs and RQs

Short Grass	Tall Grass	Broadleaf Plants/

Small Insects	Fruits/Pods/

Seeds/

Large Insects	Granivore

EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ

15	10989.15	85.81	0.01	39.33	0.00	48.27	0.00	5.36	0.00	1.19	0.00

35	8891.40	59.30	0.01	27.18	0.00	33.36	0.00	3.71	0.00	0.82	0.00

1000	3845.80	13.75	0.00	6.30	0.00	7.73	0.00	0.86	0.00	0.19	0.00

Table F-5.  T-REX Output: Upper Bound Kenaga, Chronic Mammalian Dietary
Based Risk Quotients

NOAEC (ppm)	EECs and RQs

	Short Grass	Tall Grass	Broadleaf Plants/

Small Insects	Fruits/Pods/

Seeds/

Large Insects

	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ

10980	90.00	0.01	41.25	0.00	50.63	0.00	5.63	0.00

Size class not used for dietary risk quotients

Table F-6: T-REX Output:  Upper Bound Kenaga, Chronic Mammalian
Dose-Based Risk Quotients

Size Class

(grams)	Adjusted NOAEL	EECs and RQs

Short Grass	Tall Grass	Broadleaf Plants/

Small Insects	Fruits/Pods/

Seeds/

Large Insects	Granivore

EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ	EEC	RQ

15	1206.61	85.81	0.07	39.33	0.03	48.27	0.04	5.36	0.00	1.19	0.00

35	976.28	59.30	0.06	27.18	0.03	33.36	0.03	3.71	0.00	0.82	0.00

1000	422.27	13.75	0.03	6.30	0.01	7.73	0.02	0.86	0.00	0.19	0.00

APPENDIX G:  Modeling of Terrestrial plant Exposure from Contaminated
irrigation Water

The following calculations were used for determining risk quotients for
plants when groundwater or surface water contaminated by sulfometuron
methyl is applied to areas as irrigation water and subsequently drift to
adjacent areas.

SURFACE WATER IRRIGATION:

Assume a 1-acre field is irrigated with one inch of water containing 31
µg/L (or ppb) sulfometuron methyl (peak EEC for surface water, Table
15).

One acre has 6,272,640 square inches of surface area.  A 1-acre field
irrigated with 1 acre-inch of water (6,272,640 cubic inches of water)
would have been treated with 3,630 cubic ft of water (6,272,640 cubic
inches x 1 cubic ft/1728 cubic inches).  Converting to gallons, the
field has received 27,156 gallons of water (3,630 cubic ft x 7.481
gallons/cubic ft).  On a pounds per acre basis, 1 inch of water applied
to a 1-acre field weighs 226,625 lbs (27,156 gallons x 8.3453 lbs/gallon
of water).

So, if surface water containing 31 ppb sulfometuron methyl is used to
provide of 1 acre-inch of irrigation water, sulfometuron methyl is
applied at a rate of:

226,625 lb of water/A x  31 ppb (ai sulfometuron methyl) = 0.00703 lbs
ai/A sulfometuron methyl	     			1,000,000,000

Therefore, the risk quotient for sensitive plants adjacent to a field
that is irrigated with surface water containing 31 ppb (or µg/L)
sulfometuron methyl is calculated as follows:

EEC (spray drift) = application rate of contaminated irrigation water
(0.00703 lb ai/A) * 1% drift =  7.03 x 10-5 lb ai/A.

Non-endangered Plant RQ:

From 1 acre-inch of surface water: EEC/EC25 for vegetative vigor =
7.03 x 10-5 lbs ai/A = 3.9

					 				       1.8 x 10-5 lbs ai/A

Endangered Plant RQ:

From 1 acre-inch of surface water: EEC/EC05 for vegetative vigor =

							7.03 x 10-5 lbs ai/A = 71

 							9.9 x 10-7 lbs ai/A

GROUND WATER IRRIGATION

To calculate risk quotients for plants when ground water contaminated by
sulfometuron methyl is applied as irrigation water and subsequently
drifts to adjacent areas, the following method was used.

Assume a 1-acre field is irrigated with one inch of water containing
0.33 ppb (or µg/L) sulfometuron methyl (peak EEC for ground water,
Table 15).

As calculated above, 1 acre-inch of irrigation water weighs 226,625 lbs.
 So, sulfometuron methyl is applied at a rate of:

226,625 lb of water/acre x 0.33 (ai sulfometuron methyl) = 7.48 x 10-5
lbs ai/A.	     						1,000,000,000

Therefore, the risk quotient for sensitive plants adjacent to the
irrigated area with ground water containing 0.33 ppb (or µg/L)
sulfometuron methyl is calculated as follows:

EEC (spray drift) = application rate of contaminated irrigation water
(7.48 x 10-5 lb ai/A) * 1% drift =  7.03 x 10-7 lb ai/A.

Non-endangered Plant RQ:

From 1 acre-inch of ground water: EEC/EC25 for veg.vigor =  7.48 x 10-5
lb ai/A = 0.04

								    1.8 x 10-5 lbs ai/A

Endangered Plant RQ:

From 1 acre-inch of ground water: EEC/EC25 for veg.vigor =  7.48 x 10-5
lb ai/A = 0.76

								    9.9 x 10-7 lbs ai/A

APPENDIX H: Ecological Effects Data Summaries

I.  OPP Guideline Toxicity Studies

Freshwater Fish, Acute

Bluegill Sunfish, (Lepomis macrochirus). For bluegill, results from the
range finding test indicated no mortality when exposed to sulfometuron
methyl up to 200 mg ai/L (i.e., LC50 >200 mg/L).  Accordingly, a
definitive toxicity test was not required and a single treatment test
was conducted at the toxicity limit of 150 mg ai/L using technical grade
sulfometuron methyl (99.6% ai).  Results from the limit test (MRID
435018-01) indicate no mortality to bluegill at an exposure
concentration of 150 mg ai/L.  To prevent the formation of chemical
precipitate experienced during previous toxicity testing, test solutions
were buffered with 5N sodium hydroxide.  This resulted in a greater pH
range (7.2 – 9.0) than recommended (7.2-7.6) in study guidelines.  The
study authors reported observing no precipitate or other signs of
insolubility during the study.  The test concentration were measured and
found to be within 80% to 120% of nominal.  The pH range deviation is
therefore considered a necessary byproduct of increasing the solubility
of the test chemical. No mortality was observed in the controls.  All
other test guideline deviations are considered minor. This study is
classified as acceptable and meets the guideline requirements for acute
toxicity to a fresh water fish.

Rainbow Trout, (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Similarly for rainbow trout, no
mortality was observed in a range finding test up to 200 mg ai/L or the
follow-up toxicity limit test at 150 mg ai/L sulfometuron methyl (99.6%
ai).  Buffering of test solutions was required to prevent formation of
precipitates which resulted in a greater pH range (7.9-8.7) than
recommended (7.2-7.6).  The test concentration were measured and found
to be within 80% to 120% of nominal. The pH range deviation is therefore
considered a necessary byproduct of increasing the solubility of the
test chemical. No mortality was observed at 148 mg ai/L (measured
concentration) or in the controls. All other test guideline deviations
are considered minor.  This study is classified as acceptable and meets
the guideline requirements for acute toxicity to a fresh water fish.

Freshwater Invertebrates, Acute

Water flea (Daphnia magna). The toxicity of sulfometuron methyl to
freshwater invertebrates is indicated by a 48-hr acute toxicity test
with the water flea, Daphnia magna (MRID 435018-03).  As observed with
freshwater fish, no mortality was observed in a range finding test up to
200 mg ai/L or the follow-up toxicity limit test at 150 mg ai/L
sulfometuron methyl (99.6% ai).  Buffering of test solutions was
required to prevent formation of precipitates which resulted in a
greater pH range (8.4-9.0) than recommended (7.2-7.6).  No mortality was
observed in the 150 mg/L treatment or in the negative control.  One
daphnid died in the pH adjusted control (mortality 3%).  The test
concentration was measured and found to be 100% of nominal. The pH range
deviation is therefore considered a necessary byproduct of increasing
the solubility of the test chemical.

This test was originally classified as supplemental in 1995 by EFED
because of concerns over chemical composition of the dilution water
(filtered fish tank water housing fathead minnows) and the potential for
microbial degradation.  For the purposes of this risk assessment, this
study was re-reviewed and upgraded to acceptable.  According to the
study authors, ammonia levels in the dilution water were not
significantly raised and a summary of its chemical composition was
provided in an earlier chronic life cycle test with the same organism
(MRID 416728-06) and found to be acceptable.  Furthermore, given the
very low hydrophobicity of this chemical, alteration of its
bioavailability due to sorption to organic carbon would not likely be
significant, even if levels far exceeded those reported in the dilution
water from the earlier daphnid study.  Lastly, the chemical
concentration was verified analytically which confirmed that significant
chemical degradation was not occurring.  This study is classified as
acceptable and meets the guideline requirements for an acute toxicity
study with a freshwater invertebrate.

