AGENDA
FIFRA
SCIENTIFIC
ADVISORY
PANEL
(
SAP)
OPEN
MEETING
SEPTEMBER
9
­
10,
2004
FIFRA
SAP
WEB
SITE
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
scipoly/
sap/
OPP
Docket
Telephone:
(
703­
305­
5805)
Docket
Number:
OPP­
2004­
0242
THURSDAY,
SEPTEMBER
9,
2004
Holiday
Inn
­
National
Airport
2650
Jefferson
Davis
Highway
Arlington,
VA
22202
Telephone:
(
703­
684­
7200)

Fumigant
Bystander
Exposure
Model
Review:
SOil
Fumigant
Exposure
Assessment
System
(
SOFEA
©
)
Using
Telone
as
a
Case
Study
°
8:
30AM
Introduction
and
Identification
of
Panel
Members
­
Steven
Heeringa,
Ph.
D.
(
FIFRA
SAP
Session
Chair)
°
8:
45
AM
Administrative
Procedures
by
Designated
Federal
Official
­
Mr.
Joseph
E.
Bailey
°
8:
50
AM
Welcome
­
Mr.
Joseph
J.
Merenda,
Jr.
(
Director,
Office
of
Science
Coordination
and
Policy)
°
8:
55
AM
Introduction
and
Opening
Remarks
­
Randolph
Perfetti,
Ph.
D.
(
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs)
°
9:
00
AM
Goals
and
Objectives
­
Mr.
Jeffrey
Dawson
(
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
EPA)
°
9:
15
AM
SOil
Fumigant
Exposure
Assessment
System
(
SOFEA
©
)
­
Steven
A.
Cryer,
Ph.
D.
(
Dow
AgroScience,
LLC),
Ian
van
Wesenbeeck,
Ph.
D.
(
Dow
AgroSciences,
LLC),
and
Bruce
A.
Houtman,
CIH
(
Dow
AgroSciences,
LLC)
°
10:
15
AM
BREAK
°
10:
30
AM
SOil
Fumigant
Exposure
Assessment
System
(
SOFEA
©
)
­
Steven
A.
Cryer,
Ph.
D.
(
Dow
AgroScience,
LLC),
Ian
van
Wesenbeeck,
Ph.
D.
(
Dow
AgroSciences,
LLC),
and
Bruce
A.
Houtman,
CIH
(
Dow
AgroSciences,
LLC)\
°
12:
00
AM
LUNCH
°
1:
00
PM
Public
Comments
°
2:
00
PM
Panel
Discussion
Critical
Element
1:
Documentation
Question
1:
The
background
information
presented
to
the
SAP
panel
by
the
SOFEA
developers
provides
both
user
guidance,
a
technical
overview
of
the
system,
and
a
series
of
case
studies.
(
A)
Please
comment
on
the
detail
and
clarity
of
these
documents.
(
B)
Are
the
descriptions
of
the
specific
model
components
accurate?
(
C)
Do
the
algorithms
in
the
annotated
code
perform
the
functions
as
defined
in
this
document?
(
D)
Please
discuss
any
difficulties
encountered
with
respect
to
loading
the
software
and
evaluating
the
system
including
the
presented
case
study.

°
3:
00
PM
BREAK
°
3:
15
PM
Panel
Discussion
(
continued)

Critical
Element
2:
System
Design/
Inputs
Question
2:
In
the
background
documents,
a
series
of
detailed
individual
processes
and
components
included
in
SOFEA
are
presented.
The
key
processes
include
(
1)
incorporation
of
ISCST3
into
SOFEA,
(
2)
probabilistic
scaling
of
flux
rates;
(
3)
defining
source
placement
within
an
airshed;
(
4)
development
of
receptor
grids
within
airsheds;
and
(
5)
generation
of
probability
distribution
functions
based
on
use
patterns
and
application
parameters.
(
A)
Please
comment
on
these
proposed
processes,
the
nature
of
the
components
included
in
SOFEA
and
the
data
needed
to
generate
an
analysis
using
SOFEA.
(
B)
Are
there
any
other
potential
critical
sources
of
data
or
methodologies
that
should
be
considered?

