Ecological Risk Assessment for Section 3 Registration for Fruit, Vegetable, Selected Field Crop, Turf and Ornamental Uses of Chlorantraniliprole (PC Code 090100)

(DP Barcode: DP338512)

Prepared By:

Edward Odenkirchen, Ph.D.

James Hetrick, Ph.D.

Environmental Risk Branch 1

Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Office of Pesticide Programs

Approved By:

Nancy Andrews, Ph. D., Chief

Environmental Risk Branch 1

Environmental Fate and Effects Division

Office of Pesticide Programs

  TOC \o "2-3" \h \z \t "Heading 1,1"

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543438"  I.	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY	  PAGEREF _Toc184543438 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543439"  A.	Nature of Stressor	  PAGEREF _Toc184543439 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543440"  1. 	Effects Summary	  PAGEREF _Toc184543440 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543441"  2.	Fate Summary	  PAGEREF _Toc184543441 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543442"  B.	Potential Risk to Non-Target Organisms	  PAGEREF _Toc184543442 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543443"  1.	Terrestrial Plants	  PAGEREF _Toc184543443 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543444"  2.	Terrestrial Invertebrates	  PAGEREF _Toc184543444 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543445"  3.	Terrestrial Vertebrates	  PAGEREF _Toc184543445 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543446"  4.	Aquatic Plants	  PAGEREF _Toc184543446 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543447"  5.	Freshwater Fish and Amphibians	  PAGEREF _Toc184543447 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543448"  6.	Freshwater Invertebrates	  PAGEREF _Toc184543448 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543449"  7.	Estuarine/Marine Fish	  PAGEREF _Toc184543449 \h  8

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543450"  8.	Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates	  PAGEREF _Toc184543450 \h  9

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543451"  9.	Assessment of Potential Effects to Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species	  PAGEREF _Toc184543451 \h  11

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543452"  II.	PROBLEM FORMULATION	  PAGEREF _Toc184543452 \h  12

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543453"  A.	Nature of the Federal Action	  PAGEREF _Toc184543453 \h  12

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543454"  B.	Nature of the Chemical Stressor	  PAGEREF _Toc184543454 \h  12

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543455"  C.	Use Characterization	  PAGEREF _Toc184543455 \h  14

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543456"  D. 	Ecological Receptors Considered in this Risk Assessment	  PAGEREF _Toc184543456 \h  18

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543457"  E. 	Exposure Pathways Considered for Terrestrial Organisms	  PAGEREF _Toc184543457 \h  18

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543458"  F.	Exposure Pathways Considered for Aquatic Organisms	  PAGEREF _Toc184543458 \h  19

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543459"  G.	Conceptual Model	  PAGEREF _Toc184543459 \h  19

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543460"  1.	Risk Hypothesis	  PAGEREF _Toc184543460 \h  19

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543461"  2.	Conceptual Diagram	  PAGEREF _Toc184543461 \h  20

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543462"  H.  Analysis Plan	  PAGEREF _Toc184543462 \h  20

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543463"  1.	Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps and Methods	  PAGEREF _Toc184543463 \h  20

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543464"  2.	Assessment Endpoints	  PAGEREF _Toc184543464 \h  21

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543465"  3.	Exposure Measures	  PAGEREF _Toc184543465 \h  21

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543466"  4.	Effects Measures	  PAGEREF _Toc184543466 \h  23

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543467"  IV. 	ANALYSIS	  PAGEREF _Toc184543467 \h  24

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543468"  A. 	Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization	  PAGEREF _Toc184543468 \h  24

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543469"  1.  Aquatic Organism Exposure	  PAGEREF _Toc184543469 \h  28

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543470"  2. 	Terrestrial Vertebrate Exposure	  PAGEREF _Toc184543470 \h  33

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543471"  3.	Terrestrial Invertebrate Exposure	  PAGEREF _Toc184543471 \h  33

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543472"  4.	Terrestrial Plant Exposure	  PAGEREF _Toc184543472 \h  33

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543473"  B.  	Effects Characterization	  PAGEREF _Toc184543473 \h  34

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543474"  1.	Avian Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543474 \h  35

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543475"  2.	Mammalian Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543475 \h  36

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543476"  3.	Terrestrial Invertebrate Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543476 \h  37

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543477"  4. 	Terrestrial Plant Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543477 \h  40

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543478"  5.	Freshwater Invertebrate Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543478 \h  41

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543479"  6.	Freshwater Fish Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543479 \h  43

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543480"  7.	Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543480 \h  44

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543481"  8.	Estuarine Marine Fish Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543481 \h  45

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543482"  9.	Aquatic Plant Toxicity	  PAGEREF _Toc184543482 \h  46

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543483"  10.	Summary of Effects Measurement Endpoint Values Used in the Risk Assessment	  PAGEREF _Toc184543483 \h  47

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543484"  V. 	RISK CHARACTERIZATION	  PAGEREF _Toc184543484 \h  48

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543485"  A. 	Risk Estimation	  PAGEREF _Toc184543485 \h  48

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543486"  1.	Terrestrial Vertebrate Risk Quotients   PAGEREF _Toc184543486 \h  48

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543487"  2.	Terrestrial Invertebrate Risk Quotients	  PAGEREF _Toc184543487 \h  49

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543488"  3.	Terrestrial Plant Risk Quotients	  PAGEREF _Toc184543488 \h  49

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543489"  4.	Freshwater Fish Risk Quotients	  PAGEREF _Toc184543489 \h  50

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543490"  5.	Freshwater Invertebrate Risk Quotients	  PAGEREF _Toc184543490 \h  52

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543491"  6.	Estuarine/Marine Fish Risk Quotients	  PAGEREF _Toc184543491 \h  54

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543492"  7.	Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate Risk Quotients	  PAGEREF _Toc184543492 \h  56

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543493"  8.	Aquatic Plants	  PAGEREF _Toc184543493 \h  58

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543494"  B.	Risk Discussion	  PAGEREF _Toc184543494 \h  62

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543495"  1.	Quantified Risks	  PAGEREF _Toc184543495 \h  62

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543496"  2.	Qualitative Discussion of Terrestrial Plant Risks	  PAGEREF _Toc184543496 \h  67

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543497"  3.	Qualitative Discussion of Terrestrial Invertebrate Risks	  PAGEREF _Toc184543497 \h  67

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543498"  VI. 	FEDERALLY LISTED THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ASSESSMENT	  PAGEREF _Toc184543498 \h  68

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543499"  A.  	Action Area	  PAGEREF _Toc184543499 \h  68

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543500"  B.	Taxonomic Groups Potentially at Risk	  PAGEREF _Toc184543500 \h  69

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543501"  C.	Analysis of Dose Response (Effects Study Slope)	  PAGEREF _Toc184543501 \h  70

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543502"  D.	Consideration of Alternative Assumptions of Drift.  (Need to Work ON)	  PAGEREF _Toc184543502 \h  71

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543503"  E.	Critical Habitat	  PAGEREF _Toc184543503 \h  72

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc184543504"  F.	Co-Location Analysis	  PAGEREF _Toc184543504 \h  73

I.	EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A.	Nature of Stressor

The subject of this risk assessment is a Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Section 3 registration for the use of the insecticide chlorantraniliprole.  This insecticide is proposed for a variety of use sites including brassica (cole), leafy vegetables (broccoli, broccoli raab, brussels sprouts, cabbage, chinese cabbage, cauliflower, cavalo broccoli, collards, kale, kohlrabi, mizuna, mustard greens, mustard spinach, rape greens), curcurbits (vegetables, melons, squash), and fruiting vegetables (eggplant, goundcherry, peppers, tomatoes),  non-brassica leafy vegetables (celery, lettuce, spinach, Arugula, Cardoon, Amaranth leafy),  cotton, grape, pome fruit (apple, crabapple, loquat, mayhaw, pear, oriental pear, and quice), potato, stone fruits (apricot, sweet cherry, tart cherry, plum, chickasaw plum, Damson plum, Japanese plum, plumcot, prune),  turf,  ornamental plants, and groundcovers.

1. 	Effects Summary

There were no data gaps in the effects data.    In agreement with international governmental partners associated with registration efforts for this pesticide, ecological effects data evaluation responsibilities are being met through the efforts of the Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD), UK.  The Agency is using the results of the PSD review as they appear in the dossier for registration in Europe.  Except where specifically reported, independent validation of statistical results for effects studies was not performed during the PSD reviews.

Chlorantraniliprole can be characterized as having very little toxicity to terrestrial and aquatic vertebrates.  As can be expected for an insecticide, the compound is toxic to a number of terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates.  The compound can produce limited adverse effects in terrestrial and aquatic plants.

Available data for formulated products suggested no concern for enhanced toxicity of formulations versus the active ingredient alone.  Data for degradates suggest no concern for toxicity exceeding the parent compound and in most cases toxicity is orders of magnitude below the parent.

2.	Fate Summary

There were no identified data gaps in the fate data.  Under international agreements the Agency was not responsible for conducting environmental fate data reviews.  Data review is being conducted for use by all parties to the international agreement by the Pesticide Control Service, Department of Agriculture and Food, Ireland. The Agency is using the results of the PSD review as they appear in the dossier for registration in Europe except for the aerobic soil metabolism half-lives.  EFED recalculated aerobic soil metabolism half-lives for chlorantraniliprole to be representative of the total extractable chlorantraniliprole fraction in soil.  The total extractable soil fraction of chlorantraniliprole (water pre-soak and acetonitrile/water + acid/surfactants or concentrated acid at evaluated temperature) was used to a conservative half-life of bioavailable chlorantraniliprole in soil.

Based on this review, chlorantraniliprole may be characterized as persistent and mobile in terrestrial and aquatic environments. Extended chlorantraniliprole use is expected to cause accumulation of residues in soil from year to year.  Major routes of dissipation are expected to be alkaline-catalyzed hydrolysis, photodegradation in water, leaching, and runoff.

Nine degradates/metabolites of the parent compound have been identified in environmental fate studies: IN-EQW78, IN-LBA22, IN-LBA24, IN-LBA23

IN-ECD73, IN-F6L99, IN-EVK64, IN-F9N04, and IN-GAZ70.  The greatest percentage production of a degradate was for IN-LBA24, which was 90% of applied parent produced in the photolysis study at pH7.   This risk assessment did not quantify the risks from these degradates because they were commonly of lower toxic potency than the parent. For example IN-LBA24 is orders of magnitude less toxic than the parent pesticide.  Coupling the observed lower toxic potency with the risk assessments exposure modeling assumptions of stability for the parent would suggest that excluding the degradates from quantitative risk estimation would not substantially affect the conclusion of the risk assessment.

B.	Potential Risk to Non-Target Organisms

1.	Terrestrial Plants

The conclusion of the risk assessment is that best available information indicates that risks of direct effects to non-listed terrestrial plants are below Agency screening levels of concern.

2.	Terrestrial Invertebrates

While the Agency currently does not use a standard method for quantifying risks of pesticides to terrestrial invertebrates, available effects data for insect species, when compared with application rates suggest that the insecticide chlorantraniliprole has the potential to produce direct adverse effects in some non-target insect species.  It appears from the effects data that sensitivity to the pesticide is quite varied among tested invertebrates.  If species specific risk assessment becomes necessary (e.g., assessment of a federally listed threatened or endangered species) it is recommended that closer evaluation of the potential representation of the invertebrate data set for a specific organism be considered.

3.	Terrestrial Vertebrates

The conclusion of the risk assessment is that best available information indicates that risks of direct effects to non-listed terrestrial vertebrates are below Agency screening levels of concern.

4.	Aquatic Plants

The conclusion of the risk assessment is that best available information indicates that risks of direct effects to non-listed aquatic plants are below Agency screening levels of concern.

5.	Freshwater Fish and Amphibians

The conclusion of the risk assessment is that best available information indicates that risks of direct effects to non-listed freshwater fish and amphibians are below Agency screening levels of concern.

6.	Freshwater Invertebrates

The following tables present the conclusions of the risk assessment for freshwater invertebrates.  Acute concerns are triggered by freshwater invertebrate RQ values for every exposure scenario modeled (except for ground spray for the OR apple and CA turf scenarios, which involve lower rainfall assumptions and thus lower estimates of aquatic exposure). These concerns are limited primarily to acute effects to listed species and restricted use considerations.

Chronic freshwater invertebrate risk concerns were identified for proposed uses on  FL peppers (ground or aerial spray), FL cucumbers (ground or aerial spray), CA nursery (ground spray), FL nursery (ground spray), and TN nursery (ground spray).  In all cases the RQs were less than an order of magnitude above the Agency concern level.  These chronic endpoints are calculated using the most sensitive chronic NOEC for daphnids (4.47 ug/L ug/L).

