UNITED
STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WASHINGTON,
D.
C.
20460
OFFICE
OF
PREVENTION,
PESTICIDES
AND
TOXIC
SUBSTANCES
May
12,
2006
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
Aldicarb.
List
A
Reregistration
Case
No.
0140/
Chemical
ID
No.
098301.
Revised
Anticipated
Residues
and
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
for
the
HED
Human
Health
Risk
Assessment.
DP
Barcode
No.
D328808.

FROM:
Felecia
Fort,
Chemist
Reregistration
Branch
1
Health
Effects
Division
(
7509C)

THROUGH:
Sheila
Piper,
Chemist
Sherrie
Kinard,
Chemist
Dietary
Exposure
Science
Advisory
Council
(
DESAC)

and
Whang
Phang,
Ph.
D.,
Branch
Senior
Scientist
Reregistration
Branch
1
Health
Effects
Division
(
7509C)

TO:
Sherrie
Kinard,
Chemical
Review
Manager
Special
Review
and
Reregistration
Division
(
7508W)

Background/
Action
Requested
A
dietary
assessment
was
completed
for
aldicarb
on
June
20,
2005
(
F.
Fort,
D299873).
The
assessment
has
been
revised
to
incorporate
comments
submitted
by
the
registrant,
Bayer
CropSciences
during
the
Phase
1
"
Error
Correction"
comment
period.
A
detailed
description
of
these
comments
can
be
found
in
the
memorandum,
"
Aldicarb.
List
A
Reregistration
Case
No.
0140/
Chemical
ID
No.
098301.
HED's
Response
to
Bayer
CropScience
"
Error
Only"
Comments
DP
Barcode
No.
D320377."

In
order
to
complete
the
Agency's
human
health
risk
assessment
for
aldicarb,
HED
has
been
requested
to
prepare
refined
(
Tier
3/
4)
dietary
exposure
and
risk
analyses
which
incorporate
both
existing
uses
as
well
as
proposed
label
amendments
for
potatoes
and
citrus,
and
a
proposed
import
tolerance
for
aldicarb
residues
in
bananas.
Page
2
of
203
Anticipated
residues
incorporate
available
field
trial
residue
data,
pesticide
monitoring
data
from
both
the
United
States
Department
of
Agriculture
(
USDA)
and
the
Food
and
Drug
Administration
(
FDA),
and
market
basket
survey
data
submitted
by
the
registrant
and
the
Carbamate
Task
Force
(
CTF).
In
addition,
estimates
of
percent
crop
treated
(%
CT)
generated
by
EPA's
Biologic
and
Economic
Analysis
Division
(
BEAD)
are
used
to
refine
the
assessment.
Finally,
results
of
processing
and
cooking
studies
submitted
in
support
of
registration
and
reregistration
are
incorporated.

Risk
estimates
were
generated
for
acute
(
single­
day)
dietary
exposures
using
the
most
recent
version
of
the
Dietary
Exposure
Evaluation
Model
(
DEEM­
FCID
 
,
Version
2.03)
and
toxicological
doses
and
endpoints
selected
by
HED
for
aldicarb
risk
assessments.
Results
based
on
the
rat
red
blood
cell
cholinesterase
depression
endpoint
(
RBC
ChEI)
reflect
standard
Agency
policy
for
defining
hazard
inputs
for
risk
assessment
purposes.
Results
based
on
rat
brain
ChEI
and
human
RBC
ChEI
endpoints
are
provided
for
characterization
purposes.

Executive
Summary
The
aldicarb
acute
dietary
exposure
assessments
were
highly
refined
(
i.
e.,
Tier
3/
4),
incorporating
monitoring
data
from
the
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
(
PDP,
potatoes)
and
the
Carbamate
Task
Force
Market
Basket
Survey
(
oranges).
These
two
data
sets
were
used
to
assess
exposure
from
all
potato
and
sweet
potato
food
forms,
as
well
as
all
citrus
commodities
(
orange,
grapefruit,
lemon
and
lime).
For
all
other
commodities,
field
trial
data
were
used
in
the
assessment,
but
residues
were
either
very
low
or
nondetectable
(
soybeans,
cottonseed,
peanuts,
dry
beans
and
coffee).
Sugarbeet
and
sugarcane
were
excluded
from
the
assessments,
since
aldicarb
residues
would
not
be
expected
in
the
processed
commodities
as
consumed;
the
existing
tolerance
for
sorghum
was
used
in
the
assessment,
but
did
not
contribute
to
estimated
dietary
exposure
due
to
the
low
%
CT,
the
low
tolerance,
and
the
low
consumption.

Percent
crop
treated
information
was
incorporated
for
both
fresh
and
processed
potatoes,
oranges
and
grapefruit,
and
for
all
other
commodities.
In
addition,
extensive
processing/
cooking
data,
generally
indicating
reduction
of
residues
through
boiling
and
juicing,
were
incorporated
into
the
assessment.

This
memorandum
describes
the
endpoints
and
doses
for
acute
dietary
exposure
and
risk
assessment;
consumption
and
residue
data
used,
including
use
information
and
processing
factors;
and
the
detailed
residue
inputs
and
DEEM
 
outputs.
The
general
approach
to
calculation
of
anticipated
residues
(
ARs)
and
the
process
for
incorporating
the
aldicarb
residue
and
monitoring
data
into
the
acute
dietary
exposure
analysis
was
discussed
by
HED's
Chemistry
Science
Advisory
Council
(
ChemSAC)
on
5/
9/
01;
the
dietary
exposure
assessments
were
also
subject
to
peer
review
in
HED's
Dietary
Exposure
Science
Advisory
Council
(
DE
SAC).

Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Acute
dietary
exposure
assessments
were
conducted
for
the
general
US
population
and
population
subgroups
including
all
infants
(<
1
year
old),
children
1­
2,
children
3­
5,
children
6­
12,
youth
13­
19,
adults
20­
49,
females
13­
49,
and
adults
50+
years
old.
The
analysis
which
included
existing
aldicarb
registrations
indicates
estimated
acute
dietary
exposure
Page
3
of
203
and
risk
exceed
HED's
level
of
concern
[
i.
e.,
>
100
%
of
the
acute
population
adjusted
dose
(
aPAD)]
for
the
general
US
population
and
relevant
population
subgroups
at
the
99.9th
%
ile
of
exposure
(
Table
1).
Estimated
acute
dietary
exposure
and
risk
exceed
HED's
level
of
concern
[
i.
e.,
>
100
%
aPAD]
for
children
1­
2
years
and
children
3­
5
years
old.
The
estimated
dietary
exposure
and
risk
for
these
two
population
subgroups
at
the
99.9th
percentile
exposure
using
the
rat
RBC
ChEI
endpoint
was
0.000797
mg/
kg/
day,
or
159%
aPAD
and
0.000643
mg/
kg/
day
or
129%
aPAD,
respectively.
For
the
general
US
population,
estimated
dietary
exposure
was
0.000358
mg/
kg/
day,
or
72%
aPAD.
Estimated
exposure
and
risk
were
below
HED's
level
of
concern
(
i.
e.,
<
100
%
aPAD)
at
the
99.8th
percentile
for
both
children
1­
2
years
old
and
children
3­
5
years
old.
If
the
PAD
is
based
on
the
rat
brain
ChEI
or
human
RBC
ChEI
endpoint,
risks
estimates
are
above
HED's
level
of
concern
for
children
1­
2
years
old
(
106%
(
brain)
and
122%
(
human),
respectively).

Because
estimated
dietary
exposure
was
above
HED's
level
of
concern,
an
analysis
was
conducted
to
determine
the
foods
or
food
forms
which
contribute
the
most
to
the
exposure
estimates.
For
all
population
subgroups,
residues
in
potatoes
were
the
most
significant
source
of
dietary
exposure.
For
all
infants,
residues
in
sweet
potato
were
also
significant
contributors.

Sensitivity
analyses
were
conducted
to
determine
if
assumptions
for
nondetectable
residues
overestimated
exposures.
These
analyses
consisted
of
(
1)
assuming
aldicarb
per
se
residues
were
0
ppm;
and
(
2)
assuming
nondetect
residues
in
citrus
monitoring
samples
were
true
zeroes.
The
assumption
of
zero
residues
for
aldicarb
per
se
had
a
greater
impact
on
the
estimated
exposure
than
the
assumption
of
zero
residue
values
for
citrus
nondetects.
However,
the
sensitivity
analyses
did
not
significantly
reduce
the
estimated
exposure
and
risk
for
any
of
the
population
subgroups.
These
analyses
indicate
that
actual
detected
residues
from
monitoring
data
were
the
source
of
the
exposure
and
risk,
and
not
assumed
residues
for
nondetects
(
Table
10b).
For
the
general
US
population,
assuming
aldicarb
residues
of
0
ppm
and
zero
residues
for
nondetects
in
citrus,
the
estimated
exposure
was
reduced
to
70
%
of
the
aPAD;
for
children
1­
2
years
old,
the
estimated
exposure
was
reduced
to
154
%
of
the
aPAD.

Since
residues
in
citrus
and
potatoes
were
identified
as
significant
contributors
to
estimated
dietary
exposure,
analyses
were
conducted
in
which
citrus
and
potato
commodities
were
separately
omitted
from
the
exposure
assessment
(
Table
10b).
When
citrus
commodities
were
excluded,
estimated
exposure
for
children
1­
2
years
old
was
reduced
from
159%
to
151%
of
the
aPAD;
exposures
for
infants
<
1
year
old
from
123%
to119
%
of
the
aPAD,
while
exposures
for
the
general
US
population
and
all
other
population
subgroups
ranged
from
54­
90%
of
the
aPAD.
When
potato
commodities
were
excluded,
the
highest
estimated
exposure
was
for
children
1­
2,
at
0.000199
mg/
kg/
day,
or
40%
of
the
aPAD;
estimated
exposures
for
all
other
population
subgroups
ranged
from
5
to
32%
of
the
aPAD,
all
based
on
rat
RBC
ChEI.
Detailed
results
are
shown
in
Table
10b.

Proposed
amended
label
requests
would
allow
the
establishment
of
a
citrus
crop
group
tolerance;
a
shorter
pre­
harvest
interval
(
PHI,
from
150
to
120
days)
on
potatoes
grown
in
the
Pacific
Northwest;
use
on
potatoes
in
six
Midwestern
states;
and
an
import
tolerance
for
residues
in
bananas.
Acute
dietary
exposure
analyses
were
conducted
to
determine
the
potential
increased
incremental
exposure
associated
with
each
of
these
proposed
registration
actions,
even
though
exposures
estimated
for
the
existing
uses
already
exceed
HED's
level
of
concern.
These
additional
assessments
indicate
there
would
be
little
or
no
increased
dietary
exposure
and
risk
associated
with
the
establishment
of
a
citrus
Page
4
of
203
crop
group
tolerance
or
a
proposed
import
tolerance
in
bananas.
However,
increased
dietary
exposure
would
be
incurred
if
the
two
label
amendments
for
potatoes
were
approved.
Inclusion
of
both
potato
label
amendments
resulted
in
an
estimated
risk
of
216%
of
the
aPAD
for
children
1­
2
years
old.
Based
on
individual
assessments
for
the
two
label
amendments,
the
proposed
shorter
PHI
results
in
a
greater
incremental
increase
in
the
estimated
exposure
than
the
use
on
potatoes
in
six
additional
Midwestern
states.
Exposure
estimates
for
the
proposed
registration
actions
are
shown
in
detail
in
Table
11.

These
above
results
are
based
on
the
rat
RBC
ChEI
toxicological
endpoint.
The
comparative
risk
estimates
based
on
rat
brain
ChEI
and
human
RBC
ChEI
are
shown
in
the
summary
tables.

Chronic
Dietary
Exposure
A
chronic
assessment
was
not
conducted
because
the
toxicity
database
for
aldicarb
indicates
that
the
magnitude
of
ChEI
does
not
increase
with
continued
exposure,
due
to
the
reversibility
of
ChEI
(
generally
within
8
to
24
hours).
The
longer­
term
exposures
could
be
considered
as
a
series
of
acute
exposures.

Drinking
Water
Acute
dietary
exposure
and
risk
from
food
alone
was
above
HED's
level
of
concern
(
i.
e.,
>
100
%
aPAD),
so
a
drinking
water
only
assessment
was
conducted.
If
all
of
the
allowable
exposure
occurred
through
drinking
water,
HED
would
not
have
concerns
for
acute
exposure
to
aldicarb
residues
in
surface
water.
Acute
water
exposure
and
risk
estimates
for
infants,
the
most
highly
exposed
population
subgroup,
range
from
1%
aPAD
[
potato]
to
15%
aPAD
[
cotton]
at
the
95th
%
ile
of
exposure.
Acute
water
exposure
and
risk
estimates
for
the
general
US
population
and
all
other
population
subgroups
ranged
from
<
1%
aPAD
to
5%
aPAD
(
see
Table
14).

Seven
regional
ground
water
monitoring
residue
levels
were
used
to
derive
an
acute
dietary
exposure
estimate
for
water
alone
(
the
eighth
region
had
a
residue
value
of
0
ppb,
and
was
excluded
from
the
aggregate
assessment).
The
data
indicate
that
acute
exposure
from
ground
water
sources
of
drinking
water
is
also
of
concern,
with
acute
aggregate
risks
ranging
from
20%
aPAD
to
945%
aPAD
(
see
Table
15).

Drinking
water
exposure
and
risk
estimates
calculated
based
on
ground
water
monitoring
overestimate
risks
for
all
but
those
who
obtain
their
drinking
water
from
wells
in
vulnerable
aldicarb
use
areas.
However,
since
acute
food
only
exposures
exceed
the
aPAD,
HED
is
concerned
about
any
additional
exposure
(
to
all
subpopulations)
through
drinking
water,
regardless
of
the
source.
Page
5
of
203
Table
1.
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
and
Risk
(
99.9th
%
ile)
 
Existing
Registrations
Population
Exposure
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Rat
(
RBC
ChEI)
%
PAD
Rat
(
Brain
ChEI)
%
PAD
Human
(
RBC
ChEI)
%
PAD
U.
S.
Pop
0.000358
72
48
55
All
Infants
0.000463
93
62
71
Children
1­
2
years
0.000797
159
106
123
Children
3­
5
years
0.000643
129
86
99
Children
6­
12
years
0.000457
91
61
70
Youth
13­
19
0.000312
62
42
48
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000298
60
40
46
Adults
50+
0.000320
64
43
49
Females13­
49
0.000282
56
38
43
Population
Adjusted
Dose
(
PAD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg/
day
Rat
(
RBC
CheI)
0.00075
mg/
kg/
day
Rat
(
Brain
CheI)
0.00065
mg/
kg/
day
Human
(
RBC
CheI)

Table
1b.
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
and
Risk
(
99.9th
%
ile)
 
(
Aldicarb
=
0;
citrus
nondetects
=
0)

Population
Exposure
(
mg/
kg/
day)
Rat
(
RBC
ChEI)
%
PAD
Rat
(
Brain
ChEI)
%
PAD
Human
(
RBC
ChEI)
%
PAD
U.
S.
Pop
0.000349
70
46
54
All
Infants
0.000443
89
59
68
Children
1­
2
years
0.000773
154
103
119
Children
3­
5
years
0.000623
125
83
96
Children
6­
12
years
0.000443
89
59
68
Youth
13­
19
0.000304
61
41
46
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000290
58
39
45
Adults
50+
0.000314
63
42
48
Females13­
49
0.000274
55
37
42
Population
Adjusted
Dose
(
PAD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg/
day
Rat
(
RBC
CheI)
0.00075
mg/
kg/
day
Rat
(
Brain
CheI)
0.00065
mg/
kg/
day
Human
(
RBC
CheI)
Page
6
of
203
Uncertainties
in
the
Aldicarb
Dietary
Exposure
Assessments
Estimated
dietary
exposure
in
these
preliminary
assessments
is
almost
entirely
due
to
potatoes
and
citrus.
Potato
exposure
estimates
are
based
on
potato
monitoring
data
generated
by
the
USDA
PDP
in
a
1997
special
survey,
and
citrus
exposure
is
based
on
orange
monitoring
data
submitted
by
the
Carbamate
Task
Force.
The
potato
and
orange
monitoring
studies
were
used
both
directly
for
these
commodities,
as
well
as
by
translation
to
sweet
potatoes
and
other
citrus,
such
as
lemon,
lime,
etc.
These
monitoring
data
were
considered
most
appropriate
for
aldicarb
acute
dietary
exposure
analyses
since
residues
were
measured
in
individual
potato
tubers
and
oranges,
thereby
eliminating
the
need
for
mathematical
"
decomposition"
of
composite
monitoring
sample
residues.
In
addition,
the
PDP
and
CTF
data
sets
were
largely
relied
upon
because
residues
were
determined
closest
to
the
point
of
consumption
(
i.
e.,
"
dinner
plate"
residues),
and
because
the
limits
of
detection
(
LODs)
in
these
two
data
sets
were
lower
than
those
achieved
in
any
other
studies.

In
the
1997
PDP
special
survey,
aldicarb
and
its
metabolites
were
analyzed
in
342
composite
potato
samples
collected
from
states
where
aldicarb
can
be
applied
(
FL,
ID,
OR
and
WA).
Residues
were
detected
in
20
composite
samples,
and
individual
potato
tubers
(
10
per
composite)
from
16
of
the
composites
with
detects
were
analyzed.
The
highest
combined
residue
in
a
composite
sample
was
0.17
ppm,
which
is
below
the
reassessed
tolerance
of
0.2
ppm.
The
highest
residue
in
an
individual
tuber
was
approximately
0.4
ppm,
or
twice
the
tolerance.
In
the
CTF
market
basket
survey,
aldicarb
and
metabolite
residues
were
measured
in
399
oranges
collected
from
grocery
stores;
residues
were
detected
in
16
of
the
oranges
sampled.
The
maximum
orange
residue
of
0.03
ppm
is
10
times
lower
than
the
reassessed
tolerance
of
0.3
ppm.
In
both
the
PDP
and
CTF
studies,
detected
residues
were
the
sulfone
and
sulfoxide
metabolites,
but
aldicarb
per
se
was
not
detected.

There
are
some
uncertainties
associated
with
the
potato
and
orange
monitoring
data:

 
For
both
potatoes
and
citrus,
only
the
fresh
market
commodity
was
analyzed
for
aldicarb
residues,
but
the
data
were
used
to
assess
exposure
from
processed
commodities.
The
%
CT
is
clearly
greater
for
both
processed
potatoes
and
oranges
than
for
fresh
potatoes
and
oranges.
The
underlying
assumption
is
that
the
typical
application
rates
for
fresh
and
processed
commodities
are
similar.

 
The
potato
monitoring
data
from
PDP
were
part
of
a
special
survey,
and
were
not
specifically
generated
for
risk
assessment
purposes.
Of
the
342
composite
samples
analyzed,
there
were
detectable
residues
in
20
samples,
and
individual
potato
tuber
residues
were
determined
in
16
of
the
20
composites.
Since
individual
tuber
residues
were
determined
in
only
the
composites
with
detectable
residues,
and
not
in
the
322
composites
with
residues
of
less
than
or
equal
to
the
LOD,
the
individual
tuber
residue
data
may
be
skewed.
There
was
no
attempt
to
compensate
for
this
artifact
of
study
design
in
the
current
dietary
exposure
assessment;
for
example,
no
assumptions
were
made
regarding
the
distribution
of
individual
tuber
residues
in
the
four
composite
samples
with
detectable
residues
that
were
not
further
analyzed.
In
addition,
there
was
no
assumption
regarding
the
potential
distribution
of
residues
in
the
remaining
322
composite
samples
that
had
no
detectable
residues.

 
The
highest
residue
found
in
individual
potato
tubers
from
the
PDP
special
survey
was
approximately
0.4
ppm,
yet
one
FDA
monitoring
sample
from
1997
indicated
residues
in
potatoes
were
as
high
as
1.4
ppm.
In
addition,
previously
submitted
6(
a)
2
data
have
shown
that
aldicarb
residues
as
high
as
1.2
ppm
have
been
found
in
canned
potatoes.
Although
the
FDA
and
6(
a)
2
data
were
not
used
quantitatively
in
the
acute
dietary
exposure
analysis,
they
raise
concerns
regarding
potential
exposures
much
higher
than
those
which
already
indicate
a
Page
7
of
203
risk
concern.
[
FDA
surveillance
monitoring
resulted
in
only
one
detect
of
aldicarb
residues
in
potatoes
in
1998,
and
none
in
1999].

 
Translation
of
potato
data
to
sweet
potatoes
may
not
be
appropriate,
since
aldicarb
use
areas
and
growing
regions
for
the
two
types
of
potatoes
are
not
the
same.
However,
use
rates
for
both
types
of
potatoes
are
similar,
and
therefore
translation
of
potato
monitoring
data
should
be
more
representative
of
likely
exposures
than
field
trial
data
for
sweet
potatoes.

 
Orange
monitoring
data
were
translated
to
all
other
citrus;
this
approach
is
considered
appropriate
since
the
use
pattern
is
the
same,
and
since
field
trial
data
support
the
establishment
of
a
citrus
crop
group
tolerance.
However,
residue
profiles
in
individual
citrus
fruits
may
differ.

 
HED
generally
assumes
that
nondetectable
residues
in
treated
samples
are
½
the
LOD.
However,
for
monitoring
data
in
which
aldicarb
and
metabolite
residues
were
determined
individually,
nondetect
residues
of
aldicarb
per
se
in
potatoes
and
oranges,
and
all
nondetect
residues
in
citrus
commodities,
were
assumed
to
be
0,
rather
than
½
LOD.
This
assumption
did
not
underestimate
exposure,
since
the
sensitivity
analyses
showed
that
exposure
and
risk
were
largely
due
to
detected
residues
in
potato
and
citrus
monitoring
samples.

 
Aldicarb
residues
were
detected
by
PDP
in
one
sample
each
of
green
beans
(
1994)
and
cantaloupe
(
1998),
commodities
for
which
there
is
no
registered
use;
there
have
been
documented
poisoning
incidents
associated
with
purported
misuse
on
watermelons
(
1978,
1985
and
1987)
and
cucumbers
(
1988),
but
these
PDP
monitoring
detections
are
not
considered
to
indicate
a
consistent
pattern
of
violative
residues,
and
have
not
been
included
in
the
aldicarb
dietary
exposure
analyses.

Toxicological
Information
The
HED
determined
that
the
rat
subchronic
neurotoxicity
study
[
MRID
43829602]
and
the
rat
acute
neurotoxicity
study
(
MRID
45068601;
Moser)
be
used
as
co­
critical
studies
for
endpoint
selection.
Aldicarb­
induced
inhibition
of
ChE
activity
is
rapidly
reversible
(
less
than
24
hours).
Therefore,
chronic
exposure
to
aldicarb
is
considered
to
be
a
series
of
acute
exposures,
and
a
separate
chronic
assessment
is
not
necessary.
A
summary
of
the
doses
and
endpoints
relevant
to
dietary
exposure
assessment
are
shown
below.

Aldicarb
is
classified
as
not
likely
to
be
carcinogenic
to
humans,
based
on
the
lack
of
evidence
of
carcinogenicity
in
studies
in
rats
and
mice
and
the
absence
of
a
mutagenicity
concern.
Therefore,
a
dietary
exposure
assessment
for
cancer
risk
assessment
is
not
required.
Page
8
of
203
Table
2.
Aldicarb
Toxicology
Endpoint
Selection.

Exposure
Scenario
Dose
Used
in
Risk
Assessment,
UF1
Hazard­
Based
FQPA
SF
and
Endpoint
for
Risk
Assessment
Study
and
Toxicological
Effects
DIETARY
EXPOSURES
Acute
Dietary:
General
US
Population
[
MRID
Nos.
43829602,
45068601,
43442302,
43442305,
&
42373001]
BMDL10
=
0.02
mg/
kg
UF
=
20
Acute
RfD
=
0.001
mg/
kg/
day
FQPA
SF
=
2X
aPAD=
acute
RfD
FQPA
SF
=
0.0005
mg/
kg/
day
Rat
acute/
subchronic
neurotoxicity
(
adult)
RBC
ChEI
human
study
[
reduction
of
interspecies
factor
to
2X]

Chronic
Dietary:
General
US
Population
[
MRID
No.
43829602,
45068601,
43442302,
43442305,
&
42373001]
BMDL10
=
0.02
mg/
kg
UF
=
20
Chronic
RfD
=
0.001
mg/
kg/
day
FQPA
SF
=
2X
cPAD
=
chronic
RfD
FQPA
SF
=
0.0005
mg/
kg/
day
Rat
acute/
subchronic
neurotoxicity
(
adult)
RBC
ChEI
human
study
[
reduction
of
interspecies
factor
to
2X]

Cancer
Aldicarb
is
classified
as
not
likely
to
be
carcinogenic
to
humans,
based
on
the
lack
of
evidence
of
carcinogenicity
in
studies
in
rats
and
mice
and
the
absence
of
a
mutagenicity
concern.
Therefore,
a
dietary
exposure
assessment
for
cancer
risk
assessment
is
not
required.

Use
Information
A
Quantitative
Usage
Analysis
(
QUA)
was
completed
by
BEAD/
OPP
(
Attachment
1,
J.
Faulkner,
12/
23/
99).
Subsequently,
HED
requested
additional
information
related
to
use
on
both
fresh
and
processed
citrus
and
potatoes,
and
a
revised
QUA
was
generated
for
these
commodities
(
Attachment
2,
J.
Faulkner,
5/
12/
00).

In
terms
of
pounds
of
active
ingredient
(
ai)
applied,
the
most
significant
use
site
for
aldicarb
is
cotton,
with
2
to
3
million
lbs
ai
applied
on
an
annual
basis.
Other
significant
use
sites
(
in
decreasing
amounts
of
ai
applied)
are
peanuts,
potatoes,
sugar
beets
and
oranges.

For
all
crops
having
registered
uses,
both
a
weighted
average
and
estimated
maximum
%
CT
were
generated.
In
acute
analyses
the
adjustment
for
estimated
maximum
%
CT
is
incorporated
in
the
residue
distribution
files
(
RDFs)
by
adding
zero
residue
values
corresponding
to
the
percent
of
the
crop
not
treated.
For
commodities
considered
to
be
blended
(
e.
g.,
sugars
and
oil),
the
adjustment
for
%
CT
is
incorporated
into
the
acute
AR
(
point
estimate).

Usage
estimates
for
potatoes
were
based
on
data
from
1996
through
1998,
since
the
use
on
potatoes
was
reinstated
in
9/
95
(
refer
to
the
Residue
Data
section
of
this
document
for
additional
information).
In
conjunction
with
the
proposed
use
on
bananas,
the
registrant
provided
estimates
of
additional
%
CT
on
both
fresh
and
processed
potatoes
that
would
likely
result
from
two
proposed
label
amendments
to
i)
shorten
the
PHI
to
120
days
in
the
Pacific
Northwest
(
PNW);
and
ii)
allow
use
on
Page
9
of
203
potatoes
grown
in
six
Midwestern
states
(
MI,
MN,
ND,
SD,
WY
and
CO).
The
registrant's
estimated
proportional
changes
[
found
in
MRID
No.
44847405]
in
use
on
fresh
and
processed
potatoes
were
applied
to
the
BEAD
estimates
of
%
CT
for
potatoes.
In
addition,
BEAD
generated
fresh
and
processed
%
CT
estimates
for
orange
and
grapefruit.
The
%
CT
estimates
for
both
fresh
and
processed
potatoes
and
citrus
are
shown
in
Table
3.
These
estimates
have
been
used
to
construct
residue
distributions
for
use
in
the
acute
analysis.

Table
3.
Aldicarb
Usage
Estimates
for
Fresh/
Processed
Potatoes
and
Citrus.

Fresh
Commodity
Usage
Estimate
(%
CT)
Processed
Commodity
Usage
Estimate
(%
CT)
Commodity
Weighted
Average
Estimated
Maximum
Weighted
Average
Estimated
Maximum
Potato,
1
Current
4
5
17
24
Current+
PHI
7
9
26
36
Current+
MW
6
7
21
28
Current+
PHI+
MW
8
10
29
40
Orange
7
13
11
23
Grapefruit
16
25
17
33
1
Current
=
existing
use
areas,
FL
and
the
Pacific
NW;
PHI
=
including
a
proposed
label
amendment
allowing
a
shorter
PHI
in
the
Pacific
NW;
MW
=
including
the
proposed
use
on
potatoes
in
six
Midwestern
states.