Estuarine and marine Fish, Acute

Sheepshead minnow (Cyprinodon variegatus). The toxicity of sulfometuron
methyl to estuarine and marine fish is indicated by a 96-hr acute
toxicity test with the sheepshead minnow, Cyprinodon variegatus
conducted at nominal concentrations of sulfometuron methyl (99.1% ai)
ranging from 15 to 100 mg ai/L (MRID 416728-03).  The LC50 based on
measured concentrations from this study was found to be greater than 45
mg ai/L.  No mortality or observable signs of sublethal effects occurred
in the study except for one dead fish (5%) at 8.2 mg/L (measured).  This
study was re-reviewed for this risk assessment and found to contain
several significant deficiencies which render its classification as
supplemental.  Specifically, measured concentrations ranged widely from
test initiation to termination (4 to 7 times), which is believed due to
the formation of an observable precipitate in test solutions.  This
occurred despite buffering of the dilution water to an initial pH of 8.5
(pH ranged thereafter from 7.4 to 8.5).

Although originally classified as supplemental by EFED in 1993, the
study was subsequently upgraded to core/acceptable by EFED in 1994 upon
the registrant’s explanation that solubility limits in unbuffered
water prevented adequate recovery of sulfometuron methyl from test
solutions and that test concentrations were verified analytically.
However, while this information may explain the low % of nominal
concentrations observed in the study, there was high variability in
measured test concentrations with treatments and substantial uncertainty
in the actual exposure of organisms to dissolved sulfometuron methyl (no
centrifugation of test samples prior to analysis).  Although these
deficiencies could render the study classification as
“unacceptable,” it is considered to provide some useful information
in this risk assessment (i.e., an indication of a lack of toxicity at or
near solubility limits in test solutions).  Furthermore, when viewed in
the context of screening level EECs (i.e., a maximum peak concentration
of 0.031 ppm in water), the bioavailable (dissolved) portion
sulfometuron methyl would have to be approximately 1500-fold lower than
the highest measured test concentration (~45 ppm) in order for risks to
be evident.  Therefore, this study is classified as supplemental but is
not recommended for repeat testing at this time because a repeat test
would be highly unlikely to alter the risk assessment conclusions.

Estuarine and Marine Invertebrates, Acute

Mysid shrimp, Mysidopsis bahia.  For mysids, a 96-h assay was conducted
at nominal concentrations of sulfometuron methyl (99.1%) ranging from 15
to 100 mg ai/L (MRID 416728-04).  The 96-h LC50 based on measured
concentrations from this study was found to be greater than 44.8 mg
ai./L.  No mortality or observable signs of sublethal effects occurred
in the study at any test concentration or the control.  A re-review of
the mysid test indicates it has several significant deficiencies which
render its classification as supplemental.  Specifically, measured
concentrations of sulfometuron methyl ranged widely from test initiation
to termination (3X to 13X in the mysid tests) and were substantially
below nominal concentrations.  The low % nominal is believed due to the
formation of an observable precipitate in test solutions.  The low %
nominal occurred despite buffering of the dilution water to an initial
pH of 8.5 (pH ranged thereafter from 7.6 to 8.5).  The pH range in the
mysid test extended beyond the recommended range in the test guidelines
(7.7-8.0 for euryhaline shrimp).

Although the mysid study was originally classified as supplemental by
EFED in 1993, the study was subsequently upgraded to core/acceptable in
1994 by EFED upon the registrant’s explanation that solubility limits
in unbuffered water prevented adequate recovery of sulfometuron methyl
from test solutions and that test concentrations were verified
analytically.   However, while this information may explain the low % of
nominal concentrations observed in the study, there was high variability
in measured test concentrations with treatments and substantial
uncertainty in the actual exposure of organisms to dissolved
sulfometuron methyl (no centrifugation of test samples prior to analysis
per OPP test guidelines).  Although these deficiencies could render the
study classification as “unacceptable,” it is considered to provide
some useful information in this risk assessment (i.e., an indication of
a lack of toxicity at or near solubility limits in test solutions).
Furthermore, when viewed in the context of screening level EECs (i.e., a
maximum peak concentration of 0.031 ppm in water), the bioavailable
(dissolved) portion sulfometuron methyl would have to be approximately
1300-fold lower than the highest measured test concentration (~ 45 ppm)
in order for risks to be evident.  Therefore, this study is classified
as supplemental but is not recommended for repeat testing at this time
because a repeated test would not likely affect the risk assessment
conclusions.

Eastern oyster, Crassostrea virginica.  For oysters, a 48-h assay was
conducted on embryos at the same nominal concentrations as used for
mysids (MRID 416728-05).  The 48-h EC50 based on measured concentrations
for this study was found to be greater than 38.2 mg ai/L.  No mortality
occurred and 99% of the surviving control oysters were normal.

A re-review of the oyster study indicates it has several significant
deficiencies which render its classification as supplemental.
Specifically, measured concentrations of sulfometuron methyl ranged
widely from test initiation to termination (up to 3X) and were
substantially below nominal concentrations.  The low % nominal is
believed due to the formation of an observable precipitate in test
solutions.  In the oyster test, pH ranged from 7.7 to 8.0.  The pH range
in the oyster test extended beyond the recommended range in the test
guidelines (8.0-8.3 for stenohaline oysters).

Although this study was originally classified as supplemental by EFED in
1993, it was subsequently upgraded to core/acceptable in 1994 by EFED
upon the registrant’s explanation that solubility limits in unbuffered
water prevented adequate recovery of sulfometuron methyl from test
solutions and that test concentrations were verified analytically.
However, while this information may explain the low % of nominal
concentrations observed in the study, there was high variability in
measured test concentrations with treatments and substantial uncertainty
in the actual exposure of organisms to dissolved sulfometuron methyl (no
centrifugation of test samples prior to analysis per OPP test
guidelines).  Although these deficiencies could render the study
classifications as “unacceptable,” it is considered to provide some
useful information in this risk assessment (i.e., an indication of a
lack of toxicity at or near solubility limits in test solutions).
Furthermore, when viewed in the context of screening level EECs (i.e., a
maximum peak concentration of 0.031 ppm in water), the bioavailable
(dissolved) portion sulfometuron methyl would have to be approximately
1000-fold lower than the highest measured test concentration (~ 40 ppm)
in order for risks to be evident.  Therefore, this study is classified
as supplemental but is not recommended for repeat testing at this time
because a repeated test would not likely affect the risk assessment
conclusions.

Freshwater Fish, Chronic

A chronic, early life-stage toxicity test was conducted in 1982 to
determine the effect of sulfometuron methyl on fathead minnow embryo
hatching, larval survival, and growth (MRID 423857-04; Accession No.
249796).  Fertilized embryos and hatched larvae were exposed to 5
nominal concentrations ranging from 0.15 to 2.5 mg ai/L under
flow-through conditions.  Dimethylformamide (DMF) was used as a carrier
(0.1 ml/L) and a solvent and negative control were used.  Two replicates
were used per test treatment, with each replicate containing 50 embryos
and subsequent to hatching, 20 larvae.  A statistically-significant
reduction in hatching was attributed to the highest test concentration
(2.5 mg/L nominal, 1.16 mg/L measured) using chi-square analysis (but
not significant using ANOVA).  Mean percent hatch was 38% in the highest
test concentration compared to 75% in the solvent and negative controls.
 Larval survival was not significantly affected in any test
concentration (ranging from 85-100%) compared to 92% in the negative
control and 95% in the solvent control. Larval growth (length, weight)
were also not significantly affected in any test concentration relative
to either control.  During the last week of the test, a diluter
malfunction resulted in a precipitous drop in exposure concentrations in
all treatments (at or below detection of 0.01 mg/L in several
treatments). Thus, the NOAEC and LOAEC from this study (0.71 and 1.16
mg/L, respectively for % hatching) were determined by considering only
the embryo exposure portion of the study prior up through hatching
(i.e., prior to the diluter malfunction).

A re-review of this study conducted for this risk assessment the study
is unacceptable primarily because of high uncertainty in quantifying
exposure experienced by fathead minnows during the test.  Specifically,
temporal variability in test concentrations exceeded OPP test guidelines
of < 1.5X in all test concentrations.  Even when measured concentrations
from the last week are not considered, the ratio of the highest to the
lowest test concentration ranged from 1.6 to 2.7.  As reported in the
study, the stability of the test substance in the DMF carrier is in
question and is thought to be responsible for the low measured
concentrations (48% of nominal on average).  Follow-up testing indicated
that at the pH of the study (7.2-7.5), the solubility of the
sulfometuron methyl with the DMF carrier would be approximately 3 mg/L.
At higher pH, the solubility of sulfometuron methyl increases
substantially (>100 mg/L).  At the time this study was conducted (1982),
however, pH adjusted test solutions was not conducted reportedly due to
lack of knowledge of the NaOH pH adjustment method.  However, results
from the Daphnia life cycle study discussed below indicate that with
appropriate buffering, stable and consistent concentrations are
achievable with sulfometuron methyl.  Because the NOAEC for fathead
minnow from this study (0.71 mg/L) is within an order of magnitude of
EECs (0.031 mg/L), there is a reasonable probability that a valid NOAEC
for chronic effects could fall in the range of the EECs.  Finally, the
precipitous drop in exposure concentrations brings into question the
study findings of a lack of a significant affect on fathead minnow
larval growth, since exposure was terminated up to a week prematurely.
This study is considered unacceptable and does not fulfill the guideline
requirements for chronic toxicity to freshwater fish.