Tier II RQs  for FW Invertebrates from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application	Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lbs/A)	#	Int

(days)

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	2.146	0.1850	0.4801	RU,LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	4.939	0.4258	1.1049	RU,LS, Chronic

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.306	0.1126	0.2922	RU,LS

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.922	0.0795	0.2063	LS

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	3.001	0.2587	0.6714	RU,LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	5.683	0.4899	1.2714	RU,LS Chronic

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.997	0.2584	0.6705	RU,LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.576	0.1359	0.3526	RU,LS

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	3.207	0.2765	0.7174	RU,LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	3.271	0.2820	0.7318	RU,LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.197	0.1032	0.2678	RU,LS

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	1.026	0.0884	0.2295	LS

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	1.153	0.0994	0.2579	LS

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	1.091	0.0941	0.2441	LS

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.674	0.0581	0.1508	LS

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.859	0.0741	0.1922	LS

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.392	0.1200	0.3114	RU,LS

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.886	0.0764	0.1982	LS

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.907	0.0782	0.2029	LS

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint= 11.6 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 4.47 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

Tier II RQs  for FW Invertebrates from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lbs/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	2.045	0.1763	0.4575	RU,LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	4.86	0.4190	1.0872	RU,LS, Chronic

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	1.097	0.0946	0.2454	LS

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.619	0.0534	0.1385	LS

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.817	0.2428	0.6302	RU,LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	5.475	0.4720	1.2248	RU,LS, Chronic

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.781	0.2397	0.6221	RU,LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.28	0.1103	0.2864	RU,LS

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.995	0.2582	0.6700	RU,LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	3.116	0.2686	0.6971	RU,LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	1.025	0.0884	0.2293	LS

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.706	0.0609	0.1579	LS

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.852	0.0734	0.1906	LS

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.898	0.0774	0.2009	LS

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.365	0.0315	0.0817	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.68	0.0586	0.1521	LS

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.195	0.1030	0.2673	RU,LS

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.62	0.0534	0.1387	LS

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.739	0.0637	0.1653	LS

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.707	0.0609	0.1582	LS

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.985	0.0849	0.2204	LS

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.554	0.0478	0.1239	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	4.672	0.4028	1.0452	RU,LS, Chronic

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.543	0.1330	0.3452	RU,LS

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	8.136	0.7014	1.8201	RU,LS, Chronic

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.284	0.1969	0.5110	RU,LS

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	9.126	0.7867	2.0416	RU,LS, Chronic

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=11.6 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 4.47 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

7.	Estuarine/Marine Fish

The conclusion of the risk assessment is that best available information indicates risks of direct effects to non-listed estuarine/marine fish are below Agency screening levels of concern.

8.	Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates

The following table summarizes the proposed use sites associated with each model scenario and identifies the Agency concern levels exceeded.  Risks to estuarine/marine invertebrates that exceed Agency concern levels are confined to the following Tier II modeling scenarios: FL cabbage (aerial or ground spray), FL cucumber (aerial or ground spray), FL peppers (aerial or ground spray), FL tomatoes (aerial spray),  CA lettuce (ground and aerial spray), NC cotton (aerial or ground spray), MS cotton (aerial or ground spray) CA nursery (ground spray), TN nursery (ground spray), FL nursery (ground spray), and MI nursery (ground spray).  These risks are generally limited to acute effects to listed species. However, the restricted use LOCs  are exceeded for the Florida vegetable scenarios (cucumber, peppers) and nursery use scenarios (CA nursery, TN nursery, and FL nursery scenarios).

Tier II RQs  for Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lbs/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	2.146	0.0538	0.0894	LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	4.939	0.1238	0.2058	RU,LS

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.306	0.0327	0.0544	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.922	0.0231	0.0384	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	3.001	0.0752	0.1250	LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	5.683	0.1424	0.2368	RU,LS

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.997	0.0751	0.1249	LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.576	0.0395	0.0657	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	3.207	0.0804	0.1336	LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	3.271	0.0820	0.1363	LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.197	0.0300	0.0499	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	1.026	0.0257	0.0428	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	1.153	0.0289	0.0480	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	1.091	0.0273	0.0455	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.674	0.0169	0.0281	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.859	0.0215	0.0358	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.392	0.0349	0.0580	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.886	0.0222	0.0369	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.907	0.0227	0.0378	None

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint= 39.9 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 24 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

Tier II RQs  for Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	2.045	0.0513	0.0852	LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	4.86	0.1218	0.2025	RU,LS

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	1.097	0.0275	0.0457	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.619	0.0155	0.0258	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.817	0.0706	0.1174	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	5.475	0.1372	0.2281	RU,LS

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.781	0.0697	0.1159	LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.28	0.0321	0.0533	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.995	0.0751	0.1248	LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	3.116	0.0781	0.1298	LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	1.025	0.0257	0.0427	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.706	0.0177	0.0294	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.852	0.0214	0.0355	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.898	0.0225	0.0374	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.365	0.0091	0.0152	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.68	0.0170	0.0283	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.195	0.0299	0.0498	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.62	0.0155	0.0258	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.739	0.0185	0.0308	None

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.707	0.0177	0.0295	None

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.985	0.0247	0.0410	None

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.554	0.0139	0.0231	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	4.672	0.1171	0.1947	RU,LS

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.543	0.0387	0.0643	None

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	8.136	0.2039	0.3390	RU,LS

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.284	0.0572	0.0952	LS

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	9.126	0.2287	0.3803	RU,LS

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=39.9 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 24 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

9.	Assessment of Potential Effects to Federally Listed Threatened and Endangered Species

The following table summarizes the conclusions of potential concerns for direct and indirect effects to federally-listed threatened and endangered species (listed species).

Potential Effects to Federally Listed Taxa

Listed Taxa	Direct Effects	Scenario Identified as of Concern	Indirect Effects	Scenario Identified as of Concern

Terrestrial and semi-aquatic plants - monocots	Yes4

Yes1	all

Terrestrial and semi-aquatic plants - dicots	Yes4

Yes1	all

Terrestrial invertebrates	Yes	all	No

	Birds	No

Yes1,2,3,5	All

Terrestrial phase amphibians	No

Yes1,2,5	All

Reptiles	No

Yes1,2,3,5	All

Mammals	No

Yes1,2,3,5	All

Aquatic vascular plants	No

No

	Freshwater fish	No

Yes2,5	All

Aquatic phase amphibians	No

Yes2,5	All

Freshwater crustaceans	Yes	All except  CA turf (ground spray) and OR apple (ground spray)	Yes2,5	All

Mollusks	Yes(may be subject to further evaluation)	All except  CA turf (ground spray) and OR apple (ground spray)	Yes2,5	All

Marine/estuarine fish	No

Yes3	FL cabbage, FL cucumber, FL pepper, NC cotton, MS cotton,  CA lettuce, CA nursery, FL nursery, MI nursery, TN nursery

Marine/estuarine invertebrates	Yes	FL cabbage, FL cucumber, FL pepper, NC cotton, MS cotton,  CA lettuce, CA nursery, FL nursery, MI nursery, TN nursery

	No

	1 direct effects on terrestrial invertebrates

2 direct effects on aquatic invertebrates

3 direct effects on estuarine/marine invertebrates

4 insufficient data to preclude risk

5direct effects to terrestrial plants at the listed species level of concern suggests concern of animals with obligate relationships to a plant species

II.	PROBLEM FORMULATION

A.	Nature of the Federal Action

DuPont crop protection is requesting an Agency decision regarding a FIFRA Section 3 registration for the pesticide chlorantraniliprole.  The nature of the uses of the pesticide under this proposed EUP is discussed in the Use Characterization section of this risk assessment.

B.	Nature of the Chemical Stressor

The risk assessment addresses the active ingredient chlorantraniliprole.  The following information summarizes basic chemical identity information for the active ingredient:

	Chemical Name: 3-Bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl-6- [(methylamino)  carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide

	Empirical Formula: C18H14N5O2BrCl2

	Molecular Weight: 483.15 g/mole

	CAS No.: 500008-45-7 (chlorantraniliprole)

	Common Name: chlorantraniliprole

	Pesticide Type: Insecticide

	Chemical Family: Anthranilic diamide

	Physical State: Fine Crystalline Powder

	Odor: No odor

	pH: 5.77 ± 0.087 at 20oC

UV/Visible Absorption: A lambda max under basic conditions was ~320 nm. No defined lambda max, 	above 290 nm, under neutral or acidic conditions.

	Melting Point: 208-210oC

	Relative Density: 1.5070 at 20oC

	Dissociation Constant in Water: pKa was approximately 10.88 ± 0.71 at 20°C

	Partition Coefficient: Kow (20°C ) = 2.77 at pH 4, 2.86 at pH7 & 2.80 at pH9

Water Solubility: pH 4: 0.972 mg/L (CV = 1.9%) pH 7: 0.880 mg/L (CV = 1.3%) pH 9: 	0.971 mg/L (CV = 3.8%)

	Solubility in Organic Solvents at 20oC:

	Acetone 3.446 g/l

	Acetonitrile 0.711g/l

	Ethyl acetate 1.144 g/l

	Dichloromethane 2.476 g/l

	Dimethylformamide 2.476 g/l

	1-Octanol 0.386 g/l

	Methanol 1.714 g/l

	n-Hexane <0.0001 g/l

	o-Xylene 0.162 g/l

	Vapor Pressure (est.): 6.3 x 10-12 PA at20oC (2.1 x 10-11Pa at 25oC)

	Henry’s Law Constant: 3.1 x 10-15 atm-m3/mol (20oC) (3.1 x 10-10 Pa-m3/mol)

The structure of the active ingredient is reported as follows:

While degradates have been identified, the available effects data indicate that their toxicity is lower than the parent, often by an order of magnitude.  The greatest percentage production of a degradate was for IN-LBA24, which was 90% of applied parent produced in the photodegradation study at a buffered pH of  7.  Even at this maximum production of degradate, the low toxicity (one tenth that of parent) would not affect quantitative risk estimations to any significant degree, and it was assumed that further quantitative consideration of risks associated with degradates would not materially add to the confidence of the risk assessment conclusions.

C.	Use Characterization

The following is as list of proposed crop uses:  brassica (cole), leafy vegetables (broccoli, broccoli raab, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, Chinese cabbage, cauliflower, cavalo broccoli, collards, kale, kohlrabi, mizuna, mustard greens, mustard spinach, rape greens), curcurbits (vegetables, melons, squash), fruiting vegetables (eggplant, goundcherry, peppers, tomatoes), cotton, grape, pome fruits, potato, and stone fruits.   The pesticide may also be applied to turf, and ornamental plants

Chlorantraniliprole  is proposed for the control of a variety of insect pests on crops including beet armyworm, cotton bollworm, diamondback moth, cabbage looper, corn earworm, cross-striped cabbageworm, imported cabbage worm, melon worm, pickle worm, leaf miners, whiteflies (suppression only), hornworm, southern armyworm, salt marsh caterpillar, soybean looper, western yellow-striped armyworm, tomato fruit worm, European corn borer, garden webworm, tomato pinworm, grape berry moth, grape leaf roller, western grape skeletonizer, green fruit worm, spotted tentiform leafminer, codling moth, oriental fruit moth, tufted apple cut moth, white apple leafhopper, Colorado potato beetle, obliquebanded leafroller, peach twig borer, and southern armyworm. In addition to crop pests, chlorantraniliprole is proposed for control turf and ornamental plants pests including: armyworms, sod webworms, white grubs, European crane fly, billbugs, annual bluegrass weevil, spittle bugs, chinch bugs, bagworms, tussock moths, lace bugs, aphids, birch leafminer, and clearwing borers.

Proposed label application rates are presented in the following tables.  They are influenced by product, application method (drip chemigation vs. foliar application), crop, and target pest.

Proposed Labeled Use Rates for CoragenTM SC

Use Site	Application Method	Target Pest	Application rate

(lb a.i./acre)	Number of Applications/ Interval

Brassica and leafy vegetables	drip chemigation	beet armyworm diamondback moth	0.045-0.065	2 to 3 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

10 day interval

cabbage looper, corn earworm, cross-striped cabbage worm, imported cabbageworm	0.045-0.098

foliar (air or ground spray)	diamondback moth	0.026-0.045	4 to 7 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

5 day interval

beet armyworm, cabbage looper, corn earworm, cross-striped cabbage worm, imported cabbageworm	0.045-0.065	3 to 4 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

5 day interval

Cucurbits vegetables , melons, squash	drip chemigation	melon worm 0.026-0.045	4 to 7 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

10 day interval

beet armyworm, cabbage looper, pickle worm	0.045-0.065	3 to 4 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

10 day interval

leafminers, whiteflies	0.065-0.098	2 to 3 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

10 day interval

	foliar (air or ground spray)	melon worm	0.026-0.045	4 to 7 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

5 day interval

beet armyworm, cabbage looper, pickle worm	0.045-0.065	3 to 4 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

5 day interval

leafminers, whiteflies	0.065-0.09	2 to 3 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

5 day interval

Fruiting vegetables, peppers, tomatoes	drip chemigation	beet armyworm, hornworms, southern armyworm, western yellow striped armyworm 0.045-0.065	3 to 4  for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

10 day interval

tomato fruitworm, loopers	0.045-0.09	2 to 4 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

10 day interval

european corn borer, garden webworm, leafminers, tomato pinworm, whiteflies	0.065-0.098	2 to 3 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

10 day interval

	foliar (air or ground spray)	hornworms	0.026-0.065	3 to 7 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

5 day interval

beet armyworm, european corn borer, garden webworm, loopers, southern armyworm, tomato fruitworm, tomato pinworm, western yelowstriped armyworm	0.045-0.065	3 to 4 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

5 day interval

leafminers, whiteflies	0.065-0.098	2 to 3 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

5 day interval

Proposed Labeled Use Rates for AltacorTM WG

Use Site	Target Pest	Application rate

(lb a.i./acre)	Number of Applications/ Interval

Cotton	beet armyworm, cotton bollworm, fall armyworm, saltmarsh caterpillar, southern armyworm, tobacco budworm	0.044-0.088	2 to 4 applications/season for maximum crop application of 0.2 lbs a.i./acre

5 day interval

	cabbage looper, soybean looper

	0.066-0.099

	2 to 3 applications/season for maximum crop application of 0.2 lbs a.i./acre

5 day interval

Grape	grape berry moth, grape leafroller	0.044-0.099	No more than 4 (2-4) applications/season no more than 0.2 lbs a.i./acre

7 day interval

	omnivorous leafroller, western grapeleaf skeletonizer	0.066-0.099	No more than 4  (2-3) applications/season no more than 0.2 lbs a.i./acre

7 day interval

Pome fruits	green fruitworm, spotted tentiform leafminer	0.044-0.088	2 to 3 applications/season for maximum crop application of 0.2 lbs a.i./acre

10 day interval

	codling moth, obliquebanded leafroller, oriental fruit moth, tufted apple bud moth, white apple bud moth	0.066-0.099	2 t o 3 for maximum crop application of 0.2 lb a.i./acre

10 day interval

Potato	cabbage looper, Colorado potato beetle, European corn borer 0.044-0.066	3 to 4 applications/season for maximum crop application of 0.2 lbs a.i./acre