Insufficient
information
is
available
to
determine
reliable
%
CT
estimates
for
coffee;
although
aldicarb
is
registered
for
use
on
coffee
in
Puerto
Rico,
the
BEAD
QUA
indicates
94%
of
aldicarb
usage
on
coffee
occurs
in
Brazil.
An
upper
bound
assessment
for
coffee
%
CT
was
calculated
by
HED,
assuming
that
100%
of
Brazilian
coffee
is
treated
with
aldicarb,
and
based
on
an
average
of
20%
of
US
coffee
imports
originating
in
Brazil
[
Agricultural
Statistics
1997,
(
1993­
1995
import
statistics)].
There
are
no
%
CT
data
for
the
proposed
use
on
bananas,
but
the
registrant
estimates
(
at
most)
a
45%
market
share,
which
has
been
used
in
the
dietary
exposure
estimates.

For
crops
where
no
usage
is
reported
(
e.
g.,
grain
sorghum
or
soybean),
or
for
which
<
1
%
CT
is
estimated,
HED
typically
defaults
to
1
%
CT
in
dietary
exposure
analyses.
Commodities
from
these
crops
may
be
excluded
from
analyses
conducted
to
identify
significant
contributors
to
dietary
exposure.

Consumption
Data
DEEM­
FCID
 
Program
and
Consumption
Information
Acute
dietary
exposure
assessments
were
conducted
for
aldicarb
using
DEEM­
FCID
 
,
Version
2.03
which
incorporates
consumption
data
from
USDA's
Continuing
Surveys
of
Food
Intakes
by
Individuals
(
CSFII),
1994­
1996
and
1998.
The
1994­
96,
98
data
are
based
on
the
reported
consumption
of
more
than
20,000
individuals
over
two
non­
consecutive
survey
days.
Foods
"
as
consumed"
(
e.
g.,
apple
pie)
are
linked
to
EPA­
defined
food
commodities
(
e.
g.
apples,
peeled
fruit
­
cooked;
fresh
or
N/
S;
baked;
or
wheat
flour
­
cooked;
fresh
or
N/
S,
baked)
using
publicly
available
recipe
translation
files
developed
jointly
by
USDA/
ARS
and
EPA.
For
acute
exposure
assessment,
consumption
data
are
are
retained
as
individual
consumption
events.
Based
on
analysis
of
the
1994­
96,
98
CSFII
consumption
data,
which
took
into
account
dietary
patterns
and
survey
respondents,
HED
concluded
that
it
is
most
appropriate
to
report
risk
for
the
following
population
subgroups:
the
Page
10
of
203
general
U.
S.
population,
all
infants
(<
1
year
old),
children
1­
2,
children
3­
5,
children
6­
12,
youth
13­
19,
adults
20­
49,
females
13­
49,
and
adults
50+
years
old.

For
acute
exposure
assessments,
individual
one­
day
food
consumption
data
are
used
on
an
individualby
individual
basis.
The
reported
consumption
amounts
of
each
food
item
can
be
multiplied
by
a
residue
point
estimate
and
summed
to
obtain
a
total
daily
pesticide
exposure
for
a
deterministic
exposure
assessment,
or
"
matched"
in
multiple
random
pairings
with
residue
values
and
then
summed
in
a
probabilistic
assessment.
The
resulting
distribution
of
exposures
is
expressed
as
a
percentage
of
the
aPAD
on
both
a
user
(
i.
e.,
those
who
reported
eating
relevant
commodities/
food
forms)
and
a
per­
capita
(
i.
e.,
those
who
reported
eating
the
relevant
commodities
as
well
as
those
who
did
not)
basis.
In
accordance
with
HED
policy,
per
capita
exposure
and
risk
are
reported
for
all
tiers
of
analysis.
However,
for
tiers
1
and
2,
significant
differences
in
user
vs.
per
capita
exposure
and
risk
are
identified
and
noted
in
the
risk
assessment.

Residue
Data
Existing
and
reassessed
tolerances
for
aldicarb
residues
in
raw
agricultural
commodities
(
RACs)
are
expressed
in
terms
of
the
combined
residues
of
aldicarb
and
its
cholinesterase­
inhibiting
metabolites
aldicarb
sulfoxide
[
2­
methyl­
2­(
methylsulfinyl)
propionaldehyde
O­(
methyl
carbamoyl)
oxime]
and
aldicarb
sulfone
[
2­
methyl­
2­(
methylsulfonyl)
propionaldehyde
O­(
methyl
carbamoyl)
oxime]
(
40
CFR
§
180.269,
§
185.150
(
a),
and
§
186.150).
Reassessed
plant
commodity
tolerances
range
from
0.02
ppm
(
sugarcane)
to
0.3
ppm
(
citrus).
In
conjunction
with
the
review
of
all
available
residue
chemistry
data,
HED
has
determined
that
tolerances
for
aldicarb
residues
in
poultry
and
livestock
commodities
are
not
needed;
therefore,
the
current
dietary
risk
estimates
exclude
existing
tolerances
for
residues
in
milk
and
the
meat,
meat
by­
products,
and
fat
of
cattle,
hogs,
horses,
goats
and
sheep.

The
residue
chemistry
database
for
aldicarb
is
largely
complete
(
C.
Swartz,
Residue
and
Product
Chemistry
Chapters
of
the
HED
RED;
DP
Barcode
D266396,
6/
2/
2000);
additional
studies
have
been
required
to
determine
appropriate
tolerances
for
residues
in
grain
sorghum
forage,
cottonseed
and
cotton
gin
by­
products
(
gin
trash).
Several
proposed
label
amendments
for
potatoes
and
a
petition
for
use
on
bananas
are
supported
by
adequate
residue
data.
In
addition,
the
registrant's
proposal
to
establish
a
citrus
crop
group
tolerance
is
supported
by
adequate
data.
Aldicarb
is
generally
applied
early
in
the
growing
season,
and
residues
tend
to
be
low
or
nondetectable
in
harvested
RACs,
with
the
exception
of
potatoes,
sweet
potatoes
and
citrus
commodities.
In
field
trials
for
these
commodities,
aldicarb
per
se
is
typically
at
or
just
above
the
LOD;
however,
residues
of
aldicarb
sulfoxide
and/
or
aldicarb
sulfone
are
detected
more
often
and
at
higher
levels
than
that
of
aldicarb.
Aldicarb
sulfoxide
residues
are
found
more
frequently
than
the
sulfone,
and
tend
to
be
higher
than
sulfone
residues
when
both
are
present.
In
monitoring
data,
aldicarb
per
se
is
rarely
detected.
Aldicarb
sulfoxide
is
considered
to
be
as
potent
as
the
parent
in
terms
of
toxicity,
while
the
sulfone
is
less
potent.

In
the
past,
monitoring
data
have
shown
that
individual
or
combined
aldicarb
residues
higher
than
the
tolerance
may
occur
in
single
potato
(
and
sweet
potato)
tubers.
Due
to
concerns
for
acute
dietary
risk
associated
with
these
higher
residues,
the
registrant
voluntarily
canceled
use
on
potatoes
in
1990,
and
subsequently
generated
extensive
field
trial
data,
including
both
composite
and
single
tuber
residue
measurements
for
aldicarb
and
its
metabolites
in
potatoes.
These
data
showed
that
residues
in
composite
samples
would
not
exceed
the
reassessed
tolerance
of
0.2
ppm
provided
positive
displacement
application
(
PDA)
equipment
is
used
during
application
of
the
pesticide.
In
addition,
Page
11
of
203
acute
dietary
exposure
associated
with
residues
in
individual
potatoes
was
considered
below
the
Agency's
level
of
concern.
The
use
on
potatoes
was
reinstated
in
9/
95,
and
all
current
labels
specify
use
of
PDA
equipment
for
treatment
of
potatoes,
citrus
and
sweet
potatoes.

In
general,
residue
data
submitted
in
support
of
registration
and
reregistration
were
generated
using
an
analytical
method,
similar
to
the
enforcement
method,
which
converts
all
residues
to
aldicarb
sulfone.
For
the
more
recent
field
trial
data
and
for
market
basket
and
single
tuber
analyses,
residue
values
for
aldicarb
per
se
and
each
of
its
metabolites
were
generated
individually;
the
total
residue
was
then
calculated
as
the
sulfone
using
the
following
formula,
which
accounts
for
the
difference
in
molecular
weights
of
the
parent
and
two
metabolites:

Total
residue
(
as
sulfone)
=
aldicarb
sulfone
+
(
aldicarb
x
1.17)
+
(
aldicarb
sulfoxide
x
1.08)

In
order
to
incorporate
nondetectable
residues
into
the
exposure
assessment,
HED
used
the
current
policy
[
refer
to
ChemSAC
memo
dated
5/
19/
98
and
HED
SOP
99.6]
of
assigning
residue
values
of
½
LOD
to
these
samples.
If
the
residues
were
determined
as
the
sulfone,
then
the
½
LOD
for
the
total
residue
determined
as
the
sulfone
was
used
in
the
analysis.
When
the
parent
and
metabolites
were
determined
individually,
using
a
½
LOD
of
0.005
for
aldicarb
and
each
of
its
metabolites,
for
example,
the
combined
½
LOD
is
as
follows:

Total
½
LOD
residue
(
ppm)
=
0.005
+
(
0.005
x
1.17)
+
(
0.005
x
1.08)
=
0.01625
ppm
As
noted
in
the
policy
document,
HED
typically
conducts
sensitivity
analyses
to
determine
if
the
exposure
estimate
is
due
in
large
part
to
the
assumption
of
½
LOD
values
for
nondetectable
residues.
These
sensitivity
analyses
generally
consist
of
first
evaluating
risk
assuming
½
LOD
for
nondetect
residues,
and
then
evaluating
risk
when
these
residues
are
assumed
to
be
true
zeroes.
In
citrus
commodities,
an
additional
type
of
sensitivity
analysis
assumed
true
zero
residues
for
aldicarb
per
se.
This
analysis
was
conducted
since
no
parent
residues
were
identified
in
an
acceptable
lemon
metabolism
study;
aldicarb
per
se
was
not
detected
in
any
fresh
market
monitoring
data
for
oranges,
although
there
was
one
detectable
residue
of
aldicarb
per
se
in
orange
juice
monitoring
data
(
see
below).
Sensitivity
analyses
conducted
for
the
aldicarb
dietary
exposure
analysis
are
described
in
more
detail
below
(
see
"
Description
of
Analyses
Performed").
Attachment
3
provides
a
detailed
discussion
of
use
patterns,
available
field
trial
and
monitoring
data,
and
use
of
the
data
to
calculate
anticipated
residues
and
generate
residue
distribution
files
for
the
acute
dietary
exposure
assessments.

Monitoring
Data
Extensive
monitoring
data
for
aldicarb
and
its
sulfoxide
and
sulfone
metabolites
have
been
generated
in
numerous
commodities
through
the
USDA
PDP
and
the
FDA
Surveillance
Monitoring
Program.
The
PDP
data
are
generally
preferred
over
FDA
data
for
use
in
dietary
exposure
and
risk
analyses.
The
USDA
PDP
was
specifically
designed
for
risk
assessment;
analysts
prepare
samples
in
a
manner
similar
to
typical
consumer
practices,
such
as
washing,
coring/
pitting,
and/
or
peeling.
The
PDP
samples
are
5
lb
composites
collected
at
large­
scale
distribution
centers,
just
prior
to
sale
in
grocery
stores,
and
are
more
likely
to
reflect
"
dinner
plate"
residues.
The
FDA
samples
are
generally
20
lb
composites
collected
for
tolerance
enforcement
purposes,
and
are
not
typically
washed
or
peeled
prior
to
analysis;
in
addition,
FDA
samples
are
collected
in
the
channels
of
commerce,
and
often
represent
"
farm
gate"
residues.

Overviews
of
the
PDP
(
1994­
1998)
and
FDA
data
(
1992­
1998)
for
aldicarb
are
shown
in
Tables
4
and
5,
respectively.
Specific
information
regarding
use
of
these
data
in
the
dietary
exposure
analyses,
including
generation
of
residue
distribution
files
(
acute
analysis),
is
provided
in
Attachment
3.
As
Page
12
of
203
noted
in
Table
4,
aldicarb
residues
were
detected
by
PDP
in
green
beans
and
cantaloupe
(
1
sample
each),
commodities
for
which
there
is
no
registered
use;
these
detections
are
not
considered
to
indicate
a
consistent
pattern
of
violative
residues,
and
have
not
been
included
in
aldicarb
dietary
exposure
analyses.
In
1997,
PDP
conducted
a
special
survey
for
aldicarb
in
potatoes,
in
order
to
provide
a
comparison
between
a
composite
residue
value
and
the
distribution
of
residues
within
that
sample
on
a
single­
serving
basis.
While
not
specifically
designed
for
risk
assessment
purposes,
the
special
survey
provided
the
best
data
for
evaluation
of
dietary
exposure
to
aldicarb
residues
in
potatoes.
The
results
of
the
study,
as
well
as
the
incorporation
of
the
residues
into
the
dietary
exposure
assessments,
are
discussed
in
detail
in
Attachment
3.
Page
13
of
203
Table
4.
Summary
of
USDA's
Pesticide
Data
Program
Monitoring
for
Aldicarb
and
Metabolites
(
Composite
Samples
Only)
1994­
1998.

Analytical
Limit
of
Detection
(
LOD)
Range
(
ppm)

Commodity1
Years
Monitored
#
Sampled2/

(#
Detects)
3
Aldicarb
Aldicarb
Sulfone
Aldicarb
Sulfoxide
Wtd.
Ave
½
LOD4
Apple
1994­
1996
1,476/
0
0.004­
0.04
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.036756
Apple
Juice
1996­
1998
1,249/
0
0.004­
0.021
0.007­
0.075
0.007­
0.076
0.030687
Banana
1994­
1995
1,012/
0
0.004­
0.04
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.034017
Broccoli
1994
567/
0
0.004­
0.04
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.037013
Celery
1994
119/
0
0.004­
0.032
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.036825
Carrot
1994­
1996
1,470/
0
0.004­
0.04
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.032301
Sweet
Corn
1994­
1996
1,198/
0
0.004­
0.032
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.029146
Green
Bean
1994­
1998
2,159/
1
0.004­
0.04
0.007­
0.075
0.007­
0.1
0.031477
Grape
1994­
1996
1,490/
0
0.004­
0.04
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.028654
Grape
Juice
1998
500/
0
0.004­
0.021
0.007­
0.075
0.007­
0.076
0.027591
Lettuce
1994
489/
0
0.004­
0.032
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.038489
Orange
1994­
1996
1,776/
4
0.004­
0.036
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.036451
Orange
Juice
1997­
1998
1,392/
1
0.008­
0.021
0.01­
0.041
0.01­
0.036
0.032106
Peach
1994­
1997
1,782/
0
0.004­
0.04
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.036491
Sweet
Pea
1994­
1996
1,173/
0
0.004­
0.036
0.007­
0.06
0.007­
0.1
0.035113
Potato
1994­
1995
1,124/
0
0.004­
0.032
0.008­
0.06
0.008­
0.1
0.027527
Potato
Special
Survey
1997
342/
20
(
6%)
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.007585
Spinach
1995­
1998
2491/
0
0.007­
0.04
0.009­
0.06
0.009­
0.1
0.034889
Sweet
Potato
1996­
1998
1,220/
6
0.004­
0.021
0.007­
0.075
0.007­
0.076
0.026279
Tomato
1996­
1998
1,613/
0
0.004­
0.021
0.007­
0.041
0.007­
0.036
0.028099
Pear
1997­
1998
1,150/
0
0.004­
0.021
0.007­
0.075
0.007­
0.076
0.033889
Cantaloupe
1998
310/
1
0.004­
0.021
0.007­
0.041
0.007­
0.036
0.026110
Strawberry
1998
657/
0
0.008­
0.02
0.01­
0.022
0.01­
0.027
0.027176
Squash
1997­
1998
1,061/
0
0.004­
0.021
0.007­
0.075
0.007­
0.076
0.030295
Milk
1996­
1998
1,392/
0
0.003­
0.005
0.004­
0.009
0.004­
0.012
0.009941
1.
The
commodities
monitored
were
fresh
with
the
following
exceptions:
Sweet
corn,
sweet
peas
and
green
beans
(
canned
and
frozen);
spinach
(
canned
and
fresh);
strawberries
and
winter
squash
(
fresh
and
frozen).

2
The
number
sampled
reported
herein
refers
to
the
number
of
samples
for
which
aldicarb
and
both
metabolites
were
measured.
There
were
samples
analyzed
in
the
TX
laboratory
that
only
included
measurements
for
the
sulfoxide,
and
these
were
excluded
from
the
#
sampled.

3
Green
Bean:
1
detect;
sulfone
=
0.013
ppm;
sulfoxide
=
0.076
ppm
(
total
residue
=
0.097420
ppm)

Orange:
4
detects
of
sulfoxide:
0.025;
0.015;
0.017;
and
0.017
ppm
(
total
residue
=
0.043275;
0.028040;
0.028040;
and
0.025880
ppm)

Orange
Juice:
1
detect;
aldicarb
=
0.035
ppm
(
total
residue
=
0.080890
ppm)

Cantaloupe:
1
detect;
sulfoxide
=
0.017ppm
(
total
residue
=
0.028040)

Potato
(
1997)
9
detects,
sulfone
=
0.008­
0.051
ppm;
20
detects,
sulfoxide
=
0.007­
0.15
ppm
[
single
tuber
summary,
see
Attachment
3]

Sweet
Potato:
6
detects;
sulfone
and
sulfoxide
(
3
samples,
total
residue
=
0.040040­
0.182280,
sulfoxide
only
(
3
samples,
total
residue
=
0.025880­
0.146240)
[
Details
are
provided
in
Attachment
3]

4
The
weighted
average
½
LOD
was
calculated
based
on
the
total
½
LOD
residue
in
each
laboratory,
and
using
the
number
of
samples
analyzed
in
each
laboratory.
Page
14
of
203
Monitoring
data
generated
by
the
FDA
Surveillance
Monitoring
Program
are
shown
in
Table
5.
Although
monitoring
data
were
generated
for
numerous
commodities,
only
the
commodities
of
interest,
i.
e.
commodities
for
which
there
are
registered
uses,
are
summarized
in
the
table.
Aldicarb
and
its
metabolites
are
completely
recovered
using
multiresidue
methods
typically
used
by
FDA
in
its
monitoring
program.
As
shown
in
Table
5,
residues
were
generally
not
detected
in
the
monitored
commodities.

Most
of
the
detections
in
potato
samples
occurred
in
1996
and
1997,
after
use
on
potatoes
was
reinstated.
In
1996,
a
total
of
33
potato
samples
had
aldicarb
residues
ranging
from
trace
amounts
(
i.
e.,
<
0.01
ppm)
to
0.96
ppm;
in
most
cases,
confirmatory
analyses
identified
a
significant
portion
of
the
residue
as
the
sulfoxide
metabolite.
The
average
total
aldicarb
residue
in
1996
potato
detects
from
FDA
monitoring
was
0.27
ppm.
In
1997,
fewer
residues
were
detected
in
potatoes;
the
average
sulfoxide
residue
across
21
samples
was
0.18
ppm,
with
a
maximum
of
1.22
ppm
(
total
aldicarb
residues
were
1.38
ppm).
In
1998,
there
was
only
one
aldicarb
detect
in
potatoes,
at
0.08
ppm
There
were
no
aldicarb
detects
in
monitored
crops/
commodities
in
1999.

Table
5.
FDA
Surveillance
Monitoring
Data
for
Aldicarb
(
Registered
Uses
Only)
1992
­
1998.

Commodity
#
Sampled/#
Detects
(%)
Min./
Max.
Residue
(
ppm)
Residue
Detected
Orange
261/
0
Lime
7/
0
Grapefruit
60/
1
(
1.7)
0.06
Sulfoxide
Lemon
22/
0
Citrus
juice
10/
0
Potato
858/
56
(
6.5)
Trace/
1.352
Aldicarb
+
sulfoxide
Potato/
Sauce
6/
3
(
50)
Trace/
0.073
Sulfoxide
Sweet
potato
101/
0
Sugar
beet
22/
0
Coffee
Beans
2/
0
Wheat,
whole
grain
5/
0
Wheat,
flour
2/
0
Peanut,
in
shell
7/
0
Peanut,
shelled
2/
0
The
FDA
data
have
been
presented
largely
for
risk
characterization
purposes,
since
available
field
trial
residue
data,
market
basket
data
and
PDP
monitoring
data
are
more
appropriate
for
risk
assessment.
Page
15
of
203
Processing
Factors
Processing
factors
(
PFs)
for
aldicarb
in
juices,
dried
potatoes,
cooked
potato
food
forms,
dry
beans,
soybean
oil,
peanut
oil,
cottonseed
oil,
sugarcane,
and
sugar
beet
have
been
generated
in
processing/
cooking
studies
submitted
in
support
of
reregistration.
The
studies
were
considered
to
be
acceptable
and
appropriate
for
use
in
risk
assessment
and
tolerance
reassessment.
The
processing/
cooking
studies
indicate
a
general
reduction
of
residues;
since
residues
are
systemic,
the
reduction
in
residues
is
not
related
to
removal
of
certain
inedible
commodity
fractions,
e.
g.,
peel.
Detailed
results
of
the
studies
are
discussed
in
Attachment
3.
Application
of
the
aldicarb
processing
factors
to
specific
food
forms
in
DEEM
 
(
using
Adjustment
Factor
1)
is
described
in
Table
6.

Table
6.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Processing
Factors
(
PFs)
Used
in
the
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses.

Commodity/
Processed
Food
Form
PF1
Application
of
PF
to
Relevant
Food
Forms
in
DEEM
 
Orange/
juice
0.58
0.58
Orange­
juice
Tangerine­
juice
Grapefruit/
juice
0.14
Grapefruit­
juice
Lime/
juice
0.46
0.46
Lime­
juice
Lemon­
juice
Potatoes/
dry
0.3
Cooked,
boiled,
canned,
canned:
boiled,
frozen:
cooked
0.62
Potatoes/
white­
peeled
­
fried,
frozen:
fried
Potatoes/
white­
peel
only
­
fried
Potatoes/
white­
whole
­
fried
Sweet
potatoes:
Fried
Potatoes/
fried
0.19
Potatoes/
dry
­
fried
0.5
Potatoes/
white­
peeled
­
boiled,
canned:
cooked;
canned:
boiled;
frozen:
cooked
Potatoes/
white­
whole
­
boiled
Sweet
potato
­
boiled,
canned:
cooked,
canned:
boiled
Potatoes/
boiled,
cooked
0.15
Potatoes/
white­
dry
­
boiled,
canned:
boiled
Beans,
dry
0.05
Baked,
boiled,
fried,
canned:
cooked;
canned:
boiled;
cooked:
NFS
Peanut/
oil
NA
NA
Soybean/
oil
NA
NA
Cottonseed/
oil
NA
NA
Sugarcane/
sugar
beet
NA
NA
1
Processing
factors
were
entered
into
the
DEEM
 
software
as
Adjustment
Factor
1.
When
no
processing
factors
were
available,
the
DEEM
 
default
factors
were
used.

Residue
Inputs
for
the
DEEM
 
Analyses
Page
16
of
203
The
detailed
residue
inputs
to
the
acute
dietary
exposure
analyses
are
shown
in
Tables
7
and
8.

Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Commodity
Classification
In
accordance
with
HED
SOP
99.6,
commodities
included
in
the
aldicarb
acute
dietary
exposure
analysis
are
classified
as
non­
blended
(
NB,
e.
g.,
a
single
potato
or
orange),
partially
blended
(
PB,
e.
g.,
orange
juice
or
canned
potatoes),
or
blended
(
B,
e.
g.,
cottonseed
oil).
The
type
of
data
which
may
be
used
in
an
acute
assessment,
and
the
way
in
which
the
data
are
incorporated
into
residue
distribution
files
(
RDFs)
or
ARs,
varies
depending
on
the
commodity
classification.
For
example,
fresh
oranges
are
considered
to
be
non­
blended;
therefore,
residues
in
single
oranges
are
incorporated
into
a
distribution
of
residues.
If
there
are
no
"
single
serving"
monitoring
data
available,
composite
sample
measurements
may
be
used
if
they
have
been
"
decomposited"
to
generate
single
unit
residue
values.
Alternatively,
the
composite
distribution
may
be
used
directly
if
there
are
few
samples
with
detectable
residues,
and
if
detected
residues
are
very
low
or
close
to
the
LOD.
For
partially
blended
commodities
such
as
canned
potatoes,
a
distribution
of
composite
residue
values
is
used.
For
blended
commodities,
a
single
point
estimate
residue
value
is
generated.
Citrus
and
potato
commodities
and
food
forms
included
in
the
aldicarb
acute
dietary
exposure
analysis
were
also
designated
as
fresh
or
processed,
to
allow
for
appropriate
adjustments
to
the
residue
files
based
on
the
%
CT
estimates.
The
fresh/
processed
designation
and
classification
for
commodities
included
in
the
aldicarb
dietary
exposure
analyses
are
shown
in
Tables
7
and
8.

Residue
Distribution
Files
and
Anticipated
Residues
There
are
multiple
residue
data
sources
for
orange,
grapefruit,
potato
and
sweet
potato;
therefore,
RDFs
were
prepared
from
each
data
source
to
generate
a
"
menu"
of
RDFs
for
acute
dietary
exposure
analyses.
In
evaluating
the
available
residue
data
for
risk
assessment,
HED
noted
that
due
to
the
very
low
PAD,
the
dietary
risk
assessment
may
be
sensitive
to
assumed
concentrations
for
nondetectable
residues.
[
In
order
to
evaluate
the
extent
to
which
the
½
LOD
assumption
affects
dietary
risk
estimates
for
aldicarb,
dietary
exposure
was
assessed
for
citrus,
potatoes
and
sweet
potatoes
individually
using
all
of
the
available
data
sources,
and
then
the
most
appropriate
data
source
for
each
commodity
was
used
in
an
assessment
which
included
all
commodities.
The
results
of
these
individual
commodity
analyses
have
not
been
included
in
this
document.]

For
field
trial
data
sources,
RDFs
were
generated
by
assuming
all
the
samples
analyzed
constituted
the
estimated
maximum
%
CT,
and
an
appropriate
number
of
zero
residue
values
was
added
based
on
the
percent
of
crop
not
treated.
For
field
trial
(
FT)
data,
the
number
of
zero
residue
values
was
calculated
as
follows:

#
Zeroes
=
#
FT
results
x
[(
100­%
CT)/%
CT]

The
field
trial
RDF
then
consists
of
the
individual
detected
residues
and
the
calculated
number
of
zeroes.
To
calculate
an
acute
AR
for
blended
commodities
or
food
forms
from
field
trial
data,
the
following
equation
was
used:

Acute
AR
=
[
sum
of
FT
residue
values/#
residues]
x
Max.
%
CT/
100
Page
17
of
203
For
monitoring
data,
the
following
parameters
were
used
to
construct
the
RDFs:

#
Sampled
=
#
samples
reported
analyzed
#
Detects
=
#
samples
reported
to
have
detectable
residues
%
Detects
=
[(#
Detects/#
Sampled)
x
100]
Max
CT
=
estimated
maximum
%
CT
#
Zeros
(
TOTALZ)
=
the
number
of
samples
assumed
to
have
zero
residue
values,
derived
from
the
%
crop
not
treated
and
#
Sampled:
TOTALZ
=
[
1­(
Est.
Max
%
CT/
100)]
x
#
Sampled.
½
LOD
=
½
the
weighted
average
LOD
from
monitoring
data.
#
½
LOD
=
the
number
of
samples
assumed
to
have
residues
at
½
LOD
(
i.
e.,
treated,
but
with
no
detectable
residues):
#
½
LOD
=
[(
Max
CT
­
%
Detects)/
100)]
x
#
Sampled
The
RDF
then
consists
of
the
detected
residues,
the
residues
assumed
to
be
present
at
½
LOD,
and
the
number
of
samples
assumed
to
have
zero
residue
values.