Freshwater Invertebrate, Chronic

Chronic toxicity sulfometuron methyl to freshwater invertebrates is
indicated by a 21-day life cycle test conducted on the water flea,
Daphnia magna (MRID 416728-06).  Daphnids (<24-h old) were exposed to
six concentrations of sulfometuron methyl ranging from 0.1 to 100 mg/L
(nominal) in a static-renewal system.  Reproduction, growth and survival
were measured in 7 replicates per treatment (1 organism/rep.), while 3
additional replicates were designated solely for survival measurement (5
organisms/rep.).  In order to promote solubility of the test substance,
the pH of the stock solutions of the 25 mg/L and 100 mg/L treatments
were adjusted with NaOH to pH 8.5.  Both a negative and pH-adjusted
controls were included.

Results indicate that mean measured concentrations were close to nominal
concentrations (i.e., within 20% of the 0.1, 0.39, 1.6, 6.3, 25 and 100
mg/L nominal concentrations). Variability in test concentrations was
well within the acceptable limits of 1.5X.  Daphnid survival, growth and
reproduction were not significantly different between negative and pH
adjusted controls. Survival and growth (length) were not affected at any
test concentration.  Reproduction, as measured by the number of neonates
produced/daphnid, was not significantly different from negative controls
in any treatment (ANOVA, 0.05).  Although the Dunnett’s multiple
comparison test indicated a marginally significant difference in the 24
mg/L treatment (mean measured concentration), it is not considered
statistically valid to apply means testing when ANOVA results indicate
lack of significant differences among treatments.  Furthermore, an
inconsistent concentration-response relationship is indicated by the
lack of a significant reduction in daphnid reproduction at 97 mg/L (the
highest treatment tested).  Therefore, the NOAEC for daphnid
reproduction is re-interpreted as 97 mg/L (unbounded) and the LOAEC is >
97 mg/L.  This study is classified as acceptable and meets the guideline
requirements for a chronic study using a freshwater invertebrate.

Aquatic Plants

Green Algae, Selenastrum capricornutum. A tier 2 growth and reproduction
study was conducted on the effects of sulfometuron methyl (99.1% ai) on
the green algae, S. capricornutum (MRID 416801-02).  Six test
concentrations were evaluated ranging from 0.63 to 20 ug ai/L (nominal).
The 120 hr EC50 (reduction in cell density) for S. capricornutum was 4.6
µg ai/L and the NOAEC was 0.63 ug ai/L.  At the LOAEC of 1.3 μg/L,
growth was reduced approximately 20%, while the cell growth at the NOAEC
showed a slight increase relative to controls.  A monotonic
concentration-response relationship with cell density was observed.
These toxicity values are based on reported nominal concentrations.
Although the study authors indicate that samples were taken for
analytical measurement and would be analyzed “if deemed necessary,”
results from chemical analysis were not provided in the study report. At
these concentrations, solubility of the test compound is not expected to
be problematic.  Therefore, this test is classified as acceptable and
meets the guidelines requirement a test with a freshwater green algal
species.

Freshwater and Marine Diatoms (Navicula pelliculosa and Skeletonema
costatum). Preliminary tests with the freshwater diatom (N. pelliculosa)
and saltwater diatom (S. costatum) indicated a lack of toxicity such
that Tier II tests were not necessary.  Both species were exposed to a
nominal ‘limit’ test concentration of 414 ug ai/L (99.2% ai) for 120
hours including negative controls (4 reps each).  This ‘limit
concentration’ corresponded to the maximum concentration calculated
for sulfometuron methyl applied to a 6 in. deep, 1 acre pond.  For N.
pelliculosa, no significant reduction in cell density was observed
following exposure to 370 ug ai/L (measured, MRID 435385-02).  The pH
ranged from 7.4 to 7.5.  Similarly for S. costatum, no significant
reduction in cell density was observed following exposure to 410 ug ai/L
(measured, MRID 435385-02).  The test pH ranged from 7.9-8.7 at test
termination. Measurements at test initiation and termination indicate
stability of sulfometuron methyl in the test solutions.  No significant
guideline deviations were noted in these studies.  These tests are
considered acceptable and meet the guideline requirements for a
freshwater and marine diatom.

μg/L (measured values, MRID 435385-02).  Measurements at test
initiation and termination indicate stability of sulfometuron methyl in
the test solutions.  The 120-hr EC50 (cell density) for Anabaena was
calculated as 41.6 μg/L.  A NOAEC for cell density was calculated as
<14 μg/L (lowest concentration tested).  This NOAEC corresponds to a
20% in cell growth relative to controls.  This test is considered
scientifically sound but is classified as supplemental because a NOAEC
was not reached in the study.  No other major guideline deviations were
apparent in this test.

Duckweed, Lemna gibba.  The freshwater vascular plant (duckweed) was
studied in a 14-day exposure to sulfometuron methyl (95.7% ai, MRID
435835-03) at 5 test doses ranging from     0.13 to 1.045 ug ai/L plus a
negative control.  A total of 3-5 plants were tested per replicate with
3-5 fronds per plant. The pH of test solutions ranged from 7.5 to 9.4
because test solutions were buffered to maintain adequate solubility.
The 14-day exposure of EC50 and NOAEC for frond count (the most
sensitive endpoint tested) were 0.48 and 0.21 μg/L, respectively.
Frond counts were reduced 4% at the NOAEC and 20% at the LOAEC (0.32
ug/L).  Measurements at test initiation and termination indicate
stability of sulfometuron methyl in the test solutions.  Following the
14-d exposure period, recovery of duckweed was assessed at the end of
the study by exposing organisms to untreated medium for an additional 14
days.  Effects were expressed as percent inhibition of frond counts and
biomass.  The results are as follows:

											14-d Recovery			14-d Recovery:

		14-d Exposure Conc.		Frond Count Inhibition		Biomass Inhibition

			1.045 ppb					41.1%				38.3%

			0.590 ppb					11.8%				10.8%

			0.323 ppb					0.6%				- 1.0%

The study authors concluded that sulfometuron methyl was phytotoxic to
duckweed at concentrations of > 0.590 ppb and phytostatic at 0.323 ppb.
These data suggest that the effects of sulfometuron methyl to aquatic
vascular plants may be reversible following 14-d exposures at selected
concentrations (0.323 ppb and below) provided a sufficient recovery
period is available.  This study is considered acceptable and satisfies
the guideline requirement for a toxicity test using an aquatic vascular
plant.

Avian, Oral Acute

Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos. An acute oral toxicity study with the
mallard indicates sulfometuron methyl (> 93% ai) is practically
non-toxic on an acute basis (MRID 245375).  An oral LD50 of >4,650 mg
ai/kg-bw was reported in this study (recalculated by reviewer for % ai).
No mortality occurred in any treatment and birds appeared normal
throughout the 14-d test period.  Food consumption varied widely across
treatments, but did not exhibit a dose-dependent trend. Weight gain/loss
also did not exhibit a dose-dependent trend within or across sexes.
Weight gain in females may have been confounded by induction of the egg
laying cycle by the photoperiod used.  The guideline requirement (71-1)
is fulfilled for an acute oral toxicity study with birds for
sulfometuron methyl and the study is classified as acceptable.

Avian, Dietary Acute

Mallard duck, Anas platyrhynchos and bobwhite quail, Colinus
virginianus. Two, 8-d dietary acute toxicity studies were submitted on
the effects of sulfometuron methyl on bobwhite quail and mallard duck
(Accession No. 246409 and MRID 71414, respectively). Both tests
consisted of a 5-d exposure period followed by 3 days of observation.
Mortality, food consumption and body weight were measured during the
test.  Mallards were 16 days old while quail were < 14 days old at test
initiation, with each test using 10 birds per treatment level. The
submitted data indicates that sulfometuron methyl (92 to 95.2% ai) is
practically nontoxic to mallard and quail when administered via
subacute, dietary exposure.  The 8-day acute dietary LC50 values for
bobwhite quail and mallard are > 5,620 mg ai/kg-diet and > 4,600 mg
ai/kg-diet, respectively (adjusted by reviewer for & ai). There were no
signs of mortality, clinical toxicity, or abnormal behavior reported in
the studies.  The guideline (71-2) is fulfilled for a subacute dietary
study with birds and these studies are classified as acceptable.