°
4:
30
PM
ADJOURNMENT
FIFRA
SCIENTIFIC
ADVISORY
PANEL
(
SAP)
OPEN
MEETING
SEPTEMBER
9
­
10,
2004
FIFRA
SAP
WEB
SITE
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
scipoly/
sap/
OPP
Docket
Telephone:
(
703­
305­
5805)
Docket
Number:
OPP­
2004­
0242
FRIDAY,
SEPTEMBER
10,
2004
Holiday
Inn
­
National
Airport
2650
Jefferson
Davis
Highway
Arlington,
VA
22202
Telephone:
(
703­
684­
7200)

Fumigant
Bystander
Exposure
Model
Review:
SOil
Fumigant
Exposure
Assessment
System
(
SOFEA
©
)
Using
Telone
as
a
Case
Study
°
8:
30AM
Introduction
and
Identification
of
Panel
Members
­
Steven
Heeringa,
Ph.
D.
(
FIFRA
SAP
Session
Chair)
°
8:
35
AM
Administrative
Procedures
by
Designated
Federal
Official
­
Mr.
Joseph
E.
Bailey
°
8:
40
AM
Follow­
up
from
Previous
Day's
Discussion
­
Mr.
Jeffrey
Dawson
(
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs)
°
9:
00
AM
Panel
Discussion
(
continued)

Question
3:
The
determination
of
appropriate
flux/
emission
rates
is
critical
to
the
proper
use
of
the
SOFEA
model
as
these
values
define
the
source
of
fumigants
in
the
air
that
can
lead
to
exposures.
Upon
its
review
of
how
flux
rates
can
be
calculated,
the
Agency
has
identified
a
number
of
questions
it
would
like
the
panel
to
consider.
In
SOFEA,
measured
flux
rates
specific
to
the
conditions
at
the
time
of
the
monitoring
studies
used
are
adjusted
based
upon
incorporation
depth
and
seasonal
differences
to
account
for
varying
application
conditions.
Emissions
of
1,3­
dichloropropene
are
sensitive
to
soil
temperature
and
incorporation
depth.
Incorporation
depth
is
addressed
using
the
EPA
model
PRZM3
and
also
the
USDA
model
CHAIN­
2D.
Scaling
factors
were
used
to
address
temperature
differences.
(
A)
What,
if
any,
refinements
are
needed
for
this
process
including
the
manner
in
which
flux
values
were
directly
monitored
and
calculated
using
the
aerodynamic
flux
approach?
(
B)
SOFEA
can
easily
be
modified
to
probabilistically
vary
flux
rate
for
each
application
based
on
variability
in
field
flux
measurements
(
e.
g.,
application
method
or
temperature)
or
model
generated
flux.
Please
comment
on
this
potential
modification.
(
C)
How
appropriate
is
it
to
use
a
flux/
emission
factor
from
a
single
monitoring
study
(
or
small
number
of
studies)
and
apply
it
to
different
situations
such
as
for
the
same
crop
in
a
different
region
of
the
country?
(
D)
Please
comment
on
SOFEA's
capability
to
adequately
consider
multiple,
linked
application
events
on
an
airshed
basis
as
well
as
single
source
scenarios.
(
E)
Does
SOFEA
appropriately
address
situations
where
data
are
missing?
°
10:
30
AM
BREAK
°
10:
45
AM
Panel
Discussion
(
continued)

Question
4:
The
integration
of
meteorological
data
into
ISCST3
is
one
of
the
key
components
that
separates
the
SOFEA
methodology
from
that
being
employed
by
the
Agency
in
its
current
assessment.
This
information,
coupled
with
GIS
(
Geographical
Information
Systems)
data
such
as
the
amount
of
ag­
capable
land
cover,
elevation,
and
population
densities
are
optional
inputs
for
SOFEA.
(
A)
Can
the
panel
comment
on
the
value
of
adding
this
information
for
conducting
spatially
realistic
simulations?
(
B)
There
are
several
potential
sources
of
meteorological
and
GIS
data
(
e.
g.,
National
Weather
Service
and
California
Irrigation
Management
Information
System
or
CIMIS).
Please
comment
on
the
methods
used
to
select
these
data
including
locations
for
meteorological
stations.
(
C)
What
criteria
should
be
used
to
identify
airsheds
for
analysis
and
how
should
data
be
selected
to
address
each
airshed?
Please
comment
on
the
manner
in
which
these
data
are
processed.
(
D)
Data
quality
and
uncertainty
associated
with
these
data
vary
with
the
source.
Does
the
panel
agree
with
the
approaches
used
to
characterize
these
factors?
(
E)
Anemometer
sampling
height
has
been
identified
as
a
concern
by
the
Agency
in
preparation
for
this
meeting.
What
are
the
potential
impacts
of
using
data
collected
with
different
anemometer
heights
in
an
analysis
of
this
nature?
(
F)
Does
SOFEA
treat
meteorological
stability
class
inputs
appropriately?
(
G)
Does
SOFEA
appropriately
calculate
bounding
air
concentration
estimates?