5 day interval

Stone fruits	Codling moth, obliquebanded leafroller, oriental fruit moth, peach twig borer, tufted apple bud moth	0.044-0.099	No more than 4 (3-4) applications/season no more than 0.2 lbs a.i./acre

7 day interval

Proposed Labeled Use Rates for E2Y45 SC

Use Site	Application Method	Target Pest	Application rate

(lb a.i./acre)	Number of Applications/ Interval

Turf (lawns, golf courses, and other recreational turfgrass areas

	Ground spray	lepidoptera	0.026-0.052	9 to 19

maximum annual application of 0.5 lbs a.i./acre

no interval specified

white grubs, european crane fly,

	0.104-0.208

	2 to 4

maximum annual application of 0.5 lbs a.i./acre

no interval specified

billbugs, cinch bugs	0.104-0.26	1-4

maximum annual application of 0.5 lbs a.i./acre

no interval specified

annual bluegrass weevil, spittlebugs	0.157-0.26	1-3

maximum annual application of 0.5 lbs a.i./acre

no interval specified

Ornamental plants

	foliar spray	Leaf-feeding caterpillars	0.4992	Application numbers specified “as needed” with 5-day intervals  However, maximum annul  application of 0.5 lbs a.i./acre would suggest only 1 application allowable

	soil treatment (drench or soil injection)

bark treatment	Lace bugs, aphids, birch leaf miner

clearwinged borers	Unspecified in accessible units	Application numbers specified “as needed” with 5-day intervals  However, maximum annual application of 0.5 lbs a.i./acre

Ornamental flowers and ground cover	soil treatment	White grubs 0.104-0.208	2 to 4 applications/year for maximum annual application of 0.5 lbs a.i./acre

5 day interval

Stone fruits

Codling moth, obliquebanded leafroller, oriental fruit moth, peach twig borer, tufted apple bud moth	0.044-0.099	No more than 4 (2-4) applications/season no more than 0.2 lbs a.i./acre

7 day interval

D. 	Ecological Receptors Considered in this Risk Assessment  TC "C. Ecological Receptors Considered in this Risk Assessment" \f C \l "2"

The screening level risk assessment approaches the analysis for adverse effects commonly through the use of broad plant and animal taxonomic groups including:

•	Birds (also used as surrogate for terrestrial-phase amphibians and reptiles),

•	Mammals,

•	Terrestrial plants,

•	Freshwater fish (also used as a surrogate for aquatic phase amphibians),

•	Freshwater invertebrates (including sediment-dwelling species),

Estuarine/Marine Fish

Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates

•	Algae and vascular aquatic plants

Because of known effects of chlorantraniliprole to arthropods pests, the risks of the insecticide to non-target terrestrial invertebrates will also be evaluated, but without the benefit of Agency established concern thresholds to aid in interpretation of assessment results.

E. 	Exposure Pathways Considered for Terrestrial Organisms

For the purposes of this risk assessment, terrestrial non-target organisms are assumed to occupy areas immediately adjacent to treatment sites.   The exposure pathways analyzed in this risk assessment for terrestrial vertebrate wildlife include dietary uptake of food items directly treated with the pesticide at the time of application to the treated field.  Exposures are calculated on a dietary basis alone.  Dose-based exposures are not considered due to no evidence of acute oral toxicity.  Accumulation from soil to plants or animal food sources is not considered in this risk assessment.  The very low octanol/water partitioning coefficient (log Kow =2.90) suggests that bioaccumulation is not likely.  Inhalation of vapor phase pesticide is not considered quantitatively in this risk assessment.  The low vapor pressure of the parent compound (6.3 x 10-12 PA) suggests that the pesticide does not readily volatilize and the rat acute inhalation LC50: >5.1 mg/L suggests that what little material that would volatilize would not be of significant toxicity.  Dermal exposure (contact with deposited residues and impingement of spray droplets) for terrestrial vertebrates is not considered quantitatively.  The low octanol/water partitioning coefficient would suggest little potential to cross the dermal barrier, a conclusion supported by the demonstrated low dermal acute toxicity in the rat (LD50: >5000 mg/kg).

Other routes of exposure for terrestrial wildlife that are possible but not considered in this risk assessment include drinking water exposure, inhalation of pesticide associated with suspended soil particulate, inhalation of spray droplets, and oral ingestion of soil particles through incidental contact while feeding and preening.

Terrestrial plant exposures considered potentially complete for this pesticide include exposure of vegetation adjacent to treatment sites via drift, sheet flow runoff, and runoff to drainage channels.  Drift exposures are considered important to effects measures involving direct application to leaf surfaces (e.g. vegetative vigor studies).  Drift and runoff exposures are also comparable to effects endpoints associated with application of pesticide to soil (e.g. seedling emergence studies).

F.	Exposure Pathways Considered for Aquatic Organisms  TC "E. Exposure Pathways Considered for Aquatic Organisms" \f C \l "2"

For the purposes of this risk assessment aquatic non-target organisms are assumed to occupy a surface water body immediately adjacent to treatment sites.   The likely pathways for introduction of the chemical stressor to this aquatic water body include:

direct deposition of applied product through spray drift

mass transport of chemical stressor dissolved in run-off from the treated field, and

mass transport of chemical stressor adsorbed to eroded solids from the treated field.

Once pesticide enters the receiving waters, exposure it likely most significant through absorption of dissolved pesticide from the water column or interstitial water across the gill, integument, and perhaps the gut of the organism.  Food chain exposures are not considered to be significant for this pesticide because chlorantraniliprole has a low fish bioconcentration factor of <21.

G.	Conceptual Model

1.	Risk Hypothesis

The risk hypothesis for this screening-level risk assessment is as follows:

Chlorantraniliprole, used in accordance with the Section 3 labels, results in adverse effects upon survival and reproduction of non-target terrestrial and aquatic organisms.

2.	Conceptual Diagram

The following is a conceptual plan diagram depicting sources of exposure, potential receptors and adverse effects proposed uses of chlorantraniliprole

H. 	Analysis Plan

H.  Analysis Plan

1.	Preliminary Identification of Data Gaps and Methods

a.	Fate Testing

There were no identified data gaps in the fate data.  Under international agreements the Agency was not responsible for conducting environmental fate data reviews.  Data review is being conducted for use by all parties to the international agreement by the Pesticide Control Service, Department of Agriculture and Food, Ireland. The Agency is using the results of the PSD review as they appear in the dossier for registration in Europe except for the aerobic soil metabolism half-lives.  EFED recalculated aerobic soil metabolism half-lives for chlorantraniliprole to be representative of the total extractable fraction in soil.

b.	Effects Testing

There were no data gaps in the effects data.    In agreement with international governmental partners associated with registration efforts for this pesticide, ecological effects data evaluation responsibilities are being met through the efforts of the Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD), UK.  The Agency is using the results of the PSD review as they appear in the dossier for registration in Europe.  Except where specifically reported, independent validation of statistical results for effects studies was not performed during the PSD reviews.

2.	Assessment Endpoints

Assessment endpoints for this screening-level ecological risk assessment are reduced survival, reproduction output, and growth of individual organisms. These assessment endpoints, while measured at the individual level, provide insight about risks at higher levels of biological organization (e.g., populations).  It is assumed that toxicants do not affect populations or communities except through the impact on the individuals comprising the population or community and the demographics of birth, growth, and death that govern population dynamics.  The number of individuals within a population change (intrinsic rate of increase) primarily because of births (fecundity) and deaths (survival) and secondarily from migration in and out of a specific area.   If effects on the survival and reproduction of individuals are limited, it is assumed that risks at the population level from such effects will be of minor consequence. However, as the risk of reductions in survival and/or reproduction rates increases, so does the potential risk to populations.

3.	Exposure Measures

Exposures estimated in the screening-level risk assessment for non-target organisms are not species specific.

For estimating exposures of aquatic organisms to chlorantraniliprole, the risk assessment will use the PRZM/EXAMS modeling shell (PE5V01).  Inputs for this model are presented in the Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization section of this risk assessment. The screening risk assessment commonly uses estimates of the dissolved concentration of the pesticide over a single day, 21-day, and 60-day averaging periods and the exposure measurement point is that averaging period corresponding to a one in ten year return frequency for estimating exposure to water column dwelling organisms.  This modeling effort focuses on aerial and ground applications only, chemigation and injection are not included specifically as there are not adequate modeling scenarios.  It is expected that over the top aerial and ground applications are adequate to represent injection and chemgation.  This risk assessment will use this approach, although the results are likely to be overestimates of exposure for such a stable compound as chlorantraniliprole because the model uses up to 36 years of application events.

Dietary exposures for terrestrial vertebrates are estimated using the T-REX model version 1.3.1.  Inputs for this model are presented in the Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization section of this risk assessment.  The exposure endpoint for terrestrial vertebrates from the T-REX model’s output corresponds to an upper bound single day peak concentration of pesticide in each of four generalized dietary items.  These pesticide concentration estimates are then used for either direct comparison with dietary effects endpoints or first converted to daily oral dose estimates for feeding wildlife and then compared to daily dose effects endpoints.  Mean concentrations associated with a peak pesticide residue estimate may be used in the risk characterization to provide additional context to risk assessment conclusions.  However, the results of the initial screen for chlorantraniliprole indicate that this additional step will not be required for this case.

For terrestrial vertebrate risks the T-REX model was used with an assumption of a maximum 0.5 lb ai/acre single application rate.  This is highest application rate from the proposed labels.  The assumption of a single maximum application at the labeled crop limit also will allow for consideration of the potential for systemic uptake of the pesticide, which is suggested by the following label statement “DupontTM E2Y45SC insecticide is a systemic product and will be transmitted upward into the plant from root uptake.”  If no Agency risk concerns are identified at this conservative level, no further refinement would be warranted.

4.	Effects Measures

The screening-level risk assessment typically relies on a suite of toxicity studies performed on a limited number of organisms from broad taxonomic groups that are used as surrogates for a variety of taxa.  The following presents the tested taxonomic group, its target taxa as a surrogate, and the effects measures commonly used in screening risk assessment

Tested			Surrogate			Effects Measures Employed

Taxa	 		For

Birds			all birds bird, reptiles, and	most sensitive species tested

			terrestrial amphibians		LD50, LC50, NOAEC for

							reproduction and growth

Mammals (rat)		all mammals			LD50, NOAEL for

							reproduction and growth

Freshwater fish	all fish aquatic amphibians	most sensitive species tested

							LC50, NOAEC for

							reproduction and growth

Freshwater 		all freshwater invertebrates	most sensitive species tested

invertebrates						LC50, NOAEC for

							reproduction and growth

Estuarine/marine	all estuarine/marine		most sensitive species tested

Fish			fish				LC50, NOAEC for

							reproduction and growth

Estuarine/marine	all estuarine/marine		most sensitive species tested

invertebrates		invertebrates			LC50, NOAEC for

							reproduction and growth

Terrestrial 		all terrestrial invertebrates	LD50

Invertebrate 						(not commonly a quantitative risk assessment)

Terrestrial plants	all terrestrial plants		most sensitive species tested

(monocot/dicot)					of monocot and dicot EC25,

							EC5/NOAEC

Aquatic Plants		all aquatic plants		most sensitive species tested

(algae/vascular)					of algae and vascular EC50/EC25,

							EC5/NOAEC

IV. 	ANALYSIS

A. 	Environmental Fate and Transport Characterization

Chlorantraniliprole is persistent and mobile in terrestrial and aquatic environments.   Extended chlorantraniliprole use is expected to cause accumulation of residues in soil from year to year.  Major routes of dissipation are expected to be alkaline-catalyzed hydrolysis, photodegradation in water, leaching, and runoff.

Chlorantraniliprole is stable to hydrolytic degradation in pH 5 and 7 buffer solutions.  It does, however, undergo rapid hydrolysis in pH 9 buffer solution (MRID 46889017).  The major hydrolysis degradation product is (2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]-6-chloro-3,8 dimethyl-4(3H)-quinazolinone (IN-EQW78).  Photodegradation of chlorantraniliprole is a predominant degradation pathway.  Chlorantraniliprole has a half-life of 0.37 days in pH 7 buffer solution and 0.31 days in natural water irradiated with a Xenon arc lamp (MRID 46889018).  In a water/sediment system, chlorantraniliprole had photodegradation half-lives of 22 days in loamy sand sediment and 9.9 days in sandy loam sediment system (MRID 46889122).  The major photodegradation products are IN-EQW78, IN-LBA22, IN-LBA24, and IN-LBA23.  A minor photodegradation product was identified as IN-ECD73.

Chlorantraniliprole is stable (t1/2 = 228 to 924 days) in aerobic soils incubated at 250C (MRID 46889015, 46889014, 46889124).  It degrades faster at higher soil temperatures of 34-350C and 490C (MRID 46889124, 46889015).  Major degradation products were identified as IN-F6L99, IN-EVK64, IN-EQW78, IN-ECD73, IN-GAZ70.  Minor degradation products were identified IF-F9N04 and IN-EVK64.  Chlorantraniliprole is also persistent (t1/2= 231 and 125 days) under stratified redox test conditions in a sand and loam sediment/water systems (MRID 46889016).   The major degradation product was identified as IN-EQW78.  Minor degradations products were identified as IN-F6L99, IN-F9N04, IN-GAZ70, and IN-ECD73.

Chlorantraniliprole is expected to be mobile in soil and aquatic environments.  It has soil: water Freundlich batch equilibrium adsorption coefficients of 1.22 (Koc=153, 1/n=1.0028) in a loamy sand from Spain, 9.16 (Koc=509, 1/n=1.0434) in a silty clay loam from IA,  1.36 (Koc=272, 1/n=0.8485) in a sandy loam from  MS, 1.59 (Koc= 526, 1/n=0.9370) in a loamy sand from GA, 2.34 (Koc=180, 1/n=0.9256) in a loam from Italy (MRID 46889123).  Because there is a positive, linear regression between Kd and soil organic carbon, it is appropriate to use Koc for environmental fate modeling.