Mammal, Acute

Rat, Sprague Dawley.  The acute toxicity of sulfometuron methyl
(technical grade active ingredient) is indicated by an acute, oral
toxicity study with the rat (MRID 43089201).  In this study, 5 male and
5 female rats were administered a single oral dose of 5000 mg ai/kg-bw
technical grade sulfometuron methyl (approx. 100% a.i.) in corn oil via
gavage.  Rats were observed for mortality, signs of ill health,
pharmacologic and toxicological effects for 14 days after dosing.  No
mortality occurred at 5,000 mg ai/kg-bw and no clinical signs of
toxicity were observed that were related to sulfometuron methyl
exposure. Male and females continued to gain weight throughout the
study.  An acute, oral LD50 value of >5000 mg ai/kg-bw was determined
from this study, indicating that sulfometuron methyl is categorized as
practically non-toxic (toxicity category IV) to small mammals on an
acute oral basis.  This study is considered acceptable and satisfies the
guideline requirement (81-1) for an acute toxicity study with mammals.

Formulated Product, Rat (Sprague Dawley).  Formulated pesticide products
may contain a number of other ‘inert’ ingredients that alter their
toxicity compared to the technical grade active ingredient (e.g.,
resulting in greater toxicity).  For sulfometuron methyl, data on the
oral toxicity of formulated products were available for one species of
terrestrial animal (rat).  Results from this study indicate that the
formulated product DPX-T5486-87 (74% ai) is practically nontoxic to
laboratory rats, with an LD50 of >5,000 mg ai/kg-bw.  No clinical signs
of toxicity, weight loss or gross legions were observed in this study.
This study satisfied guideline requirements for acute oral toxicity with
rats and is considered acceptable.

Mammals, Chronic/Developmental

A combined 2-generation reproduction/oncogenicity study and 2-year
chronic reproduction study with rats exposed to sulfometuron methyl was
submitted to the agency (MRID 423857-05 and 423857-06).  However, study
authors had to abandoned the study on about day 200 due to disease of
the test organisms that was not related to exposure.  Portions of this
study were submitted to the Agency (e.g., 90-day and chronic
reproduction) but were found unacceptable upon their review by HED.
Similarly, a mammalian developmental toxicity study (MRID 78796) with
the rat was also found to be invalid by HED.

A developmental toxicity study with the rabbit (Accession No. 78798) was
submitted to the Agency.  In this study, rabbits were administered doses
of 0, 30, 100, or 300 mg/kg/day from gestation days (GD) 6-18 and
examined at GD 29.  There were no mortalities and no treatment-related
clinical signs or macroscopic findings.  A slight decrease in maternal
body weight occurred during the gestation period (GD 6-18) but this was
judged biologically insignificant.  There were no treatment related
effects on fetal or maternal endpoints measured, including external,
visceral or skeletal malformations, frequency of resorptions, live
fetuses, or dead fetuses, or on the number of litters, sex ratio, or
post-implantation loss.  The developmental LOAEL was not observed.  The
developmental NOAEL is 300 mg/kg/day (highest dose tested).   According
to the data evaluation record provided by HED, this study is acceptable
but does not fulfill the guideline requirement for a developmental
toxicity study with rabbits because dose levels were not considered high
enough to adequately assess developmental toxicity.

Terrestrial Invertebrate

eturon methyl, bees were exposed at 5 treatments ranging from 13 to 100
μg ai/bee and included a solvent and negative control (MRID 416728-10).
 Results indicate that sulfometuron methyl is practically non-toxic to
bees on an acute contact basis.  The contact 48-h LD50 for sulfometuron
methyl is >100 µg ai/bee.  Cumulative mortality and immobility ranged
from 4-8% in the controls to 0-2% in the treatments.  No overt signs of
toxicity were observed in the study.  The guideline (141-1) is
fulfilled.

 Terrestrial Plants tc \l4 "b.     Terrestrial Plants

For sulfometuron methyl, six dicots (sugar beet, rape, tomato, pea,
cucumber and soybean) and four monocots (onion, corn, wheat, sorghum)
were tested using the Tier 2 protocols for effects on seedling emergence
and vegetative vigor.  Tier 1 tests were not conducted since preliminary
testing indicated all plants would be promoted to Tier 2 testing.  Test
durations were 14 days and 21 days for the seedling emergence and
vegetative vigor studies, respectively.  Depending on the species and
test, seven to eleven treatments were used with application rates ranged
from 0.0000017 to 0.5625 lb ai/acre.  For this risk assessment, a
re-review and statistical analysis was conducted on the Tier 2 toxicity
data from the more sensitive test species in both the seedling emergence
and vegetative vigor tests.  All statistical comparisons were made to
negative controls (previous analyses in the DER made comparisons to
solvent controls even though negative and solvent controls were not
significantly different).  For calculation of the EC25 and EC05,
nonlinear regression was conducted using the methods of Bruce and
Versteeg (1992).  In situations where the NOAEC was found to be greater
than or equal to the EC25, the EC05 was used for the comparison with
threatened and endangered species.

Results for the most sensitive endpoints and species with monocots and
dicots indicate that seedling emergence and vegetative vigor are
impacted at exposures well below the maximum application rate of 0.375
lb ai/acre for sulfometuron methyl.  For seedling emergence, the EC25 of
1.9 x 10 -4 lb ai/acre for the most sensitive monocot (sorghum) is about
a factor of 5 greater than the EC25 of 3.2 x 10 -5 lb ai/acre for the
most sensitive dicot (sugar beet).  For 9 of the 10 test species, a
comparison of EC25 values indicates that interspecies sensitivity
differences are within a factor of 20 (based on summary data presented
by McKelvey, 1995).  This indicates that the most sensitive test species
are not ‘outliers’ in terms of their relative sensitivity.  The EC05
and NOAEC for the sorghum and sugar beet are 4.3 x 10-5 and 2.9 x 10-5,
respectively.  A consistent, declining monotonic exposure-response curve
was observed for sugar beet, while that for sorghum was monotonic
following an increase in mean shoot height of 24% in the lowest test
treatment and 2% in the next lowest treatment relative to the negative
control.  Because the statistical method of Bruce and Versteeg (1992)
uses a pooled response from the non-monotonic portion of the
dose-response curve for calculating ECx values, the actual mean response
associated with the EC05 for sorghum is slightly higher than the mean
response observed for controls, rendering it a relatively conservative
toxicological value.

Results from the vegetative vigor study indicate the most sensitive
monocot (corn) and dicot (soybean) are impacted at somewhat lower levels
compared to the seedling emergence study.  The EC25 values for corn and
soybean (shoot dry weight) are 3.7 x 10-5 and 1.8 x 10-5, respectively.
Because the NOAEC exceeded the EC25 values for both species, the EC05 is
used for risk assessment with threatened and endangered species.  The
EC05 values for corn and soybean are 8.4 x 10-6 and 9.9 x 10-7,
respectively. For all 10 test species, a comparison of EC25 values
indicates that interspecies sensitivity differences are within a factor
of 20 (based on summary data presented by McKelvey, 1995).  This
indicates that the most sensitive test species are not ‘outliers’ in
terms of their relative sensitivity.  A consistent, declining monotonic
exposure-response curve was observed for corn and soybean in the
vegetative vigor test.

II. Acceptable or Supplemental Studies from ECOTOX

Aquatic Organisms

Naqvi and Hawkins (1989).  In this study, Naqvi and Hawkins (1989)
exposed four genera of field-collected microcrustaceans (Diaptomus sp.
Eucyclops sp., Alonella sp., and Cypria sp.) to sulfometuron methyl from
the Oust® formulated product at nominal concentrations of ranging from
100 to 2500 mg/L for 48-h.  Consistent, monotonic exposure-response
relationships across the six treatments occurred for all four species
and 48-h LC50s (probit analysis) were reported as follows:

Species	Test Chemical	48-h LC50 (mg/L)

(95% confidence limits)	Classification	Reference

Diaptomus sp.

Oust®

(~93% ai)	1315 (1207-1524)	supplemental	Naqvi and Hawkins (1989)

Eucyclops sp.

1320 (1154-1536)

Alonella sp.

802 (475-928)

Cypria sp

2241 (1744-4517)

This study is classified as supplemental primarily because test
concentrations were not measured in the study and the field collected
test organisms were provided a relatively short application period
(96-h) vs. the 7-d minimum acclimation period recommend for freshwater
invertebrate testing.  Furthermore, organisms were not positively
identified to the species level, thus indicating that more than one test
species may have been tested in each study.  Finally, the study authors
do not indicate whether nominal concentrations were adjusted to reflect
the percent active ingredient in the formulated product.

Romaire (1984).  A study was submitted by the registrant (DuPont) per
FIFRA Section 6(a)2 requirements on July 1, 1991.  In this study,
Romaire (1984) evaluated the acute toxicity of Oust® (% ai not
reported) to juvenile red swamp crayfish, Procambarus clarkii. A static,
acute toxicity study was conducted for 96 hours in 4 replicate aquaria
(5 crayfish/aquarium) at 8 test concentrations ranging from 0 to 10,000
mg ai/L.  Analytical measurements sulfometuron methyl were not taken
during the study.  The authors report that the 96-h LC50 was > 5,000 mg
ai/L for sulfometuron methyl and mortality did not exceed 50% in any
test treatment.  However, review of this study indicates that it is
unacceptable because dissolved oxygen levels dropped precipitously
throughout the study in test concentrations where mortality was
observed, despite periodic aeration of test solutions.  Dissolved oxygen
levels repeatedly reached levels as low as 2.1 mg/L or approximately 25%
saturation, which is well below ASTM recommendations of 60% saturation.
Because the effect of dissolved oxygen on crayfish mortality could not
be separated from the possible effects of sulfometuron methyl, this
study is not considered scientifically sound for the purposes of
describing the acute toxicity of sulfometuron methyl to juvenile
crayfish.