In
order
to
calculate
the
acute
AR
for
blended
commodities
or
food
forms
from
monitoring
data,
the
following
equation
was
used:

AR
=
[
Sum
of
detected
residues
+
#
Samples
@
½
LOD
x
(
½
LOD)]/#
Sampled
Description
of
Analyses
Performed
Acute
dietary
exposure
analyses
were
conducted
based
on
the
existing
registered
uses
for
aldicarb.

Acute
For
the
acute
analysis,
the
most
refined
exposure
assessment
resulted
from
the
use
of
data
from
the
CTF
for
citrus
commodities,
and
the
1997
PDP
special
survey
data
for
potatoes.
The
CTF
data
set
consisted
of
residue
data
for
aldicarb
and
its
metabolites
in
399
single
oranges
taken
very
close
to
the
point
of
consumption
(
grocery
shelves),
and
using
a
combined
½
LOD
residue
value
lower
than
that
of
any
other
data
set.
The
1997
potato
data
generated
by
PDP
provide
composite
and
"
single
serving"
residue
data
for
potatoes;
these
data
represent
residues
closer
to
the
point
of
consumption
than
those
of
any
other
data
set
for
potatoes,
and
were
also
collected
with
considerably
lower
LOD's
(
and
therefore
½
LOD).
There
were
a
total
of
342
composite
potato
samples
analyzed,
20
of
which
had
detectable
aldicarb
residues;
individual
tubers
in
16
of
the
20
composite
samples
were
analyzed.
Due
to
the
use
of
the
lower
½
LOD
values
in
the
two
data
sets,
the
resulting
analyses
are
less
likely
to
be
sensitive
to
the
½
LOD
assumption
for
nondetectable
residues.

The
following
acute
analyses
were
conducted
for
risk
assessment
and
risk
characterization:

Initial
Analysis
(
Attachment
5):
Analysis
1:
Acute
exposure
analyses
based
on
existing
uses;
Page
18
of
203
Sensitivity
Analyses
(
Attachments
6
and
7):
Analysis
2:
Acute
exposure
analysis
assuming
aldicarb
per
se
residues
of
0
ppm
in
citrus
and
potatoes;
Analysis
3:
Acute
exposure
analysis
assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0,
and
assuming
½
LOD
residues
in
citrus
monitoring
samples
were
true
zeroes;

Incorporation
of
Proposed
Registration
Actions
(
Attachments
8,
9,
10,
11,
12
and
13):
Analysis
4:
Analysis
3,
and
including
the
proposed
citrus
crop
group
tolerance;
Analysis
5:
Analysis
3,
and
including
the
proposed
shorter
PHI
for
potatoes;
Analysis
6:
Analysis
3,
and
including
the
proposed
use
on
potatoes
in
six
Midwestern
states;
Analysis
7:
Analysis
3,
and
including
the
proposed
shorter
PHI
for
potatoes
and
the
proposed
use
on
potatoes
in
six
Midwestern
states;
Analysis
8:
Analysis
3,
and
including
a
proposed
import
tolerance
for
bananas.
Analysis
9:
Analysis
3,
and
including
all
proposed
label
amendments.

Additional
Assessments
for
Risk
Characterization
Purposes
(
Attachments
14
and
15):

Analysis
10:
Analysis
3,
Excluding
Citrus
Commodities.
Analysis
11:
Analysis
3,
Excluding
Potato
Commodities.

Results
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
and
Risk
Estimates
Page
19
of
203
The
acute
dietary
exposure
assessment
which
included
the
existing
aldicarb
registrations
indicates
that
estimated
dietary
exposure
exceeds
HED's
level
of
concern
(
i.
e.,
>
100
%
aPAD)
for
the
general
US
population
and
relevant
population
subgroups.
The
highest
exposure
estimate
was
for
children
1­
2
years
old;
the
99.9th
percentile
dietary
exposure
estimate
was
0.000797
mg/
kg/
day,
or
469
%
aPAD.
For
the
general
US
population,
estimated
dietary
exposure
was
211
%
aPAD
(
0.000358
mg/
kg/
day).
Estimated
exposure
and
risk
were
below
HED's
level
of
concern
(
i.
e.,
<
100
%
aPAD)
at
the
99.5th
percentile
for
children
1­
2
years
old,
and
at
the
99.7th
percentile
of
exposure
for
the
general
US
population
and
all
remaining
population
subgroups.
Refer
to
Table
9
for
a
complete
listing
of
the
results
of
the
acute
dietary
exposure
assessment;
the
DEEM
 
input
and
output
files
are
included
in
the
attachments.

Because
estimated
dietary
exposure
was
above
HED's
level
of
concern,
an
analysis
was
conducted
to
determine
the
foods
or
food
forms
which
contribute
the
most
to
the
exposure
estimates.
For
all
population
subgroups,
residues
in
potatoes
were
the
most
significant
source
of
dietary
exposure.
For
all
infants,
residues
in
sweet
potato
were
also
significant
contributors.

Sensitivity
analyses
were
conducted
to
determine
if
assumptions
for
nondetectable
residues
overestimated
exposures.
These
analyses
consisted
of
(
1)
assuming
aldicarb
per
se
residues
were
0
ppm;
and
(
2)
assuming
nondetect
residues
in
citrus
monitoring
samples
were
true
zeroes.
The
assumption
of
zero
residues
for
aldicarb
per
se
had
a
greater
impact
on
the
estimated
exposure
than
the
assumption
of
zero
residue
values
for
citrus
nondetects.
However,
the
sensitivity
analyses
did
not
significantly
reduce
the
estimated
exposure
and
risk
for
any
of
the
population
subgroups.
These
analyses
indicate
that
actual
detected
residues
from
monitoring
data
were
the
source
of
the
exposure
and
risk,
and
not
assumed
residues
for
nondetects
(
Table
10a).
For
the
general
US
population,
assuming
aldicarb
residues
of
0
ppm
and
zero
residues
for
nondetects
in
citrus,
the
estimated
exposure
was
reduced
to
205
%
aPAD;
for
children
1­
2
years
old,
the
estimated
exposure
was
reduced
to
454
%
aPAD.

Since
residues
in
citrus
and
potatoes
were
identified
as
significant
contributors
to
estimated
dietary
exposure,
analyses
were
conducted
in
which
citrus
and
potato
commodities
were
separately
omitted
from
the
exposure
assessment
(
Table
10b).
When
citrus
commodities
were
excluded,
estimated
exposure
for
children
1­
2
years
old
was
444
%
of
the
aPAD;
exposures
for
infants
<
1
year
old
were
254
%
of
the
aPAD,
while
exposures
for
the
general
US
population
and
all
other
population
subgroups
ranged
from
159­
351%
of
the
aPAD.
When
potato
commodities
were
excluded,
the
highest
estimated
exposure
was
for
children
1­
2,
at
0.000199
mg/
kg/
day,
or
117%
of
the
aPAD;
estimated
exposures
for
all
other
population
subgroups
ranged
from
15
to
96%
of
the
aPAD.
Detailed
results
are
shown
in
Table
10b.

Proposed
Label
Amendments
The
registrant
for
technical
aldicarb,
Aventis
CropScience,
has
proposed
a
number
of
registration
actions;
HED
has
been
requested
to
estimate
dietary
exposure
and
risk
associated
with
these
proposals,
even
though
exposure
and
risk
based
on
existing
uses
already
exceed
HED's
level
of
concern.
Proposed
registrations
actions
include:
establishment
of
a
citrus
crop
group
tolerance;
a
shorter
PHI
for
potatoes
in
the
Pacific
Northwest
(
PNW);
use
on
potatoes
in
six
Midwestern
states;
and
a
proposed
import
tolerance
for
residues
in
bananas.
The
results
of
DEEM
 
analyses
conducted
for
the
proposed
registration
actions
are
shown
in
Table
11,
and
the
input
and
output
files
are
included
in
the
attachments.
Page
20
of
203
The
proposed
citrus
crop
group
tolerance
did
not
result
in
increased
estimated
dietary
exposure,
assuming
the
residue
profile
in
other
citrus
commodities
(
kumquats,
citrus
citron,
tangerines
and
tangelos)
would
be
similar
to
that
observed
in
oranges,
and
assuming
an
estimated
maximum
of
7
%
CT
(
translated
from
limes).

The
proposed
shorter
PHI
on
potatoes
in
the
PNW
resulted
in
a
greater
incremental
increase
in
estimated
acute
dietary
exposure
than
adding
use
in
six
Midwestern
states.
For
example,
for
children
1­
2,
the
shorter
PHI
results
in
an
estimated
exposure
of
607
%
aPAD,
while
use
in
the
six
new
states
corresponds
to
529
%
aPAD.

The
proposed
use
on
bananas
resulted
in
a
small
increase
in
estimated
dietary
exposure.
However,
HED
considers
this
to
be
an
overestimate
of
exposure,
since
the
results
of
field
trials
supporting
the
proposed
use
showed
that
residues
were
not
detected
in
whole
bananas,
pulp
and
banana
processed
fractions
(
such
as
chips
and
puree).
The
exposure
assessment
for
the
proposed
use
assumed
residues
of
the
combined
½
LOD
in
bananas
and
a
45%
market
share.

The
acute
dietary
exposure
assessment
which
incorporated
all
of
the
proposed
registration
actions
resulted
in
estimated
exposures
above
HED's
level
of
concern
for
the
general
US
population
and
all
relevant
population
subgroups.
The
most
highly
exposed
population
subgroup
was
children
1­
2,
at
636
%
aPAD;
estimated
dietary
exposure
for
the
general
US
population
corresponds
to
293
%
aPAD.
Page
21
of
203
Table
7.
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses.

[
Analysis
1:
Acute
Exposure
Based
on
Existing
Uses]

Commodity
Name1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classification3
F/
P4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Oranges­
Juice
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
36LOD+
347Z
(
16)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
76LOD+
307Z
(
17)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
76LOD+
307Z
(
17)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
36LOD+
347Z
(
16)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
76LOD+
307Z
(
17)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
36LOD+
347Z
(
16)

Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
76LOD+
307Z
(
17)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
160Z
(
27)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­
Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
109Z
(
28)

Grapefruit
­
Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
109Z
(
28)

Grapefruit
­
Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
160Z
(
27)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
160Z
(
27)

Grapefruit
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
109Z
(
28)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Potatoes/
white­
dry
Boiled
B
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
0.002503
Page
22
of
203
Table
7.
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses.

[
Analysis
1:
Acute
Exposure
Based
on
Existing
Uses]

Commodity
Name1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classification3
F/
P4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
46)

Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Potatoes/
white­
peeled
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
47)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
white­
peel
only
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
46)

Potatoes/
white­
unspec.
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
47)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
46)

Potatoes/
white­
whole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
47)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.

2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.

3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.

4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.

5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).

6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.

7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
½
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.
Page
23
of
203
Table
8.
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).

[
Analysis
1:
Acute
Exposure
Based
on
Existing
Uses]

%
CT2
Commodity/

Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source3
Commodity
Classification4
Food
Forms5
Acute
RDF6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR7
Beans
(
dry)/
0.1
1
2
FT
B
Baked,
boiled,
fried,
canned:
cooked;

canned:
boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.000200
Coffee
Beans/
0.1
20
20
FT/
PS
B
Boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.002
Cottonseed/
0.1
27
33
FT/
PS
B
Cottonseed
meal
N/
A
0.016995
B
Cottonseed
oil
N/
A
0.000495
Lemon/
0.3
1
3
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit:
uncooked;
cooked;

canned,
NFS;
Peel:
uncooked,
baked,

boiled,
canned,
frozen;
Juice:
canned,

frozen
Juice
concentrate:
frozen,
cooked,

baked,
boiled,
canned
16
Det.+
37LOD+
1,725Z
(
34)
N/
A
Limes/
0.3
4
7
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit;
Peel:
baked,
boiled;

Juice:
uncooked,
canned,
frozen;

Juice
concentrate:
cooked,
frozen
16
Det.+
37LOD+
709Z
(
33)
N/
A
Peanuts
30
47
FT
B
Peanuts,
hulled;
Peanuts
­
butter;
N/
A
0.002585
Peanuts,
oil
N/
A
0.000705
Pecans/
0.5
4
8
FT
PB
Unbaked,
baked,
boiled
22
Detects
+
253Z
(
1)
N/
A
Sorghum,
grain/
0.2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Boiled
N/
A
0.002
Soybeans/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Soybean
flour
(
defatted,
full
fat);

mature
seeds,
dry;
protein
isolate;

sprouted
seeds)
N/
A
0.0001
B
soybean
oil
N/
A
0.00005
Sugarcane/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Sugar­
cane,
refined;

sugarcane
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sugar
beets/
0.05
9
11
FT
B
Sugar
beet,
refined;
sugar
beet/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sweet
potato/
0.1
15
37
PDP
potato
singles
NB
Cooked,
baked,
boiled,
fried
160
Det.+
272Z
(
55)
N/
A
PDP
potato
Composites
PB
Canned
(
NFS,
cooked,
boiled)
342
Det.+
582Z
(
56)
N/
A
1
The
relevant
commodities
are
shown
along
with
the
reassessed
tolerances
from
the
6/
2/
00
Residue
Chemistry
Chapter.

2
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
Max.
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).

3
FT
=
Field
Trials;
PS
=
Processing
Study;
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force;
PDP
=
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
(
monitoring
data).

4
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.

5
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.

6
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
½
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.

7
For
blended
commodities,
a
point
estimate
was
used
for
the
acute
analysis,
with
the
%
CT
incorporated
into
the
AR
(
i.
e.,
Adj.
Factor
2
was
set
to
1).
Page
24
of
203
Table
9.
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
and
Risk,
Based
on
Existing
Registrations.
1
[
Analysis
1]
(
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
and
Risk)

Rat
(
RBC)*
Rat
(
Brain)
Human
Population
Exposure
%
PAD
Exposure
%
PAD
Exposure
%
PAD
U.
S.
Pop
0.000358
71.63
0.000358
47.75
0.000358
55.10
All
Infants
0.000463
92.52
0.000463
61.68
0.000463
71.17
Children
1­
2
years
0.000797
159.45
0.000797
106.30
0.000797
122.65
Children
3­
5
years
0.000643
128.52
0.000643
85.68
0.000643
98.86
Children
6­
12
years
0.000457
91.38
0.000457
60.92
0.000457
70.29
Youth
13­
19
0.000312
62.48
0.000312
41.65
0.000312
48.06
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000298
59.56
0.000298
39.71
0.000298
45.82
Adults
50+
0.000320
64.06
0.000320
42.71
0.000320
49.28
Females13­
49
0.000282
56.40
0.000282
37.60
0.000282
43.38
PAD
0.0005
mg/
kg/
day
0.00075
mg/
kg/
day
0.00065
mg/
kg/
day
Table
10a.
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure,
Sensitivity
Analyses.
1(
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
and
Risk)
Aldicarb
=
0
Rat
(
RBC)*
Rat
(
Brain)
Human
Population
Exposure
%
PAD
Exposure
%
PAD
Exposure
%
PAD
U.
S.
Pop
0.000349
69.71
0.000349
46.47
0.000349
53.62
All
Infants
0.000443
88.64
0.000443
59.09
0.000443
68.18
Children
1­
2
years
0.000773
154.66
0.000773
103.11
0.000773
118.97
Children
3­
5
years
0.000623
124.70
0.000623
83.13
0.000623
95.92
Children
6­
12
years
0.000443
88.58
0.000443
59.06
0.000443
68.14
Youth
13­
19
0.000304
60.85
0.000304
40.56
0.000304
46.81
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000290
58.01
0.000290
38.67
0.000290
44.62
Adults
50+
0.000314
62.89
0.000314
41.93
0.000314
48.38
Females13­
49
0.000274
54.85
0.000274
36.57
0.000274
42.20
PAD
0.0005
mg/
kg/
day
0.00075
mg/
kg/
day
0.00065
mg/
kg/
day
Page
25
of
203
Table
10b.
Aldicarb
Sensitivity
Analysis
No
citrus
No
potatoes
Population
Exposure
Rat
(
RBC
ChEI)
Rat(
Brain
ChEI)
Human
(
RBC
ChEI)
Exposure
Rat
(
RBC
ChEI)
Rat(
Brain
ChEI)
Human
(
RBC
ChEI)
U.
S.
Pop
0.000337
67
45
52
0.000063
13
8.4
9.7
All
Infants
0.000433
87
58
67
0.000025
5.0
3.4
3.9
Children
1­
2
years
0.000755
151
101
116
0.000199
40
26
31
Children
3­
5
years
0.000597
119
80
92
0.000162
32
22
25
Children
6­
12
years
0.000452
90
60
70
0.000101
20
13
16
Youth
13­
19
0.000300
60
40
46
0.000067
13
9.0
10
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000283
57
38
44
0.000050
10
6.7
7.7
Adults
50+
0.000307
61
41
47
0.000052
10
6.9
7.9
Females13­
49
0.000270
54
36
42
0.000055
11
7.3
8.4
Population
Adjusted
Dose
(
PAD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg/
day
Rat
(
RBC
CheI)
0.00075
mg/
kg/
day
Rat
(
Brain
CheI)
0.00065
mg/
kg/
day
Human
(
RBC
CheI)
Page
26
of
203
Table
11.
Estimated
Acute
Dietary
Risk
Associated
With
Proposed
Registration
Actions.
1
%
aPAD
at
the
99.9th
Percentile
of
Exposure2
Population
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
[
Analysis
4]
Shorter
PHI
on
PNW
Potatoes
[
Analysis
5]
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
MW
States
[
Analysis
6]
Potato
Shorter
PHI+
Use
in
6
MW
States
[
Analysis
7]
Import
Tolerance
on
Bananas
[
Analysis
8]
All
Proposed
Label
Amendments
[
Analysis
9]

Rat
RBC
US
Population
70
94
82
99
70
99
All
Infants
(<
1yr)
91
122
106
130
94
134
Children
1­
2
yrs
153
206
180
216
154
216
Children
3­
5
yrs
123
169
148
178
123
177
Children
6
­
12
yrs
91
120
105
127
89
131
Youth
13­
19
yrs
60
87
74
93
63
92
Adults
20­
49
yrs
59
78
69
83
58
84
Adults
50+
yrs
61
81
73
84
62
85
Females
13­
49
yrs
56
75
65
79
56
79
Rat
Brain
US
Population
46
63
55
66
47
66
All
Infants
(<
1yr)
61
81
71
86
63
89
Children
1­
2
yrs
102
137
120
144
103
144
Children
3­
5
yrs
82
113
99
119
82
118
Children
6
­
12
yrs
61
80
70
85
59
88
Youth
13­
19
yrs
40
58
49
62
42
61
Adults
20­
49
yrs
39
52
46
55
39
56
Adults
50+
yrs
41
54
48
56
42
56
Females
13­
49
yrs
37
50
44
52
38
53
Human
RBC
US
Population
53
72
63
76
54
77
All
Infants
(<
1yr)
70
94
82
100
70
103
Children
1­
2
yrs
118
159
138
166
118
166
Children
3­
5
yrs
94
130
114
137
94
136
Children
6
­
12
yrs
70
93
81
98
70
101
Youth
13­
19
yrs
46
67
57
71
46
71
Adults
20­
49
yrs
45
60
53
64
45
64
Adults
50+
yrs
47
62
56
65
41
65
Females
13­
49
yrs
43
57
50
60
43
61
1
Proposed
registration
actions
include:
1)
Establishment
of
a
citrus
crop
group
tolerance;
2)
reduction
of
the
PHI
on
potatoes
in
the
Pacific
Northwest
(
PNW)
from
150
to
120
days;
3)
Proposed
use
on
potatoes
grown
in
six
Midwestern
states
(
6
MW);
and
4)
A
proposed
import
tolerance
for
residues
in
bananas.
2
Acute
exposure
is
expressed
in
mg/
kg/
day,
and
as
a
percentage
of
the
acute
population
adjusted
dose
(
aPAD),
which
is
0.00017
mg/
kg/
day.
Page
27
of
203
Drinking
Water
A
drinking
water
assessment
was
provided
by
the
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division
(
Jonathon
Angier,
Ph.
D,
5/
10/
05,
D316754).

Surface
water
monitoring
data
for
aldicarb
were
too
limited
to
be
used
quantitatively
in
the
drinking
water
exposure
assessment,
so
EFED
used
Tier­
II
modeling
to
generate
estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
in
surface
water.
Specifically,
the
Pesticide
Root
Zone
Model
and
Exposure
Analysis
Model
System
(
PRZM/
EXAMS)
Index
Reservoir
was
used
to
generate
surface
water
EECs
for
drinking
water.
The
model
is
used
by
OPP
to
estimate
pesticide
concentrations
that
may
be
in
surface
water
due
to
pesticide
use
and
runoff.
The
PRZM/
EXAMS
estimates
of
potential
pesticide
levels
in
surface
water
incorporate
pesticide­
specific
properties,
simulation
of
multiple
years
to
reflect
climatic
variations,
and
modeling
on
a
crop­
specific
basis.

A
Tier
II
EEC
for
a
particular
crop
or
use
is
based
on
a
single
site
that
represents
a
high
exposure
scenario
for
the
crop
or
use.
Weather
and
agricultural
practices
are
simulated
at
the
site
for
36
years
to
estimate
the
probability
of
exceeding
a
given
concentration
(
maximum
concentration
or
average
concentration)
in
a
single
year.
Maximum
EECs
are
calculated
so
that
there
is
a
10%
probability
that
the
maximum
concentration
in
a
given
year
will
exceed
the
EEC
at
the
site;
this
can
also
be
expressed
as
an
expectation
that
water
concentrations
will
exceed
EECs
once
every
10
years.

In
the
dietary
assessment,
a
distribution
of
estimates
of
possible
concentrations
in
drinking
water
were
used.
Approximately
11000
values
were
generated
based
on
maximum
aldicarb
use
patterns
in/
on
Florida
citrus,
Idaho
potatoes,
and
Mississippi
cotton.
The
values
were
adjusted
for
percent
crop
area
(
PCA)
using
a
factor
of
0.87
for
Florida
citrus
and
Idaho
potato
scenarios
and
a
factor
of
0.20
for
Mississippi
cotton.
These
values
represent
the
complete
daily
36
year
PRZMEXAMS
output
distribution
and
are
considered
somewhat
conservative,
but
are
within
the
range
of
aldicarb
detects
in
targeted
surface
water
monitoring
data..
A
RDF
file
was
created
using
these
values
for
the
two
commodities
"
Water,
direct,
all
sources"
and
"
Water,
indirect,
all
sources"
in
the
residue
file
editor
for
DEEM­
FCID.
The
range
of
the
concentrations
are
shown
in
Table
12.

Table
12.
Range
of
Surface
Water
Concentrations
Used
In
the
Dietary
Exposure
Assessment
Crop/
Location
Acute
Concentration
(
ppb)

Mississippi
Cotton
0
­
38.6
Idaho
Potato
0
­
5.8
Florida
Citrus
0
­
13.1
Ground
water
monitoring
for
aldicarb
and
metabolite
residues
has
been
extensive
over
the
last
two
Page
28
of
203
decades.
Over
43000
individual
samples
were
collected
and
analyzed
during
this
time.
Monitoring
data
sources
include
the
registrant,
Bayer
(
formerly
Aventis
CropScience,
formerly
RPAC),
STORET,
the
U.
S.
Geological
Survey
(
USGS),
state
and
local
governments,
and
university
researchers.
[
The
STOrage
and
RETrieval
(
STORET)
system
is
a
database
maintained
by
EPA
which
contains
information
on
water
monitoring
data
including
where
and
when
the
sample
was
taken,
and
the
name
of
the
organization
that
sponsored
the
monitoring.]
The
ground
water
monitoring
data
are
discussed
in
detail
and
summarized
in
the
EFED
RED
chapter.

Although
the
ground
water
data
are
extensive,
they
are
not
ideal
for
direct
use
in
probabilistic
exposure
models
for
a
variety
of
reasons.
In
most
areas
where
there
has
been
ground
water
contamination
from
aldicarb,
steps
have
been
taken
to
mitigate
exposures,
either
through
filtering
or
through
use
of
alternative
sources
of
drinking
water.
Ground
water
sampling
has
also
varied
in
frequency
and
scope
over
the
years,
generally
declining
during
the
last
10
to
12
years.
Some
of
the
monitoring
data
do
not
reflect
current
use
areas
and
rates,
and
do
not
reflect
present
conditions.
[
Current
label
restrictions
prohibit
aldicarb
application
in
areas
where
there
have
been
historical
concerns
for
ground
water
contamination
(
i.
e.,
Del
Norte
and
Humboldt
counties
in
CA,
Curry
County
in
OR,
and
Nassau
and
Suffolk
Counties
in
NY).
The
registrant
does
not
market
aldicarb
for
use
in
Northeastern
states.
However,
regions
presenting
soil/
stratigraphic/
hydrologic
attributes
similar
to
these
historical
problem
areas
should
be
considered
potentially
vulnerable
to
groundwater
contamination].
Overall,
the
extent
of
ground
water
contamination
today
may
be
less
than
in
the
past,
but
it
is
also
not
well­
characterized.
For
the
purpose
of
the
drinking
water
assessment,
ground
water
concentrations
have
been
presented
on
a
regional
basis.
Eight
distinct
regions
were
selected
based
on
broad
similarity
in
aldicarb
usage,
crop
type
or
soil
conditions.
The
monitoring
data
from
each
region
were
examined,
and
a
single
maximum
sample
result
was
chosen
to
represent
ground
water
concentrations
within
the
entire
region;
for
each
region,
the
sample
chosen
was
detected
the
within
the
last
5
to
10
years
(
i.
e.,
higher
residue
values
that
may
have
resulted
from
historical
use
of
aldicarb
in
vulnerable
areas
were
excluded).
The
aldicarb
water
residue
values
chosen
for
the
drinking
water
assessment
are
considered
to
be
somewhat
conservative,
because
they
reflect
exposures
to
people
who
are
most
highly
exposed
in
each
region.
The
population
potentially
exposed
at
these
levels
consists
of
individuals
who
obtain
drinking
water
from
private
wells
in
areas
with
vulnerable
soils,
or
that
may
be
contaminated
from
past
agricultural
applications
of
aldicarb.
A
summary
of
the
suggested
ground
water
concentrations
for
use
in
the
drinking
water
exposure
assessment
has
been
taken
directly
from
the
EFED
RED
chapter,
and
is
presented
in
Table
13.

Table
13.
Aldicarb
Ground
Water
Concentrations
for
Use
in
the
Drinking
Water
Assessment.

Region1
Location
and
Year
of
Detection
Aldicarb
Concentration
(
ppb)
Data
Source
Rationale
for
Selection
A
ID;
Caribou
Co.,
1992
2.1
State
of
ID
Max.
conc.
since
1990
B
CA;
Solano
Co.,
1997
6.4
State
of
CA
Max.
conc.
since
1997;
most
recent
detect
in
region.

C
WY;
Washakie
Co.,
1992
9.7
Registrant
Max.
conc.
since
1992;
second
most
recent
detect
in
region
D
N/
A
0.0
N/
A
No
aldicarb
detections
reported
from
this
region.
Page
29
of
203
Table
13.
Aldicarb
Ground
Water
Concentrations
for
Use
in
the
Drinking
Water
Assessment.

Region1
Location
and
Year
of
Detection
Aldicarb
Concentration
(
ppb)
Data
Source
Rationale
for
Selection
E
WI;
Langlade
Co.,
1992
23.0
Registrant
Max.
conc.
since
1992.
Very
little
data
available
after
1994;
however,
2
detects
above
10
ppb
in
1997.

F
RI;
Newport
Co.,
1994
24.0
State
of
RI
Max.
conc.
since
1994;
fourth
most
recent
detection
in
region.

G
AL,
Baldwin
Co.,
1990
20.0
Registrant
Max.
conc.
since
1990.
No
data
available
after
1993.

H
FL,
Madison
Co.,
1996
9.3
State
of
FL
Max.
conc.
since
1996;
ninth
most
recent
detection
in
region.