Laboratory Environmental Fate Data for Chlorantraniliprole

Data	Units	 Value	Source

Molecular Weight	g/mole	483.15

	Solubility	mg/L	1.023	MRID 46889026

Vapor Pressure	Torr	1.57E-13	DuPont 16517

Henrys Constant	atm m3/mol	3.1E-15	Estimated

Hydrolysis @ pH 7 	Days	Stable	MRID 46889017

Photodegradation in Water	Days	0.31 	MRID 46889018

Aerobic Soil Metabolism

	Days	577.61

537.3

374.6

410.1

246.6

228.0

888.6

924.1

396.0	MRID 46889124

MRID 46889015

MRID 46889124

(Total Soil Extractable Residue @ 25oC) for benzo and pyrazole-labeled chlorantraniliprole

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	Days	231

125	MRID 46889016

Anaerobic Aquatic

Metabolism	Days	208	DuPont 14568

Soil:Water  Coefficients (Average Koc)	L/g	153-loam sand

509-silty clay loam

272-sandy loam

526-loamy sand

180-loam

	MRID 46889123

1- EFED recalculated first-order half-lives for both benzo- and pyrazole-labeled chlorantraniliprole. Half-lives values presented in the OECD Chlorantranilipole Volume 3(1): Annex B, Environmental Fate and Behavior. (mean = 491 (886, 539, 380, 233, 323, 629, 423, 518 days); SD=203; t90, n-1 =1.417; N=8)

The following table presents the degradates associated with each fate study.  Structures of the degradates, when available are appended to this risk assessment.

Study	Degradation Product	Maximum Formation Percentage

(% of applied parent) 	Chemical Name

Hydrolysis

MRID 46889212	IN-EQW78	86.7 @ pH 9  (2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]-6-chloro-3,8 dimethyl-4(3H)-quinazolinone

Photodegradation in Water

MRID 46889018	IN-EQW78	ND @ pH 7 buffer  solution

ND @ natural water,  sterile

	(2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]-6-chloro-3,8 dimethyl-4(3H)-quinazolinone

	IN-LBA22	52.1 @ pH 7 buffer  solution

3.4   @ natural water,  sterile

IN-LBA24	90.2 @ pH 7 buffer  solution

89.3   @ natural water,  sterile

IN-LBA23	40.8 @ pH 7 buffer  solution

51.4 @ natural water,  sterile

	Soil Metabolism

MRID 46889014

MRID 46889124

MRID 46889015	IN-F6L99	 2.1 @ 250C incubation

 5.2 @ 350C incubation

 4.2 @ 490C incubation

	N-Methyl-[3-bromo-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]carboxylic acid

	IN-EVK64	ND @ 250C incubation

 1.7 @ 350C incubation

 5.3 @ 490C incubation

IN-EQW78	9.5  @ 250C incubation

33.3 @ 350C incubation

71.6  @ 490C incubation (2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]-6-chloro-3,8 dimethyl-4(3H)-quinazolinone

	IN-ECD73	4.9 @ 250C incubation

8.2 @ 350C incubation

9.1  @ 490C incubation 2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-yl]-6-chloro-3,8-dimet hyl-4(3H)-quinazolinone

	INGAZ70	4.3 @ 250C incubation

7.4  @ 350C incubation

1.0 @ 490C incubation 2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]-6-chloro-8-methyl-4 (1H)-quinazolinone

Water/Sediment

Metabolism

MRID 46889016

MRID 46889122	IN-EQW78	30.2 @ no photodegradation

40.9 @ photodegradation (2-[3-Bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]-6-chloro-3,8 dimethyl-4(3H)-quinazolinone

	IN-F6L99	4.2 @ no photodegradation

ND @  photodegradation	5-bromo-N-methyl-1H-pyrazole-3-carboxamide

	IN-F9N04	2.7 @ no photodegradation

ND @ photodegradation N-[2-(Aminocarbonyl)-4-chloro-6-methylphenyl]-3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyri dinyl)1H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide

	IN-GAZ70	3.0 @ no photodegradation

ND @ photodegradation 2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazol-5-yl]-6-chloro-8-methyl-4 (1H)-quinazolinone

	IN-ECD73	4.7 @ no photodegradation

0.8 @ photodegradation 2-[3-bromo-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-1H-pyrazole-5-yl]-6-chloro-3,8-dimet hyl-4(3H)-quinazolinone

	INLBA22	11.1 @ no photodegradation

ND @ photodegradation

INLBA24	4.6 @ no photodegradation

1.5 @ photodegradation

INLNA23	2.3 @ no photodegradation

0.5 @ photodegradation

 Radiolabelled chlorantraniliprole (applied at 0.286 lbs ai/A ) had half-lives of 181 to 222 days for dissipation studies in CA and Texas bareground field dissipation studies. In the Texas study, degradation products include IN-EQW78 (42% of applied @ Day 450), IN-GAZ70 (7% of applied radioactivity), IN-ECD73 (9.5%@ Day 540), IN-F6L99 (5% @ Day 120). Most of radioactivity was detected in the surface 0 to 6 inch soil layer.  In the California study, degradation products include IN-EQW78 (29% of applied @ Day 741), IN-ECD73 (6.8% of applied radioactivity@ Day 740), IN-GAZ70 (5.9%@ Day 300), IN-F6L99 (2.1% @ Day 531). Applied radioactivity was detected with soil depth.  Maximum depth of radioactivity detection was 30-36 inches soil layer (2.7% of applied radioactivity @ Day 379).

Nonradiolabelled chlorantraniliprole (formulated as 35WG at 0.286 lbs ai/A) had half-lives of  210 days in Minnesota study and 274 days in Prince Edward Island study.  In the Minnesota study,  degradation products included IN-EQW78 ( 3.8% of applied @ Day 0),  IN-ECD73 (4.1%@ Day 0) and IN-GAZ70 (4.1% day Day 0).  Routes of dissipation  for chlorantraniliprole were identified as leaching (1% of applied @ 12 to 30 inches) and runoff (<6% of applied).  In the Prince Edward study, IN-EQW78 (5.3% of applied @ Day 0),  IN-ECD73 (1.3%@ Day 0) and IN-GAZ70 (0.4% day Day 0). Chlorantranilipole was detected (<0.5% of applied) at soil depths greater than 30 cm.

Nonradiolabelled chlorantraniliprole (formulated as 20SC at 0.286 lbs ai/A) on bareground plots had half-lives of  52 days in California study, 206 days in the Texas study, 697 days in the New Jersey study, and 1130 days in the Georgia study.  In the California study, degradation products included IN-EQW78 ( 21% of applied @ Day 540) and  IN-ECD73 (4.0%@ Day 540).  Chlorantranilipole residues were detected at depth 18 inches (45 cm). In the Texas study, degradation products included IN-EQW78

(20% of applied @ Day 540) and  IN-ECD73 (2%@ Day 540).  Chlorantranilipole residues were detected at depths >24 inches (<0.8% of applied). In the New Jersey study, degradation products included IN-EQW78 (9% of applied @ Day 475) and  IN-ECD73 (4%@ Day 541).  Chlorantranilipole residues were detected at depths > 24 inches (1% of applied).  In the Georgia study, degradation products included IN-EQW78 (12% of applied @ Day 540) and  IN-ECD73 (6%@ Day 540).  Chlorantranilipole residues were detected at depths 12 to 18 inches (~0.33 % of applied).

1.  Aquatic Organism Exposure

The aquatic exposure assessment for 3-bromo-N-[4-chloro-2-methyl]-6-[(methylamino) carbonyl]phenyl]-1-(3-chloro-2-pyridinyl)-[H-pyrazole-5-carboxamide (chlorantraniliprole) was conducted using registrant submitted data.  The aquatic exposure assessment is based on Tier II surface water modeling (PRZM-EXAMS shell, PE5V01).  The modeling was conducted using registrant-submitted environmental fate data.

The surface water modeling was conducted using PE5V01.  The modeling was conducted for only chlorantraniliprole. The modeling strategy was designed to assess major crops and application conditions specified in the Section 3 for chlorantraniliprole.

a.	Surface Water

The PRZM/EXAMS input parameters for chlorantraniliprole are shown in the table below.

PRZM/EXAMS Input Parameters for Chlorantraniliprole

Data	Units	 Value	Source 	Comments

Molecular Weight	g/mole	483.15

Solubility	mg/L	1.023	MRID 46889026

	Vapor Pressure	Torr	1.57E-13	DuPont 16517

	Henrys Constant	atm m3/mol	3.1E-15	Estimated	Calculated via solubility and vapor pressure

Hydrolysis @ pH 7 	Days	Stable	MRID 46889017

	Photodegradation in Water	days	0.31 	MRID 46889018

	Aerobic Soil Metabolism	Days	631.762,3	MRID 46889124

MRID 46889015

MRID 46889124

	Calculated 90th percentile of mean1

Mean= 509 days

SD= 252 days

t= 1.40

n= 9

*Several reported half-lives in MRID 46889124

 were not used because of poor fit with first-order degradation  model

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	Days	 341.13	MRID 46889016	Calculated 90th percentile of mean1

Mean=  178 days

SD=  74.95 days

t= 3.078

n=2

Anaerobic Aquatic

Metabolism	Days	208	DuPont 14568	Value represents single half-life value4

Soil:Water  Coefficient (Koc)	L/g	328	MRID 46889123	Average Koc

1 tinput=Mean+(t90,n-1*SD)/√N-1

2- EFED recalculated first-order half-lives for both benzo- and pyrazole-labeled chlorantraniliprole. The calculated half-lives are based on aerobic soil metabolism data in non-sterile soil at 250C. Half-lives used in the assessment include 577.6, 537.3, 374.6, 410.1, 246.6, 228, 888.6, 924.1, 396 days.

3- The 90th percentile of the mean half-life for chlorantraniliprole was 600 days for half-lives values presented in the OECD Chlorantranilipole Volume 3(1): Annex B, Environmental Fate and Behavior. (mean = 491 ( 886, 539, 380, 233, 323, 629, 423, 518 days); SD=203; t90, n-1 =1.417; N=8)

4- A single value half-life was used because of the insensitivity of PRZM/EXAMS modeling to anaerobic aquatic metabolism half-lives.

The Agency does not have exposure scenarios for aquatic modeling for all use sites and locations in the country.  Therefore, Agency risk assessments rely on a series of representative model scenarios to represent a suite of use sites and locations.   Because the proposed chlorantraniliprole labels propose a range of application rates with various application approaches and crops, EFED conducted a comprehensive modeling analysis of the recommended application conditions for chlorantraniliprole.  This analysis provides a series of possible use scenarios to assess the impact of application rate, application method, and crop on DPX-E2Y45 concentrations in surface water. Application conditions considered in the modeling are in the following table.

Application Conditions of Chlorantraniliprole for Various Crop Types (Maximum Application Rate)

Scenario	Application Method	Single Application Rate

(lbs ai/A)	Number of Applications 	Application Interval

(days)	Annual Application Rate

(lbs ai/A)

DuPont™Corgen™SC

FL cabbage	Aerial/Ground Spray	0.065	3	3	0.20

FL cucumber

0.065	3	5	0.20

PA tomato

0.098	2	5	0.20

CA tomato

0.098	2	5	0.20

FL tomato

0.098	2	5	0.20

FL peppers

0.098	2	5	0.20

CA lettuce

0.065	3	3	0.20

DuPont™Altacor™ WG

CA cotton	Aerial/Ground Spray	0.099	2	5	0.20

NC cotton

0.099	2	5	0.20

MS cotton

0.099	2	5	0.20

NY grape

0.099	2	7	0.20

CA grape

0.099	2	7	0.20

NC apple

0.099	2	10	0.20

PA apple

0.099	2	10	0.20

OR apple

0.099	2	10	0.20

ID potato

0.066	3	5	0.20

ME potato

0.066	3	5	0.20

GA peach

0.099	2	7	0.20

MI cherry

0.099	2	7	0.20

DuPont™E2Y45 SC

Turf	Ground Spray	0.26	2	7	0.5

Turf	Ground Spray	0.026	19	7	0.5

Ornamental Flowers and Groundcover	Ground Spray	0.4992

1

NA	0.5

NA- not applicable

Tier II aquatic EECs for maximum chlorantraniliprole application rates are shown in the next two tables.

PRZM/EXAMS  EECs for Application Conditions of Chlo慲瑮慲楮楬牰汯潦⁲慖楲畯⁳牃灯吠灹獥⠠慍楸 畭敁楲污䄠灰楬慣楴湯删瑡⥥܇捓湥牡潩䄇灰楬慣楴 湯删瑡൥氨獢愠⽩⥁⌇䄠灰ݳ灁汰捩瑡潩湉整癲污⠍ 慤獹ܩ‱湩ㄠ‰敹牡䌠湯散瑮慲楴湯

(μg/L)

Peak

21-day

average

60-day

Average

FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	2.146	1.466

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	4.939	3.748

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.306	1.136

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.922	0.702

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	3.001	2.312

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	5.683	4.425

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.997	2.203

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.576	1.229

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	3.207	2.584

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	3.271	2.633

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.197	1.041

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	1.026	0.791

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	1.153	0.917

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	1.091	0.857

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.674	0.558

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.859	0.707

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.392	1.319

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.886	0.655

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.907	0.758

PRZM/EXAMS  EECs for Application Conditions of Chlorantraniliprole for Various Crop Types (Maximum Ground Application Rate)

Scenario	Application Rate

(lbs ai/A)	# Apps	Application Interval

(days)	1 in 10 year Concentration

(μg/L)

Peak

21-day

average

60-day

Average

FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	2.045	1.331

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	4.860	3.695

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	1.097	0.914

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.619	0.473

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.817	2.198

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	5.475	4.234

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.781	2.057

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.280	1.005

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.995	2.440

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	3.116	2.469

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	1.025	0.889

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.706	0.550

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.852	0.689

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.898	0.716

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.365	0.304

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.680	0.513

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.195	1.092

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.620	0.447

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.739	0.596

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.707	0.531

FL Turf	0.026	19	7	0.753	0.644	0.488

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.985	0.769

PA Turf	0.026	19	7	1.624	1.357	1.023

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.554	0.416

CA Turf	0.026	19	7	0.766	0.669	0.544

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	4.672	3.495

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.543	1.385

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	8.136	6.203

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.284	2.033

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	9.126	6.778

NA- not applicable

b.	Monitoring Data

There are no surface or groundwater water monitoring data for chlorantraniliprole because it is a new compound

2. 	Terrestrial Vertebrate Exposure

Terrestrial vertebrate exposures were estimated using the T-REX v 1.3.1 model.  Because of the very low toxicity of chlorantraniliprole to mammals and birds, the risk assessment considered exposure estimates only for a highly conservative assumed maximum single use scenario (0.5 lbs ai/acre).  A default dissipation half-life value of 35 days was assumed, though it has no impact on peak residue estimates for a single application scenario The following table shows the results of the exposure estimate.