Byl et al. (1994). The effects of sulfometuron methyl on the aquatic
vascular plant, Hydrilla verticillata, were evaluated in a laboratory
study conducted by Byl et al (1994).  In this study, Byl et al.) exposed
plants to four aqueous solutions ranging from 0.001 to 1.0 mg/L
sulfometuron methyl (as the formulated product, Oust®, % ai not
reported) .  Three replicates were used per treatment and exposures
continued for 5 days.  The number of plants tested per replicate was not
reported.  A significant decrease in shoot length was observed at or
above 0.01 mg/L, with combined shoot and root length approximating 30%
of the controls.  Reduction in mean growth followed a concentration
dependent monotonic relationship.  A significant increase in peroxidase
activity (a potential biochemical indicator of chemical exposure) was
also measured at 0.01 mg/L relative to controls.  This study is
classified as supplemental because sulfometuron methyl was not measured
in the study and it is unclear whether results reported reflect % ai or
total formulated product.

Fort et al (1999).  In this study, Fort et al. (1999) conducted three
separate tests of sulfometuron methyl exposure to the African clawed
frog, Xenopus laevis: (1) a 4-day frog embryo teratogenesis assay
(FETAX) to evaluate embryo mortality/ malformations; (2) a 14-d test to
evaluate effects on tail resporption, and (3) a 30-d exposure to
evaluate effects on limb development. Both analytically impure (85% ai)
and purified (99.5% ai) sulfometuron methyl exposures were evaluated in
the study, but due to the confounding influence of impurities on
sulfometuron methyl toxicity, results from only the purified (99.5% ai)
sulfometuron methyl are used here.

In the FETAX assay, 2 replicates of 20 mid-blastula frog embryos (stage
8) were exposed to 11 nominal test concentrations of sulfometuron methyl
ranging from 0.001 to 24.9 mg ai/L for 96-h.  Sulfometuron methyl stock
solutions were prepared using a DMSO carrier and verified analytically
(analytical results not reported).  Both a negative and solvent control
were included.  Test procedures generally conformed to ASTM
recommendations for the FETAX assay (ASTM, 1996).  Results indicate no
statistically significant effect of sulfometuron methyl on embryo
survival or percent malformations up to (and including) the highest test
concentration (24.9 mg/L).  Solvent controls were not significantly
different from negative controls.

Similar results were found in the 30-d study, whereby no statistically
significant effect of sulfometuron methyl exposure was found on limb
development (% malformations) up through 24.9 mg/L.  Results from the
14-d tail resporption study indicate a significant reduction in tail
resporption at 9.95 and 24.9 mg ai/L beginning at development stage 64
through 66 (test termination).  No significant reduction occur at or
below 1 mg ai/L.

This study is classified as supplemental primarily because exposure
concentrations were not measured during the test.  Although the authors
report that sulfometuron methyl was ‘stable’ over the 24 to 96-h
renewal cycles used in the studies, no analytical chemistry results were
provided.  Furthermore, randomization of study organisms and replicates
was not indicated (an ASTM requirement).  Collection and testing of
embryos by separate clutches (an ASTM recommendation) was not apparent
in the study. Finally, the final concentrations of carrier solvent in
the various treatments was not reported (solvent concentrations were
only reported for the stock solutions).

Toxicity of sulfometuron methyl to the African clawed frog from a study
by Fort et al.  (1999).

Species	Test Chemical	Exposure Duration	Endpoint (Effect)	Effect Level

(mg ai/L)	Study Classification	Ref.

Xenopus laevis		sulfometuron methyl (99.5% ai)	96-h	LC50 (% mortality)

NOAEC  (% malformations)	> 24.9

 24.9 (a)	Supplemental	Fort et al. (1999)

14-d	NOAEC (tail resorption)

LOAEC (tail resporption)	0.995

9.95

30-d	NOAEC (limb deformation)	24.9(a)

(a) Highest tested dose, LOAEL not achieved in study.

Terrestrial Organisms

Busse et al. (2005). In a greenhouse study, Busse et al. (2005) studied
the effect of sulfometuron methyl (applied as the formulated product
Oust) on ectomycorrhizal formation and seedling growth of three conifer
species: ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa), Douglas fir (Pseudosuga
menziesii), and white fir (Abies concolor).  Conifer seedlings (5
replicates) were grown in four different soil types and applied with
sulfometuron methyl at 0, 1X and 2X its application rate of 0.14 kg
ai/ha (0.125 lb/A).  Sulfometuron methyl was applied to soil at the
onset of lateral root formation (approximately 45-55 d post planting)
due to the high sensitivity of seedlings to sulfometuron methyl applied
prior to this time period. Results indicate that ectomycorrhizal
formation was not inhibited for any conifer regardless of soil type or
application rate (1X or 2X).  For ponderosa pine, seedling dry weight
and root growth (number of root tips/plant) were significantly reduced
relative to controls at 0.125 and 0.250 lb ai/A in two of the four soil
types.  For Douglas fir and white fir, no significant reduction in
seedling dry weight occurred at any treatment level.  However, root
growth was reduced for Douglas fir at 0.125 lb ai/A for three of the
four soil types and at 0.25 lb ai/A for the forth soil type.  White fir
appeared least sensitive to sulfometuron methyl, with significant
reductions in root growth at 0.125 lb ai/A in one soil type and at 0.25
lb ai/A in a second soil type.  The authors conclude that sulfometuron
methyl does not inhibit mycorrhizal formation at the specified
application rates but does inhibit plant growth of ponderosa pine and
root growth of all three species, depending on soil type and application
rate. The lowest NOAEC from this study is 1X the application rate or
0.125 lb ai/A, several orders of magnitude above NOECs observed in the
seedling emergence and vegetative vigor guideline studies.

Boyle and Walters (2005) examined the effect of saccharin, a major
degradation product of sulfometuron methyl, on resistance of broad bean
(Vicia faba) to rust fungus.  Although not conceived as a degradate
study per se, these results nevertheless have some relevance to the
ecotoxicology of one of the sulfometuron methyl degradation products.
In this study, 200 ml of 0.3 mM saccharin was applied either as a soil
drench or to foliage of broad bean which were exposed to rust fungus
four times over a 14-d period.  Results indicate that saccharin did not
induce resistance to rust fungus nor did it significantly affect shoot
weight or leaf area.  However the authors report the number of leaflets
formed was significantly reduced relative to controls.

Neary et al. (1984) evaluated the effects of sulfometuron methyl (as the
formulated product Oust) on slash pine (Pinus elliottii) and loblolly
pine (Pinus taeda) seedlings inhabiting coastal plain flatlands.  In
this study, 60 trees of each species were exposed to sulfometuron methyl
via broadcast spray at 0.50 lb ai/A in a randomized factorial design
involving different plot locations, irrigation and fertilization levels.
 Although this study was designed primarily to investigate the efficacy
of different weed control methods, the authors did report that three
months after treatment, application of sulfometuron methyl did not
reduce survival of slash or loblolly pine, suggesting an unbounded NOAEC
of 0.50 lb ai/A (only dose tested).

APPENDIX I; Ecological Effects Data Requirements

Ecological Effects Data Requirements for Sulfometuron Methyl

Guideline

Data Requirement

Test Material

MRID

Study Classification	Data Requirement Met? 	More Data Needed?

71-1

Avian Oral LD50

sulfometuron methyl	245375	Acceptable	Yes	No

71-2

Avian Dietary LC50

sulfometuron methyl	71414

246409 (2)	Acceptable  Acceptable	Yes	No

71-4

Avian Reproduction

sulfometuron methyl

Data Gap	No	Reserved(3)

72-1

Freshwater Fish LC50	sulfometuron methyl	435018-01

435018-02	Acceptable	Yes	No

72-2

Freshwater Invertebrate Acute LC50	sulfometuron methyl	435018-03
Acceptable (1)	Yes	No

72-3(a)

Estuarine/Marine Fish LC50	sulfometuron methyl	416728-03	Supplemental
(1)	No	Reserved(3)

72-3(b)

Estuarine/Marine Mollusk EC50	sulfometuron methyl	416728-05	Supplemental
(1)	No	Reserved(3)

72-3(c)

Estuarine/Marine Shrimp EC50	sulfometuron methyl	416728-04	Supplemental
(1)	No 	Reserved(3)

72-4(a)

Freshwater Fish Early Life-Stage	sulfometuron methyl	423857-04; 249796
(2)	Invalid (1)	No	Reserved(3)

72-4(b)

Aquatic Invertebrate Life-Cycle (freshwater)	sulfometuron methyl
416728-06	Acceptable	Yes	No

123-1(a)	Seedling Emergence

(Tier II)	sulfometuron methyl	435385-01	Acceptable	Yes	No

123-1(b)

Vegetative Vigor (Tier II)	sulfometuron methyl	435385-01	Acceptable	Yes
No

123-2

Aquatic Plant Growth

Blue-green Algae (Tier II)	sulfometuron methyl	435385-02	Acceptable	Yes
No

	Duckweed, Lemna gibba

(Tier II)	sulfometuron methyl	435385-03	Acceptable	Yes	No

Freshwater Diatom, Navicula (Tier 1)	sulfometuron methyl	435385-02
Acceptable	Yes	No

Marine Diatom  (Tier 1)	sulfometuron methyl	435385-02	Acceptable	Yes	No

Green algae (Tier II)	sulfometuron methyl	416801-02	Acceptable	Yes	No

141-1

Honey Bee Acute

Contact LD50	sulfometuron methyl	416728-10	Acceptable	Yes	No

(1) Study was re-classified as part of this risk assessment.