1
Regions
are
described
as
follows:
Region
A
=
Pacific
Northwest
(
ID/
OR/
WA);
Region
B
=
CA;
Region
C
=
Central
Plains
and
Western
(
MT,
WY,
NV,
UT,
CO,
KS,
NE,
ND,
SD,
MN,
IA,
MO);
Region
D
=
Southwest
and
Central
Plains
(
AZ,
NM,
TX,
OK);
Region
E
=
Midwest
and
Central
Plains
(
WI,
IL,
IN,
MI,
OH,
WV,
PA,
NJ,
DE,
MD);
Region
F
=
New
England
(
NY,
VT,
NH,
MA,
CT,
RI,
ME);
Region
G
=
Southeast
(
AR,
LA,
MS,
AL,
GA,
TN,
KY,
SC,
NC,
VA,
DC);
Region
H
=
FL.

Typical
acute
aggregate
exposure
and
risk
assessments
include
the
estimated
acute
(
food
only)
exposure
and
acute
surface
water
(
modeled)
and
ground
water
EECs
(
calculated
from
monitoring
data).
For
aldicarb,
estimated
dietary
(
food
only)
exposure
to
aldicarb
for
all
population
subgroups
exceeds
the
level
of
concern
for
acute
dietary
exposure.
When
acute
food
exposure
alone
exceeds
the
level
of
concern,
HED
does
not
typically
aggregate
modeled
EECs,
but
states
that
any
additional
exposure
through
drinking
water
would
be
of
concern.
However,
as
a
tool
for
the
risk
managers,
a
"
water
only"
dietary
assessment
was
done
assuming
no
exposure
from
food
to
get
an
estimate
of
contribution
of
drinking
water
to
the
dietary
exposure
and
risk.
For
surface
water,
a
distribution
of
concentrations
derived
from
PRZM­
EXAMS
modeling
was
used
in
the
assessment.
For
ground
water,
a
point
estimate
derived
from
monitoring
data
was
used.

If
there
were
no
acute
dietary
food
exposure,
and
all
of
the
allowable
exposure
occurred
through
surface
water
sources
(
i.
e.,
assuming
the
aPAD
(
rat
RBC)
of
0.0005
mg/
kg/
day
is
completely
allotted
to
exposure
to
residues
in
water),
HED
would
not
have
concerns
for
total
aldicarb
residues.
Drinking
water
exposures
determined
based
on
surface
water
sources
ranged
from
<
1%
to
15%
aPAD
at
the
95th
percentile
of
exposure.

Seven
regional
ground
water
monitoring
residue
levels
were
used
to
derive
an
acute
dietary
exposure
estimate
for
water
alone
(
the
eighth
region
had
a
residue
value
of
0
ppb,
and
was
excluded
from
the
aggregate
assessment).
The
data
indicate
that
acute
exposure
from
ground
water
sources
of
drinking
water
is
also
of
concern,
with
acute
aggregate
risks
ranging
from
20%
aPAD
to
945%
aPAD.

A
drinking
water
assessment
was
also
conducted
for
ground
water
sources
of
drinking
water,
since
extensive
monitoring
data
are
available.
Drinking
water
exposure
and
risk
estimates
for
the
general
population,
all
infants,
children
1­
2.,
and
females
13­
49
years
are
shown
in
Table
14.
The
data
indicate
Page
30
of
203
that
acute
exposure
from
ground
water
sources
of
drinking
water
is
also
of
concern,
with
drinking
water
exposure
and
risk
estimates
ranging
from
20%
aPAD
(
youth
13­
19
yrs
old,
Region
A)
to
945%
aPAD
(
infants,
Region
F).

The
drinking
water
exposure
and
risk
estimates
calculated
based
on
ground
water
monitoring
values
overestimate
risks
for
all
but
those
who
obtain
their
drinking
water
from
wells
in
vulnerable
aldicarb
use
areas.
However,
since
food
only
exposures
exceed
the
aPAD,
HED
is
concerned
about
any
additional
exposure
through
drinking
water,
regardless
of
the
source.

Table.
14.
Aldicarb
Acute
Water
Exposure
and
Risk
for
Select
Population
Subgroups
at
the
95th
%
ile
of
Exposure
[
Based
on
Surface
Water
Concentrations
from
Modeling]
U.
S.
Population
All
infants
Children
1­
2
years
Females
13­
49
Regions
Exposure
%
PAD
Exposure
%
PAD
Exposure
%
PAD
Exposure
%
PAD
Rat
­
RBC
Cotton
0.000025
5.0
0.000078
15
0.000037
7.4
0.000024
5
Potato
0.000006
1.2
0.000015
3.1
0000008
1.6
0.000005
1.1
Citrus
0.000002
0.46
0.000006
1.3
0.000003
0.66
0.000002
0.43
Rat
 
Brain
Cotton
0.000025
3.4
0.000078
10
0.000037
5.0
0.000024
3.2
Potato
0.000006
0.77
0.000015
2.1
0000008
1.1
0.000005
0.72
Citrus
0.000002
0.31
0.000006
0.83
0.000003
0.44
0.000002
0.29
Human
­
RBC
Cotton
0.000025
3.9
0.000078
12
0.000037
5.7
0.000024
3.6
Potato
0.000006
0.89
0.000015
2.4
0000008
1.3
0.000005
0.83
Citrus
0.000002
0.35
0.000006
0.96
0.000003
0.51
0.000002
0.33
1.
EDWCs
were
based
on
the
following
scenarios:
Mississippi
Cotton;
Idaho
Potato;
Florida
Citrus
2.
Generated
using
the
DEEM­
FCID
model
­
Version
2.03
3.
Acute
Aggregate
Risk
=
%
of
the
aPAD=
[(
Total
Exposure/
aPAD
mg/
kg/
day)
x
100]
Table.
15.
Aldicarb
Acute
Water
Exposure
and
Risk
for
Select
Population
Subgroups
at
the
95th
%
ile
of
Exposure.

[
Based
on
Ground
Water
Concentrations
from
Monitoring]

Gen
Population
All
Infants
(<
1
Year)
Children
(
1
­
2
Years)
Females
13­
49
Years
Region1
Aldicarb
Conc.

in
Ground
Water
(
ppb)
Water
Exp.

(
mg/
kg/
day)
2
%
aPAD3
Water
Exp.

(
mg/
kg/
day)
2
%
aPAD3
Water
Exp.

(
mg/
kg/
day)
2
%
aPAD3
Water
Exp.

(
mg/
kg/
day)
2
%
aPAD3
Rat
­
RBC
A
2.1
0.000110
22
0.000414
83
0.000172
34
0.000102
20
B
6.4
0.000334
67
0.001261
252
0.000525
105
0.000312
62
C
9.7
0.000507
101
0.001910
382
0.000795
159
0.000472
94
E
23.0
0.001201
240
0.004530
906
0.001885
377
0.001119
224
F
24.0
0.001254
251
0.004727
945
0.001967
393
0.001168
234
G
20.0
0.001045
139
0.003939
525
0.001639
219
0.000973
130
H
9.3
0.000486
97
0.001832
366
0.000762
152
0.000453
91
Rat
­
Brain
A
2.1
0.000110
15
0.000414
55
0.000172
23
0.000102
14
B
6.4
0.000334
45
0.001261
168
0.000525
70
0.000312
42
C
9.7
0.000507
68
0.001910
255
0.000795
106
0.000472
63
E
23.0
0.001201
160
0.004530
604
0.001885
251
0.001119
149
F
24.0
0.001254
166
0.004727
626
0.001967
261
0.001168
155
G
20.0
0.001045
139
0.003939
525
0.001639
219
0.000973
130
H
9.3
0.000486
65
0.001832
244
0.000762
102
0.000453
60
Human
RBC
A
2.1
0.000110
17
0.000414
64
0.000172
26
0.000102
16
Table.
15.
Aldicarb
Acute
Water
Exposure
and
Risk
for
Select
Population
Subgroups
at
the
95th
%
ile
of
Exposure.

[
Based
on
Ground
Water
Concentrations
from
Monitoring]

Gen
Population
All
Infants
(<
1
Year)
Children
(
1
­
2
Years)
Females
13­
49
Years
Region1
Aldicarb
Conc.

in
Ground
Water
(
ppb)
Water
Exp.

(
mg/
kg/
day)
2
%
aPAD3
Water
Exp.

(
mg/
kg/
day)
2
%
aPAD3
Water
Exp.

(
mg/
kg/
day)
2
%
aPAD3
Water
Exp.

(
mg/
kg/
day)
2
%
aPAD3
B
6.4
0.000334
51
0.001261
194
0.000525
81
0.000312
48
C
9.7
0.000507
78
0.001910
294
0.000795
122
0.000472
73
E
23.0
0.001201
185
0.004530
697
0.001885
290
0.001119
172
F
24.0
0.001254
191
0.004727
722
0.001967
300
0.001168
178
G
20.0
0.001045
161
0.003939
606
0.001639
252
0.000973
150
H
9.3
0.000486
65
0.001832
244
0.000762
102
0.000453
60
1
Regions
are
described
as
follows:
Region
A
=
Pacific
Northwest
(
ID/
OR/
WA);
Region
B
=
CA;
Region
C
=
Central
Plains
and
Western
(
MT,
WY,
NV,
UT,
CO,
KS,
NE,
ND,
SD,

MN,
IA,
MO);
Region
E
=
Midwest
and
Central
Plains
(
WI,
IL,
IN,
MI,
OH,
WV,
PA,
NJ,
DE,
MD);
Region
F
=
New
England
(
NY,
VT,
NH,
MA,
CT,
RI,
ME);
Region
G
=

Southeast
(
AR,
LA,
MS,
AL,
GA,
TN,
KY,
SC,
NC,
VA,
DC);
Region
H
=
FL.
[
There
were
no
detections
in
Region
D,
Southwest
and
Central
Plains
(
AZ,
NM,
TX,
OK)].

2.
Generated
using
the
DEEM­
FCID
model
­
Version
2.03
3
Acute
Aggregate
Risk
=
%
of
the
aPAD=
[(
Total
Exposure/
aPAD
mg/
kg/
day)
x
100]
Page
33
of
203
In
summary,
acute
dietary
food
only
exposure
exceeds
HED's
level
of
concern;
ground
water
monitoring
data
indicate
that
potential
exposures
through
drinking
water
in
high
aldicarb
use
areas
are
also
above
HED's
level
of
concern.
For
surface
and
ground
water
drinking
water
obtained
from
public
and
community
water
systems,
the
potential
effect
of
water
treatment
processes
on
aldicarb
residues
has
not
been
considered;
however,
monitoring
data
indicate
that
these
types
of
drinking
water
sources
are
not
likely
to
be
contaminated
with
aldicarb
residues.

Attachments:

Attachment
1:
Percent
Crop
Treated
Estimates
for
the
Aldicarb
Dietary
Exposure
and
Risk
Assessment.
Attachment
2:
Additional
Fresh/
Processed
Aldicarb
Usage
Estimates
for
Citrus
and
Potatoes.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.
Attachment
4:
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.
Attachment
5:
Analysis
1
­
DEEM
 
Input/
Output
Files
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
(
Based
on
Existing
Registrations).
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.
Attachment
7:
Analysis
3
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm.
Attachment
8:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.
Attachment
9:
Analysis
5
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW.
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.
Attachment
11:
Analysis
7
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW
and
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Import
Tolerance
on
Bananas.
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
All
Proposed
Label
Amendments.
Attachment
14:
Analysis
10
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Excluding
Citrus
Commodities.
Attachment
15:
Analysis
11
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm,
Excluding
Potato
and
Sweet
Potato
Commodities.
Attachment
1:
Percent
Crop
Treated
Estimates
for
the
Aldicarb
Dietary
Exposure
and
Risk
Assessment.

ALDICARB
Case
#:
140
AI
#:
98301
Analyst:
John
Faulkner
Data
years:
1988­
98
QUA
date:
December
23,
1999
aldicar9.
wpd
EPA's
QUANTITATIVE
USAGE
ANALYSIS
Acres
Treated
(
000)
%
of
Crop
Treated
LB
AI
Applied
(
000)
Average
Application
Rate
States
of
Most
Usage
Site
Acres
Grown
(
000)
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
lb
ai/

acre/
yr
#
appl
/
yr
lb
ai/

A/
appl
(%
of
total
lb
ai
used
on
this
site)

Citrus,
Other
*
55
2
4
4%
7%
7
12
3.5
1.1
3.3
FL
100%

Grapefruit
167
20
33
12%
20%
77
113
3.8
1.3
3.0
FL
TX
100%

Lemons
62
0
2
1%
3%
2
5
3.8
­
­
CA
86%

Oranges
888
40
90
5%
10%
150
299
3.8
1.2
3.0
FL
90%

Pecans
469
18
39
4%
8%
55
134
3.1
1.2
2.5
GA
MS
TX
AL
87%

Potatoes
1,433
150
289
10%
20%
400
703
2.7
1.0
2.7
WA
FL
MI
OR
85%

Sweet
Potatoes,
Yams
82
13
30
15%
37%
17
41
1.4
1.0
1.4
NC
TX
AL
87%

Beans/
Peas,
Dry
2,190
25
39
1%
2%
24
67
1.0
1.1
0.9
WA
ID
MI
84%

Beans/
Peas,
Green
709
2
5
0%
1%
2
6
1.3
1.0
1.3
WA
ID
90%

Sorghum
11,140
10
34
0%
0%
5
18
0.5
1.0
0.4
TX
MO
AR
82%

Alfalfa
23,701
1
12
0%
0%
1
12
1.3
1.0
1.3
CA
MT
90%

Peanuts
1,582
480
749
30%
47%
540
931
1.1
1.1
1.0
GA
AL
NC
VA
87%

Soybeans
63,141
76
136
0%
0%
52
93
0.7
1.0
0.7
SC
IL
VA
AL
WA
TN
82%

Sunflower
2,789
1
2
0%
0%
­
­
­
­
­

Cotton
12,967
3,500
4,330
27%
33%
2,600
3,271
0.6
1.0
0.6
GA
TX
CA
NC
MS
AR
68%

Sugar
Beets
1,425
130
160
9%
11%
238
387
1.8
1.1
1.7
ID
NE
WY
CO
MT
81%
Attachment
1:
Percent
Crop
Treated
Estimates
for
the
Aldicarb
Dietary
Exposure
and
Risk
Assessment.

Acres
Treated
(
000)
%
of
Crop
Treated
LB
AI
Applied
(
000)
Average
Application
Rate
States
of
Most
Usage
Site
Acres
Grown
(
000)
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
lb
ai/

acre/
yr
#
appl
/
yr
lb
ai/

A/
appl
(%
of
total
lb
ai
used
on
this
site)

Sugarcane
926
0*
0*
0*
0*
0*
0*
­
­
­

Coffee
400
­
­
­
550
­
1.4
­
­
Brazil
94%

Tobacco
716
50
81
7%
11%
80
157
1.6
1.0
1.6
NC
VA
92%

Total
4,918
5,477
4,800
5,525
COLUMN
HEADINGS
Wtd
Avg
=
Weighted
average­­
the
most
recent
years
and
more
reliable
data
are
weighted
more
heavily.

Est
Max
=
Estimated
maximum,
which
is
estimated
from
available
data.

Average
application
rates
are
calculated
from
the
weighted
averages.

NOTES
ON
TABLE
DATA
Calculations
of
the
above
numbers
may
not
appear
to
agree
because
they
are
displayed
as
rounded
to
the
nearest
1000
for
acres
treated
or
lb.
a.
i.
(
Therefore
0
=
<
500)

to
the
nearest
whole
percentage
point
for
%
of
crop
treated.
(
Therefore
0%
=
<
0.5%)

0*
=
Available
EPA
sources
indicate
that
no
usage
is
observed
in
the
reported
data
for
this
site,
which
implies
that
there
is
little
or
no
usage.

A
dash
(­)
indicates
that
information
on
this
site
is
NOT
available
in
EPA
sources
or
is
insufficient.

*
Citrus,
Other
includes
kumquats,
limes,
tangelos,
and
tangerines.

SOURCES:
EPA
data
(
1988­
98),
USDA
(
1990­
97),
and
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy
(
1992
data)
Attachment
2.
Additional
Fresh/
Processed
Aldicarb
Usage
Estimates
for
Citrus
and
Potatoes.

Acres
(
000)

Treated
%
of
Crop
Treated
Lb
ai
(
000)

Applied
Average
Application
Rates
Site
Acres
(
000)
Grown
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
lb
ai/
A/
yr
#
appl/
year
lb
ai/

A/
appl
States/
Regions
Potatoes,
fresh
Florida
14
*
12
12
83%
83%
FL
Pacific
Northwest
(
PNW)
138
*
15
22
11%
16%
ID
OR
WA
PNW
with
shorter
PHI
proj
138
*
30
45
22%
32%
ID
OR
WA
Midwest
(
MW)
proj
105
*
9
9
9%
9%
MI
MN
ND
SD
WY
CO
US
Current
(
FL
+
PNW)
626
27
34
4%
5%
FL
ID
OR
WA
with
shorter
PHI
in
PNW
proj
626
42
56
7%
9%
FL
ID
OR
WA
US
Current
+
MW
(
FL
PNW
MW)
proj
626
36
43
6%
7%
FL
ID
OR
WA
MW
with
shorter
PHI
in
PNW
proj
626
51
65
8%
10%
FL
ID
OR
WA
MW
Potatoes,
processed
Florida
30
*
21
21
72%
72%
FL
Pacific
Northwest
(
PNW)
455
*
107
157
23%
34%
ID
OR
WA
PNW
with
shorter
PHI
proj
455
*
167
247
37%
54%
ID
OR
WA
Midwest
(
MW)
proj
240
*
27
27
11%
11%
MI
MN
ND
SD
WY
CO
US
Current
(
FL
+
PNW)
736
128
178
17%
24%
FL
ID
OR
WA
with
shorter
PHI
in
PNW
proj
736
189
268
26%
36%
FL
ID
OR
WA
US
Current
+
MW
(
FL
PNW
MW)
proj
736
155
205
21%
28%
FL
ID
OR
WA
MW
with
shorter
PHI
in
PNW
proj
736
216
295
29%
40%
FL
ID
OR
WA
MW
Potatoes,
fresh
and
processed
Florida
44
*
33
33
75%
75%
FL
Pacific
Northwest
(
PNW)
593
*
122
179
21%
30%
ID
OR
WA
PNW
with
shorter
PHI
proj
593
*
198
291
33%
49%
ID
OR
WA
Midwest
(
MW)
proj
345
*
36
36
10%
10%
MI
MN
ND
SD
WY
CO
US
Current
(
FL
+
PNW)
1,362
155
212
11%
16%
400
700
2.6
1.1
2.3
FL
ID
OR
WA
with
shorter
PHI
in
PNW
proj
1,362
231
324
17%
24%
FL
ID
OR
WA
Attachment
2.
Additional
Fresh/
Processed
Aldicarb
Usage
Estimates
for
Citrus
and
Potatoes.

Acres
(
000)

Treated
%
of
Crop
Treated
Lb
ai
(
000)

Applied
Average
Application
Rates
Site
Acres
(
000)
Grown
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
Wtd
Avg
Est
Max
lb
ai/
A/
yr
#
appl/
year
lb
ai/

A/
appl
States/
Regions
US
Current
+
MW
(
FL
PNW
MW)
proj
1,362
191
248
14%
18%
FL
ID
OR
WA
MW
with
shorter
PHI
in
PNW
proj
1,362
267
360
20%
26%
FL
ID
OR
WA
MW
Grapefruit
Fresh
165
26
41
16%
25%
122
191
4.7
1.3
3.5
34
FL
Processed
38
6
13
17%
33%
20
38
3.0
1.1
2.7
7
FL
TX
Total
203
33
54
16%
26%
142
229
4.3
1.3
3.4
42
FL
TX
Oranges
Fresh
408
27
51
7%
13%
97
182
3.6
1.2
3.0
32
FL
Processed
518
59
120
11%
23%
185
377
3.1
1.1
2.9
64
FL
TX
Total
926
86
171
9%
18%
283
559
3.3
1.1
3.0
96
FL
TX
COLUMN
HEADINGS
*
Acres
grown
applies
to
the
entire
US
unless
indicated
with
an
asterisk
(*)
where
it
applies
only
to
the
region
specified.

Wtd
Avg
=
Weighted
average­­
the
most
recent
years
and
more
reliable
data
are
weighted
more
heavily.

Est
Max
=
Estimated
maximum,
which
is
estimated
from
available
data.

Average
application
rates
are
calculated
from
the
weighted
averages.

NOTES
ON
TABLE
DATA
Calculations
of
the
above
numbers
may
not
appear
to
agree
because
they
are
displayed
as
rounded
to
the
nearest
1000
for
acres
treated
or
lb.
a.
i.
(
Therefore
0
=
<
500)

to
the
nearest
whole
percentage
point
for
%
of
crop
treated.
(
Therefore
0%
=
<
0.5%)

proj
=
projected.
Numbers
in
italics
and
indicated
with
"
proj"
are
projected
or
include
projected
amounts.

SOURCES:
EPA
data
(
1988­
98),
USDA
(
1990­
98),
and
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy
(
1992
data)

WEFA
Group
forecasts
(
1997
data)
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
38
of
203
Summary
of
Residue
Data
Supporting
Anticipated
Residue
Estimates
and
Acute
RDFs:

Crop/
Commodity
MRID
Nos.

Pecans
140487,
102123
Peanuts
102013
Cottonseed
102061,
42436606
Dry
Beans
135031
Soybeans
135031,
40884601
Sugarcane
101923
Sugarbeet
35368,
35369,
101966
Coffee
096131,
016252
Orange
36313,
42016901,
42004401,
43110601,
140001,
102114
Grapefruit
148971,
102129,
42016901
Lime
102129
Lemon
102129
Potato
42827804,
42827802,
43299002,
43385001,
44244701,
44196701,
44209001,
44341801
Sweet
Potato
101923,
42722301
Banana
44847402,
44847403,
45181802
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
39
of
203
Pecans
Use
Pattern
and
%
CT
Estimates
Aldicarb
is
applied
post­
emergence,
soil
incorporated,
to
producing
pecan
trees;
either
a
single
application
is
made
at
bud
break,
or
split
applications
are
permitted
at
bud
break
and
mid­
summer.
For
single
applications,
the
maximum
seasonal
rate
is
5
lb
ai/
A
in
FL,
7.1
lb
ai/
A
in
AZ,
and
10.1
ai/
A
in
other
states.
For
split
applications,
the
first
application
may
be
made
at
bud
break,
at
5
lb
ai/
A,
followed
by
a
3
lb
ai/
A
application
in
mid
summer;
alternatively,
a
single
application
of
3
lb
ai/
A
may
be
made
mid­
summer.
Labels
specify
a
seasonal
maximum
of
10.1
lb
ai/
A.
Under
certain
Special
Local
Need
(
SLN)
registrations,
shank
or
injection
split
applications
may
be
made
at
bud
break
at
2.6
lb
ai/
A,
followed
by
a
mid­
summer
application
of
1.2
lb
ai/
A,
for
a
total
seasonal
application
3.8
lb
ai/
A.
Label­
specified
pre­
harvest
intervals
(
PHI's)
range
from
105
to
120
days,
although
some
labels
do
not
specify
a
PHI.
Applications
made
in
CA
exclude
Del
Norte
and
Humboldt
counties.
Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD
indicate
an
estimated
maximum
of
8
%
CT
for
the
acute
analysis
for
pecans.

Residue
Data
[
MRID
Nos.
140487
and
102123]

Residue
data
submitted
under
MRID
Nos.
140487
and
102123
are
identical.
In
field
trials
conducted
in
1975­
1976,
pecans
grown
in
GA,
AL,
SC
and
MS
were
treated
with
single
applications
of
2
­
38.4
lb
ai/
A,
or
with
two
split
applications
of
5
lb
ai/
A.
Total
aldicarb
residues
were
measured
in
kernels
and
shells,
and
the
residues
in
whole
nuts
calculated
to
determine
the
appropriate
tolerance.
The
method
limit
of
detection
was
0.01
ppm,
with
nondetectable
residues
assigned
a
residue
value
of
½
LOD,
or
0.005
ppm.
For
the
purpose
of
risk
assessment,
HED
is
most
concerned
with
residues
in
pecan
kernels
(
i.
e.,
nuts)
reflecting
the
maximum
label
rate
(
i.
e.,
5­
10
lb
ai/
A).
However,
the
quantitative
usage
analysis
prepared
by
BEAD/
OPP
indicates
that
the
average
application
rate
for
pecans
is
3.1
lb
ai/
A,
with
approximately
one
application
made
per
year.
Most
of
the
usage
on
pecans
occurs
in
GA,
MS,
TX
and
AL.
Since
field
trial
data
reflect
worst­
case
farmgate
residues,
and
since
the
usage
data
indicate
the
maximum
label
rate
is
not
typically
used,
the
entire
range
of
available
field
trial
residue
data,
reflecting
all
application
rates
up
to
the
maximum
1X
label
rate,
have
been
incorporated
into
the
acute
residue
distribution
file
(
RDF,
for
acute
analysis),
as
shown
in
Table
1.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
40
of
203
Table
1.
Pecan
Field
Trial
Summary
for
Risk
Assessment.

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Residue,
ppm
2
180­
197
0.02;
0.005
GA
4
180­
197
0.04;
0.02
AL;
SC
5
171­
268
0.05;
0.08;
0.005
GA;
MS
6
180­
197
0.07;
0.01;
0.06;
0.005
GA
8
180­
197
0.03;
0.09
GA;
AL;
SC
10
180­
268
0.11;
0.10;
0.01;
0.27;
0.03;
0.05;
0.12;
0.005
GA
5+
5
(
split)
106
0.17
Average
Pecan
Residue
0.0614
ppm
The
pecan
RDF
is
included
in
a
complete
listing
of
RDFs
for
the
aldicarb
dietary
exposure
analysis,
Attachment
4.
The
acute
RDF
are
shown
below.

PECANS
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF1
Pecans
PB
22
Detects
+
253
zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.0614
Peanuts
Use
Pattern
and
%
CT
Estimates
Aldicarb
labels
allow
application
to
peanuts
via
soil
incorporation
(
in­
furrow
or
banded)
at
planting
at
3
lb
ai/
A;
alternatively,
split
applications
may
be
made
at­
planting
at
1.5
lb
ai/
A,
with
a
1.5
lb
ai/
A
application
made
at
or
just
prior
to
peg
initiation
but
no
later
than
40
days
after
emergence
and
prior
to
last
cultivation.
The
maximum
seasonal
rate
is
3
lb
ai/
A,
with
a
PHI
of
90
days.
Use
is
limited
to
AL,
FL,
GA,
NC,
and
VA.

Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD
indicate
an
estimated
maximum
of
47
%
CT
for
peanuts.
Since
peanuts
are
considered
to
be
blended,
the
acute
dietary
exposure
assessment
incorporated
a
residue
point
estimate
for
aldicarb
in
peanuts.
The
estimated
maximum
of
47%
CT
is
incorporated
into
the
acute
point
estimate.

Residue
Data
[
MRID
No
102013]

Field
trial
data
for
peanuts
were
submitted
under
MRID
No.
102013
in
support
of
registration.
In
field
trials
conducted
in
AL,
FL,
GA,
NC,
OK,
TX
and
VA,
peanuts
were
treated
at
rates
of
2,
4
or
6
lb
ai/
A,
either
pre­
plant,
at­
plant
or
at­
pegging,
and
harvested
118­
168
days
later.
In
addition,
several
trials
were
conducted
in
which
peanuts
were
treated
with
split
applications
of
2
+
2,
4
+
4,
4
+
2,
or
6
+
2
lb
ai/
A,
with
the
first
application
at­
plant
and
the
second
application
at
pegging,
with
PHI's
of
38­
137
days.
Total
aldicarb
residues
were
measured
in
green
nuts,
whole
nuts,
dry
nuts,
and,
in
some
cases,
the
kernel,
or
edible
portion.
Residues
were
generally
low
or
nondetectable,
with
a
method
sensitivity
(
LOD)
of
0.01
ppm
for
whole
nuts,
dry
nut
and
green
nut,
and
0.002
ppm
for
kernels;
the
resulting
½
LOD
values
assigned
to
nondetectable
residues
were
0.005
ppm
and
0.001
ppm,
respectively.
Only
one
field
trial
conducted
in
VA
used
the
label
rate
of
3
lb
ai/
A,
but
nuts
were
harvested
at
PHI's
less
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
41
of
203
then
90
days,
and
residues
in
only
the
green
nuts
were
measured.
Residues
in
peanut
oil
processed
from
peanuts
bearing
detectable
residues
were
<
0.003
ppm;
residues
in
oil
are
therefore
estimated
at
½
LOD
or
0.0015
ppm.
The
acute
anticipated
residues
in
peanut
oil
are
derived
from
½
LOD,
as
shown
in
Table
2.
Since
residues
in
peanut
kernel
samples
are
most
useful
for
risk
assessment,
only
the
kernel
results
(
i.
e.,
excluding
whole
dry
nuts
and
green
nuts)
are
summarized
in
Table
2.
Since
none
of
the
results
in
kernels
reflect
the
label
maximum
of
3
lb
ai/
A,
all
the
residue
values
from
the
2­
and
4­
lb
ai/
A
applications
were
used.
This
approach
is
considered
to
be
an
upper­
bound
estimate
of
aldicarb
residues
in
peanuts,
since
usage
data
indicate
a
lower
application
rate
of
approximately
1
lb
ai/
A
is
typically
used.