T-REX Predicted Dietary EECs for a One-Time Conservative

Application of 0.5 lb ai/acre

Dietary-based EECs  (mg/kg-diet)

Short Grass 	120.0

Tall Grass 	55.0

Broadleaf plants/sm Insects	67.5

Fruits/pods/seeds/lg Insects	7.5

3.	Terrestrial Invertebrate Exposure

The Agency currently has no method for estimating exposure to non-target terrestrial invertebrates.

4.	Terrestrial Plant Exposure

Exposures for terrestrial plants were estimated using the TERRPLANT model.  The low water solubility of chlorantraniliprole leads to the use of a runoff factor of 0.01 in the model.  Because of the low expected toxicity of the pesticide to terrestrial plants, the exposure estimates presented in the table below are based on a maximum single application rate for both aerial and ground methods.  Four application methods were considered ground spray application (0.5 lb/acre, 560 g/ha) to turf with no soil incorporation, ground spray application (0.5 lb/acre, 560 g/ha)  to ornamentals with soil incorporation to 6 inches depth (surrogate for soil injection), foliar spray application (0.2 lb/acre, 114 g/ha) with ground equipment and no incorporation, foliar spray application (0.2 lb/acre, 114 g/ha) with aerial equipment and no incorporation.  In all cases the solubility limit of the pesticide was entered into the model as 0.88 mg/L (pH 7).

Estimated Plant Exposures Under Maximum Single Application Scenarios

Application Method/Rate	Total Loading  to Adjacent Areas (EEC = Sheet Runoff +Drift)

g ai/ha	Total Loading to Semi-aquatic Areas (EEC = Channelized Runoff + Drift)

g ai/ha	DRIFT EEC   (for ground: application rate x 0.01) (for aerial: application rate x 0.05)

g ai/ha

Ground Spray to Turf and ornamentals

Unincorporated/560 g/ha	11.2	61.6	5.6

Ground Spray to Turf and ornamentals

Incorporated to six inches/560 g/ha	6.5	14.9	5.6

Aerial spray unincorporated /224 g/ha 	13.44	33.6	11.2

Ground spray unincorporated /224 g/ha 	4.48	24.64	2.24

B.  	Effects Characterization

In agreement with international governmental partners associated with registration efforts for this pesticide, ecological effects data evaluation responsibilities are being met through the efforts of the Pesticides Safety Directorate (PSD), UK.  The Agency is using the results of the PSD review as they appear in the dossier for registration in Europe.  Except where specifically reported, independent validation of statistical results for effects studies was not performed during the PSD reviews.

1.	Avian Toxicity

This risk assessment uses the summarized acute and chronic toxicity data from Volume 3, Annex B.9: Ecotoxicology with the regulatory evaluation and approval as completed by the PSD.  The full text of those summaries and evaluations are available in the above volume.  Chlorantraniliprole, degradates and formulated products can be characterized as being practically non-toxic from the acute oral and dietary perspectives.

Available Bird Toxicity Data for Chlorantraniliprole, Formulations, and Degradates

Test Material Identification	Nature of Tested Material	Registrant Study ID	Test Species 	Test Type	Endpoint Type	Effects Value Based on A.S. Units of Active Substance

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14380	Anas platyrhynchos

(Mallard)	Subacute dietary	LC 50

NOAEC	>5620

5620	mg/kg diet

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14384	Anas platyrhynchos

(Mallard)	Reproduction	LOAEC (viable embryo reduction)

NOAEC	250

500	mg/kg diet

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14378	Colinus virginianus

(Northern bobwhite)	Acute oral dose	LD 50

NOAEL 	>2250

2250	mg/kg bw

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14379	Colinus virginianus

(Northern bobwhite)	Subacute dietary	LC 50

NOAEC)	>5620

5620	mg/kg diet

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14383	Colinus virginianus

(Northern bobwhite)	Reproduction	LOAEC (egsheell thinning)

NOAEC	250

120	mg/kg-diet

IN-EQW78	Technical metabolite	DuPont-18859	Colinus virginianus

(Northern bobwhite)	Acute oral dose	LD 50

NOAEL	>2250

2250	mg IN-EQW78/kg bw

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18945	Colinus virginianus

(Northern bobwhite)	Acute oral dose	LD 50

NOAEL(transient clinical signs, no mortality)	>2000

432

	mg a.i./kg bw

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-18946	Colinus virginianus

(Northern bobwhite)	Acute oral dose	LD 50

NOAEL(transient clinical signs, no mortality)	>2250

486

	mg a.i./kg bw

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-19420	Colinus virginianus

(Northern bobwhite)	Subacute dietary	LC 50

NOAEC	>5620

5620	mg a.i./kg diet

The available data show no indications that formulated product, metabolites, or degradates are more toxic than active ingredient.

2.	Mammalian Toxicity

Acute toxicity study effects for the technical active ingredient in mammals are reported as follows:

	Acute Oral Toxicity LD50: >5000 mg/kg (Rat)

Acute Dermal Toxicity LD50: >5000 mg/kg (Rat)

	Acute Inhalation Toxicity LC50: >5.1 mg/L (Rat)

Formulated products are as equally non-toxic following acute exposures as is

technical chlorantraniliprole. A single dose of chlorantraniliprole 20SC [200 g/L (w/v); 18.5% (w/w)] (chlorantraniliprole 20SC) was administered by oral gavage to three fasted female rats at a dose of 5000 mg/kg. The rats were dosed one at a time at a minimum of 48-hour intervals.  All rats survived until the scheduled sacrifice. No clinical signs of toxicity were observed, and no body weight loss occurred after dosing. No gross lesions were present in the rats at necropsy.  A single dose of chlorantraniliprole 35WG was administered by oral gavage to one fasted female rat each at a dose of 175, 550, or 1750 mg/kg and to three fasted female rats at a dose of 5000 mg/kg.   No deaths occurred. The rats exhibited no clinical signs of toxicity during the study. No body weight losses occurred after dosing. No gross lesions were present in the rats at necropsy. For the purposes of this risk assessment, to facilitate a comparison of estimated dietary residues with toxicity endpoints for acute effects, the existing rate oral LD50 toxicity study was used to estimate a dietary concentration of the pesticide that would correspond to a daily oral dose equivalent to the LD50.  To accomplish this, a conservative ingestion rate of 100 percent of the body weight was applied.  The resulting estimated dietary acute toxicity endpoint is >5000 mg/kg-diet [(>5000 mg/kg-bw)(1 kg-bw/1kg-diet) = >5000 mg/kg-diet].

In developmental toxicity studies in rats and rabbits, chlorantraniliprole exhibited no effects on any parameter in pregnant females or their offspring at levels up to and including the maximum tested dose of 1,000 mg/kg bw/day.  The NOAEL for this study is 1,000 mg/kg/day.

No reproduction toxicity was observed in a two-generation reproduction study with

chlorantraniliprole in rats.  No adverse effects were observed on reproduction, fertility, sperm parameters, estrous cycle, litter size, pup survival and developmental landmarks up to the maximum tested dose of 20,000 ppm in the diet. There were no adverse histological findings indicative of reproductive toxicity. There was a slight reduction in the F1 pup (but not F2 pup) weight during lactation at the highest dose level (mean maternal intake during lactation equal to 3118 mg/kg-bw/day); this was attributed, in part, to weight loss in one dehydrated dam during lactation which had a litter with some of the lowest pup weights. The slight change in pup weight was without subsequent effects since overall body weight, weight gain and development in F1 rats fed 20,000 ppm were similar to control animals.  The NOAEC for this study is 20,000 ppm or 1000 mg/kg bw/day as a NOAEL (estimated).

3.	Terrestrial Invertebrate Toxicity

This risk assessment uses the summarized acute and chronic toxicity data from Volume 3, Annex B.9: Ecotoxicology with the regulatory evaluation and approval as completed by the PSD.  The full text of those summaries and evaluations are available in the above volume.

The available formulated product data, when adjusted for active ingredient suggest that there is no practical difference between the toxicity of active ingredient and formulated products to bees.

Available Terrestrial Invertebrate Toxicity Data for Chlorantraniliprole, Formulations, and Degradates (data ordered by species to facilitate comparisons of a.i. with degradates and products)

Test Material Identification	Nature of Tested Material 	Registrant Study ID	Test Species 	Test Type	Endpoint Type	Effects Value Based on A.S. Units of Active Substance

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18423	Aphidius rhopalosiphi	Mortality and reproduction	LR 50 and ER 50	>750	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-12405	Aphidius rhopalosiphi	Mortality and reproduction	LR 50 and ER 50	>750	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-12753	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	Semi-field	NOEC	156.16	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-14387	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	Acute oral	LD50	>0.119	mg. chlorantraniliprole/bee

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont*-14387	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	Acute contact	LD50	>0.100	mg. chlorantraniliprole/bee

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-14388	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	NOAEC	52.5	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-14706	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	NOAEC	52.5	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-16269	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	Acute	Mortality <4%	112.5	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-16271	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	NOAEC	>60	g chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-16272	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	NOAEC	>60	g chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-17208	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	NOAEC	60	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-17247	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	LOAEC (mortality and decreased flight intensity) >60	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-17248	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	LOAEC (mortality and decreased flight intensity) 60	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-17582	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	Acute oral	LD 50

	>0.0274

>104.1

	μg/bee in water

μg/bee in acetone

chlorantraniliprole/bee

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18085	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	NOAEC	60	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18086	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	LOAEC (mortality and decreased flight intensity) 60	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18087	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	semi-field	NOAEC	60	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18426	Apis mellifera

(Honeybee)	Acute oral	LD 50	>114.1	μg. chlorantraniliprole/bee

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-17301	Chrysoperla carnea

(Green lacewing) larvae	Mortality Reproduction	EC50 LOEC	120

120	g chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-19746	Coccinella septempunctata

(Lady bird beetle)	Mortality

Reproduction	LOAEC

LOAEC	60

60	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-17300	Coccinella septempunctata

(Lady bird beetle) larvae	Mortality Reproduction	EC50 LOEC	<120

120	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 	Technical	DuPont-14398	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm)	Acute	LC 50	>1000	mg chlorantraniliprole /kg soil dry weight.

IN-EQW78	Technical metabolite	DuPont-15389	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm)	Acute	LC 50	>1000	mg IN-EQW78/kg soil dry weight.

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-16694	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm	Reproduction Growth	NOAEC	350	mg chlorantraniliprole /kg soil dry weight.

IN-EQW78	Technical metabolite	DuPont-17093	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm	Reproduction Growth	NOAEC	1000	mg IN-EQW78/kg soil dry weight.

IN-F6L99	Technical metabolite	DuPont-17631	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm)	Acute	LC 50	632.5	mg IN-F6L99/kg soil dry weight.

IN-ECD73	Technical metabolite	DuPont-17632	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm)	Reproduction Growth	NOAEC	1000	mg IN-ECD73/kg artificial soil dry weight

IN-GAZ70	Technical metabolite	DuPont-17633	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm)	Reproduction Growth	NOAEC	1000	mg IN-GAZ70/kg soil dry weight

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-18817	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm)	Acute	LC 50 	>350	mg chlorantraniliprole/kg drysoil

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18818	Eisenia fetida

(Earthworm)	Acute	LC 50 	>200	mg chlorantraniliprole/kg drysoil

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-16532	Episyrphus balteatus

(Hoverfly)	Mortality 	LR100	120	g chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18082	Episyrphus balteatus

(Hoverfly)	Mortality Reproduction	LR 50 ER 50	12.6

13.3	g chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-19747	Episyrphus balteatus

(Hoverfly)	Mortality 1st treatment

Mortality 2nd treatment

Reproduction	<control

>control

NOAEL	60

60

60	G  chlorantraniliprole/ha twice with 7-day interval

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-18084	Episyrphus balteatus

(Hoverfly)	Mortality

Reproduction	LR50

ER 50	4.64

>4.4	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-20303	Episyrphus balteatus

(Hoverfly)	Mortality 1st treatment

Mortality 2nd treatment

Reproduction	<control

<control

NOAEL	60

60

60	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha twice with 7-day interval

IN-EQW78	Technical metabolite	DuPont-16531	Folsomia candida

(Springtail)	Reproduction	EC 50 NOEC	>100

100 	mg IN-EQW78/kg dry soil

IN-ECD73	Technical metabolite	DuPont-17083	Folsomia candida

(Springtail)	Reproduction	EC 50 NOEC	>100

100 	mg IN-ECD73/kg dry soil

Chlorantraniliprole 	Technical	DuPont-18730	Folsomia candida

(Springtail)	Reproduction	EC 50 NOEC	0.48

0.39 	mg chlorantraniliprole /kg dry soil

Chlorantraniliprole	Technical	DuPont-19748	Hypoaspis aculeifer (mite) Reproduction	NOAEC	100	mg chlorantraniliprole /kg dry soil

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18081 RV1	Orius laevigatus	Mortality and reproduction	LR 50 & ER 50	>120	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-12406	Typhlodromus pyri	Mortality and reproduction	LR 50 and ER 50	>750	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-14704	Typhlodromus pyri	Mortality and reproduction	LR 50 ER 50	>750	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-17312	Typhlodromus pyri	Population study	NOAEC	750	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-14705	Typhlodromus pyri	Population reduction (transient)	LOAEC	52.5	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18424	Typhlodromus pyri	Mortality and reproduction	LR 50 and ER 50	>750	g. chlorantraniliprole/ha

4. 	Terrestrial Plant Toxicity

This risk assessment uses the summarized acute and chronic toxicity data from Volume 3, Annex B.9: Ecotoxicology with the regulatory evaluation and approval as completed by the PSD.  The full text of those summaries and evaluations are available in the above volume.