(2) Accession number.

(3) Data requirement not met for this guideline study.  However, risk
assessment results are not likely to change based on submission of new
acceptable data.  Therefore, the data requirement for this study is
reserved but may be required in the future should additional information
warrant additional testing.

APPENDIX J: Ecological Effects Studies Rejected by OPP

SULFOMETURON METHYL + DEGRADATES

Papers that Were Accepted for ECOTOX But Ultimately Rejected By OPP (May
2007)

Initial Screen Acceptable for ECOTOX and OPP

	Ahrens, J. F. (1985). Evaluation of Sulfometuron Methyl for Weed
Control in Christmas Tree Plantings.  Proc.Northeast.Weed Sci.Soc.  39:
249-253. (Rejection Rationale:  Target/efficacy study, Mixtures;
EcoReference No.: 31608)

	Anderson, R. L., Lefever, F. R., and Maurer, J. K. (1988). The Effect
of Various Saccharin Forms on Gastro-Intestinal Tract, Urine and Bladder
of Male Rats.  Food Chem.Toxicol. 26: 665-669. (Rejection Rationale:
Endpoint Relevancy; EcoReference No.: 82947)

	Byl, T. D. and Klaine, S. J. (1991). Peroxidase Activity as an
Indicator of Sublethal Stress in the Aquatic Plant Hydrilla verticillata
(Royle).  In: J.W.Gorsuch, W.R.Lower, W.Wang, and M.A.Lewis (Eds.),
Plants for Toxicity Assessment, 2nd Volume, ASTM STP 1115, Philadelphia,
PA 101-106. (Rejection Rationale:  Superceded by Byl et al, 1994;
EcoReference No.: 17181)

	Cumberland, P. F. T., Richold, M., Parsons, J. F., and Pratten, M. K.
(1994). Further Evaluation of a Teratogenicity Screen Using an
Intravitelline Injection Technique.  Toxicol. In Vitro 8: 153-166.
(Rejection Rationale:  Endpoint Relevancy, Exposure Route; EcoReference
No.: 91195)

	Dodel, J. B., Everaere, L., Gauthier, B., and Issaly, G. (1983). Use of
Dpx 5648 Or Methyl
2-(((((4,6-Dimethyl-2-Pyrimidinyl)Amino)-Carbonyl)Amino)=Sulfonyl)Benzoa
te Or Dpx 5648, A New Herbicide for Weeding Uncultivated Plac.  Columa
3: 257-265. (Rejection Rationale:  Target/Efficacy study; EcoReference
No.: 31204)

	Epelbaum, S., Landstein, D., Arad, S., Barak, Z., Chipman, D. M.,
Larossa, R. A., and Vandyk, T. K. (1992). Is the Inhibitory Effect of
the Herbicide Sulfometuron Methyl due to 2 Ketobutyrate Accumulation?
In: B.K.Singh, H.E.Flores, and J.C.Shannon (Eds.), 7th Annu. Penn. State
Symp. in Plant Physiol., May 28-30, Univ.Park, PA, Am.Soc.of Plant
Physiol., Rockville, MD 352-353. (Rejection Rationale:  Target/Efficacy
study, Toxicity mechanisms);

	Fleischer, S. J., Gaylor, M. J., Dickens, R., and Turner, D. L. (1989).
Roadside Management of Annual Fleabane (Erigeron annuus) and Wild Carrot
(Daucus carota).  Weed Technol. 3: 72-75. (Rejection Rationale:
Target/Efficacy study; EcoReference No.: 90965) EcoReference No.: 49268)

	Harada, K., Miyasaki, T., and Tamura, Y. (1994). Chemoattractant
Effects of Sugars and Their Related Compounds on Black Abalone Haliotis
discus.  Comp.Biochem.Physiol.A 109: 111-115. (Rejection Rationale:
Endpoint relevancy; EcoReference No.: 90554)

	Hirose, M., Shirai, T., Tsuda, H., Fukushima, S., Ogiso, T., and Ito,
N. (1981). Effect of Phenobarbital, Polychlorinated Biphenyl and Sodium
Saccharin on Hepatic and Renal Carcinogenesis in Unilaterally
Nephrectomized Rats Given N-Ethyl-N-Hydroxyethylnitrosasmine Orally.
Carcinogenesis 2: 1299-1302. (Rejection Rationale:  Endpoint relevancy;
EcoReference No.: 82213)

	Kim, H.-C., Cha, S.-W., Ha, C.-S., Roh, J.-K., Lee, Y.-S., Furukawa,
F., Nishikawa, A., and Takahashi, M. (1996). Reappraisal of Eight
Representative Carcinogenic and Non-Carcinogenic Compounds in a New
Medium-Term Rat Liver Bioassay Using.  Cancer Lett. 104: 85-90.
(Rejection Rationale:  Endpoint relevancy; EcoReference No.: 90556)

	King, J. W. and Rogers III, J. N. (1986). Bermudagrass Growth
Suppression with Sulfometuron Methyl and Metsulfuron Methyl.  Ark Farm
Re 35(2): 1-4. (Rejection Rationale:  Target/Efficacy study, Mixture;
EcoReference No.: 31373)

	Kitchin, K. T. and Ebron, M. T. (1983). Studies of Saccharin and
Cyclohexylamine in a Coupled Microsomal activating/Embryo Culture
System.  Food Chem.Toxicol. 21: 537-541. (Rejection Rationale:  Endpoint
relevancy; EcoReference No.: 90513)

	Kramers, P. G. N. (1977). Mutagenicity of Saccharin in Drosophila:  The
Possible Role of Contaminants.  Mutat.Res. 56: 163-167. (Rejection
Rationale:  Endpoint relevancy; EcoReference No.: 90961)

	Liscia, A., Masala, C., Crnjar, R., Sollai, G., and Solari, P. (2004).
Saccharin Stimulates the "Deterrent" Cell in the Blowfly:  Behavioral
and Electrophysiological Evidence.  Physiol.Behav. 80: 637-646.
(Rejection Rationale:  Endpoint relevancy; EcoReference No.: 90053)

	Nascimento, M. G., De Oliveira, M. L. C. S., Lima, A. S., and De
Camargo, J. L. V. (2006). Effects of Diuron
[3-(3,4-Dichlorophenyl)-1,1-Dimethylurea] on the Urinary Bladder of Male
Wistar Rats .  Toxicology 224: 66-73. (Rejection Rationale:  Endpoint
relevancy; EcoReference No.: 90555)

	Pszczolkowski, M. A. and Brown, J. J. (2003). Effect of Sugars and
Non-Nutritive Sugar Substitutes on Consumption of Apple Leaves by
Codling Moth Neonates.  Phytoparasitica 31: 283-291. (Rejection
Rationale:  Target/Efficacy; EcoReference No.: 91055)

	Sivan, A. and Arad, S. (1998). Intraspecific Transfer of Herbicide
Resistance in the Red Microalga Porphyridium sp. (Rhodophyceae) via
Protoplast Fusion.  J.Phycol. 34: 706-711. (Rejection Rationale:
Target/Efficacy; EcoReference No.: 61449)

Initial Screen Acceptable for ECOTOX but not OPP

	Amin, S., Moore, R. W., Peterson, R. E., and Schantz, S. L. (2000).
Gestational and Lactational Exposure to TCDD or Coplanar PCBs Alters
Adult Expression of Saccharin Preference Behavior in Female Rats.
Neurotoxicol.Teratol. 22: 675-682.

EcoReference No.: 75076

Chemical of Concern: TCDD,PCB,SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:
REP,GRO,BEH; Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SAC)//PCBRES
CODED,RQA,DATA,ENTERED,DONE.

	2. 	Asamoto, M., Mann, A. M., and Cohen, S. M. (1994). P53 Mutation is
Infrequent and Might not give a Growth Advantage in Rat Bladder
Carcinogenesis In Vivo.  Carcinogenesis 15: 455-458.

EcoReference No.: 90517

Chemical of Concern: SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  CEL; Rejection
Code:  NO MIXTURE(SAC),NO COC(SMM).