Table
2.
Peanut
Field
Trial
Summary
for
Risk
Assessment.

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Kernel
Residue,
ppm
2
(
at­
plant)
144
0.001,
0.001
AL
4
(
at­
plant)
144
0.001,
0.012
2
(
preplant)
121
0.002,
0.001
GA
4
(
preplant)
121
0.002,
0.003
2
(
at­
plant)
131
0.006,
0.009
NC
4
(
at­
plant)
131
0.016,
0.017
TX
2
(
at­
plant)
114
0.005,
0.005
2
(
at­
plant)
156
0.007,
0.004
VA
4
(
at­
plant)
156
0.003,
0.004
Average
residue
in
peanuts
(
kernels)
0.0055
ppm
Acute
AR
=
0.0055
x
47%
=
0.002585
ppm
Acute
oil
AR
=
0.0015
x
47%
=
0.000705
ppm
Cottonseed
Use
Pattern
and
%
CT
Estimates
Aldicarb
products
may
be
applied
to
cotton
either
at
planting
or
post­
emergence;
rates
range
from
0.75
lb
ai/
A
(
5%
G
formulation)
to
4.1
lb
ai/
A
(
10%
G
and
15%
G
formulations,
rate
for
AZ/
Far
West).
The
registrant's
proposed
label
revisions
include
a
maximum
seasonal
use
rate
of
3.2
lb
ai/
A,
which
is
the
current
use
rate
for
at­
plant
+
post­
emergence
applications
allowed
on
EPA
Reg.
No.
264­
426.
Current
and
proposed
labels
specify
a
90­
day
pre­
harvest
interval
(
PHI).

Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD
indicate
an
estimated
maximum
of
33
%
CT
and
a
weighted
average
of
27
%
CT
for
cotton;
use
in
GA,
TX,
CA,
NC,
MS
and
AR
accounts
for
68%
of
aldicarb
use
on
cotton.
Since
cottonseed
and
its
associated
food
forms
(
cottonseed
meal
and
oil)
are
considered
to
be
blended,
the
acute
dietary
exposure
assessments
incorporate
a
residue
point
estimate
for
aldicarb
in
cottonseed.
The
estimated
maximum
of
33%
CT
is
incorporated
into
the
acute
point
estimate.
Residue
Data
[
MRID
Nos.
102061
and
42436606]

Available
field
trial
data
are
limited;
the
studies
were
conducted
prior
to
1975,
and
do
not
adequately
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
42
of
203
reflect
current
use
patterns.
Residue
data
to
support
use
on
cotton
were
submitted
under
MRID
No.
102061,
a
literature
study
generated
by
USDA
[
J.
Ag.
Food
Chem.
21(
3):
379­
386,
1973].
Seedling
cotton
grown
in
3
different
locations,
in
both
dry
and
irrigated
fields,
was
treated
with
a
single
application
of
granular
10%
G
at
1.5
lb
ai/
A,
and
harvested
90
days
later.
Residues
in
treated
cotton
ranged
from
0.0
ppm
(
i.
e.,
nondetectable)
to
0.21
ppm,
and
appeared
to
be
lower
in
the
irrigated
cotton.

Limited
field
trials
were
submitted
under
MRID
No.
42436606
[
1992
re­
format
of
a
1973
study].
Residues
in
cotton
treated
once
at­
plant,
once
at­
plant
with
an
additional
sidedress
application,
or
once
at
sidedress
only,
at
rates
ranging
from
0.5
to
3
lb
ai/
A.
The
results
of
a
cottonseed
processing
study
discussed
in
the
Aldicarb
Registration
Standard
indicate
residues
in
cottonseed
oil
processed
from
seed
bearing
measurable
aldicarb
residues
are
<
0.003
ppm,
and
therefore
the
anticipated
residue
in
oil
is
½
LOD,
or
0.0015
ppm.
These
data
are
summarized
in
Table
3.

Table
3.
Cottonseed
Field
Trial
Summary
for
Risk
Assessment.

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Cottonseed
Residue,
ppm
NC
1
(
at­
plant)
"
Normal
Harvest"
0.12
2
(
at­
plant)
"
Normal
Harvest"
0.11
SC
1+
2+
2
(
at­
plant
+
sidedress)
"
Normal
Harvest"
0.10
0.5(
at­
plant)
0.005
MS
1
(
at­
plant)
"
Normal
Harvest"
0.01
AR
2
(
at­
plant)
"
Normal
Harvest"
0.03
2
(
at­
plant)
0.005
TX
1+
3
(
at­
plant
+
sidedress)
"
Normal
Harvest"
0.04,
0.08
2
(
sidedress)
0.03,
0.03
AZ
4
(
sidedress)
"
Normal
Harvest"
0.05,
0.06
Average
residue
in
cottonseed
0.0515
ppm
Acute
AR
=
0.0515
x
33%
=
0.016995
ppm
Acute
oil
AR
=
0.0015
x
33%
=
0.000495
ppm
Dry
Beans
Use
Pattern
and
%
CT
Estimates
Aldicarb
applications
to
dry
beans
are
made
at­
planting
at
either
1.1
(
CA
only)
or
2.1
lb
ai/
A;
a
postemergence
(
up
to
bloom)
application
at
2.1
lb
ai/
A
may
be
made
in
ID,
OR
and
WA.
A
maximum
of
1
application
per
season
is
permitted,
with
a
PHI
of
80
days
for
the
post­
emergence
application,
and
a
PHI
of
90
days
for
at­
planting
applications.

Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD
indicate
an
estimated
maximum
of
2
%
CT
and
a
weighted
average
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
43
of
203
of
1
%
CT
for
dry
beans,
with
up
to
84%
of
usage
on
dry
beans
occurring
in
WA,
ID
and
MI.
Since
dry
beans
and
associated
food
forms
(
e.
g.,
baked,
boiled,
etc.)
are
considered
to
be
blended,
the
acute
dietary
exposure
assessments
incorporate
a
residue
point
estimate
for
aldicarb
in
dry
beans.
The
estimated
maximum
of
2
%
CT
is
incorporated
into
the
acute
point
estimate.

Residue
Data
[
MRID
No.
135031]

Field
trials
were
conducted
in
CA,
CO,
ID,
MI,
NE,
NY,
NC
and
WA,
with
application
rates
ranging
from
0.25­
3
lb
ai/
A.
Only
residues
in
mature
dry
seed
from
field
trials
conducted
at
up
to
2
lb
ai/
A
are
included
in
the
summary
table
(
Table
3),
shown
below.
Residues
were
very
low
or
nondetectable
(
i.
e.,
residues
were
assumed
to
be
½
LOD,
or
0.01
ppm)
in
dry
seed
harvested
from
87­
147
days
following
application.

Table
3.
Dry
Bean
Field
Trial
Summary
for
Risk
Assessment.

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Dry
Bean
Residue,
ppm
0.25
0.01,
0.01
0.5
0.01,
0.01
CA
(
small
white)

1.0
129
0.01,
0.01
0.75
0.04,
0.03
*
From
pods
which
split
during
shipping
CA
(
blackeye)

1.5
107
0.11,
0.10
*
From
pods
which
split
during
shipping
CA
(
pink)
2
103
0.01,
0.01
0.5
0.01,
0.01
CA
(
lima)

1.0
147
0.01,
0.01
0.5
0.01,
0.01
CA
(
blackeye)

1.0
147
0.01,
0.01
CO
(
pinto)
1.5
106
0.01,
0.01
ID
(
white)
1.5
121
0.01,
0.01
ID
(
wax)
1.5
113
0.01,
0.01
MI
(
white)
1.5
140
0.01,
0.01
0.5
0.01,
0.01
NE
(
great
north.)

1.0
112
0.01,
0.01
NC
(
blackeye)
1.0
87
0.01,
0.01
0.75
0.01,
0.01
WA
(
pinto)

1.5
106
0.01,
0.01
Average
residue
in
dry
beans
0.01
ppm
[
excludes
CA
trial
w/
split
pods
beans]

Acute
AR
=
0.01
x
2%
=
0.0002
ppm
The
registrant
conducted
a
cooking
study
in
which
dry
beans
(
blackeye,
red
kidney
and
field
peas)
bearing
detectable
aldicarb
residues
of
0.10
to
0.49
ppm
were
cooked
for
1,
2
or
3
hours
at
100
C.
Residues
in
blackeye
peas
were
0.49
ppm
prior
to
cooking,
and
were
0.02
or
0.03
ppm
after
cooking,
resulting
in
an
average
cooking
factor
of
0.05X.
This
cooking
factor
is
included
as
adjustment
factor
1
in
the
DEEM
 
analysis.
HED
notes
that
dietary
exposure
to
aldicarb
residues
in
dry
beans
is
not
expected
since
all
residues
were
nondetectable;
therefore,
a
sensitivity
analysis
could
exclude
dry
beans.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
44
of
203
Soybean
Use
Pattern
and
%
CT
Estimates
Soybeans
may
be
treated
with
one
at­
plant
application
of
aldicarb
at
rates
ranging
from
1.1
to
3
lb
ai/
A,
depending
on
the
geographic
location.
Labels
specify
a
PHI
of
90
days.
Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD
indicate
no
significant
aldicarb
usage
on
soybeans,
i.
e.,
0
%
CT
for
both
the
estimated
maximum
and
weighted
average.
HED
typically
defaults
to
1%
CT
when
estimates
are
<
1%;
however,
in
additional
sensitivity
analyses,
soybeans
should
be
excluded.
Since
soybeans
and
associated
food
forms
are
considered
to
be
blended,
the
acute
dietary
exposure
assessments
incorporate
a
residue
point
estimate
for
aldicarb
in
soybeans.
The
estimate
of
1
%
CT
is
incorporated
into
the
acute
point
estimate.

Residue
Data
[
MRID
Nos.
135031;
40884601]

In
field
trials
conducted
in
AL,
AR,
IN,
NC,
OK,
SC,
TX
and
VA,
soybeans
were
treated
with
one
atplant
application
of
aldicarb
at
rates
ranging
from
0.7­
3.0
lb
ai/
A,
with
PHI's
ranging
from
126­
194
days
after
application.
The
LOQ
was
0.02
ppm,
and
therefore
nondetectable
residues
were
reported
as
0.01
ppm.

Results
of
the
field
trials
are
shown
in
Table
4.

Table
4.
Soybean
Field
Trial
Summary
for
Risk
Assessment.

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Soybean
Residue,
ppm
3
0.01,
0.01
AL
2
160
0.01,
0.01
2
194
0.01,
0.01
3
160
0.01,
0.01
AR
3
161
0.01,
0.01
1.5
0.01,
0.01
IN
3
126
0.01,
0.01
1.5
0.01,
0.01
NC
3
160
0.01,
0.01
1.5
0.01,
0.01
OK
3.5
150
0.01,
0.01
1.5
0.01,
0.01
3
0.01,
0.01
3
160
0.01,
0.01
1.5
0.01,
0.01
SC
3
169
0.01,
0.01
1.5
0.01,
0.01
TX
3
134
0.01,
0.01
1
0.01,
0.01
VA
1
147
0.01,
0.01
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
45
of
203
Table
4.
Soybean
Field
Trial
Summary
for
Risk
Assessment.

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Soybean
Residue,
ppm
1.5
0.01,
0.01
3
164
0.01,
0.01
1.5
0.01,
0.01
3
127
0.01,
0.01
0.7
0.01,
0.01
1.4
166
0.01,
0.01
Average
residue
in
soybeans
0.01
ppm
Acute
soybean
AR
=
0.01
x
1%
=
0.0001
ppm
Acute
soybean
oil
AR
=
0.005
ppm
x
1%
=
0.00005
ppm
Although
soybean
processing
data
were
included
in
MRID
No.
135031,
these
data
were
considered
unacceptable
since
there
were
no
detectable
aldicarb
residues
in
soybeans
processed
into
meal
and
oil.
Additional
soybean
processing
data
were
submitted
under
MRID
No.
40884601.
Following
treatment
at
12
lb
ai/
A
(
4X
the
maximum
label
rate),
residues
in
dried
soybeans
were
0.03
ppm.
Residues
in
soybean
meal
were
0.05
and
0.04
ppm,
while
residues
in
both
samples
of
refined
oil
were
<
0.01
ppm.
For
the
purpose
of
dietary
exposure
assessment,
the
anticipated
residue
in
refined
oil
is
½
the
LOD
for
the
processing
study,
or
0.005
ppm.
For
the
acute
analysis,
incorporation
of
the
%
CT
into
the
point
estimate
results
in
an
AR
of
0.00005
ppm..
HED
notes
that
since
residues
in
soybean
and
soybean
oil
were
nondetectable
(
and
since
BEAD
estimates
0
%
CT),
a
sensitivity
analysis
could
be
conducted
excluding
soybeans
and
associated
food
forms.

Grain
Sorghum
Aldicarb
products
may
be
applied
to
grain
sorghum
soil­
incorporated
at­
planting,
at
a
rate
of
1.1
lb
ai/
A.
Only
one
application
is
permitted
per
season,
with
a
PHI
of
90
days.
Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD
indicate
no
significant
aldicarb
usage
on
grain
sorghum,
i.
e.,
0
%
CT
for
both
the
estimated
maximum
and
weighted
average.
HED
typically
defaults
to
1%
CT
when
estimates
are
<
1%;
however,
in
additional
sensitivity
analyses,
sorghum
should
be
excluded.
The
sorghum
AR
is
based
on
the
tolerance
of
0.2
ppm,
and
the
maximum
%
CT,
or
1%.
For
the
acute
analysis,
the
AR
is
0.002
ppm.

Sugarcane
[
MRID
No.
101923]
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
46
of
203
Sugarcane
grown
in
LA
may
be
treated
with
aldicarb
once
per
season,
either
at­
planting
or
at
ratoon
growth,
at
3
lb
ai/
A.
The
label
PHI
is
120
days.
Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD
indicate
no
significant
aldicarb
usage
on
sugarcane,
i.
e.,
0
%
CT
for
both
the
estimated
maximum
and
weighted
average.
Residue
data
to
support
the
use
on
sugarcane
were
submitted
under
MRID
No.
101923.
Sugarcane
stalk
residues
were
in
the
<
0.01
­
0.02
range
following
treatment
at
2
or
4
lb
ai/
A.
Cane
stalks
with
residues
<
0.011
were
processed
into
bagasse,
dilute
juice,
clarified
juice,
syrup,
raw
sugar
and
molasses,
in
which
residues
were
all
<
0.011
ppm.
In
addition,
fortified
dilute
juice
(
0.24
ppm)
was
processed
into
clarified
juice,
syrup
and
raw
sugar.
Residues
in
clarified
juice
were
0.1
ppm,
while
residues
in
syrup
and
raw
sugar
were
0.21
and
<
0.011
ppm,
respectively.
Given
that
there
is
no
significant
usage
estimated
on
sugarcane,
residues
in
stalks
were
generally
nondetectable
even
at
1.3X,
and
since
aldicarb
residues
in
raw
sugar
are
not
expected,
HED
concludes
that
sugarcane
(
refined
sugar
and
molasses)
should
be
excluded
from
dietary
exposure
analyses
for
aldicarb.

Sugar
beet
Use
Pattern
and
%
CT
Estimates
Aldicarb
may
be
applied
to
sugar
beet
soil­
incorporated
at­
planting
(
or
1
week
before
planting)
at
2.1
­
5
lb
ai/
A.
Alternatively,
an
at­
plant
application
may
be
made,
followed
by
an
additional
application
40­
60
days
after
the
initial
application;
the
application
rates
specified
are
2.1
­
3
lb
ai/
A.
Finally,
a
single
post­
emergence
application
can
be
made
at
2.1
­
4
lb
ai/
A,
30­
60
days
after
planting.
Registered
labels
specify
a
PHI
of
90
days,
or
120
days
if
sugar
beet
tops
are
to
be
fed
to
livestock.
Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD/
OPP
indicate
an
estimated
maximum
of
11
%
CT
and
a
weighted
average
of
9
%
CT
for
sugar
beet.
[
Since
sugar
beet
food
forms
are
considered
to
be
blended,
the
acute
dietary
exposure
assessments
incorporate
a
residue
point
estimate
for
aldicarb
in
sugar
beet].

Residue
Data
[
MRID
Nos.
35368;
35369;
101966]

Sugar
beet
tops
field
trial
data
submitted
under
MRID
No.
35368
have
not
been
presented,
since
they
are
a
livestock
feed
item,
and
since
secondary
residues
in
livestock
commodities
are
not
expected
to
occur.

Field
trials
described
in
MRID
No.
35369
(
1970)
were
conducted
in
CO,
and
included
applications
at
2
or
4
lb
ai/
A,
with
harvest
occurring
160
and
176
days
later,
respectively.
Residues
in
roots
were
<
0.01
ppm,
[
0.005
ppm]
in
duplicate
root
samples
from
each
trial.
A
range
of
application
rates
and
timing
was
incorporated
in
field
trials
submitted
under
MRID
No.
101966.
In
field
trials
conducted
in
CA,
UT,
ID,
MI,
ND,
CO,
NC,
OH,
NM
and
WA,
single
or
multiple
applications
were
made
at
rates
ranging
from
1­
30
lb
ai/
A,
with
harvest
occurring
from
18­
238
days
after
treatment.
Very
few
trials
were
conducted
with
either
a
120­
or
90­
day
PHI.
These
trials
are
summarized
below,
in
Table
5:

Table
5.
Sugar
beet
Field
Trial
Summary
for
Risk
Assessment.

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Sugar
beet
Residue,
ppm
CA
3
(
at­
plant)
90
0.02
UT
2
(
preplant)
90
0.005,
0.005
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
47
of
203
Table
5.
Sugar
beet
Field
Trial
Summary
for
Risk
Assessment.

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Sugar
beet
Residue,
ppm
120
0.005,
0.005
90
0.02,
0.04
4
(
preplant)

120
0.01,
0.005
90
0.005
2
(
preplant)

120
0.005
90
0.01
ID
4
(
preplant)

120
0.01
MI
5
(
at­
plant)
114
0.03
1.5+
1
(
at­
plant+
post­
emergence)
113
0.01
ND
4
(
at­
plant)
103
0.01
104
0.005
WA
1+
1
(
at­
plant
+
over
foliage)
110
0.005
Average
residue
in
sugar
beet
0.0114
ppm
Acute
sugar
beet
AR
=
0.0114
x
11%
=
0.0013
ppm
In
conjunction
with
the
field
trials
summarized
above,
a
processing
study
was
conducted
in
which
roots
bearing
detectable
residues
were
processed
into
diffusion
juice,
thin
juice,
thick
juice,
dry
pulp,
and
wet
pulp.
Although
there
were
detectable
residues
in
the
diffusion
juice,
these
residues
were
found
to
be
unstable
following
treatment
with
lime
water,
which
simulates
commercial
processing.
Residues
in
thin
juice
and
thick
juice
were
generally
either
0.005
ppm,
or
<
0.005
ppm.
Based
on
these
data,
the
registrant
concluded
that
there
would
be
no
detectable
aldicarb
residues
in
beet
sugar
and
molasses
processed
from
treated
sugar
beet
roots.
HED
concurs
with
this
conclusion;
therefore,
these
commodities
should
be
excluded
from
dietary
exposure
analyses
conducted
for
aldicarb.

Coffee
Use
Pattern
and
%
CT
Estimates
Coffee
grown
in
Puerto
Rico
may
be
treated
with
up
to
2
applications
per
season,
totaling
4.4
lb
ai/
A
(
0.11
oz/
tree).
Applications
are
made
to
the
soil
along
both
driplines,
and
coffee
can
be
harvested
90
days
later.
Tolerances
were
originally
proposed
in
1977
for
uses
outside
the
US,
primarily
in
Latin
America,
Africa
and
Asia.
Labels
submitted
in
support
of
PP#
7F1953
permitted
two
applications
at
6.7­
13.4
lb
ai/
A
(
1.5­
3
g
ai/
tree),
with
harvest
occurring
at
least
90
days
after
the
second
treatment;
HED
has
no
data
regarding
the
use
patterns
for
aldicarb
on
coffee
grown
outside
the
US.
The
estimated
upper
bound
%
CT
for
coffee
is
20
%.

Residue
Data
[
MRID
No.
096131;
016252]

Residue
data
submitted
under
MRID
No.
096131
indicate
residues
in
mature
green
coffee
beans
are
at
or
below
the
limit
of
detection
(<
0.02
ppm)
following
application
at
the
purported
label
rates.
In
conjunction
with
the
aldicarb
Registration
Standard,
a
coffee
bean
processing
study
was
required
to
support
aldicarb
use
on
coffee.
Data
submitted
under
MRID
No.
016252
were
deemed
acceptable.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
48
of
203
Coffee
was
treated
at
4X
the
maximum
label
rate,
resulting
in
detectable
residues
of
0.11
ppm
in
green
coffee
beans.
Aldicarb
residues
were
<
0.02
(
i.
e.,
nondetectable)
in
roasted
beans,
spent
grounds
and
instant
coffee
processed
from
the
treated
beans.
Based
on
the
low
residues
expected
in
mature
beans,
and
on
the
processing
study
conducted
in
coffee,
the
anticipated
residue
for
aldicarb
in
coffee
is
0.01
ppm,
or
½
LOD
for
coffee.
Application
of
the
%
CT
estimate
to
the
AR
results
in
an
acute
AR
of
0.002
ppm.
Since
residues
were
not
detected
in
coffee
as
consumed,
a
sensitivity
analysis
excluding
coffee
could
be
conducted.

Citrus
Fruits
(
Orange,
Grapefruit,
Lemon,
Lime)

Aldicarb
is
currently
registered
for
use
on
orange,
grapefruit,
lemon
and
lime,
and
these
crops
and
their
associated
commodities
have
been
considered
in
the
dietary
exposure
analysis.
However,
a
petition
to
establish
a
citrus
crop
group
tolerance
would
allow
use
on
additional
citrus
crops
such
as
tangerine,
kumquat,
citron,
etc.
The
existing
use
and
the
proposed
uses
are
considered
separately.

Use
Pattern
Aldicarb
can
be
applied
to
citrus
as
a
band
or
in­
furrow
treatment
along
the
driplines
on
both
sides
of
the
tree
row
just
prior
to
or
during
spring
flush
of
foliage
growth.
The
maximum
seasonal
and
single
application
rate
is
5
lb
ai/
A,
with
a
30­
day
PHI
specified
for
lemons
only.
BEAD/
OPP
provided
usage
estimates
for
both
fresh
and
processed
oranges
and
grapefruit,
as
previously
described.
Usage
data
suggest
that
most
citrus
crops
are
treated
once
per
season
(
in
accordance
with
the
label),
but
that
the
typical
rate
is
somewhat
less
than
the
maximum
of
5
lb
ai/
A.
Orange
and
grapefruit
%
CT
data
have
been
discussed
in
detail
under
"
usage
information;"
lemon
and
lime
usage
data
are
discussed
below.

Orange
Residue
Data
There
are
several
sources
of
residue
data
available
to
complete
dietary
exposure
analyses
for
oranges,
and,
by
translation,
other
citrus
commodities.
These
include:

(
i)
Field
trial
data
submitted
in
support
of
reregistration,
including
composite
sample
analyses
for
total
aldicarb
residues
as
the
sulfone;

(
ii)
An
in­
orchard
variability
study
in
which
aldicarb
and
metabolite
residues
were
measured
in
single
oranges
following
treatment
at
the
label
rate;

(
iii)
A
"
market
basket"
study
in
which
single
oranges
were
analyzed
for
total
aldicarb
residues
using
the
enforcement
method,
considered
to
be
more
like
a
farm­
gate
monitoring
study;

(
iv)
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
composite
monitoring
data
for
aldicarb
and
metabolite
residues
in
oranges
and
orange
juice;

(
v)
A
juice
processing
study
resulting
in
a
reduction
factor
for
aldicarb
and
metabolites;

(
vi)
The
Carbamate
Task
Force
Carbamate
Market
Basket
Survey,
in
which
aldicarb
and
metabolite
residues
in
single
oranges
were
analyzed;
and
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
49
of
203
(
vii)
FDA
Surveillance
Monitoring
Data
included
a
total
of
261
composite
samples
analyzed
during
1992
through
1998,
in
which
there
were
no
aldicarb
residues
detected.

Depending
on
the
data
set,
2
types
of
sensitivity
analyses
are
possible.
First,
since
aldicarb
per
se
was
not
detected
in
any
of
the
samples
from
certain
data
sets,
these
residues
may
be
assumed
to
be
true
zeroes
(
rather
than
½
LOD);
this
approach
is
supported
by
the
results
of
the
lemon
metabolism
study.
Second,
in
monitoring
data,
all
nondetectable
residues
may
be
assumed
to
be
zero
residue
values.
These
two
types
of
analyses
can
therefore
be
used
to
determine
if
the
dietary
exposure
estimates
are
sensitive
to
assumed
values
for
nondetectable
residues.

Based
on
the
orange
food
forms
included
in
DEEM
 
and
the
availability
of
fresh
and
processed
%
CT
data,
relevant
RDFs
consist
of
fresh
non­
blended
(
NB)
and
partially
blended
(
PB)
food
forms
and
processed
PB
food
forms.

Field
Trial
Data
[
MRID
Nos.
36313;
42016901;
42004401;
43110601]

Orange
field
trial
data
submitted
under
MRID
No.
36313
included
several
different
application
rates
ranging
from
2.5
to
10
lb
ai/
A,
but
only
the
5
lb
ai/
A
residue
results
have
been
summarized.
Following
a
single
application
of
5
lb
ai/
A
in
FL,
CA
and
AZ,
composite
samples
consisting
of
12­
25
fruits
were
harvested
at
PHIs
ranging
from
30
to
244
days.
Total
aldicarb
residues
were
measured
(
as
the
sulfone)
in
both
peel
and
pulp.
Results
of
the
study
are
shown
in
Table
6.

Table
6.
Orange
Field
Trial
Summary
(
5
lb
ai/
A
Application).