The following table presents the available terrestrial plant toxicity data.

Available Terrestrial Plant Toxicity Data for Chlorantraniliprole, Formulations, and Degradates

Test Material Identification	Nature of Tested Material	Registrant Study ID	Test Species 	Test Type	Endpoint Type	Effects Value Based on A.S.  Units of Active Substance

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-19074	Zea mays (corn)

Avena sativa (oat)

Allium cepa (common onion)

Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)

Cucumis sativa (cucumber)

Brassica napus (rape)

Pisum sativum (pea)

Glycine max (soybean)

Beta vulgaris (sugarbeet)

Lycopersicon esculentum (tomato)	Vegetative vigor	EC25 dicots

EC5 dicots

EC25 monocots

EC5 monocots

	>300

>300 cucumber, rape

 <300 all others

>300

<300 Onion

>300 otherl species

	g. chlorantraniliprole /ha

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-19075	Zea mays (corn)

Avena sativa (oat)

Allium cepa (common onion)

Lolium perenne (perennial ryegrass)

Cucumis sativa (cucumber)

Brassica napus (rape)

Pisum sativum (pea)

Glycine max (soybean)

Beta vulgaris (sugarbeet)

Lycopersicon esculentum (tomato)	Seedling emergence	EC25 monocots

EC5 monocots

EC25 dicots

EC5 dicots

>300 (except rygrass with 34% effect)

<300

<300 all others

>300

<300 (cucumber, rape, pea, sugar beet)

>300 otherl species

	g. chlorantraniliprole /ha

5.	Freshwater Invertebrate Toxicity

This risk assessment uses the summarized acute and chronic toxicity data from Volume 3, Annex B.9: Ecotoxicology with the regulatory evaluation and approval as completed by the PSD.  The full text of those summaries and evaluations are available in the above volume.  Chlorantraniliprole can be characterized as very highly toxic to freshwater invertebrates.

Available Freshwater Invertebrate Toxicity Data for Chlorantraniliprole, Formulations, and Degradates (data ordered by species to facilitate comparisons of a.i. with degradates and products)

Test Material Identification	Nature of Tested Material	Registrant Study ID	Test Species 	Test Type	Endpoint Type	Effects Value Based on A.S. Units of Active Substance

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-18428	Brachionus calyciflorus	Acute	EC 50	>1.00	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-15109	Centroptilum triangulifer

(Mayfly)	Acute	LC 50	0.0116	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-17585	Chimarra atterima

(Caddisfly)	Acute	LC 50	0.0117	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-15112	Chironomus riparius

(Midge)	Acute	LC 50	0.0859	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14396	Chironomus riparius

(Midge)	Chronic	NOAEC (pore water from 28-d sediment study	0.005	mg chlorantraniliprole/kg spiked sediment dry weight

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-18090	Copepods (of the suborder Cyclopoida)	Acute	LC 50	>1.00	mg chlorantraniliprole technical/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-15868	28-day old Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50	0.0166	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12411*	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50	0.0116	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12754 RV1	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Chronic	NOAEC	0.00447	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

LBA24-002	Technical metabolite	DuPont-14889 RV1	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50

NOAEC	>10

10	mg LBA24-002/L

LBA22-002	Technical metabolite	DuPont-14890 RV1	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50

NOAEC	>0.24

0.24	mg LBA22-002/L

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-15113	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	 EC 50	0.011	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

IN-EQW78	Technical metabolite	DuPont-15388	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50

NOAEC	>0.138

0.138	mg IN-EQW78/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-15874	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Chronic	NOAEC	0.00447	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

LBA23-000	 	DuPont-16754 RV1	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50

NOAEC	>0.01	mg LBA23-000/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-17653	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50	0.0098	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

IN-GAZ70	Technical metabolite	DuPont-18387	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50

NOAEC	>0.00987

0.00987	mg IN-GAZ70/L

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18427 RV1	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50	0.0071	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

IN-ECD73	Technical metabolite	DuPont-18472	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50

NOAEC	>0.013

0.0138	mg IN-ECD73/L

IN-F6L99	Technical metabolite	DuPont-18473	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50	46.8	mg IN-F6L99/L

IN-F9N04	Technical metabolite	DuPont-18474	Daphnia magna

(Water flea)	Acute	EC 50	0.03	mg IN-F9N04/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-15877	Gammarus pseudolimnaeus	Acute	LC 50	0.0351	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-15114	Hyalella azteca Acute	LC 50	>0.389	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-15873	Lumbriculus variegatus

(California blackworm)	Acute	LC 50	>1.49	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-15872	Oronectes virilis

(Crayfish)	Acute	LC 50	>1.42	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-18804	Soyedina carolinensis

(Carolina Forestfly)	Acute	LC 50	>0.978	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

The available data show no indications that formulated product, metabolites, or degradates are more toxic than active ingredient.

Freshwater Fish Toxicity

This risk assessment uses the summarized acute and chronic toxicity data from Volume 3, Annex B.9: Ecotoxicology with the regulatory evaluation and approval as completed by the PSD.  The full text of those summaries and evaluations are available in the above volume.  While non-definitive LC50 values are only available for chlorantraniliprole, it can be characterized as being slightly to practically non-toxic to freshwater fish.

 Available Freshwater Fish Toxicity Data for Chlorantraniliprole, Formulations, and Degradates (data ordered by species to facilitate comparisons of a.i. with degradates and products)

Test Material Identification	Nature of Tested Material	Registrant Study ID	Test Species 	Test Type	Endpoint Type	Effects Value Based on A.S. Units of Active Substance

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14278	Ictalurus punctatus

(Channel catfish)	Acute	LC 50	>13.4	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12333	Lepomis macrochirus

(Bluegill sunfish)	Acute	LC 50	>15.1	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12332	Oncorhynchus mykiss

(Rainbow trout)	Acute	LC 50	>13.8	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14279	Oncorhynchus mykiss

(Rainbow trout)	Chronic	NOAEC	0.11	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-15396	Lepomis macrochirus

(Bluegill sunfish)	Acute	LC 50	>1.19	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18602	Lepomis macrochirus

(Bluegill sunfish)	Acute	LC 50	>1.84	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-15386	Oncorhynchus mykiss

(Rainbow trout)	Acute	LC 50	>1.09	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18601	Oncorhynchus mykiss

(Rainbow trout)	Acute	LC 50	>2.16	mg chlorantraniliprole/ha

* Study reviewed by PSD at the time of risk assessment.

The available data show no indications that formulated products are more toxic than active ingredient.

7.	Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate Toxicity

The following table presents the available estuarine/marine invertebrate toxicity data.  This risk assessment uses the summarized acute and chronic toxicity data from Volume 3, Annex B.9: Ecotoxicology with the regulatory evaluation and approval as completed by the PSD.  The full text of those summaries and evaluations are available in the above volume.  Chrlorantraniliprole is very highly toxic to certain estuarine marine invertebrates, based on the data for the eastern oyster.

Available Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate Toxicity Data for Chlorantraniliprole, Formulations, and Degradates

Test Material Identification	Nature of Tested Material	Registrant Study ID	Test Species 	Test Type	Endpoint Type	Effects Value Based on A.S. Units of Active Substance

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12335	Americamysis bahia

(Mysid shrimp)	Acute	LC 50	1.15	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14397	Americamysis bahia

(Mysid shrimp)	Chronic	NOAEC	0.695	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12412	Crassostrea virginica

(Eastern oyster)	Acute	EC 50	0.0399	mg chlorantraniliprole/L

Because the most sensitive species acutely (oyster) is not represented by chronic values, the acute to chronic ratio for the mysid (1.15/0.695 = 1.65) was applied to the oyster LC50 to estimate a chronic effects endpoint for this species (0.0399 mg/L/1.65 = 0.024 mg/L).

8.	Estuarine Marine Fish Toxicity

The following table presents the available estuarine/marine fish toxicity data This risk assessment uses the summarized acute and chronic toxicity data from Volume 3, Annex B.9: Ecotoxicology with the regulatory evaluation and approval as completed by the PSD.  The full text of those summaries and evaluations are available in the above volume. While non-definitive LC50 values are only available for chlorantraniliprole, it can be characterized as being slightly to practically non-toxic to estuarine/marine fish.

Available Estuarine/Marine Fish Toxicity Data for Chlorantraniliprole, Formulations, and Degradates

Test Material Identification	Nature of Tested Material	Registrant Study ID	Test Species 	Test Type	Endpoint Type	Effects Value Based on A.S. Units of Active Substance

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12334	Cyprinodon variegatus

(Sheepshead minnow)	Acute	LC 50	>12.0	mg/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14394	Cyprinodon variegatus

(Sheepshead minnow)	Early Life Stage Toxicity	NOAEC	1.28	mg/L

9.	Aquatic Plant Toxicity

The following table presents the available aquatic plant toxicity data.  This risk assessment uses the summarized acute and chronic toxicity data from Volume 3, Annex B.9: Ecotoxicology with the regulatory evaluation and approval as completed by the PSD.  The full text of those summaries and evaluations are available in the above volume.

Available Aquatic Plant Toxicity Data for Chlorantraniliprole, Formulations, and Degradates

Test Material Identification	Nature of Tested Material	Registrant Study ID	Test Species 	Test Type	Endpoint Type	Effects Value Based on A.S. Units of Active Substance

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14390	Anabaena flos-aquae

(Blue-green algae)	Growth / Reproduction	EC50 NOAEC	>2

2	mg. chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12409 RV1	Lemna gibba

(Duckweed)	Growth / Reproduction	EC50 NOAEC	>2

2	mg. chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14392 RV1	Navicula pelliculosa	Growth / Reproduction	EC50

NOEC	>15.1

15.1	mg. chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-12408 RV1	Selenastrum capricornutum

(Green algae)	Growth / Reproduction	EC50

NOEC	>2

2	mg. chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole Technical	Technical	DuPont-14391	Skeletonema costatum	Growth / Reproduction	EC50

NOEC	>14.6

14.6	mg. chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole 20SC	Formulated Product	DuPont-18088 Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata

(Green algae)	Growth / Reproduction	EC50

NOEC	>4

4	mg. chlorantraniliprole/L

Chlorantraniliprole 35WG	Formulated Product	DuPont-18089 Pseudokirchneriella subcapitata

(Green algae)	Growth / Reproduction	EC50

NOEC	>1.78

1.78	mg. chlorantraniliprole/L

10.	Summary of Effects Measurement Endpoint Values Used in the Risk Assessment

The following table presents the effects measurement endpoints used in the risk assessment for chlorantraniliprole.

Effects Measurement Endpoints Used in Quantitative Risk Assessment

Taxa	Effects Measurement Endpoint	Rationale

Birds (reptiles, terrestrial invertebrates)	Survival – bobwhite and mallard LC50>5620 mg/kg-diet

Reproduction – mallard 120 mg/kg-diet	Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Mammals	Survival – estimated rat LC50>5000 mg/kg-diet

Reproduction – rat NOAEC 20,000 mg/kg-diet	Most sensitive tested LD50 adjusted to estimate dietary equivalent (100% bw consumed/day)

Most sensitive tested

Terrestrial plants	Vegetative Vigor                Dicot EC25  >300 g/ha

                                      Dicot EC5 <300 g/ha

                                      Monocot EC25 >300g/ha

                                      Monocot EC5 <300g/ha

Seedling Emergence             Dicot EC25 >300 g/ha

                                      Dicot EC5 <300 g/ha

                                      Monocot EC25 <300 /ha

                                      Monocot EC5 <300 g/ha	Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Freshwater invertebrates	Survival – daphnid 48-h EC50 0.0116 mg/L

Reproduction –daphnid NOAEC 0.0044 mg/L	Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Freshwater fish	Survival – trout 96-h LC50 > 13.8 mg/L

Reproduction – trout NOAEC 0.11 mg/L	Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Estuarine/marine

invertebrates	Survival – oyster 48-h EC50 0.0399 mg/L

Chronic effect estimate – 0.024 mg/L	Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested for acute adjusted with available ACR

Estuarine/marine fish	Survival– sheepshead 96-h LC50 > 12 mg/L

Reproduction – sheepshead NOAEC 1.28 mg/L	Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

Aquatic plants	Growth/reproduction – Unicellular NOEC 1.78 mg/L

Growth – Vascular NOEC 2 mg/L	Most sensitive tested

Most sensitive tested

V. 	RISK CHARACTERIZATION

A. 	Risk Estimation

1.	Terrestrial Vertebrate Risk Quotients

Because of the very low toxicity of chlorantraniliprole to mammals and birds, the risk assessment presents risk quotients (RQs) only for a highly conservative assumed maximum single use scenario (0.5 lbs ai/acre).  The following two tables show the results of these RQ calculations.  No Agency levels of concern (LOCs) were exceeded for birds or mammals under this upper bound exposure assumption.  There would be no concern for labeled uses which are all of lower application.