	3. 	Bannasch, P., Griesemer, R. A., Anders, F., Becker, R., Cabral, J.
R., Della Porta, G., Feron, V. J., Henschler, D., Ito, N., Kroes, R.,
Magee, P. N., McKnight, B., Montesano, R., Napalkov, N. P., Nesnow, S.,
Roberfroid, M., Slaga, T., Turusov, V. S., Wilbourn, J., and Williams,
G. M. (1986). Assays for Initiating and Promoting Activities.  In:
R.Montesano, et al.(Eds.), IARC (Int.Agency for Res.on Cancer)
Sci.Publ.No.83, Long-Term and Short-Term Assays for Carcinogens: A
Critical Appraisal, Oxford Univ.Press, New York, NY 103-126.

EcoReference No.: 90967

Chemical of Concern: PbAC,EXQ,SAC,CTC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:
MOR,PHY; Rejection Code:  NO CONTROL,ENDPOINT(SAC).

	4. 	Bantle, J. A., Burton, D. T., Dawson, D. A., Dumont, J. N., Finch,
R. A., Fort, D. J., Linder, G., and Rayburn, J. R. (1994). Fetax
Interlaboratory Validation Study:  Phase II Testing.
Environ.Toxicol.Chem. 13: 1629-1637.

EcoReference No.: 13502

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  A;  Rejection Code:  NO
CONTROL(SMM).

	5. 	Boswell, K. J., Reid, M. L., Fitch, J. V., Bennett, S. M., Narciso,
S. P., Hubbell, C. L., and Reid, L. D. (2005). Estradiol Valerate and
Intake of Sweetened Water.  Pharmacol.Biochem.Behav. 80: 1-7.

EcoReference No.: 90545

Chemical of Concern: SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  GRO,BEH;
Rejection Code:  NO CONTROL,ENDPOINT(SAC).

	6. 	Byl, T. D. and Klaine, S. J. (1991). Peroxidase Activity as an
Indicator of Sublethal Stress in the Aquatic Plant Hydrilla verticillata
(Royle).  In: J.W.Gorsuch, W.R.Lower, W.Wang, and M.A.Lewis (Eds.),
Plants for Toxicity Assessment, 2nd Volume, ASTM STP 1115, Philadelphia,
PA 101-106.

EcoReference No.: 17181

Chemical of Concern: SMM,CuS;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:  BCM,GRO;
Rejection Code:  LITE EVAL CODED(CuS),NO ENDPOINT(SMM).

	7. 	Byl, T. D., Sutton, H. D., and Klaine, S. J. (1994). Evaluation of
Peroxidase as a Biochemical Indicator of Toxic Chemical Exposure in the
Aquatic Plant Hydrilla verticillata, Royle.  Environ.Toxicol.Chem. 13:
509-515.

EcoReference No.: 4016

Chemical of Concern: SMM,CuS,Se,Cd;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:
BCM,GRO; Rejection Code:  LITE EVAL CODED(CuS),NO ENDPOINT(SMM).

	8. 	Cumberland, P. F. T., Richold, M., Parsons, J., and Pratten, M. K.
(1994). Intravitelline Injection of Rodent Conceptuses:  An Improved In
Vitro Developmental Toxicity Screen.  Toxicol.In Vitro 8: 731-733.

EcoReference No.: 91267

Chemical of Concern: ETU,SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  GRO,BCM,CEL;
Rejection Code:  NO CONTROL,NO ENDPOINT(ETU,SAC).

	9. 	Duan, J. J. and Prokopy, R. J. (1993). Toward Developing
Pesticide-Treated Spheres for Controlling Apple Maggot Flies, Rhagoletis
pomonella (Walsh) (Dipt., Tephritidae): I. Carbohydrates and Amino Acids
as Feeding Stimulants.  J.Appl.Entomol. 115: 176-184.

EcoReference No.: 91063

Chemical of Concern: SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  BEH; Rejection
Code:  NO CONTROL,ENDPOINT(SAC).

	10. 	Fedtke, C., Schmalfuss, J., and Couderchet, M. (1999).
Chloroacetanilides, Oxyacetamides, Tetrazolinones:  Mode of Action.  1.
Cross Resistance and Oleic Acid Incorporation in Algal Model Systems.
Pestic.Sci. 55: 580-582 .

EcoReference No.: 90964

Chemical of Concern: SMM,PCP,PAQT,DU,ACR,BTC,ATZ,BSF,CPP,MBZ;  Habitat:
A;  Effect Codes:  POP; Rejection Code:  NO
CONTROL,ENDPOINT(SMM,PCP,ATZ).

	11. 	Ferguson, S. A., Delclos, K. B., Newbold, R. R., and Flynn, K. M.
(2003). Dietary Ethinyl Estradiol Exposure During Development Causes
Increased Voluntary Sodium Intake and Mild Maternal and Offspring
Toxicity in Rats.  Neurotoxicol.Teratol. 25: 491-501.

EcoReference No.: 90547

Chemical of Concern: EED,SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  GRO,BEH;
Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SAC).

	12. 	Ferguson, S. A., Flynn, K. M., Delclos, K. B., and Newbold, R. R.
(2000). Maternal and Offspring Toxicity but few Sexually Dimorphic
Behavioral Alterations Result from Nonylphenol Exposure.
Neurotoxicol.Teratol. 22: 583-591.

EcoReference No.: 68835

Chemical of Concern: SAC,NYP;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:
BEH,GRO,MOR,REP; Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SAC).

	13. 	Flynn, K. M., Ferguson, S. A., Delclos, K. B., and Newbold, R. R.
(2000). Effects of Genistein Exposure on Sexually Dimorphic Behaviors in
Rats.  Toxicol.Sci. 55: 311-319.

EcoReference No.: 90544

Chemical of Concern: SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  GRO,BEH;
Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SAC).

	14. 	Gonzalez, F. E., Atkins, R. L., and Brown, G. C. (1984).
Sulfometuron Methyl, Rate and Timing Studies on Bermudagrass and
Bahiagrass Roadside Turf.  Proc.South Weed Sci.Soc. 37: 272-274.

EcoReference No.: 31768

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  GRO; Rejection
Code:  NO ENDPOINT,NO CONTROL(TARGET-SMM).

	15. 	Hannan, P. J. (1995). A Novel Detection Scheme for Herbicidal
Residues.  Environ.Toxicol.Chem. 14: 775-780.

EcoReference No.: 69628

Chemical of Concern: ATZ,PPZ,THF,CRME,TNM,AMTR,CZE,SMM;  Habitat:  AT;
Effect Codes:  PHY; Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(ALL CHEMS) .

	16. 	Hartnett, M. E., Newcomb, J. R., and Hodson, R. C. (1987).
Mutations in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii Conferring Resistance to the
Herbicide Sulfometuron Methyl.  Plant Physiol.(Bethesda) 85: 898-901.

EcoReference No.: 90536

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:  POP,PHY;
Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SMM).

	17. 	Harvey, J. H. Jr., Dulka, J. J., and Anderson, J. J. (1985).
Properties of Sulfometuron Methyl Affecting Its Environmental Fate:
Aqueous Hydrolysis and Photolysis, Mobility and Adsorption on Soils, and
Bioaccumulation Potential.  J.Agric.Food Chem. 33:  590-596.

EcoReference No.: 90543

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:  ACC; Rejection
Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SMM).

	18. 	Hicks, R. M., Wakefield, J. S. J., and Chowaniec, J. (1975).
Evaluation of a New Model to Detect Bladder Carcinogens or
Co-Carcinogens; Results Obtained with Saccharin, Cyclamate and
Cyclophosphamide.  Chem.-Biol.Interact. 11: 225-233.

EcoReference No.: 91040

Chemical of Concern: SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  PHY; Rejection
Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SAC).

	19. 	Ikeda, M., Mitsui, T., Setani, K., Tamura, M., Kakeyama, M., Sone,
H., Tohyama, C., and Tomita, T. (2005). In Utero and Lactational
Exposure to 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin in Rats Disrupts Brain
Sexual Differentiation.  Toxicol.Appl.Pharmacol. 205: 98-105.

EcoReference No.: 80278

Chemical of Concern: TCDD,DXN,SAC;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:
BEH,REP,GRO,BCM,PHY; Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SAC)//PCBRES
CODED,RQA,DATA ENTERED,DONE.

	20. 	Ioannides, C., Lum, P. Y., and Parke, D. V. (1984). Cytochrome
P-488 and the Activation of Toxic Chemicals and Carcinogens.
Xenobiotica 14: 119-137 .

EcoReference No.: 90546

Chemical of Concern: ETHN,SAC,DDT,AND;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:
CEL,BCM; Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SAC).

	21. 	Jaffe, R. L. (1995). Rapid Assay of Cytotoxicity Using Tetramitus
flagellates.  Toxicol.Ind.Health 11: 543-558.

EcoReference No.: 5895

Chemical of Concern: Cd,SMM;  Habitat:  A;  Rejection Code:  NO
ENDPOINT(SMM).