Trial
Location
Sample
Type
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Pulp
Residue,
ppm
Total
Peel
Residue,
ppm
Green
fruit
30
0.07,
0.06
0.34,
0.38
Mature
fruit
62
0.03,
0.03
0.12,
0.08
Fruit
124
0.05,
0.04
0.04,
0.04
Mature
fruit
31,
63
0.05,
0.05,
0.04,
0.05
0.18,
0.17,
0.16,
0.12
FL
Whole
fruit
93­
127
0.07,
0.07,
0.09,
0.09,
0.07,
0.09,
0.04,
0.04,
0.03,
0.03
CA
Mature
fruit
178
0.02,
0.02,
0.02,
0.03,
0.04,
0.05
0.02,
0.03,
0.04,
0.06,
0.06,
0.07
CA
Mature
fruit
193
0.02,
0.02,
0.02,
0.02,
0.02,
0.02
0.04,
0.04,
0.04,
0.04,
0.04,
0.04
Green
and
Ripe
fruit
158­
188
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005
0.01,
0.01,
0.01,
0.01
Green
and
Ripe
fruit
249
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005
0.01,
0.01,
0.01,
0.01
AZ
Ripe
fruit
280
0.005,
0.005
0.01,
0.01
Total
#
of
Pulp
Residues
=
32
Ave
Pulp
Residue=
0.0256
ppm
When
field
trial
data
are
used
to
generate
residue
distribution
files,
the
partially
blended
and
nonblended
RDFs
are
essentially
the
same;
since
composite
field
trial
data
generally
represent
upper
bound
estimates
of
residues,
they
are
not
decomposited
to
yield
single
unit
residues.
The
following
acute
RDFs
were
generated
using
the
field
trial
data:
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
50
of
203
ORANGE,
FT
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF2
Orange,
NB=
PB
Fresh
32
detects
+
214
Zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.0256
[%
CT
=
13]

RDF3
Orange,
PB
Proc.
32
Detects
+
107
Zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.0256
[%
CT
=
23]
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
51
of
203
An
in­
orchard
variability
study
was
submitted
under
MRID
Nos.
420169­
01
and
420044­
01,
in
which
oranges
were
treated
at
5
lb
ai/
A
as
an
incorporated
band
under
the
driplines
of
the
trees,
and
fruit
was
harvested
60
days
later.
A
total
of
100
individual
oranges
from
each
of
three
trials
was
analyzed
for
aldicarb
and
each
of
its
metabolites.
In
the
first
trial,
there
were
no
detections
(
i.
e.,
<
0.01,
or
0.005
ppm
assumed
)
of
aldicarb
per
se
or
the
sulfone
metabolite;
detections
of
the
sulfoxide
ranged
from
<
0.01
(
0.005)
to
0.04
ppm.
In
the
second
trial,
there
was
one
detection
of
aldicarb
per
se
at
0.005
ppm,
with
no
other
detections
of
aldicarb
or
the
sulfoxide
and
sulfone
metabolites;
because
aldicarb
was
detected
at
½
LOD,
the
total
residue
for
all
100
samples
was
0.01625
ppm
(
the
combined
½
LOD
for
the
method).
In
the
third
trial,
there
were
no
detections
(
i.
e.,
<
0.01,
or
0.005
ppm
assumed
)
of
aldicarb
per
se,
and
detections
of
the
sulfone
ranged
from
0.005
to
0.02
ppm;
aldicarb
sulfoxide
detects
ranged
from
0.005
to
0.15
ppm.
The
combined
residue
in
the
third
trial
ranged
from
0.01625
to
0.17785
ppm.
The
overall
average
residue
(
parent
plus
metabolites)
for
all
three
trials
is
0.026524
ppm.
The
individual
residue
values
are
captured
in
the
acute
RDFs
shown
in
attachment
4.
All
oranges
are
assumed
to
have
been
treated,
and
the
acute
RDFs
are
constructed
using
the
300
measured
residue
values
and
then
a
number
of
zero
residues
values
were
added
to
account
for
the
percent
of
the
crop
not
treated.
Since
aldicarb
per
se
residues
were
detected
(
below
the
LOD),
there
was
no
sensitivity
analysis
for
zero
residues
of
aldicarb.

ORANGE,
FT
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF4
Orange,
NB=
PB
Fresh
300
detects
+
2007
zeroes
Residue
Range
=
0.01625
to
0.17785
Ave.
Residue
=
0.026254
[%
CT
=
13]

RDF5
Orange,
PB
Proc.
300
detects
+
1004
zeroes
Range
=
<
0.005
­
0.12
Ave.
Residue
=
0.026254
[%
CT
=
23]

A
"
market
basket
survey"
for
aldicarb
residues
in
oranges
was
submitted
under
MRID
No.
431106­
01
(
1993).
Oranges
were
sampled
from
March
to
May
from
orange
groves
known
to
have
been
treated
with
aldicarb,
with
the
additional
criteria
that
mature
fruit
were
present
on
trees
at
the
time
of
treatment,
and
that
the
oranges
were
intended
for
fresh
market.
This
study
is
considered
to
be
more
like
a
farmgate
monitoring
study
than
a
traditional
market
basket
survey;
a
majority
of
the
aldicarb
usage
on
oranges
is
in
FL,
and
the
data
were
intended
to
be
extrapolated
to
the
remaining
US
production
for
fresh
market.

Harvest
was
timed
as
close
as
possible
to
the
harvest
date,
and
only
bearing
trees
were
selected.
A
total
of
50
trees
were
selected
randomly
from
the
treated
locations,
and
then
eight
oranges
were
selected
from
each
tree;
once
the
selected
oranges
were
placed
in
a
sample
bag,
one
orange
was
selected
at
random
for
analysis.
A
total
of
869
individual
oranges
were
analyzed.
Since
the
enforcement
method
was
used,
combined
residues
were
determined
as
the
sulfone.
Residues
ranged
from
0.005
ppm
(
i.
e.,
<
0.01,
therefore
½
LOD
used)
to
0.12
ppm,
with
an
average
of
0.008648
ppm.
The
individual
residue
values
are
shown
in
Attachment
4.
[
Even
though
these
data
were
based
on
fresh
market
residues,
there
are
no
data
reflecting
residues
in
oranges
intended
for
processing;
therefore,
the
fresh
market
residue
data
were
also
used
to
construct
a
processed
orange
RDF
for
this
data
set].
The
following
acute
RDFs
were
generated:
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
52
of
203
ORANGE
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF6
Orange,
NB=
PB
Fresh
869
detects
+
5,815
Zeroes
Residue
Range
=
<
0.005
­
0.12
Ave.
Residue
=
0.008648
[%
CT
=
13]

RDF7
Orange,
PB
Proc.
869
detects
+
2,909
Zeroes
Residue
Range
=
<
0.005
­
0.12
Ave.
Residue
=
0.008648
[%
CT
=
23]

Orange
Processing
Data
[
MRID
Nos.
140001;
102114]

Residues
in
oranges
were
0.08/
0.06
and
0.65/
0.52
ppm
in
fresh
fruit;
following
simulated
commercial
processing,
residues
in
juice
were
0.07/
0.05
and
0.17/
0.18
ppm,
indicating
an
average
reduction
factor
of
0.58X,
to
be
used
in
the
DEEM
 
analysis
as
Adjustment
Factor
1.
[
Note
that
this
factor
may
only
be
applied
when
fresh
orange
residue
data
are
the
residue
source
data
for
orange
juice].

PDP
Monitoring
Data
Oranges
Aldicarb
residues
in
oranges
were
monitored
by
USDA's
PDP
during
1994­
1996;
a
total
of
1,776
samples
were
analyzed
for
aldicarb
and
each
of
its
metabolites,
with
4
detects
of
aldicarb
sulfoxide.
Detected
sulfoxide
residues
were
0.015,
0.017,
0.017
and
0.025
ppm,
with
corresponding
total
aldicarb
residues
of
0.02588,
0.02804,
0.02804,
and
0.04328
ppm.
The
PDP
combined
weighted
average
½
LOD
value
for
aldicarb
in
oranges
is
0.036451
ppm.
The
relatively
high
½
LOD
is
due
to
the
high
LOD
value
achieved
for
aldicarb
sulfoxide
in
some
PDP
laboratories.
Assuming
residues
of
0
ppm
for
aldicarb
per
se,
the
weighted
average
½
LOD
is
0.025848
ppm.
Generally,
the
low
number
of
detects
and
relatively
low
levels
of
the
detected
sulfoxide
residues
would
permit
use
of
the
monitoring
data
directly
for
both
partially
blended
and
nonblended
food
forms
(
i.
e.,
the
detects
would
not
be
decomposited).
However,
this
approach
is
not
appropriate
for
aldicarb,
since
there
are
single
unit
residue
data
available
for
nonblended
food
forms.
Therefore,
the
acute
RDFs
constructed
from
the
PDP
orange
data
are
as
follows:

ORANGE,
PDP
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF8
Orange
PB
Fresh
4
Detects+
227@
1/
2
LOD+
1,545
Zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.125235
½
LOD
=
0.036451
(
wtd.
ave.)
[%
CT
=
13]

RDF9
Orange
PB
Proc.
4
Detects+
405@
1/
2
LOD+
1,367
Zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.125235
½
LOD
=
0.036451
(
wtd.
ave.)
[%
CT
=
23]
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
53
of
203
In
order
to
conduct
sensitivity
analyses,
RDFs
identical
to
RDF8
and
RDF9
were
prepared,
assuming
aldicarb
per
se
residues
of
0
ppm
[
see
below,
RDFs
10
and
11].
The
combined
½
LOD
of
0.025848
ppm
was
used,
with
detected
residues
of
0.03450,
0.02336,
0.02336
and
0.02120
ppm;
the
sum
of
the
detected
residues,
assuming
zero
residues
of
aldicarb,
is
0.10242
ppm.
In
addition,
RDF12
was
prepared
assuming
zero
residues
for
aldicarb
per
se,
and
assuming
that
1,772
samples
with
nondetectable
residues
were
zeroes;
RDF12
applies
to
both
fresh
and
processed
commodities.

ORANGE,
PDP
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF10
Orange
PB
Fresh
4
Detects+
227@
1/
2
LOD+
1,545
Zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.10242
½
LOD
=
0.025848
(
wtd.
ave.)
[%
CT
=
13]

RDF11
Orange
PB
Proc.
4
Detects+
405@
1/
2
LOD+
1,367
Zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.10242
½
LOD
=
0.025848
(
wtd.
ave.)

RDF12
[
Sens.]
Orange
PB
F/
P
4
Detects
+
1772
Zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.10242
[%
CT
=
23]

Orange
Juice
Aldicarb
residues
in
orange
juice
were
monitored
by
USDA's
PDP
during
1997­
1998;
a
total
of
1,392
samples
were
analyzed
for
aldicarb
and
each
of
its
metabolites,
with
1
detect
of
aldicarb
per
se
at
0.035
ppm
(
for
a
total
combined
residue
0.080890
ppm).
The
weighted
½
LOD
for
orange
juice
is
0.032106
ppm.
As
with
fresh
oranges,
the
relatively
high
½
LOD
is
due
to
the
high
LOD
value
for
aldicarb
sulfoxide.
An
analysis
in
which
aldicarb
per
se
residues
are
assumed
to
be
zero
could
not
be
conducted
using
this
data
set,
since
the
parent
was
the
only
residue
detected
in
one
sample.
The
following
acute
RDFs,
including
one
for
the
sensitivity
analysis,
were
prepared
for
juice:

OJ,
PDP
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF13
Orange
Juice
PB
Fresh
1
Detect+
180@
½
LOD+
1,211
Zeroes
Detect=
0.08089
½
LOD
=
0.032106
(
Wtd.
Ave.)
[%
CT
=
13]

RDF14
Orange
Juice
PB
Proc.
1
Detect
+
319@
½
LOD+
1,072
Zeroes
Detect=
0.08089
½
LOD
=
0.032106
(
Wtd.
Ave.)
[%
CT
=
23]

RDF15
[
Sens.]
Orange
Juice,
PB
F/
P
1
detect
+
1,391
Zeroes
Detect=
0.08089
Note
that
in
the
DEEM
 
analysis,
any
of
the
RDFs
generated
for
fresh
oranges
may
be
used
for
juice,
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
54
of
203
with
the
juice
processing
factor
of
0.58X
applied
via
Adjustment
Factor
1.

Carbamate
Market
Basket
Survey
Preliminary
data
from
a
carbamate
market
basket
survey
conducted
by
the
Carbamate
Task
Force
(
CTF)
included
results
for
oranges
tested
for
residues
of
aldicarb
and
it
metabolites.
These
data
are
currently
undergoing
review
in
HED,
and
are
presented
herein
for
the
purpose
of
conducting
a
preliminary
risk
assessment
for
aldicarb.
A
total
of
399
single
oranges
were
analyzed
for
residues
of
aldicarb
and
its
two
metabolites;
the
LOD
for
the
analytical
method,
0.001
ppm,
is
considerably
lower
than
in
other
studies
submitted
in
conjunction
with
reregistration.
Nondetectable
combined
residues
(
i.
e.,
½
LOD)
were
therefore
much
lower,
at
0.001625
ppm.
A
total
of
16
of
399
samples
(
4%)
had
detectable
combined
residues,
ranging
from
0.0014738
to
0.029065
ppm.
As
in
other
studies,
aldicarb
per
se
was
not
detected,
but
there
were
16
detections
of
the
sulfoxide,
and
8
of
those
samples
also
had
detectable
sulfone
residues.
The
sum
of
the
detected
combined
residues
is
0.129892
ppm;
assuming
zero
residues
of
aldicarb
per
se,
detected
combined
residues
ranged
from
0.000888
to
0.028480
ppm,
with
a
sum
of
0.120532
ppm.
The
following
RDFs
were
prepared
using
the
data,
and
are
presented
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.

ORANGE,
CTF
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF16
Orange
NB=
PB,
fresh
16
detects+
36@
½
LOD+
347
zeroes
Sum
of
detects=
0.129892
½
LOD=
0.001625
[%
CT
=
13]

RDF17
Orange
PB,
Proc.
16
detects+
76@
½
LOD+
307
zeroes
Sum
of
detects=
0.129892
½
LOD=
0.001625
[%
CT
=
23]

In
order
to
conduct
sensitivity
analyses,
RDFs
18
and
19,
identical
to
RDF16
and
RDF17,
were
prepared,
assuming
aldicarb
per
se
residues
of
0
ppm.
The
combined
½
LOD
of
0.00104
was
used,
and
detected
residues
included
only
the
sulfoxide
and
sulfone.
In
addition,
RDF20
was
prepared
assuming
all
nondetectable
residues
were
zeroes
(
applies
to
both
fresh
and
processed
commodities).
The
acute
RDFs
are
as
follows:

ORANGE,
CTF
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF18
Orange
NB=
PB,
fresh
16
detects+
36@
½
LOD+
347
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
½
LOD
=
0.00104
[%
CT
=
13]

RDF19
Orange
PB,
Proc.
16
detects+
76@
½
LOD+
307
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
½
LOD
=
0.00104
[%
CT
=
23]

RDF20
[
Sens.]
NB,
PB
Fresh/
Proc.
16
detects+
383
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
55
of
203
Grapefruit
[
MRID
Nos.
148971;
102129;
42016901]

Residue
data
to
support
aldicarb
use
on
grapefruit
are
not
as
extensive
as
orange
residue
data.
Field
trial
data
were
submitted
under
MRID
Nos.
148971
and
102129.
In
addition,
an
in­
orchard
variability
study,
similar
to
the
study
conducted
on
oranges,
was
submitted
under
MRID
No.
42016901.
Finally,
a
grapefruit
processing
study,
also
submitted
under
MRID
No.
102129,
demonstrates
a
reduction
in
residues
in
grapefruit
juice.
These
data
can
be
used
to
generate
RDFs
and
ARs
for
grapefruit.
In
addition,
translation
of
orange
monitoring
data
is
permitted
(
refer
to
HED
SOP
99.3).

Field
Trial
Data
In
field
trials
conducted
in
TX,
FL
and
CA
(
MRID
Nos.
102129
and
148971),
grapefruit
were
treated
at
either
5
or
10
lb
ai/
A.
Grapefruit
were
harvested
at
PHIs
ranging
from
105
to
300
days
following
application.
Table
7
indicates
total
aldicarb
residues
(
determined
as
the
sulfone)
in
grapefruit;
no
information
is
available
regarding
the
method
sensitivity.

Table
7.
Grapefruit
Field
Trial
Summary
(
MRID
No.
148971).

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Aldicarb
Residue,
ppm
TX
5
230
0.02
TX
5
0.02
10
237
0.02
TX
5
194
0.02
TX
5
194
0.02
TX
5
0.02
10
230
0.02
TX
5
238
0.02
TX
10
290
0.02,
0.02,
0.02,
0.02,
0.02,
0.02
FL
10
296
0.03,
0.03,
0.03,
0.03,
0.03,
0.03
TX
10
229
0.03,
0.03,
0.03
TX
10
239
0.03,
0.03,
0.03
FL
10
271
0.03,
0.03,
0.03
FL
10
295
0.03,
0.03,
0.03
FL
10
269
0.03,
0.03,
0.03,
0.03,
0.03,
0.03
5
105
0.02
CA
10
105
0.08
TX
5
265
0.02
10
265
0.02
Total
#
of
grapefruit
samples
=
42
Average
residue
in
grapefruit
=
0.027
ppm
When
field
trial
data
are
used
to
generate
residue
distribution
files,
the
partially
blended
and
nonblended
RDFs
are
essentially
the
same;
since
field
trial
data
generally
represent
upper
bound
estimates
of
residues,
they
are
not
decomposited
to
yield
single
unit
residues.
Using
the
field
trial
data
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
56
of
203
and
%
CT
data,
the
following
acute
RDFs
were
generated:

GRAPEFRUIT,
FT
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF21
NB=
PB,
Fresh
42
detects
+
126
zeros
Ave.
Residue
=
0.027
RDF22
PB,
Proc.
42
detects
+
85
zeros
Ave.
Residue
=
0.027
An
in­
orchard
variability
study
was
submitted
under
MRID
No.
42016901,
in
which
grapefruit
were
treated
at
5
lb
ai/
A
as
an
incorporated
band
under
the
driplines
of
the
trees,
and
fruit
was
harvested
60
days
later.
A
total
of
100
individual
grapefruit
from
each
of
three
trials
(
i.
e.,
300
grapefruit)
was
analyzed
for
aldicarb
and
each
of
its
metabolites.
Aldicarb
per
se
was
not
detected
in
any
of
the
samples,
while
sulfoxide
residues
ranged
from
the
LOD,
0.01
(
assigned
a
value
of
½
LOD,
or
0.005
ppm)
to
0.03
ppm.
Aldicarb
sulfone
residues
were
detected
at
or
below
the
LOD
of
0.01
ppm,
and
were
assigned
a
value
of
½
LOD.
Combined
residues
in
the
300
samples
ranged
from
0.01625
(
combined
½
LOD)
to
0.04325
ppm.
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
residues
are
true
zeroes,
residues
range
from
0.0104
to
0.0374
ppm.
The
average
residue
is
0.017438
ppm
when
aldicarb
per
se
is
included
at
½
LOD,
or
0.011588
ppm
when
aldicarb
is
assumed
to
be
0
ppm.
A
total
of
262
samples
had
combined
residues
at
½
LOD.
Since
all
of
the
samples
were
known
to
be
treated,
the
following
acute
RDF
files
were
generated
by
adding
zero
residue
values
to
account
for
the
percent
of
crop
not
treated.

GRAPEFRUIT,
FT
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF23
NB=
PB,
Fresh
300
residue
values
+
900
zeros
Ave.
Residue
=
0.017438
RDF24
PB,
Proc.
300
residue
values
+
609
zeros
Ave.
Residue
=
0.017438
For
the
sensitivity
analysis,
aldicarb
per
se
can
be
assumed
to
be
zero,
resulting
in
RDFs
identical
to
RDF23
and
RDF24,
but
incorporating
residue
values
calculated
with
aldicarb
assumed
to
be
zero.

GRAPEFRUIT,
FT
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF25
NB=
PB,
Fresh
300
residue
values
+
900
zeros
Ave.
Residue
=
0.011588
RDF26
PB,
Proc.
300
residue
values
+
609
zeros
Ave.
Residue
=
0.011588
Grapefruit
Processing
Data
In
a
grapefruit
processing
study
submitted
under
MRID
No.
102129,
combined
aldicarb
residues
in
grapefruit
were
0.21
and
0.27
ppm,
and
resulted
in
juice
residues
of
0.02
and
0.05
ppm
respectively,
following
processing
in
accordance
with
typical
commercial
practices.
The
average
processing
factor
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
57
of
203
for
grapefruit
juice
is
0.14X,
and
is
incorporated
into
the
DEEM
 
analysis
using
Adjustment
Factor
1.

Monitoring
Data
In
order
to
ensure
that
all
available
residue
data
have
been
considered
in
the
assessment,
the
orange
monitoring
data
generated
by
the
Carbamate
Task
Force
have
been
evaluated
for
translation
to
grapefruit.
In
translating
monitoring
data
between
similar
crops
with
similar
use
patterns
but
different
%
CT
information,
HED
typically
preserves
the
ratio
between
the
%
detects
and
the
estimated
maximum
%
CT.
Essentially,
the
detects
and
½
LODs
are
translated,
and
the
number
of
samples
assumed
to
have
zero
residues
is
adjusted
accordingly.
In
single
oranges
monitored
by
the
Task
Force,
the
ratio
between
%
detects
(
4%)
and
estimated
maximum
%
CT
(
13%)
is
0.3.
When
this
ratio
is
applied
to
the
fresh
grapefruit
estimated
maximum
of
25
%
CT,
the
16
orange
detects
are
expected
to
constitute
7.5%
detects
for
grapefruit.
The
new
total
of
samples
is
213:
16
detects
(
translated
from
orange),
37
samples
assumed
to
have
residues
at
½
LOD,
and
160
samples
with
zero
residues.
The
resulting
acute
RDFs
are
shown
below.
The
RDF
for
processed
grapefruit
was
generated
similarly:
the
16
detects
constitute
9.9%
for
processed
grapefruit,
to
obtain
a
total
of
162
samples,
consisting
of
16
detects,
37
residues
at
½
LOD,
and
109
samples
with
zero
residues.
The
grapefruit
acute
RDFs
generated
using
orange
monitoring
data
are
shown
below.

G
RAPEFRUIT,
CTF
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF27
NB=
PB,
Fresh
16
detects+
37@
½
LOD+
160
zeroes
Sum
of
detects
=
0.129892
½
LOD
=
0.001625
RDF28
PB,
Proc.
16
detects+
37@
½
LOD+
109
zeroes
Sum
of
detects
=
0.129892
½
LOD
=
0.001625
For
the
sensitivity
analyses,
identical
RDFs
were
generated,
assuming
that
aldicarb
per
se
residues
(
in
the
16
detects
and
the
½
LOD
values)
are
zero.
The
residue
values
from
orange
RDFs
18
and
19
were
used,
along
with
the
grapefruit
numbers
for
½
LOD
and
zeroes:

G
RAPEFRUIT,
CTF
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF29
NB=
PB,
Fresh
16
detects+
37@
½
LOD+
160
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
½
LOD=
0.00104
RDF30
PB,
Proc.
16
detects+
37@
½
LOD+
109
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
½
LOD=
0.00104
Finally,
acute
RDFs
were
generated
assuming
that
all
nondetectable
residues
were
actually
zero
residue
values:
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
58
of
203
G
RAPEFRUIT,
CTF
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF31
NB=
PB,
Fresh
16
detects+
197
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
RDF32
PB,
Proc.
16
detects+
146
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
A
summary
of
the
orange
and
grapefruit
residue
data
is
presented
in
Table
8.
The
data
show
that
the
Carbamate
Task
Force
market
basket
survey
data
have
the
lowest
LOD
(
and
½
LOD),
and
therefore
are
least
likely
to
affect
the
analysis
due
to
the
assumptions
made
regarding
nondetectable
residues.
In
addition,
these
data
reflect
residues
closer
to
the
"
dinner
plate"
than
other
monitoring
data
(
with
the
exception
of
the
PDP
juice
monitoring
data).
Although
the
data
are
considered
to
be
preliminary,
pending
completion
of
a
review
of
the
data,
the
Task
Force
monitoring
samples
have
been
used
in
the
HED
analysis,
and
have
been
translated
to
all
other
citrus
crops/
commodities.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Table
8.
Summary
of
Available
Orange/
Grapefruit
Residue
Data
for
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Data
Source
#
Sampled/#
Det.
Min.
Res.
(
ppm)
1
Max.
Res.
(
ppm)
1
Ave.
of
Detects
(
ppm)
1
Ave.
Residue
(
ppm)
1
Individual
Citrus
Fruits
Grapefruit,
In­
Orchard
Variability
300/
38
0.01625
(
0.0104)
0.04325
(
0.0374)
0.025629
(
0.019779)
0.017438
(
0.011588)

Orange,
In­
Orchard
Variability
300/
133
0.01625
0.17785
0.047989
0.030274
Orange
Market
Basket
(=
Farmgate)
869/
160
0.005
0.12
0.0248125
0.0086479
Orange
CTF
Market
Basket
399/
16
0.001625
(
0.004010)
0.029065
(
0.028480)
0.016605
(
0.007533)
0.001885
(
0.001300)

Composite
Samples
Orange,
FT
32/
22
0.005
0.08
0.0350
0.0256
Orange,
PDP
1776/
4
0.010660
(
0.008320)
0.043275
(
0.034500)
0.031309
(
0.025605)
0.035979
(
0.025879)

Orange
Juice,
PDP
1392/
1
0.01508
0.080890
0.080890
0.032106
Grapefruit,
FT
43
0.02
0.08
0.027
1
Since
aldicarb
per
se
was
not
detected
in
any
sample,
total
residues
were
calculated
assuming
zero
residue
values
for
aldicarb
per
se
(
rather
than
½
LOD).
When
applicable,
these
residue
values
are
shown
in
parentheses.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
60
of
203
Lime
and
Lemon
[
MRID
No.
102129]

The
registered
use
pattern
for
lime
and
lemon
is
the
same
as
the
orange/
grapefruit
use
pattern.
Field
trial
data
to
support
use
on
lime
and
lemon
are
limited,
consisting
of
one
lemon
field
trial
conducted
in
CA,
and
several
lime
field
trials
conducted
in
FL
in
which
exaggerated
rates
and
short
PHI's
were
used.
Residues
in
lemons
ranged
from
0.02
to
0.05
ppm
(
MRID
No.
102129).
Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD/
OPP
indicate
the
weighted
average
and
estimated
maximum
%
CT
are
1/
3
for
lemon
and
4/
7
for
lime.
A
lime
juice
processing
study
was
conducted
and
submitted
under
MRID
No.
102129.
Aldicarb
residues
of
0.09
and
0.21
ppm
in
lime
resulted
in
residues
of
0.04
and
0.1
ppm,
respectively,
in
lime
juice
processed
in
accordance
with
typical
commercial
processes.
The
resulting
average
lime
juice
processing
factor
of
0.46X
has
been
translated
to
lemon.

In
order
to
include
lemon
and
lime
commodities
in
the
dietary
exposure
analyses
for
aldicarb,
orange
monitoring
data
have
been
translated
to
lime/
lemon,
and
the
juice
processing
factor
applied
to
relevant
food
forms.
Since
the
Carbamate
Task
Force
orange
monitoring
data
reflect
"
dinner
plate"
residues
and
have
the
lowest
½
LOD
of
all
the
data
sets,
these
data
are
the
most
appropriate
for
translation
to
lime/
lemon.

The
approach
used
to
translate
the
Task
Force
data
from
orange
to
grapefruit
was
also
used
for
lime
and
lemon;
since
there
is
no
differentiation
between
fresh
and
processed
%
CT
for
lime
and
lemon,
the
ratio
between
orange
detects
and
orange
fresh
market
estimated
maximum
%
CT
(
0.3,
as
discussed
above
under
grapefruit)
was
translated.
For
lime,
the
16
detected
residues
constitute
2.1%
detects,
resulting
in
762
total
samples.
The
resulting
lime
RDF
consists
of
the
16
detected
residues,
37
samples
at
½
LOD,
and
709
zero
residue
values.
Similarly,
for
lemon,
the
16
detected
residues
constitute
0.9
%
detects,
resulting
in
1,778
total
samples.
The
resulting
lemon
RDF
consists
of
the
16
detected
residues,
37
samples
at
½
LOD,
and
1,725
zero
residue
values.
The
acute
lemon
and
lime
RDFs
are
as
follows:

LEMON/
LIME
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF33
PB,
Lime
16
detects+
37@
½
LOD+
709
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.129892
½
LOD
=
0.001625
RDF34
PB,
Lemon
16
detects+
37@
½
LOD+
1,725
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.129892
½
LOD
=
0.001625
For
sensitivity
analyses,
identical
acute
RDFs
were
generated,
but
using
the
lower
½
LOD
which
incorporates
true
zero
residues
for
aldicarb
per
se,
and
the
concomitant
lower
residue
values
for
the
16
detects:

LEMON/
LIME
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF35
PB,
Lime
16
detects+
37@
½
LOD+
709
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
½
LOD
=
0.00104
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
61
of
203
RDF36
PB,
Lemon
16
detects+
37@
½
LOD+
1,725
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
½
LOD
=
0.00104
Finally,
assuming
zero
residue
values
for
the
nondetectable
sample,
and
assuming
the
detected
residues
had
zero
residues
of
aldicarb
per
se
yields
the
following
two
RDFs:

LEMON/
LIME
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF37
PB,
Lime
16
detects+
746
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
RDF38
PB,
Lemon
16
detects+
1,762
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.120532
Proposed
Uses
on
Citrus
Citron,
Kumquat,
Tangelo
and
Tangerine
In
conjunction
with
the
registrant's
proposal
to
establish
a
citrus
crop
group
tolerance
at
0.3
ppm,
aldicarb
could
be
used
on
additional
citrus
crops
including
citrus
citron,
kumquat,
tangelo
and
tangerine.
Since
these
uses
are
not
currently
registered,
there
are
no
estimates
of
%
CT.
However,
as
an
upper
bound
estimate
of
%
CT,
HED
translated
the
lime
%
CT
estimates
(
4%
CT
for
the
weighted
average,
and
7
%
CT
for
the
estimated
maximum)
to
the
proposed
citrus
crops.
Typically,
HED
assumes
tolerance­
level
residues
for
proposed
uses;
however,
for
risk
assessment
purposes,
the
orange
monitoring
data
from
the
CTF
have
been
translated
to
proposed
crops,
in
order
to
determine
if
the
proposed
use
is
likely
to
result
in
an
incremental
increase
in
dietary
exposure.
The
lime
RDFs
have
been
translated
to
the
proposed
citrus
commodities
and
food
forms,
which
are
also
considered
to
be
partially
blended.
The
orange
juice
PF
of
0.6X
is
translated
to
tangerine
juice.
The
proposed
citrus
acute
RDF
is
shown
below.