Mammal RQs

Dietary Item	Estimated EEC

 mg/kg-diet	Acute Effects Endpoint mg/kg-diet	Chronic

Effects Endpoint mg/kg-diet	Acute RQ*	Chronic

RQ*	Identified Concerns**

Short Grass 	120.0	>5000	20,000	<0.1	<1	None

Tall Grass 	55.0

	<0.1	<1	None

Broadleaf plants/sm Insects	67.5

	<0.1	<1	None

Fruits/pods/seeds/lg Insects	7.5

	<0.1	<1	None

* RQ = EEC/effects endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.2), and listed species (0.1).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

Bird RQs

Dietary Item	Estimated EEC

 mg/kg-diet	Acute Effects Endpoint mg/kg-diet	Chronic

Effects Endpoint mg/kg-diet	Acute RQ*	Chronic

RQ*	Identified Concerns**

Short Grass 	120.0	>5620	500	<0.1	<1	None

Tall Grass 	55.0

	<0.1	<1	None

Broadleaf plants/sm Insects	67.5

	<0.1	<1	None

Fruits/pods/seeds/lg Insects	7.5

	<0.1	<1	None

* RQ = EEC/effects endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.2), and listed species (0.1).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

2.	Terrestrial Invertebrate Risk Quotients

The Agency currently does not have a method for calculating risk quotients for terrestrial invertebrates.

3.	Terrestrial Plant Risk Quotients

Only the highest application scenario was modeled for plant exposures.  For seedling emergence-based risk quotients runoff plus drift loading to adjacent areas is directly compared with available toxicity endpoints (see table below).  Because these endpoints were not definitive endpoints it, numerical conclusions regarding exceeding Agency levels of concern cannot be made.  Instead, the risk discussion section of this document will provide further context.

Seedling Emergence Plant RQs Under Maximum Single Application Rate

Application Method/Rate	Total Loading  to Adjacent Areas

g ai/ha	Total Loading to Semi-aquatic Areas

g ai/ha	Plant Type	Non-Listed

Effects Endpoint

(g/ha)	Listed Effects Endpoint

(g/ha)	Non-Listed RQ	Listed RQ

Ground Unincorp./100.8 g/ha	2.0160	11.0880	Monocot

Dicot	<300

>300	<300

<300	>0.0067

<0.0067	>0.037

>0.037

Ground Incorp/100.8 g/ha	2.0160	11.0880	Monocot

Dicot	<300

>300	<300

<300	>0.0067

<0.0067	>0.037

>0.037

Aerial /100.8 g/ha	6.0480	15.1200	Monocot

Dicot	<300

>300	<300

<300	>0.020

<0.020

	>0.050

>0.050

For vegetative vigor-based risk quotients runoff plus drift loading to adjacent areas is directly compared with available toxicity endpoints (see table below).  Because these endpoints were not definitive endpoints it, numerical conclusions regarding exceeding Agency levels of concern cannot be made.  Instead, the risk discussion section of this document will provide further context.

Vegetative Vigor Plant RQs Under Maximum Single Application Rate

Application Method/Rate	DRIFT EEC   (for ground: application rate x 0.01) (for aerial: application rate x 0.05)

g ai/ha	Plant Type	Non-Listed

Effects Endpoint

(g/ha)	Listed Effects Endpoint

(g/ha)	Non-Listed RQ	Listed RQ

Ground Unincorp./100.8 g/ha	1.0080	Monocot

Dicot	>300

>300	<300

<300	<0.0034

<0.0034

	>0.0034

>0.0034

Ground Incorp/100.8 g/ha	1.0080	Monocot

Dicot	>300

>300	<300

<300	<0.0034

<0.0034

	>0.0034

>0.0034

Aerial /100.8 g/ha	5.0400	Monocot

Dicot	>300

>300	<300

<300	<0.017

<0.017

	>0.017

>0.017

4.	Freshwater Fish Risk Quotients

The following tables present the RQs for freshwater fish.  No RQs exceeded Agency levels of concern.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for FW Fish from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

60-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lbs/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	1.466	0.0001	0.0133	None

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	3.748	0.0003	0.0341	None

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.136	0.0001	0.0103	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.702	0.0001	0.0064	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	2.312	0.0002	0.0210	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	4.425	0.0003	0.0402	None

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.203	0.0002	0.0200	None

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.229	0.0001	0.0112	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	2.584	0.0002	0.0235	None

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	2.633	0.0002	0.0239	None

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.041	0.0001	0.0095	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	0.791	0.0001	0.0072	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	0.917	0.0001	0.0083	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	0.857	0.0001	0.0078	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.558	0.0000	0.0051	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.707	0.0001	0.0064	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.319	0.0001	0.0120	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.655	0.0000	0.0060	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.758	0.0001	0.0069	None

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=13,800 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint=110 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for FW Fish from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

60-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	1.331	0.0001	0.0121	None

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	3.695	0.0003	0.0336	None

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	0.914	0.0001	0.0083	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.473	0.0000	0.0043	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.198	0.0002	0.0200	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	4.234	0.0003	0.0385	None

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.057	0.0001	0.0187	None

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.005	0.0001	0.0091	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.440	0.0002	0.0222	None

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	2.469	0.0002	0.0224	None

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	0.889	0.0001	0.0081	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.550	0.0000	0.0050	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.689	0.0000	0.0063	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.716	0.0001	0.0065	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.304	0.0000	0.0028	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.513	0.0000	0.0047	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.092	0.0001	0.0099	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.447	0.0000	0.0041	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.596	0.0000	0.0054	None

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.531	0.0000	0.0048	None

FL Turf	0.026	19	7	0.753	0.488	0.0000	0.0044	None

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.769	0.0001	0.0070	None

PA Turf	0.026	19	7	1.625	1.023	0.0001	0.0093	None

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.416	0.0000	0.0038	None

CA Turf	0.026	19	7	0.766	0.544	0.0000	0.0049	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	3.495	0.0003	0.0318	None

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.385	0.0001	0.0126	None

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	6.203	0.0004	0.0564	None

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.033	0.0001	0.0185	None

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	6.778	0.0005	0.0616	None

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=13,800 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint=110 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

5.	Freshwater Invertebrate Risk Quotients

The following table presents the RQs for freshwater invertebrates.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for FW Invertebrates from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	2.146	0.1850	0.4801	RU,LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	4.939	0.4258	1.1049	RU,LS, C

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.306	0.1126	0.2922	RU,LS

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.922	0.0795	0.2063	LS

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	3.001	0.2587	0.6714	RU,LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	5.683	0.4899	1.2714	RU,LS,C

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.997	0.2584	0.6705	RU,LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.576	0.1359	0.3526	RU,LS

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	3.207	0.2765	0.7174	RU,LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	3.271	0.2820	0.7318	RU,LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.197	0.1032	0.2678	RU,LS

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	1.026	0.0884	0.2295	LS

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	1.153	0.0994	0.2579	LS

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	1.091	0.0941	0.2441	LS

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.674	0.0581	0.1508	LS

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.859	0.0741	0.1922	LS

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.392	0.1200	0.3114	RU,LS

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.886	0.0764	0.1982	LS

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.907	0.0782	0.2029	LS

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint= 11.6 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 4.47 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for FW Invertebrates from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Ave	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	2.045	0.1763	0.4575	RU,LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	4.86	0.4190	1.0872	RU,LS,C

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	1.097	0.0946	0.2454	LS

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.619	0.0534	0.1385	LS

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.817	0.2428	0.6302	RU,LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	5.475	0.4720	1.2248	RU,LS,C

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.781	0.2397	0.6221	RU,LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.28	0.1103	0.2864	RU,LS

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.995	0.2582	0.6700	RU,LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	3.116	0.2686	0.6971	RU,LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	1.025	0.0884	0.2293	LS

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.706	0.0609	0.1579	LS

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.852	0.0734	0.1906	LS

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.898	0.0774	0.2009	LS

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.365	0.0315	0.0817	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.68	0.0586	0.1521	LS

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.195	0.1030	0.2673	RU,LS

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.62	0.0534	0.1387	LS

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.739	0.0637	0.1653	LS

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.707	0.0609	0.1582	LS

FL Turf	0.026	19	7	0.753	0.644	0.0649	0.1441	LS

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.985	0.0849	0.2204	LS

PA Turf	0.026	19	7	1.625	1.357	0.1400	0.3036	RU,LS

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.554	0.0478	0.1239	None

CA Turf	0.026	19	7	0.766	0.669	0.0660	0.1500	LS

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	4.672	0.4028	1.0452	RU,LS,C

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.543	0.1330	0.3452	RU,LS

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	8.136	0.7014	1.8201	RU,LS,C

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.284	0.1969	0.5110	RU,LS

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	9.126	0.7867	2.0416	RU,LS,C

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=11.6 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 4.47 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

6.	Estuarine/Marine Fish Risk Quotients

The following table presents the RQs for estuarine/marine fish.  No Agency levels of concern were exceeded.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for Estuarine/Marine Fish from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

60-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	1.466	0.0001	0.0011	None

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	3.748	0.0003	0.0029	None

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.136	0.0001	0.0009	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.702	0.0001	0.0005	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	2.312	0.0002	0.0018	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	4.425	0.0004	0.0035	None

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.203	0.0002	0.0017	None

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.229	0.0001	0.0010	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	2.584	0.0002	0.0020	None

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	2.633	0.0002	0.0021	None

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.041	0.0001	0.0008	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	0.791	0.0001	0.0006	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	0.917	0.0001	0.0007	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	0.857	0.0001	0.0007	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.558	0.0000	0.0004	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.707	0.0001	0.0006	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.319	0.0001	0.0010	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.655	0.0001	0.0005	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.758	0.0001	0.0006	None

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=12,000 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 1280 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for Estuarine/Marine Fish from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

60-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	1.331	0.0001	0.0010	None

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	3.695	0.0003	0.0029	None

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	0.914	0.0001	0.0007	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.473	0.0000	0.0004	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.198	0.0002	0.0017	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	4.234	0.0004	0.0033	None

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.057	0.0002	0.0016	None

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.005	0.0001	0.0008	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.440	0.0002	0.0019	None

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	2.469	0.0002	0.0019	None

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	0.889	0.0001	0.0007	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.550	0.0000	0.0004	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.689	0.0001	0.0005	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.716	0.0001	0.0006	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.304	0.0000	0.0002	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.513	0.0000	0.0004	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.092	0.0001	0.0009	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.447	0.0000	0.0003	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.596	0.0000	0.0005	None

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.531	0.0000	0.0004	None

FL Turf	0.026	19	7	0.753	0.488	0.0000	0.0003	None

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.769	0.0001	0.0006	None

PA Turf	0.026	19	7	1.625	1.023	0.0001	0.0008	None

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.416	0.0000	0.0003	None

CA Turf	0.026	19	7	0.766	0.544	0.0000	0.0004	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	3.495	0.0003	0.0027	None

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.385	0.0001	0.0011	None

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	6.203	0.0005	0.0048	None

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.033	0.0002	0.0016	None

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	6.778	0.0006	0.0053	None

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	2.531	1.331	0.0001	0.0010	None

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=12,000 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 1,280 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

7.	Estuarine/Marine Invertebrate Risk Quotients

The following table presents the RQs for estuarine/marine invertebrates.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	2.146	0.0538	0.0894	LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	4.939	0.1238	0.2058	RU,LS

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.306	0.0327	0.0544	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.922	0.0231	0.0384	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	3.001	0.0752	0.1250	LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	5.683	0.1424	0.2368	RU,LS

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.997	0.0751	0.1249	LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.576	0.0395	0.0657	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	3.207	0.0804	0.1336	LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	3.271	0.0820	0.1363	LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.197	0.0300	0.0499	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	1.026	0.0257	0.0428	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	1.153	0.0289	0.0480	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	1.091	0.0273	0.0455	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.674	0.0169	0.0281	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.859	0.0215	0.0358	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.392	0.0349	0.0580	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.886	0.0222	0.0369	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.907	0.0227	0.0378	None

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint= 39.9 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 24 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	2.045	0.0513	0.0852	LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	4.86	0.1218	0.2025	RU,LS

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	1.097	0.0275	0.0457	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.619	0.0155	0.0258	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.817	0.0706	0.1174	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	5.475	0.1372	0.2281	RU,LS

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.781	0.0697	0.1159	LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.28	0.0321	0.0533	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.995	0.0751	0.1248	LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	3.116	0.0781	0.1298	LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	1.025	0.0257	0.0427	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.706	0.0177	0.0294	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.852	0.0214	0.0355	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.898	0.0225	0.0374	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.365	0.0091	0.0152	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.68	0.0170	0.0283	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.195	0.0299	0.0498	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.62	0.0155	0.0258	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.739	0.0185	0.0308	None

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.707	0.0177	0.0295	None

FL Turf	0.026	19	7	0.753	0.644	0.0189	0.0268	None

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.985	0.0247	0.0410	None

PA Turf	0.026	19	7	1.625	1.357	0.0407	0.0565	None

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.554	0.0139	0.0231	None

CA Turf	0.026	19	7	0.766	0.669	0.0192	0.0279	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	4.672	0.1171	0.1947	RU,LS

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.543	0.0387	0.0643	None

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	8.136	0.2039	0.3390	RU,LS

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.284	0.0572	0.0952	LS

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	9.126	0.2287	0.3803	RU,LS

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=39.9 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 24 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

8.	Aquatic Plants

The following two tables present the RQs for aquatic plants.  No Agency levels of concern were exceeded.