°
12:
00
AM
LUNCH
°
1:
00
PM
Panel
Discussion
Question
5:
The
Agency
model,
ISCST3
is
critical
component
of
the
SOFEA
approach.
This
model
has
been
peer
reviewed
and
is
commonly
used
for
regulatory
purposes
by
the
Agency.
SOFEA
also
uses
other
Agency
systems
such
as
PCRAMMET
and
PRZM3
as
well
as
the
USDA
model
CHAIN­
2D.
(
A)
Please
recommend
any
parameters
that
should
be
altered
to
optimize
the
manner
that
they
are
used
in
SOFEA.
(
B)
ISCST3,
as
integrated
into
SOFEA,
was
run
in
regulatory
mode
which
includes
the
use
of
the
"
calms"
processing
routine.
Does
the
panel
concur
with
this
approach?
If
not,
please
suggest
a
suitable
alternative.

Critical
Element
3:
Results
Question
6:
Soil
fumigants
can
be
used
in
different
regions
of
the
country
under
different
conditions
and
they
can
be
applied
with
a
variety
of
equipment.
(
A)
Please
comment
on
to
what
extent
the
methodologies
in
SOFEA
can
be
applied
generically
in
order
to
assess
a
wide
variety
of
fumigant
uses?
What
considerations
with
regard
to
data
needs
and
model
inputs
should
be
considered
for
such
an
effort?

°
2:
30
PM
BREAK
°
2:
45
PM
Panel
Discussion
(
continued)

Question
7:
(
A)
Please
comment
on
whether
SOFEA
adequately
identifies
and
quantifies
airborne
concentrations
of
soil
fumigants
that
have
migrated
from
treated
fields
to
sensitive
receptors.
(
B)
The
Agency
is
particularly
concerned
about
air
concentrations
in
the
upper
ends
of
the
distribution.
Are
these
results
presented
in
a
clear
and
concise
manner
that
would
allow
for
appropriate
characterization
of
exposures
that
could
occur
at
such
levels?
(
C)
Please
comment
on
SOFEA's
approach
for
calculating
and
presenting
probability
distributions
of
moving
average
concentrations
for
differing
durations
of
exposure.
(
D)
Please
comment
on
the
types
of
monitoring
data
that
would
be
required
to
define
the
accuracy
of
simulations
made
with
SOFEA
for
differing
durations
of
exposure.

Question
8:
(
A)
What
types
of
sensitivity/
uncertainty
analyses
of
SOFEA
are
recommended
by
the
panel
to
be
the
most
useful
in
making
scientifically
sound,
regulatory
decisions?
(
B)
What
should
be
routinely
reported
as
part
of
a
SOFEA
assessment
with
respect
to
inputs
and
outputs?
Are
there
certain
tables
and
graphs
that
should
be
reported?
(
C)
Does
the
panel
recommend
any
further
steps
to
evaluate
SOFEA
and
if
so,
what?
(
D)
SOFEA
uses
a
Monte
Carlo
based
approach
based
on
varied
random
number
streams
for
each
simulation.
Can
the
panel
comment
on
the
appropriate
statistical
techniques
that
should
be
used
to
define
differences
between
outputs
for
different
scenarios?

°
4:
30
PM
ADJOURNMENT
Please
be
advised
that
agenda
times
are
approximate.
For
further
information,
please
contact
the
Designated
Federal
Official
for
the
meeting,
Joseph
E.
Bailey,
via
telephone:
(
202)
564­
8450;
fax
(
202)
564­
8382;
or
email:
bailey.
joseph@
epa.
gov