CITRUS,
PROPOSED
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF39
PB
=
NB,
Citrus
16
detects+
37@
1/
2
LOD
+
709
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.129892
½
LOD
=
0.001625
Potato
Use
Pattern
The
current
use
pattern
for
aldicarb
on
potatoes
allows
a
single
soil­
incorporated
at­
plant
application
of
3
lb
ai/
A.
A
PHI
of
100
days
is
used
in
FL,
and
a
PHI
of
150
days
is
in
effect
in
the
Pacific
Northwest
(
PNW).
Proposed
label
amendments
for
potatoes
would
reduce
the
PHI
from
150
to
120
days
in
the
PNW,
and
would
allow
aldicarb
use
on
potatoes
in
6
new
states
in
the
Midwest,
MN,
MI,
ND,
SD,
WY
and
CO.
The
%
CT
estimates
for
both
existing
and
proposed
uses
on
potatoes
have
been
described
in
detail
under
"
Usage
Information."
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
62
of
203
Residue
Data
There
are
multiple
sources
of
residue
data
available
to
complete
dietary
exposure
and
risk
analyses
for
potatoes.
These
include:

(
i)
1992,
A
total
of
17
side­
by­
side
field
trials
[
CA(
1),
CO(
2),
FL(
1),
ID(
2),
MI(
2),
MN(
1),
MT(
1),
NE(
1),
ND(
1),
OR(
2),
TX(
1),
WA(
2)]
with
PDA
and
GFA
equipment.
These
trials
demonstrated
that
GFA­
treated
potatoes
had
higher
residues,
especially
in
row­
end
potatoes;
a
total
of
918
individual
tubers
were
analyzed
[
MRID
No.
42827804].
The
data
were
reviewed
under
DP
Barcode
No.
D192797;
S.
Funk,
10/
14/
93.
[
Since
PDA
equipment
was
used
in
only
the
TX
trial,
these
data
have
not
been
included
in
the
current
analysis,
which
is
intended
to
reflect
the
current
use
pattern
(
i.
e.,
PDA
equipment
required).]

(
ii)
1993,
A
total
of
8
field
trials
[
FL(
1),
WA(
2),
MI(
2),
ME(
1),
PA(
1),
ID(
1)]
which
investigated
the
in­
plant
and
in­
field
variability
of
aldicarb
residues
in
potatoes
treated
at
the
maximum
label
rate.
A
total
of
1,621
individual
tubers
were
analyzed
[
MRID
No.
2827802];
the
data
were
reviewed
under
DP
Barcode
No.
D192797;
S.
Funk,
10/
14/
93.

(
iii)
1993,
A
total
of
12
field
trials
[
FL(
2),
ID(
4),
TX(
2),
WA(
4)]
were
conducted
to
support
use
of
PDA
equipment
on
potatoes
grown
in
the
PNW
and
FL;
more
than
1,500
individual
tubers
were
analyzed
[
MRID
No.
43299002].
The
data
were
reviewed
under
DP
Barcode
No.
D205271;
S.
Funk,
10/
03/
94.
(
iv)
1994,
Results
of
mid­
row
potato
tuber
analyses
for
the
FL
field
trials
submitted
to
supplement
information
found
in
MRID
No.
43299002.
A
total
of
70
individual
mid­
row
tubers
were
analyzed
to
support
PDA
equipment
[
MRID
No.
43385001].
The
data
were
reviewed
under
DP
Barcode
No.
D208503;
S.
Funk,
11/
18/
94.

(
v)
1996,
Field
trials
were
conducted
to
support
the
proposed
use
on
potatoes
in
six
states
in
the
Midwest.
A
total
of
12
composite
samples
from
6
field
trials
[
CO(
2),
MI(
2),
ND(
1),
SD(
1)]
were
analyzed,
and
fifteen
individual
tubers
from
one
of
the
composites
were
analyzed
[
MRID
No.
44244701].
The
data
were
reviewed
under
DP
Barcode
No.
D242191;
S.
Funk,
1/
15/
98.

(
vi)
1996,
Field
trials
were
conducted
in
the
PNW
[
WA(
3),
OR(
4),
ID(
3)]
to
support
a
reduction
in
the
PHI
from
150
to
120
days.
A
total
of
20
composite
samples
were
analyzed
[
MRID
No.
44196701].
The
data
were
reviewed
under
DP
Barcode
No.
D232788;
S.
Funk,
2/
26/
97.

(
vii)
1996,
A
study
was
conducted
in
which
143
composite
potato
samples
destined
for
commercial
processing
in
the
PNW
were
analyzed
for
aldicarb
residues.
The
participating
processors
were
Nestle,
Sunspice
and
Lamb­
Weston.
Detailed
information
about
the
study
was
not
submitted
to
EPA,
and
there
is
no
MRID
#
for
these
data,
which
were
discussed
in
the
S.
Funk
memo
dated
3/
11/
97
(
No
DP
Barcode
#).
The
data
have
not
been
incorporated
into
the
current
analysis,
since
further
details
regarding
the
individual
residues
detected
in
the
samples
are
needed.
The
maximum
residue
detected
in
any
composite
sample
(
16
tubers/
composite)
was
0.38
ppm.

(
viii)
1996,
A
farmgate
monitoring
study
was
conducted
by
the
registrant,
in
which
60
PNW
commercial
plots
were
selected
randomly,
and
composite
samples
consisting
of
30
tubers
each
were
collected.
In
order
to
reflect
the
distribution
of
PNW
potato
production,
a
total
of
12
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
63
of
203
fields
were
sampled
in
ID,
6
in
OR,
and
42
in
WA
[
MRID
No.
44209001].
The
purported
application
rate
was
3
lb
ai/
A.
The
data
were
reviewed
under
DP
Barcode
Nos.
D231368
and
D242191;
S.
Funk,
11/
12/
96
and
1/
15/
98.

(
ix)
1996,
The
State
of
FL
and
the
registrant,
RPAC,
sampled
the
same
sites
to
yield
a
total
of
17
(
FL)
or
12
(
RPAC)
composite
samples;
there
were
19
composite
samples
analyzed
by
both
the
state
of
FL
and
RPAC.
The
State
of
FL
used
a
less
sensitive
analytical
method,
and
therefore
the
results
of
the
two
sets
of
analyses
differed.
A
total
of
10
individual
tubers
were
analyzed
by
RPAC.
There
is
no
MRID
#
for
the
data,
which
were
reviewed
under
DP
Barcode
No.
D229956;
S.
Funk,
9/
24/
96.
This
data
set
has
not
been
incorporated
into
the
HED
dietary
exposure
analysis,
due
to
the
differences
in
the
analytical
techniques
used
by
FL
and
the
registrant,
and
since
there
were
relatively
few
samples.
(
x)
1997,
A
farmgate
monitoring
study
was
conducted
by
the
registrant,
in
which
44
FL
commercial
plots
were
selected
randomly,
and
composite
samples
consisting
of
30
tubers
each
were
collected.
In
addition
to
the
44
composite
sample
analyses,
individual
potatoes
from
4
of
the
composites
(
60
individual
tubers)
were
analyzed
[
MRID
No.
44341801].
The
data
were
given
a
brief
review
under
DP
Barcode
No.
D242191;
S.
Funk,
1/
15/
98.

(
xi)
1997,
The
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
conducted
a
special
survey
in
which
342
composite
samples
were
analyzed
for
aldicarb
residues;
residues
in
individual
tubers
were
analyzed
for
some
of
these
composites.
The
purpose
of
the
study
was
to
provide
a
comparison
between
a
composite
value
and
the
distribution
of
residues
within
that
sample
on
a
single­
serving
basis.
The
results
of
this
survey
are
discussed
in
more
detail,
below.

(
xii)
FY
97/
98,
The
State
of
FL
provided
the
registrant
with
a
summary
of
residues
in
41
composite
monitoring
samples.
The
submission
was
attached
to
a
letter;
no
specifics
regarding
sampling
or
analysis
were
provided,
and
the
supporting
data
have
not
been
reviewed
by
HED.
Aldicarb
sulfoxide
residues
were
detected
in
5
of
41
samples
at
0.069
to
0.15
ppm.
The
remaining
samples
were
reported
to
have
residues
"
BQL,"
or
below
quantifiable
limits
(<
0.06
ppm)
or
ND
(
not
detected,
no
LOD
reported).
These
data
have
not
been
incorporated
into
the
HED
dietary
exposure
analysis.

(
xiii)
The
effect
of
cooking
on
aldicarb
residues
in
potatoes
has
been
investigated,
and
the
results
of
these
studies
were
summarized
for
risk
assessment
purposes
in
the
S.
Funk
review
dated
7/
20/
95
(
No
DP
Barcode
#).
A
cooking
factor
of
0.5X
should
be
applied
to
boiled/
cooked
potatoes;
no
processing
factor
was
deemed
appropriate
for
baked
potato,
since
microwaving
did
not
reduce
residues.
Reduction
factors
of
0.74X
and
0.5X
were
generated
for
chips
and
fries,
respectively,
with
an
average
of
0.62X.
Finally,
a
reduction
factor
of
0.3X
was
identified
for
dried
potatoes.
These
reduction
factors
are
valid
for
the
current
dietary
exposure
analyses
for
aldicarb.
Furthermore,
the
reduction
factors
should
be
translated
to
similar
sweet
potato
food
forms.

Most
of
the
data
were
reviewed
in
detail
in
previous
memoranda,
and
were
recommended
to
be
used
in
HED
dietary
exposure
assessments.
The
results
of
the
studies,
as
well
as
the
strengths
and
weaknesses
for
use
in
dietary
exposure
assessment
and
risk
characterization,
are
discussed
below.
The
resulting
residue
distribution
files
and
associated
acute
(
blended
commodities)
anticipated
residues
have
been
generated
using
the
equations
described
previously.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
64
of
203
1993
­
In­
Field
Variability
Data
[
MRID
No.
42827802]

Field
trials
were
conducted
in
ME,
FL,
PA,
WA,
MI
and
ID;
the
ME
and
PA
data
have
been
excluded
from
the
current
analysis,
since
aldicarb
is
not
used
in
these
states.
Potatoes
were
treated
either
atplant
(
MI
and
FL)
or
at
emergence
(
MI,
ID,
WA)
with
aldicarb
at
3
lb
ai/
A
using
positive
displacement
application
equipment.
Individual
potatoes
were
harvested
at
maturity
and
analyzed
for
aldicarb
and
metabolite
residues
with
limits
of
detection
(
LODs)
of
0.02
ppm
for
each
analyte.
Aldicarb
per
se
was
generally
not
detected,
but
some
samples
had
detectable
residues,
reported
as
<
0.02
ppm.
In
accordance
with
HED
policy,
aldicarb
residues
were
assumed
to
be
present
at
½
LOD,
or
0.01
ppm.
Combined
residues
in
all
field
trials
ranged
from
0.0325
ppm
(
combined
½
LOD)
to
1.32
ppm.
A
total
of
800
tubers
were
analyzed
for
in­
field
variability,
with
100
analyzed
per
trial,
except
one
of
the
WA
trials,
in
which
300
tubers
were
analyzed.
Residues
were
detected
in
554
of
800
samples,
with
an
average
residue
of
0.212765
ppm
in
the
detects.
The
average
tuber
residue
was
0.157334
ppm.

Since
the
data
were
generated
in
field
trials,
the
RDF
for
non­
blended
and
partially
blended
commodities
are
the
same.
Based
on
fresh/
processed
%
CT
estimates
of
5/
24
and
4/
17
for
acute
the
following
RDFs
(
and
acute
ARs
for
blended
potato
food
forms)
were
generated
using
the
in­
field
variability
data:

POTATO,
FT
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF40
NB,
Fresh
800
detects
+
15,200
zeroes
Ave.
of
Detects
=
0.157334
PB,
Proc.
800
detects
+
2,533
zeroes
Ave.
of
Detects
=
0.157334
RDF41
B,
Proc.
AR
=
0.157334
x
0.24
=
0.037760
1993/
1994
­
Field
Trials
Using
GFA
and
PDA
Equipment
[
MRID
Nos.
43299002/
43385001]

The
study
was
conducted
to
compare
residues
in
potatoes
from
side­
by­
side
trials
using
both
types
of
application
equipment.
Field
trials
were
conducted
in
FL,
TX,
OR,
WA
and
ID.
Residues
in
row­
end
tubers
were
compared
in
the
FL
and
TX
field
trials;
mid­
row
data
were
not
generated
for
TX,
but
were
later
submitted
to
support
the
use
in
FL.
In
the
trials
conducted
in
the
PNW,
both
row­
end
and
midrow
potatoes
from
trials
conducted
using
PDA
equipment
were
analyzed.
Potatoes
were
treated
atplanting
at
the
maximum
label
rate
of
3
lb
ai/
A,
and
were
harvested
at
maturity.
In
order
to
reflect
the
current
use
pattern,
only
the
residue
data
(
mid­
row
and
end­
row)
from
trials
conducted
with
PDA
equipment
have
been
included
in
the
HED
analysis.

With
the
exclusion
of
the
TX
field
trial
data,
residue
data
from
14
field
trials
were
incorporated
into
the
RDFs.
There
were
4
trials
from
ID,
WA
and
OR,
and
an
additional
2
field
trials
from
FL.
In
each
trial,
approximately
100
row­
end
tubers
were
analyzed,
and
an
additional
30
or
35
mid­
row
potatoes
were
analyzed.
In
total,
1,329
row­
end
and
430
mid­
row
tubers
were
analyzed.
Residues
greater
than
the
combined
½
LOD
were
detected
in
493
samples,
with
1,266
tubers
having
residues
at
or
below
the
combined
½
LOD.
The
maximum
residue
detected
in
any
sample
was
1.2073
ppm.
The
average
of
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
65
of
203
the
detectable
residues
was
0.114587
ppm,
while
the
average
residue
for
all
samples
was
0.055507
ppm.

Using
the
same
general
format
as
the
in­
orchard
variability,
the
following
RDFs
were
generated
from
the
PNW
and
FL
single
tuber
data,
generated
using
PDA
equipment:

POTATO,
FT
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF40
NB,
Fresh
1,759
"
Detects"
+
33,421
zeroes
Ave.
of
Detects
=
0.055507
PB,
Proc.
1,759
"
Detects"
+
5,570
zeroes
Ave.
of
Detects
=
0.055507
RDF41
B,
Proc.
AR
=
0.055507
x
0.24
=
0.013322
Although
HED
would
normally
advocate
combining
the
two
data
sets,
which
had
similar
use
patterns
and
LOD's,
the
in­
field
variability
study
had
a
higher
percentage
of
detects,
and
the
average
residue
was
significantly
higher.
Therefore,
the
two
data
sets
were
not
combined.

1996/
1997
Farmgate
Monitoring
Studies
in
the
PNW
and
FL
[
MRID
Nos.
44209001,
44341801]

A
total
of
60
composites
from
the
PNW
and
44
composites
from
FL
were
analyzed
for
aldicarb
and
its
two
metabolites.
Commercial
potato
plots
were
selected
at
random,
and
composites
consisting
of
15
tubers
each
were
harvested
at
maturity.
The
fields
were
known
to
be
treated,
with
a
purported
application
rate
of
3
lb
ai/
A.
For
the
PNW
data,
there
were
25
of
60
samples
with
detectable
residues,
ranging
from
0.04546
to
0.15878
ppm;
the
average
of
the
detected
residues
was
0.072567
ppm,
while
the
average
residue
overall
was
0.049375
ppm.
The
combined
½
LOD
for
the
study
was
0.0325
ppm.

For
the
FL
study,
31
of
44
samples
had
detectable
residues,
ranging
from
0.02273
to
0.42877
ppm,
with
a
combined
½
LOD
of
0.01625
ppm.
The
average
of
the
detected
residues
was
0.09352
ppm,
while
the
overall
average
residue
was
0.07069
ppm.
In
addition
to
the
composite
samples,
individual
tuber
residue
values
were
generated
for
4
of
the
composites,
for
a
total
of
60
individual
tuber
residue
values.
In
composites
with
residues
ranging
from
0.24504
to
0.42292
ppm,
individual
tuber
residues
ranged
from
0.01625
(
½
LOD)
to
1.84585
ppm.
The
average
individual
tuber
residue
was
0.348709
ppm.
The
individual
tuber
data
have
been
presented
for
characterization
purposes
only.

The
combined
PNW
and
FL
composite
monitoring
data
were
used
to
generate
the
following
RDF
(
and
associated
ARs)
for
partially
blended
commodities.
The
average
residue
from
the
combined
data
set
is
0.58393
ppm.

POTATO,
FT
Acute
(
RDF)

PB,
Proc.
104
"
Detects"
+
329
zeroes
Ave.
of
Detects
=
0.58393
RDF44
B,
Proc.
AR
=
0.58393
x
0.24
=
0.140143
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
66
of
203
PDP
Monitoring
Data
The
1997
special
survey
was
targeted
to
potatoes
originating
from
FL,
ID,
OR
and
WA;
342
samples
were
collected
in
eight
participating
states
over
a
period
of
13
months.
Composite
samples
consisting
of
10
tubers
each
were
analyzed,
and
the
individual
tuber
residues
were
measured
for
some
composites,
specifically
the
highest
composite
residue
in
each
analytical
set.
Because
of
the
way
the
individual
tubers
were
selected
for
analysis,
the
special
survey
is
not
ideal
for
risk
assessment
purposes.

Of
the
342
composite
samples
analyzed,
there
were
detectable
residues
in
20
samples,
and
individual
potato
tuber
residues
were
determined
in
16
of
the
20
composites.
Since
individual
tuber
residues
were
determined
in
only
the
composites
with
the
highest
detectable
residues,
the
reported
residues
in
individual
tubers
may
have
been
skewed
toward
the
high
end.
There
was
no
attempt
to
compensate
for
this
artifact
of
study
design
in
the
current
dietary
exposure
assessment;
for
example,
no
assumptions
were
made
regarding
the
distribution
of
individual
tuber
residues
in
the
four
composite
samples
that
were
not
further
analyzed.
In
addition,
there
was
no
assumption
regarding
the
potential
distribution
of
residues
in
the
remaining
322
composite
samples
that
had
no
detectable
residues.

Aldicarb
and
its
metabolite
residues
were
analyzed
individually,
with
LODs
of
0.005
ppm
for
aldicarb
and
aldicarb
sulfone,
and
0.004
ppm
for
the
sulfoxide
metabolite.
Aldicarb
per
se
was
not
detected
in
any
of
the
composite
or
single­
serving
samples.
In
composite
sample
detects,
the
sulfoxide
constituted
79%
of
the
total
residue,
while
the
sulfone
constituted
21%
of
the
total
residue;
results
for
single
tubers
were
similar,
with
contributions
of
78%
and
22%
for
the
sulfoxide
and
sulfone,
respectively.
The
highest
combined
detected
residue
was
in
a
single
serving
sample
(
i.
e,
one
tuber),
at
0.402325
ppm
(
or
0.3994
ppm,
assuming
an
aldicarb
per
se
residue
of
0
ppm).
For
samples
with
detectable
residues
of
the
sulfoxide,
the
residue
in
the
single
serving
varied
from
0.1
to
7.4
times
the
corresponding
composite
residue.
For
the
sulfone,
single
serving
residues
were
0.2
to
6.1
times
the
composite
residue.
The
results
of
the
study
demonstrated
the
wide
range
in
variability
of
individual
tuber
residues,
relative
to
composite
residues;
variability
for
the
sulfoxide
was
1.5­
4.7,
while
the
sulfone
variability
was
2.1­
4.9.
The
details
of
the
study
are
presented
in
the
PDP
1997
Annual
Summary
Report.

For
the
composite
samples,
residues
ranged
from
0.00785
ppm
(
½
the
combined
LOD)
to
0.172925
ppm,
with
an
average
detected
residue
of
0.051322
ppm,
and
an
overall
average
residue
of
0.01043
ppm.
Since
there
were
no
detects
of
aldicarb
per
se,
the
total
and
average
residues
were
re­
calculated
assuming
0
residues
of
parent
aldicarb.
The
resulting
minimum
residue
is
0.00466
ppm,
with
a
maximum
of
0.17
ppm,
and
an
average
detect
of
0.048397
ppm.
The
overall
average
residue
is
0.007218
ppm.

As
stated
above,
20
composites
had
detectable
residues
(
5.85%),
and
a
total
of
16
of
these
were
analyzed
for
single
tuber
residues;
for
several
composites,
fewer
than
10
of
the
individual
tubers
were
analyzed;
in
order
to
include
these
single
tubers
in
the
current
analysis,
the
average
residue
in
the
analyzed
tubers
was
assigned
to
the
remaining,
unanalyzed,
tubers.

For
the
160
single
tubers,
combined
residues
ranged
from
0.007585
to
0.402325
ppm
when
aldicarb
residues
were
included
at
½
LOD,
or
from
0.00466
to
0.3994
ppm
when
aldicarb
residues
were
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
67
of
203
assumed
to
be
0
ppm.
The
average
residues
in
the
detects
were
0.07059
and
0.067665
ppm,
respectively.
Finally,
overall
average
residues
in
single
tubers
were
0.045388
and
0.042463
ppm,
respectively.

Although
the
special
survey
is
not
ideal
for
risk
assessment,
the
data
have
been
incorporated
into
RDFs
for
the
dietary
exposure
analysis
in
order
to
fully
characterize
exposure
to
residues
in
potatoes
that
might
be
present
closest
to
the
point
of
consumption
(
i.
e.,
"
dinner
plate"
residues).
Since
the
study
was
targeted
to
potatoes
in
areas
where
aldicarb
is
used,
100%
of
the
samples
were
assumed
to
have
been
"
treated,"
and
an
appropriate
number
of
zeroes
was
added
to
account
for
the
untreated
portion
of
the
crop.
This
approach
is
considered
to
be
valid
for
individual
tubers,
since
the
tubers
in
a
composite
are
assumed
to
have
similar
treatment
histories,
and
since
individual
tubers
were
analyzed
only
when
residues
were
detected
in
the
composite
sample.
In
addition,
this
approach
does
not
significantly
underestimate
exposure,
since
a
significant
percentage
of
potatoes
grown
in
FL,
OR,
WA
and
ID
are
treated
with
aldicarb.
Acute
RDFs
and
associated
acute
blended
ARs
were
generated
using
the
PDP
potato
monitoring
data
as
shown
below.

POTATO,
PDP
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF45
PB,
Fresh
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
6,498
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.01043
[%
CT
=
5]

RDF46
NB,
Fresh
160
PDP
Single
Samples+
3,040
Zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.045388
[%
CT
=
5]

PB,
Proc.
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
1,083
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.01043
[%
CT
=
24]
RDF47
B,
Proc.
AR
=
0.01043
x
0.24
=
0.002503
[%
CT
=
24]

The
following
acute
RDFs
incorporate
0
residue
values
for
aldicarb
per
se,
and
include
associated
acute
blended
ARs:

POTATO,
PDP
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF48
PB,
Fresh
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
6,498
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
5]

RDF49
NB,
Fresh
160
PDP
Single
Samples+
3,040
Zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.042463
[%
CT
=
5]

PB,
Proc.
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
1,083
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
24]
RDF50
B,
Proc.
AR
=
0.007218
x
0.24
=
0.001732
[%
CT
=
24]
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
68
of
203
A
summary
of
the
potato
residue
data
is
presented
in
Table
9.
These
data
clearly
show
that
although
the
PDP
data
are
not
ideal
for
risk
assessment
purposes
(
for
the
reasons
described
above),
the
data
were
collected
with
the
lowest
LOD
values,
thereby
reducing
the
likelihood
that
the
analysis
is
sensitive
to
the
½
LOD
assumption
for
nondetectable
residues.
Furthermore,
these
data
reflect
residues
closer
to
the
"
dinner
plate,"
taking
into
consideration
the
potential
for
residue
degradation
between
harvest
and
consumption.
An
additional
consideration
is
the
chance
that
the
residue
profile
in
processing
potatoes
may
be
substantially
different
than
residues
in
potatoes
intended
for
fresh
market
consumption.
In
summary,
although
there
are
uncertainties
in
using
the
PDP
monitoring
data,
the
data
provide
the
most
refined
assessment
of
dietary
exposure
to
aldicarb.

Table
9.
Summary
of
Potato
Residue
Data
for
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.
1
Data
Source
#
Sampled/#
Det.
Min.
Res.
(
ppm)
Max.
Res.
(
ppm)
Ave.
of
Detects
(
ppm)
Ave.
Residue
(
ppm)

Individual
Tubers
1993,
In­
Field
Variability
800/
554
0.0325
1.32
0.212765
0.157334
1993/
1994
PDA
FT's
1,759/
493
0.0325
1.2073
0.114587
0.055507
1996/
1997
Farmgate
[
from
composites
w/
detectable
residues]
60/
57
0.0325
1.8459
0.366206
0.348709
1997/
PDP
160/
96
0.00785
(
0.00466)
0.402325
(
0.3994)
0.07059
(
0.067665)
0.045388
(
0.042463)

Composite
Samples
1996/
1997
Farmgate
104/
57
0.01625
0.42877
0.083449
0.058393
1997/
PDP
342/
20
0.00785
(
0.00466)
0.172925
(
0.17)
0.051322
(
0.048397)
0.01043
(
0.007218)

1
Since
aldicarb
per
se
was
not
detected
in
any
sample,
total
residues
were
calculated
assuming
zero
residue
values
for
aldicarb
per
se
(
rather
than
½
LOD).
When
applicable,
these
residue
values
are
shown
in
parentheses.

Sweet
Potato
Use
Pattern
Aldicarb
may
be
applied
to
sweet
potatoes
soil­
incorporated
at­
planting,
with
a
maximum
rate
of
3
lb
ai/
A.
Only
one
application
per
season
is
permitted,
with
a
PHI
of
120
days.
Usage
estimates
provided
by
BEAD/
OPP
indicate
an
estimated
maximum
of
37
%
CT
and
a
weighted
average
of
15
%
CT
for
sweet
potatoes.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
69
of
203
Residue
Data
[
MRID
Nos.
101923;
42722301]

Residue
data
for
aldicarb
in
sweet
potatoes
fall
into
3
categories:
(
i)
field
trial
data
consisting
of
composite
residues;
(
ii)
field
trial
data
consisting
of
composite
residues,
some
of
which
also
have
corresponding
single
unit
residue
values
in
the
tubers
making
up
the
composite;
and
(
iii)
PDP
monitoring
data
consisting
of
residues
in
5­
lb
composite
samples.
When
available,
HED
typically
prefers
residue
data
for
single
units
of
produce
(
e.
g.,
a
single
potato
or
orange)
in
assessing
acute
dietary
exposure;
however,
single
unit
residue
data
for
sweet
potatoes
are
from
field
trial
data,
and
might
overestimate
exposure
closer
to
the
point
of
consumption.
Therefore,
use
of
the
composite
field
trial
residue
values
may
be
more
appropriate
for
risk
assessment
purposes.
Due
to
the
differences
in
combined
limits
of
detection
in
the
three
available
data
sets,
residue
distribution
files
(
RDFs)
for
each
of
the
data
sets
have
been
prepared
for
use
in
the
dietary
exposure
analyses
and
sensitivity
analyses
as
described
below.