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for Vascular Plants from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak	Non-Listed

RQ	Listed

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lbs/A)	#	Int

FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	0.0013	0.0013	None

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	0.0028	0.0028	None

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	0.0008	0.0008	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.0005	0.0005	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	0.0018	0.0018	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	0.0034	0.0034	None

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	0.0018	0.0018	None

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	0.0009	0.0009	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	0.0019	0.0019	None

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	0.0019	0.0019	None

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	0.0007	0.0007	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	0.0006	0.0006	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	0.0007	0.0007	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	0.0006	0.0006	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.0004	0.0004	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.0005	0.0005	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	0.0008	0.0008	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.0005	0.0005	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.0005	0.0005	None

1-Non-Listed Toxicity Endpoint=> 2,000 µg/L

2-Listed Toxicity Endpoint= 2,000µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** RQs  compared with  LOCs for non listed and listed species (1.0)

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for Vascular Plants from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak	Non-Listed

RQ	Listed

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lbs/A)	#	Int

FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	0.0013	0.0013	None

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	0.0028	0.0028	None

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	0.0006	0.0006	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.0004	0.0004	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	0.0017	0.0017	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	0.0033	0.0033	None

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	0.0017	0.0017	None

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	0.0007	0.0007	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	0.0017	0.0017	None

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	0.0018	0.0018	None

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	0.0006	0.0006	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.0004	0.0004	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.0005	0.0005	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.0005	0.0005	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.0002	0.0002	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.0004	0.0004	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	0.0007	0.0007	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.0004	0.0004	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.0004	0.0004	None

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.0004	0.0004	None

FL Turf	0.026	19	7	0.753	0.0004	0.0004	None

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.0006	0.0006	None

PA Turf	0.026	19	7	1.625	0.0008	0.0008	None

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.0003	0.0003	None

CA Turf	0.026	19	7	0.766	0.0004	0.0004	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	0.0028	0.0028	None

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	0.0009	0.0009	None

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	0.0049	0.0049	None

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	0.0013	0.0013	None

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	0.0055	0.0055	None

1-Non-Listed Toxicity Endpoint=> 2,000 µg/L

2-Listed Toxicity Endpoint= 2,000 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

**  RQs  compared with  LOCs for non listed and listed species (1.0)

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for Unicellular Plants from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak	Non-Listed

RQ	Listed

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	0.0015	0.0015	None

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	0.0032	0.0032	None

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	0.0009	0.0009	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.0006	0.0006	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	0.0021	0.0021	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	0.0038	0.0038	None

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	0.0020	0.0020	None

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	0.0010	0.0010	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	0.0021	0.0021	None

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	0.0021	0.0021	None

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	0.0008	0.0008	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	0.0007	0.0007	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	0.0008	0.0008	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	0.0007	0.0007	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.0004	0.0004	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.0006	0.0006	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	0.0009	0.0009	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.0006	0.0006	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.0006	0.0006	None

1-Non-Listed Toxicity Endpoint=> 1,780 µg/L

2-Listed Toxicity Endpoint= 1780µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** RQs  compared with  LOCs for non listed and listed species (1.0)

PRZM/EXAMS RQs  for  Unicellular Plants from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak	Non-Listed

RQ	Listed

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	Rate

(lb/A)	#	Int

FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	0.0014	0.0014	None

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	0.0032	0.0032	None

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	0.0007	0.0007	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.0004	0.0004	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	0.0019	0.0019	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	0.0037	0.0037	None

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	0.0019	0.0019	None

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	0.0008	0.0008	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	0.0020	0.0020	None

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	0.0020	0.0020	None

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	0.0007	0.0007	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.0005	0.0005	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.0006	0.0006	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.0006	0.0006	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.0002	0.0002	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.0005	0.0005	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	0.0008	0.0008	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.0004	0.0004	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.0005	0.0005	None

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.0005	0.0005	None

FL Turf	0.026	19	7	0.753	0.0004	0.0004	None

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.0006	0.0006	None

PA Turf	0.026	19	7	1.625	0.0009	0.0009	None

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.0004	0.0004	None

CA Turf	0.026	19	7	0.766	0.0004	0.0004	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	0.0032	0.0032	None

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	0.0010	0.0010	None

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	0.0055	0.0055	None

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	0.0014	0.0014	None

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	0.0062	0.0062	None

1-Non-Listed Toxicity Endpoint=> 1,780 µg/L

2-Listed Toxicity Endpoint= 1,780 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

**  RQs  compared with  LOCs for non listed and listed species (1.0

B.	Risk Discussion

1.	Quantified Risks

The primary concerns for quantifiable risks associated with this pesticide are for acute and chronic effects to aquatic invertebrates.  The following table presents the proposed Section 3 uses associated with RQ estimates for the model scenarios included in the quantitative freshwater invertebrate risk assessment.

Tier II RQs  for FW Invertebrates from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	lb/A	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	2.146	0.1850	0.4801	RU,LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	4.939	0.4258	1.1049	RU,LS, C

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.306	0.1126	0.2922	RU,LS

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.922	0.0795	0.2063	LS

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	3.001	0.2587	0.6714	RU,LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	5.683	0.4899	1.2714	RU,LS, C

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.997	0.2584	0.6705	RU,LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.576	0.1359	0.3526	RU,LS

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	3.207	0.2765	0.7174	RU,LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	3.271	0.2820	0.7318	RU,LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.197	0.1032	0.2678	RU,LS

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	1.026	0.0884	0.2295	LS

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	1.153	0.0994	0.2579	LS

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	1.091	0.0941	0.2441	LS

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.674	0.0581	0.1508	LS

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.859	0.0741	0.1922	LS

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.392	0.1200	0.3114	RU,LS

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.886	0.0764	0.1982	LS

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.907	0.0782	0.2029	LS

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint= 11.6 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 4.47 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

Tier II RQs  for FW Invertebrates from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	lb/a	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	2.045	0.1763	0.4575	RU,LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	4.86	0.4190	1.0872	RU,LS,

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	1.097	0.0946	0.2454	LS

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.619	0.0534	0.1385	LS

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.817	0.2428	0.6302	RU,LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	5.475	0.4720	1.2248	RU,LS, C

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.781	0.2397	0.6221	RU,LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.28	0.1103	0.2864	RU,LS

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.995	0.2582	0.6700	RU,LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	3.116	0.2686	0.6971	RU,LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	1.025	0.0884	0.2293	LS

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.706	0.0609	0.1579	LS

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.852	0.0734	0.1906	LS

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.898	0.0774	0.2009	LS

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.365	0.0315	0.0817	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.68	0.0586	0.1521	LS

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.195	0.1030	0.2673	RU,LS

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.62	0.0534	0.1387	LS

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.739	0.0637	0.1653	LS

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.707	0.0609	0.1582	LS

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.985	0.0849	0.2204	LS

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.554	0.0478	0.1239	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	4.672	0.4028	1.0452	RU,LS, C

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.543	0.1330	0.3452	RU,LS

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	8.136	0.7014	1.8201	RU,LS, C

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.284	0.1969	0.5110	RU,LS

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	9.126	0.7867	2.0416	RU,LS, C

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=11.6 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 4.47 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

Acute concerns are triggered by freshwater invertebrate RQ values for every exposure scenario modeled except the CA turf (ground spray) and OR apple (ground spray).  These concerns are limited primarily to acute effects to listed species and RQ values that are sufficiently high to raise non-listed species concerns but within the manageable range for restricted use considerations.  However, even for these proposed Section 3 uses, the restricted use concern level is just barely exceeded and no exposure estimate reaches the median lethal concentration for the most sensitive species tested.

Chronic freshwater invertebrate risk concerns were identified for proposed uses on  FL peppers (ground or aerial spray), FL cucumbers (ground or aerial spray), CA nursery (ground spray), FL nursery (ground spray), and TN nursery (ground spray).  In all cases the RQs were less than an order of magnitude above the Agency concern level.

Concerns to estuarine/marine invertebrates that exceed Agency concern levels are confined to the following Tier II modeling scenarios: FL cabbage (aerial or ground spray), FL cucumber (aerial or ground spray), FL peppers (aerial or ground spray), FL tomatoes (aerial spray),  CA lettuce (ground and aerial spray), NC cotton (aerial or ground spray), MS cotton (aerial or ground spray) CA nursery (ground spray), TN nursery (ground spray), FL nursery (ground spray), and MI nursery (ground spray).  These risks are generally limited to acute effects to listed species. However, the restricted use LOCs  are exceeded for the Florida vegetable scenarios (cucumber, peppers) and nursery use scenarios (CA nursery, TN nursery, and FL nursery scenarios).

Tier II RQs  for Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates from Aerial Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	lb/a	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.652	2.146	0.0538	0.0894	LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.693	4.939	0.1238	0.2058	RU,LS

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.513	1.306	0.0327	0.0544	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.080	0.922	0.0231	0.0384	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.660	3.001	0.0752	0.1250	LS

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.749	5.683	0.1424	0.2368	RU,LS

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.579	2.997	0.0751	0.1249	LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.785	1.576	0.0395	0.0657	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.730	3.207	0.0804	0.1336	LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.769	3.271	0.0820	0.1363	LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.389	1.197	0.0300	0.0499	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	1.188	1.026	0.0257	0.0428	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	1.359	1.153	0.0289	0.0480	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.245	1.091	0.0273	0.0455	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.786	0.674	0.0169	0.0281	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	1.021	0.859	0.0215	0.0358	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.558	1.392	0.0349	0.0580	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	1.086	0.886	0.0222	0.0369	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	1.035	0.907	0.0227	0.0378	None

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint= 39.9 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 24 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

Tier II RQs  for Estuarine/Marine Invertebrates from Ground Spray Application  of DPX-E2Y45 for Various Crop Types

Scenario	Application

Peak

21-day

Average	Acute1 RQ	Chronic2

RQ	Identified

Concerns

	lb/A	#	Int

	FL cabbage	0.065	3	3	2.531	2.045	0.0513	0.0852	LS

FL cucumber	0.065	3	5	5.624	4.86	0.1218	0.2025	RU,LS

PA tomato	0.098	2	5	1.280	1.097	0.0275	0.0457	None

CA tomato	0.098	2	5	0.731	0.619	0.0155	0.0258	None

FL tomato	0.098	2	5	3.436	2.817	0.0706	0.1174	None

FL peppers	0.098	2	5	6.501	5.475	0.1372	0.2281	RU,LS

CA lettuce	0.065	3	3	3.311	2.781	0.0697	0.1159	LS

CA cotton	0.099	2	5	1.470	1.28	0.0321	0.0533	None

NC cotton	0.099	2	5	3.473	2.995	0.0751	0.1248	LS

MS cotton	0.099	2	5	3.575	3.116	0.0781	0.1298	LS

NY grape	0.099	2	7	1.189	1.025	0.0257	0.0427	None

CA grape	0.099	2	7	0.813	0.706	0.0177	0.0294	None

NC apple	0.099	2	10	0.999	0.852	0.0214	0.0355	None

PA apple	0.099	2	10	1.048	0.898	0.0225	0.0374	None

OR apple	0.099	2	10	0.410	0.365	0.0091	0.0152	None

ID potato	0.066	3	5	0.812	0.68	0.0170	0.0283	None

ME potato	0.066	3	5	1.350	1.195	0.0299	0.0498	None

GA peach	0.099	2	7	0.763	0.62	0.0155	0.0258	None

MI Cherry	0.099	2	7	0.867	0.739	0.0185	0.0308	None

FLTurf	0.26	2	7	0.837	0.707	0.0177	0.0295	None

PA Turf	0.26	2	7	1.102	0.985	0.0247	0.0410	None

CA Turf	0.26	2	7	0.654	0.554	0.0139	0.0231	None

CA Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	5.663	4.672	0.1171	0.1947	RU,LS

CA Residential	0.4992	1	NA	1.779	1.543	0.0387	0.0643	None

FL Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	9.785	8.136	0.2039	0.3390	RU,LS

MI Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	2.508	2.284	0.0572	0.0952	LS

TN Nursery	0.4992	1	NA	10.981	9.126	0.2287	0.3803	RU,LS

1-Acute Toxicity Endpoint=39.9 µg/L

2-Chronic Toxicity Endpoint= 24 µg/L

* RQ = EEC/toxicity endpoint

** Acute RQs compared with acute LOCs for non listed species (0.5), restricted use (0.1), and listed species (0.05).  Chronic RQs compared with chronic LOC of 1.

2.	Qualitative Discussion of Terrestrial Plant Risks

The lack of definitive EC5 or NOEC values for terrestrial plants renders the risk conclusions for plants uncertain.

Inhibition of seedling emergence was reduced 5 to 34% for monocot plant species tested and from 0 to 18% for dicot species tested.   Non-listed species RQs are within a fiftieth of Agency concern levels and within a twentieth of listed species concerns, suggesting that the dose/response curve for seedling emergence would have to be unusually steep for predicted exposures to exceed non-listed plant concern levels.   Confidence in the lack of risk concerns for listed species is less than for non-listed plants, primarily because most species tested at single concentration in the seedling emergence study exhibited effects well in excess for the maximum 5% acceptable level for listed species.  Even though exposures were well below the tested concentration, the confidence in predicting that they would be associated with below a 5% or less effect response is uncertain.

Similar statements can be made for risk predictions based on vegetative vigor effects data, except that confidence that no non-listed plant effects are expected as no tested monocot or dicot even approached the 25% effects level that would trigger non-listed plant concerns.  However, listed plant RQ values are beyond an order of magnitude of concern levels, but the finding that available effects data show response as high as 12% inhibition in vegetative growth it is uncertain whether predicted exposures would fall below thresholds triggering concern for listed species (i.e., effects at or below 5%). Consequently listed species plant concerns cannot be dismissed with available data.

3.	Qualitative Discussion of Terrestrial Invertebrate Risks

The Agency currently does not have a quantitative method to assess risks of pesticides to non-target terrestrial invertebrates.  At first principles, it would appear reasonable that an insecticide would pose some risk to non-target terrestrial invertebrates, including non-target insects.  The highest application rate of chlorantraniliprole in a year is on the order of 200 g/ha.  Comparing this application rate to the available insect toxicity data expressed in g of pesticide per hectare suggests that acute effects on some insects (e.g. hoverfly, ladybird beetles, and lacewings) are possible.  Therefore, the screening level risk assessment conclusion is that effects on non-target insects cannot be precluded.

VI. 	FEDERALLY LISTED THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ASSESSMENT