	22. 	Koeppe, M. K. and Mucha, C. F.  (1991). Metabolism of Sulfometuron
Methyl in Lactating Goats.   J.Agric.Food Chem. 39: 2304-2309.

EcoReference No.: 90542

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  ACC; Rejection
Code:  NO CONTROL,ENDPOINT(SMM).

	23. 	Kovar, J. L., Zhang, J., Funke, R. P., and Weeks, D. P. (2002).
Molecular Analysis of the Acetolactate Synthase Gene of Chlamydomonas
reinhardtii and Development of a Genetically Engineered Gene as a
Dominant Selectable Marker for Genetic Transformation.  Plant J. 29:
109-117.

EcoReference No.: 90963

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:  CEL; Rejection
Code:  NO CONTROL(SMM).

	24. 	Kuhns, L. J. and Kaps, M. A. (1986). Sulfometuron Methyl and
Imazapyr Applied as a Directed Spray on White Pine.  Proc.Northeast.Weed
Sci.Soc. 40: 263-264 .

EcoReference No.: 31014

Chemical of Concern: IZP,SMM,SMU;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  POP,PHY;
Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(ALL CHEMS,TARGET-IZP,SMM,SMU).

	25. 	Landstein, D., Arad, S., Barak, Z., and Chipman, D. M. (1993).
Relationships Among the Herbicide and Functional Sites of Acetohydroxy
Acid Synthase from Chlorella emersonii.  Planta 191: 1-6.

EcoReference No.: 91069

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:  BCM; Rejection
Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SMM).

	26. 	Landstein, D., Epelbaum, S., Arad, S., Barak, Z., and Chipman, D.
M. (1995). Metabolic Response of Chlorella emersonii to the Herbicide
Sulfometuron Methyl.  Planta 197: 219-224.

EcoReference No.: 90966

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:  BCM,PHY;
Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(TARGET-SMM).

B*

B*

B*

"

#

$

R

o

—

³

Ê

Û

ò

!

"

ò

ó

ô

õ

ᔓ᭨᥊ᘀ婷㔀脈䩃 ᔓ⹨ࠆᘀ婷㔀脈䩃
ᘍ婷㔀脈䩃 ᤀò

ó

ô

I

¶

̤̀␱愀̤m欀Ꝥ

jÌ

jO

'

(

)

C

D

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

g

h

i

j

n

o

”

•

–

°

±

²

³

´

µ

¶

·

!·

¸

Ô

Õ

Ö

×

Û

Ü

j

j

j

B*

 h

h

h

 h

hA

hA

hA

hA

ùòëòëòùòäòùÝùÒùÄÀÒ¼ÒÝ±Ý£À±¼±œù•ò‘Š
‘Š†Š‘Š‘Š‘Š‘Š‘Š‘ h

 h

B*

B*

 h

਀&䘋

␆ਁ&䘋

h

”ÿø

瑹פ:Ԁ

”ÿø

B*

h

hŠz

hÐ

hÐ

hŠz

hH

 hH

hH

gdH

hH

hH

hH

hH

B*

B*

B*

H

&

@

b

…

†

C

D

G

H

I

J

t

´

Â

.H

I

J

u

v

␅؁Ĥ萏и葞и摧ѱí

摧ѱí

$

Æ

Æ

  h

Æ

Æ

Æ

Æ

Æ

Æ

Æ

  h

Æ

	”

Æ

Æ

Æ

  h

Æ

Æ

hŠz

hÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

ytÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

gdÝ

gdÝ

gdÝ

a$gdÝ

gdÝ

a$gdÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

a$gdÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

a$gdÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

a$gdÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

ytÝ

gdÝ

ytÝ

j

葞Ũ葠ﺘ摧ᓞ

葞ฐ葠摧ᓞ

葞ː葠ﺘ摧嬘ú

”ÿô

”ÿô

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

h

h

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

¸	Ì

 h]

 h]

h]

h

 h]

h]

h]

H*

Ȁ亖̀Ĵ혈Fꘃ髿뀋刓&

a$gd	B

L	”

a$gd	B

L	”

 h]

Ȁ亖̀Ĵ혈Fꘃ髿刕&

¶

{

kd

଀

'

(

º

»

"

#

(

9

D

E

I

[

g

h

l

t

ˆ

‹

—

™

š

ž

¥

¦

§

Á

Â

Ã

Ä

Å

å

ê

'

؀'

(

)

3

4

8

9

º

܀º

»

¼

Ê

Ë

Ø

Ù

瑹擿g܀සහ

Ä

Å

Í

Õ

Ý

å

෥෦

᠀

᠀

᠀

᠀

᠀

æ

è

î

ô

ú

ê

í

î

ó

鐇ư혈r鐅菿䌄̋缒㼛耢᠄

耀쀆᠆

耀쀆᠆

耀簆᠉

耀쀆᠆

ီု

0ၔၕ

᠀

᠀

᠀

᠀

᠀

鐇ư혈r鐅㯿贅ﰞ耤᠀

耀᠀

耀᠀

耀᠀

耀᠀

{

{

z

j

晆ﴁ

晆џ

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

Ò

&

&

&

&

&

&

 h

h

h

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

 h

h

h

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

$	Ø	@

&

&

&

&

&

$	Ø	@

&

&

&

&

&

&

$	Ø	@

  h3

  h3

 h3

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

$	Ø	@

"

&

\

\

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

 h

h

h

 h

h

 h

h

h

h

˜

˜

'˜

!

&

0

4

9

Y

b

c

f

Þ

à

â

ã

þ

h

h

 h

h

摧睖u؀

 h

h

 h

h

h

h

hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

C

gdÉ

hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

hÉ

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

&

 h3

  h3

摧Ⰷ

 h3

$

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

 h§

 hÉ

hà

  hÉ

  hÉ

  hÉ

  hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

 hÉ

 h

h

h

 h

h

h

  hÉ

&

$	Ø	@

 hÉ

hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

 hÉ

  hÉ

  hÉ

Á

Â

„@

„0ý^„@

À

Â

ጆ

ጆ

ጆ

ጆ

 hG

摧拆Þ

ԀĤ␆ਁ&䘋

਀&䘋

态ú萏ː萑ﴰ葞ː葠ﴰ摧㟷

摧㟷

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

gd÷7

gd÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

h÷7

摧㟷

 hU

kd

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

ú

'p

kd

kd'

Ó

Ó

Ó

Ó

Ó

Ó

'p

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

瑹䋿+̀

'

B*

B*

瑹䜔Rက

ù	.

ô

ù	.

ô

ù	.

ô

ù	.

ô

 h8:

 h8:

 h8:

 h8:

 h8:

 h8:

_

`

 h§

 hÉ

 hÉ

 hÉ

@

@

@

@

@

@

@

$

@

@

$

@

@

Ff

@

@

܀

	27. 	Langeland, K. A. (1986). Management Program for Alligatorweed in
North Carolina.  Rep.No.224, Water Resour.Res.Inst.of the Univ.of
N.Carolina 36 p.

EcoReference No.: 90590

Chemical of Concern: MTPN,SMM,TPR,HXZ,BMC,AMTL,DU,IZP,DMB,FDE,GYP,24DXY;
 Habitat:  AT;  Effect Codes:  POP; Rejection Code:  NO
CONTROL(SMM,HXZ,IZP,GYP),NO ENDPOINT(SMM,HXZ,BMC).

	28. 	Lapidot, M., Raveh, D., Sivan, A., Arad, S., and Shapira, M.
(2002). Stable Chloroplast Transformation of the Unicellular Red Alga
Porphyridium Species.  Plant Physiol. 129: 7-12.

EcoReference No.: 90535

Chemical of Concern: SMM;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:  POP,PHY;
Rejection Code:  NO ENDPOINT(SMM).

	29. 	Naqvi, S. M., Hawkins, R., and Naqvi, N. H. (1987). Mortality
Response and LC50 Values for Juvenile and Adult Crayfish, Procambarus
clarkii Exposed to Thiodan (Insecticide), Treflan, Msma, Oust.
Environ.Pollut. 48: 275-283.

EcoReference No.: 12802

Chemical of Concern: SMM,TFN;  Habitat:  A;  Effect Codes:  MOR;
Rejection Code:  NO CONTROL(SMM).

	30. 	Nishida, N., Farmer, J. D., Kodavanti, P. R. S., Tilson, H. A.,
and MacPhail, R. C. (1997). Effects of Acute and Repeated Exposures to
Aroclor 1254 in Adult Rats:  Motor Activity and Flavor Aversion
Conditioning.  Fundam.Appl.Toxicol.  40: 68-74.

EcoReference No.: 90537

Chemical of Concern: SAC,PCB;  Habitat:  T;  Effect Codes:  GRO,BEH;
Rejection Code:  NO CONTROL,ENDPOINT(SAC),OK(PCB).

	31. 	Office of Pesticide Programs (2000). Pesticide Ecotoxicity
Database (Formerly:  Environmental Effects Database (EEDB)).
Environmental Fate and Effects Division, U.S.EPA, Washington, D.C.