Residue
data
submitted
under
MRID
No.
101923
include
field
trials
conducted
in
LA,
in
which
sweet
potatoes
were
treated
at
2,
3
or
4
lb
ai/
A,
and
harvested
125
or
126
days
later.
Aldicarb
residues
were
either
very
low
or
nondetectable
(<
0.01
ppm)
in
3­
lb
composite
samples
of
mature
roots.
The
data
are
summarized
in
Table
10.

Table
10.
Sweet
Potato
Field
Trial
Summary
(
MRID
No.
101923).

Trial
Location
Appl.
Rate
(
lb
ai/
A)
PHI
(
Days)
Total
Aldicarb
Residue,
ppm
2
126
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005
3
126
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005
3
125
0.005,
0.005
LA
4
126
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.005,
0.009,
0.011
Ave.
residue
in
composite
samples
of
sweet
potatoes
0.005417
ppm
(
n=
24)

Additional
field
trial
data
submitted
under
MRID
No.
42722301
include
both
composite
and
single
tuber
residue
measurements
for
aldicarb
and
metabolites.
At­
planting
applications
were
made
at
the
maximum
label
rate
of
3
lb
ai/
A,
with
harvest
occurring
92
to
119
days
later.
Applications
were
made
with
gravity
flow
application
equipment,
which
has
been
shown
to
result
in
higher
residues
in
potatoes
harvested
from
row
ends.
Current
labels
for
both
potatoes
and
sweet
potatoes
specify
application
using
only
positive
displacement
application
equipment.
Composite
sweet
potato
samples
consisting
of
6
tubers
were
collected
from
both
the
center
of
the
treated
plots
(
uniform
application
area),
as
well
as
from
the
row
ends.
If
residues
in
the
composite
samples
(
as
calculated
by
the
registrant)
were
greater
than
0.015
ppm,
then
individual
tubers
were
analyzed.
Since
gravity
flow
applicators
are
no
longer
used,
only
residues
from
the
center
portions
of
treated
plots
have
been
included
in
this
summary.
One
study
conducted
in
MD
had
an
application
rate
much
higher
than
the
protocol
specified;
therefore,
these
results
have
not
been
included.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
70
of
203
Table
11.
Sweet
Potato
Field
Trial
Summary:
Composites
and
Individual
Tubers.
1
Trial
Location
PHI
(
Days)
Composite
Combined
Residues
(
ppm)
Individual
Combined
Residues
(
ppm)

0.044814
0.06473,
0.12953,
0.02125
[
0.01625,
0.01625,
0.01625]

0.055458
0.050450,
0.057850,
0.114250,
0.021250,
0.051970
[
0.016250]

0.043042
0.028730,
0.111930,
0.055770
[
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250]

0.031062
0.034130,
0.075610,
0.021650,
0.024890
[
0.016250,
0.016250]
TX
119
0.035182
0.036130,
0.022730,
0.072170,
0.036050
[
0.016250,
0.016250]

0.027486
0.110090,
0.058850
[
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250]

0.015154
0.011642
0.011714
LA
103
0.022134
0.049370,
0.136450
[
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250]

0.016250
0.014144
0.006242
0.022334
LA
108
0.011390
0.011622
0.013978
0.012330
0.014286
SC
118
0.013986
0.021702
0.025970,
0.046450
[
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250]

0.035966
0.032450,
0.056650
[
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250,
0.016250]

0.020234
0.014490
NC
92
0.016518
0.016250
0.016042
0.014902
0.019346
NC
98
0.015450
Average
Residue
(
ppm)
0.020838
0.036780
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
71
of
203
1
Composite
residues
in
BOLD
indicate
residues
in
individual
tubers
were
determined;
individual
residues
in
BOLD
correspond
to
detects,
while
nondetectable
residues
are
shown
in
brackets
[].

Field
trial
sweet
potato
composites:
A
total
of
54
composite
samples
were
analyzed
(
including
both
sets
of
field
trials),
and
therefore
the
RDF
is
as
follows:

S
WEET
POTATO,
FT
[
Composites]
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF51
NB=
PB
54
Detects
+
91
Zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.013984
[%
CT
=
37]

Field
trial
sweet
potato
single
unit
residue
values:
A
total
of
54
individual
tubers
were
analyzed,
and
therefore
an
additional
91
zero
residue
values
were
added,
for
a
total
of
145
residues.

S
WEET
POTATO,
FT
[
Single
Tuber
Residues]
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF52
NB
54
Detects
+
91
Zeroes
[%
CT
=
37]

In
addition
to
the
field
trial
data
summarized
above,
monitoring
data
are
available
through
the
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program.
A
total
of
1,220
sweet
potato
samples
were
analyzed
for
residues
of
aldicarb,
aldicarb
sulfone
and
aldicarb
sulfoxide
during
1996
­
1998;
one
additional
sample
was
analyzed
only
for
the
sulfoxide,
but
contained
detectable
residues;
therefore,
this
sample
was
included
in
the
summary
of
data,
and
the
combined
residue
(
0.146
ppm,
as
the
sulfone)
was
calculated
using
the
lowest
½
LOD
for
aldicarb
+
sulfone.
None
of
the
composite
sweet
potato
samples
analyzed
contained
detectable
aldicarb
per
se
residues,
but
three
samples
contained
both
sulfone
and
sulfoxide
residues
ranging
from
0.017
­
0.12
ppm.
In
addition,
two
samples
analyzed
for
parent
and
metabolites
contained
sulfoxide
only
residues
of
0.015
ppm.
The
range
in
combined
(
i.
e.,
aldicarb
+
aldicarb
sulfone
+
aldicarb
sulfoxide)
½
LOD
was
0.009620
to
0.090240
ppm,
with
a
weighted
average
½
LOD
of
0.026279
ppm.

Table
12.
Summary
of
PDP
Composite
Residue
Monitoring
Detects
for
Sweet
Potatoes.

Aldicarb
(
ppm)
Sulfone
(
ppm)
Sulfoxide
(
ppm)
Total
Residue
as
Sulfone
(
ppm)

N/
A
[
½
x
0.004]
N/
A
[
½
x
0.007]
0.13
0.146240
[
lowest
½
LOD
for
ald.+
sulfone
used
to
calculate
total]

½
x
0.008
0.048
0.12
0.182280
½
x
0.008
0.017
0.075
0.102680
½
x
0.008
0.017
0.017
0.040040
½
x
0.008
½
x
0.01
0.015
0.025880
½
x
0.008
½
x
0.01
0.015
0.025880
Monitoring
data,
composite
samples:
The
acute
RDF
is
constructed
from
a
total
of
1221
samples,
with
6
detects.
Based
on
an
estimated
maximum
of
37%
CT,
a
total
of
452
samples
could
have
been
treated,
for
a
total
of
6
detects,
446
residues
at
½
LOD
(
0.026279),
and
769
zero
residue
values.
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
72
of
203
SWEET
POTATO,
PDP
[
Composites]
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF53
PB
6
detects
+
446@
1/
2
LOD+
769
zeroes
½
LOD=
0.026279
Sum
of
Detects=
0.523
[%
CT
=
37%]

For
the
sensitivity
analysis
(
i.
e.,
in
order
to
determine
if
the
assumption
of
½
LOD
results
in
an
overestimate
of
risk),
the
detects
should
be
included
along
with
1,215
zero
residue
values:

SWEET
POTATO,
PDP
[
Composites]
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF54
PB
6
detects
+
1,215
zeroes
Sum
of
Detects
=
0.523
[%
CT
=
37%]

Current
HED
policy
allows
for
translation
of
potato
residue
data
to
sweet
potatoes;
therefore,
the
PDP
potato
data,
reflecting
residues
closer
to
the
point
of
consumption,
can
be
translated
to
sweet
potatoes.
This
allows
for
use
of
more
reasonable
single
tuber
data
in
the
analysis
for
aldicarb.
This
approach
may
not
be
appropriate,
since
sweet
potatoes
are
grown
in
many
states
in
addition
to
those
where
aldicarb
use
on
potatoes
is
permitted.
There
is
uncertainty
concerning
the
similarity
in
the
residue
profiles
for
potato
and
sweet
potato.
Using
the
PDP
composite
and
single
unit
potato
data
(
described
in
detail
above),
along
with
the
assumption
of
37
%
CT
for
sweet
potatoes
yields
the
following
RDFs:

SWEET
POTATO,
PDP
[
From
PDP
Potato
Data]
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF55
NB
160
PDP
Single
Samples
+
272
zeroes
[%
CT
=
37%]

RDF56
PB
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples
+
582
zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.01043
[%
CT
=
37%]

For
the
sensitivity
analysis,
identical
RDFs
were
generated
assuming
aldicarb
per
se
residues
of
0
ppm:

SWEET
POTATO,
PDP
[
From
PDP
Potato
Data]
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF57
NB
160
PDP
Single
Samples
+
272
zeroes
[%
CT
=
37%]

RDF58
PB
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples
+
582
zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
37%]

BANANAS
­
PROPOSED
USE
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
73
of
203
The
registrant
has
petitioned
the
Agency
to
establish
an
import
tolerance
for
aldicarb
residues
in
bananas
(
pulp),
at
0.008
ppm.
HED
noted
that
the
appropriate
tolerance
is
0.03
ppm
(
whole
fruit).
In
accordance
with
the
proposed
label,
aldicarb
is
to
be
applied
to
bananas
grown
outside
the
US
using
a
unique
new
Banana
In­
Plant
System.
In
a
review
of
the
submission,
HED
recommended
use
of
the
½
LOD
residue
value,
0.0069
ppm,
in
dietary
exposure
analysis.
Aldicarb
and
metabolite
residues
were
below
the
combined
½
LOD
in
composite
and
single
unit
pulp
and
puree.
In
order
to
assess
dietary
exposure
associated
with
the
proposed
use
on
bananas,
the
following
RDF
was
generated,
based
on
a
45
%
market
share.

BANANA
­
PROPOSED
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF59
NB=
PB
45@
½
LOD
+
55
Zeroes
½
LOD=
0.0069
Est.
Market
share
=
45%

POTATOES
­
PROPOSED
LABEL
AMENDMENTS
As
stated
above,
the
registrant
has
proposed
label
amendments
allowing
aldicarb
application
to
potatoes
grown
in
six
Midwestern
states,
and
to
allow
a
PHI
of
120
days
in
the
PNW.
Data
supporting
the
proposed
label
amendments
have
been
reviewed
in
HED,
and
are
considered
acceptable.
Based
on
these
data,
the
residue
profile
would
not
be
expected
to
change
significantly
if
the
label
amendments
were
to
be
approved
by
the
Agency.

In
order
to
incorporate
the
proposed
uses
into
the
HED
dietary
exposure
assessment,
acute
RDFs
were
generated
for
the
following
scenarios:

Current
Use
+
Shorter
PHI
Current
Use
+
Six
MW
states
Current
Use
+
Shorter
PHI
+
Six
MW
states
The
PDP
Special
Survey
in
Potatoes
(
1997)
was
the
source
of
residue
data,
and
the
%
CT
information
provided
by
BEAD/
EPA
was
used
to
determine
the
appropriate
number
of
0
residue
values
for
each
RDF.
[
The
assumption
that
the
PDP
composite
and
single
tuber
data
sets
constitute
the
"
treated"
potatoes
was
incorporated
into
the
proposed
label
amendment
analyses,
and
therefore
zero
residue
values
were
added
to
the
RDFs
to
account
for
the
remainder
of
the
"
untreated"
US
potato
crop.]
The
%
CT
information
and
the
results
of
the
PDP
potato
monitoring
study
have
been
discussed
in
detail
above.
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
residues
of
0
ppm,
the
following
sets
of
RDFs
have
been
generated:

Current
Use
+
Shorter
PHI:

POTATO,
PDP
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF60
PB,
Fresh
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
3,458
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
9%]
Attachment
3:
Aldicarb
Residue
Data
and
Anticipated
Residues
for
the
DEEM
 
Analysis.

Page
74
of
203
RDF61
NB,
Fresh
160
PDP
Single
Samples+
1,618
Zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.042463
[%
CT
=
9%]

PB,
Proc.
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
608
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
36%]
RDF62
B,
Proc.
AR
=
0.007218
x
0.36
=
0.002518
[%
CT
=
36%]

Current
Use
+
Six
Midwestern
States:

POTATO,
PDP
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF63
PB,
Fresh
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
4,544
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
7%]

RDF64
NB,
Fresh
160
PDP
Single
Samples+
2,126
Zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.042463
[%
CT
=
7%]

PB,
Proc.
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
879
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
28%]
RDF65
B,
Proc.
AR
=
0.007218
x
0.28
=
0.002021
[%
CT
=
28%]

Current
Use
+
Shorter
PHI
+
Six
Midwestern
States:

POTATO,
PDP
Acute
(
RDF)

RDF66
PB,
Fresh
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
3,078
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
10%]

RDF67
NB,
Fresh
160
PDP
Single
Samples+
1,440
Zeroes
Ave.
Residue
=
0.042463
[%
CT
=
10%]

PB,
Proc.
342
PDP
Comp.
Samples+
513
Zeroes
Ave.
Comp.
Residue
=
0.007218
[%
CT
=
40%]
RDF68
B,
Proc.
AR
=
0.007218
x
0.40
=
0.002887
[%
CT
=
40%]
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
75
of
203
PECANS
RDF1:
Pecan
Field
Trial
Residue
Data
[
MRID
No.
102123]
Estimated
Maximum
%
CT
=
8%
TOTALZ=
253
4,0.005
2,0.02
2,0.03
2,0.05
2,0.01
0.04
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.09
0.11
0.10
0.27
0.12
0.17
ORANGES
RDF2
Orange
FT
Data
[
MRID
No.
36313]
NB
and
PB
­
Fresh
[
32
detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13%
TOTALZ=
214
0.07
0.06
3,0.03
3,0.04
5,0.05
9,0.02
10,0.005
RDF3
Orange
FT
Data
[
MRID
No.
36313]
PB
­
Processed
[
32
detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
23%
TOTALZ=
107
0.07
0.06
3,0.03
3,0.04
5,0.05
9,0.02
10,0.005
RDF4:
Orange,
In­
Orchard
Study
(
FT),
Fresh
Oranges
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13
%
CT
TOTALZ=
2007
3,0.17785
0.16705
0.15125
0.14545
0.14045
0.13465
2,0.12965
0.12305
0.11885
0.11225
0.10805
5,0.07565
6,0.06485
18,0.05405
13,0.04325
38,0.03245
38,0.02165
168,0.01625
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
76
of
203
RDF5:
Orange,
In­
Orchard
Study
(
FT),
Processed
Oranges
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
23
%
CT
TOTALZ=
1004
3,0.17785
0.16705
0.15125
0.14545
0.14045
0.13465
2,0.12965
0.12305
0.11885
0.11225
0.10805
5,0.07565
6,0.06485
18,0.05405
13,0.04325
38,0.03245
38,0.02165
168,0.01625
RDF6:
Orange
"
Market
Basket,"
Fresh
Market
[
869
Detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13
TOTALZ=
5815
0.12
0.1
0.09
4,0.08
2,0.07
5,0.06
6,0.05
13,0.04
20,0.03
41,0.02
66,0.01
709,0.005
RDF7:
Orange
"
Market
Basket,"
Processed
Oranges
[
869
Detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
23
TOTALZ=
2909
0.12
0.1
0.09
4,0.08
2,0.07
5,0.06
6,0.05
13,0.04
20,0.03
41,0.02
66,0.01
709,0.005
RDF8:
Orange
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
Fresh
Oranges
[
4
detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13%
TOTALZ=
1545
227,0.036451
0.043275
0.028040
0.028040
0.025880
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
77
of
203
RDF9:
Orange
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
Processed
Oranges
[
4
detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
23%
TOTALZ=
1367
405,0.036451
0.043275
0.028040
0.028040
0.025880
RDF10:
Orange,
PB
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
Fresh
Oranges
[
4
detects]:
Sensitivity
Analysis
Assume
aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13%
TOTALZ=
1545
227,0.025848
0.034500
0.023360
0.023360
0.021200
RDF11:
Orange,
PB
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
Processed
Oranges
[
4
detects]:
Sensitivity
Analysis
Assume
aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
23%
TOTALZ=
1367
405,0.025848
0.034500
0.023360
0.023360
0.021200
RDF12:
Orange
PDP
Data,
PB
Fresh/
Processed
Oranges
[
4
detects]:
Sensitivity
Analysis
Aldicarb
=
0
ppm
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13/
23%
TOTALZ=
1772
0.034500
0.023360
0.023360
0.021200
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
78
of
203
RDF13:
Orange
Juice,
Fresh,
PB
PDP
Monitoring
Data
[
1
detect]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13%
TOTALZ=
1211
180,0.032106
0.080890
RDF14:
Orange
Juice,
Processed,
PB
PDP
Monitoring
Data
[
1
detect]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
23%
TOTALZ=
1072
319,0.032106
0.080890
RDF15:
Orange
Juice,
Fresh/
Proc.
PDP
Monitoring
Data
[
1
detect],
Sensitivity
Analysis
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13%/
23%
TOTALZ=
1391
0.080890
RDF16:
Orange,
NB,
PB
Fresh,
Carbamate
Task
Force
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13%
TOTALZ=
347
36,0.001625
0.029065
0.029045
0.015845
0.009655
0.009041
0.006977
0.004235
0.004217
0.004109
0.003557
0.003245
0.003029
0.002273
0.0020678
0.002057
0.0014738
RDF17:
Orange,
PB
Processed,
Carbamate
Task
Force
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
23%
TOTALZ=
307
76,0.001625
0.029065
0.029045
0.015845
0.009655
0.009041
0.006977
0.004235
0.004217
0.004109
0.003557
0.003245
0.003029
0.002273
0.0020678
0.002057
0.0014738
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
79
of
203
RDF18:
Orange,
NB,
PB,
Fresh
Carb.
Task
Force
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects],
Sensitivity
Analysis
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13%
TOTALZ=
347
36,0.00104
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF19:
Orange,
PB
Proc.,
Carbamate
Task
Force
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects],
Sensitivity
Analysis
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
23%
TOTALZ=
307
76,0.00104
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF20:
Orange,
PB,
NB,
Fresh/
Processed:
Carbamate
MBS
[
16
Detects]:
Sensitivity
Analysis
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
13/
23%
TOTALZ=
383
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF21:
Grapefruit
Composite
FT
Data
[
MRID
No.
148971]
PB
and
NB
­
Fresh
[
42
detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
25%
TOTALZ=
126
17,0.02
24,0.03
0.08
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
80
of
203
RDF22:
Grapefruit
Composite
FT
Data
[
MRID
No.
148971]
PB
and
NB
­
Processed
[
42
detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
33%
TOTALZ=
85
17,0.02
24,0.03
0.08
RDF23:
Grapefruit,
NB=
PB,
Fresh
In­
Orchard
Variability,
MRID
No.
42016901
[
300
samples]
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
25%
TOTALZ=
900
0.04325
12,0.03245
25,0.02165
262,0.01625
RDF24:
Grapefruit,
NB=
PB,
Proc.
In­
Orchard
Variability,
MRID
No.
42016901
[
300
samples]
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
33%
TOTALZ=
609
0.04325
12,0.03245
25,0.02165
262,0.01625
RDF25:
Grapefruit,
NB=
PB,
Fresh
In­
Orchard
Variability,
MRID
No.
42016901
[
300
samples]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
25%
TOTALZ=
900
0.0374
12,0.0266
25,0.0158
262,0.0104
RDF26:
Grapefruit,
NB=
PB,
Proc.
In­
Orchard
Variability,
MRID
No.
42016901
[
300
samples]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb=
0
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
33%
TOTALZ=
609
0.0374
12,0.0266
25,0.0158
262,0.0104
RDF27:
Grapefruit,
NB,
PB
Fresh,
Carbamate
Task
Force
MBS
Orange
Data
[
16
Detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
25%
TOTALZ=
160
37,0.001625
0.029065
0.029045
0.015845
0.009655
0.009041
0.006977
0.004235
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
81
of
203
0.004217
0.004109
0.003557
0.003245
0.003029
0.002273
0.0020678
0.002057
0.0014738
RDF28:
Grapefruit,
PB
Processed,
Carbamate
Task
Force
Orange
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
33%
TOTALZ=
109
37,0.001625
0.029065
0.029045
0.015845
0.009655
0.009041
0.006977
0.004235
0.004217
0.004109
0.003557
0.003245
0.003029
0.002273
0.0020678
0.002057
0.0014738
RDF29:
Grapefruit,
NB,
PB,
Fresh
Carb.
Task
Force
Orange
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
25%
TOTALZ=
160
37,0.00104
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF30:
Grapefruit
PB
Proc.,
Carbamate
Task
Force
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
33%
TOTALZ=
109
37,0.00104
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
82
of
203
RDF31:
Grapefruit,
PB,
NB,
Fresh:
Carbamate
Orange
MBS
[
16
Detects]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
25%
TOTALZ=
197
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF32:
Grapefruit,
PB,
Processed:
Carbamate
Orange
MBS
[
16
Detects]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
33%
TOTALZ=
146
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF33:
Lime,
PB
Carbamate
Task
Force
Orange
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
7%
TOTALZ=
709
37,0.001625
0.029065
0.029045
0.015845
0.009655
0.009041
0.006977
0.004235
0.004217
0.004109
0.003557
0.003245
0.003029
0.002273
0.0020678
0.002057
0.0014738
RDF34:
Lemon,
PB
Carbamate
Task
Force
Orange
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
3%
TOTALZ=
1725
37,0.001625
0.029065
0.029045
0.015845
0.009655
0.009041
0.006977
0.004235
0.004217
0.004109
0.003557
0.003245
0.003029
0.002273
0.0020678
0.002057
0.0014738
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
83
of
203
RDF35:
Lime,
PB
Carbamate
Task
Force
Orange
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
7%
TOTALZ=
709
37,0.00104
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF36:
Lemon,
PB
Carbamate
Task
Force
Orange
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
3%
TOTALZ=
1725
37,0.00104
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF37:
Lime,
PB
Carbamate
Task
Force
MBS
[
16
Detects]:
Sensitivity
Analysis
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
7%
TOTALZ=
746
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF38:
Lemon,
PB
Carbamate
Task
Force
MBS
[
16
Detects]:
Sensitivity
Analysis
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
3%
TOTALZ=
1762
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
84
of
203
RDF39:
Proposed
Citrus,
PB
Carbamate
Task
Force
Orange
MBS
Data
[
16
Detects]
Sensitivity
Analysis,
Aldicarb
=
0
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
7%
TOTALZ=
709
37,0.00104
0.02848
0.02846
0.01526
0.00907
0.008456
0.006392
0.00365
0.003632
0.003524
0.002972
0.00266
0.002444
0.001688
0.0014828
0.001472
0.0008888
RDF40
Potato,
Fresh,
NB=
PB,
In­
field
variability
=
800
"
detects"
[
MRID
No.
42827802]
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
5%
TOTALZ=
15200
246,0.0325
1.3241
0.9489
0.9477
0.9185
0.8565
0.8241
0.8133
0.7949
0.7913
0.7693
0.7373
0.7349
0.7105
0.6825
0.6637
0.6437
0.6361
0.6337
0.6229
0.6061
0.5985
0.5869
0.5821
0.5789
2,0.5761
0.5737
0.5685
0.5645
0.5569
2,0.5537
0.5481
0.5441
0.5413
0.5405
0.5353
0.5337
0.5245
0.5121
0.5113
0.5005
4,0.4797
0.4721
0.4697
0.4673
0.4597
0.4557
0.4525
2,0.4497
0.4489
0.4481
0.4473
0.4465
0.4457
0.4389
0.4377
0.4349
0.4281
0.4265
0.4257
0.4249
0.4173
0.4165
0.4157
2,0.4141
0.4125
0.4057
0.4033
0.4033
0.4025
0.4017
0.4001
0.3957
0.3925
0.3865
0.3833
2,0.3825
0.3741
0.3733
0.3725
0.3709
0.3693
0.3633
2,0.3625
0.3593
0.3533
2,0.3517
3,0.3493
0.3485
0.3425
0.3417
0.3401
0.3325
0.3317
0.3309
2,0.3301
0.3293
0.3277
2,0.3209
2,0.3201
0.3193
0.3185
0.3185
2,0.3177
0.3153
2,0.3101
3,0.3093
0.3085
2,0.3077
0.3061
2,0.3053
0.3045
2,0.3001
0.2993
3,0.2985
4,0.2977
0.2969
2,0.2885
0.2869
0.2861
0.2785
0.2777
0.2769
2,0.2761
0.2745
0.2677
2,0.2669
4,0.2661
0.2621
2,0.2569
3,0.2561
0.2545
2,0.2537
0.2529
0.2477
0.2469
3,0.2461
4,0.2453
4,0.2445
0.2361
0.2353
0.2345
0.2337
2,0.2329
2,0.2253
0.2245
4,0.2237
0.2221
0.2213
0.2205
0.2145
5,0.2137
4,0.2129
4,0.2121
0.2097
0.2045
0.2029
4,0.2021
2,0.2013
2,0.1997
3,0.1937
5,0.1929
0.1921
3,0.1913
0.1905
0.1897
2,0.1889
5,0.1821
4,0.1813
3,0.1805
0.1789
0.1773
0.1729
0.1721
4,0.1713
3,0.1705
4,0.1697
2,0.1681
0.1665
0.1613
2,0.1605
0.1597
2,0.1589
3,0.1573
0.1513
0.1505
5,0.1497
4,0.1489
0.1481
2,0.1473
2,0.1465
0.1457
2,0.1389
8,0.1381
2,0.1373
0.1365
6,0.1289
6,0.1281
3,0.1273
2,0.1265
0.1257
0.1189
0.1181
5,0.1173
5,0.1165
4,0.1157
0.1149
2,0.1081
2,0.1073
10,0.1065
7,0.1057
8,0.0973
5,0.0965
7,0.0957
7,0.0949
0.0941
8,0.0865
15,0.0857
9,0.0849
2,0.0841
13,0.0757
3,0.0749
11,0.0741
0.0658
19,0.0649
5,0.0641
3,0.0633
22,0.0541
5,0.0533
0.0461
0.0442
38,0.0433
5,0.0425
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
85
of
203
RDF41
Potato,
Processed,
NB=
PB,
In­
field
variability
=
800
"
detects"
[
MRID
No.
42827802]
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
24%
TOTALZ=
2533
246,0.0325
1.3241
0.9489
0.9477
0.9185
0.8565
0.8241
0.8133
0.7949
0.7913
0.7693
0.7373
0.7349
0.7105
0.6825
0.6637
0.6437
0.6361
0.6337
0.6229
0.6061
0.5985
0.5869
0.5821
0.5789
2,0.5761
0.5737
0.5685
0.5645
0.5569
2,0.5537
0.5481
0.5441
0.5413
0.5405
0.5353
0.5337
0.5245
0.5121
0.5113
0.5005
4,0.4797
0.4721
0.4697
0.4673
0.4597
0.4557
0.4525
2,0.4497
0.4489
0.4481
0.4473
0.4465
0.4457
0.4389
0.4377
0.4349
0.4281
0.4265
0.4257
0.4249
0.4173
0.4165
0.4157
2,0.4141
0.4125
0.4057
0.4033
0.4033
0.4025
0.4017
0.4001
0.3957
0.3925
0.3865
0.3833
2,0.3825
0.3741
0.3733
0.3725
0.3709
0.3693
0.3633
2,0.3625
0.3593
0.3533
2,0.3517
3,0.3493
0.3485
0.3425
0.3417
0.3401
0.3325
0.3317
0.3309
2,0.3301
0.3293
0.3277
2,0.3209
2,0.3201
0.3193
0.3185
0.3185
2,0.3177
0.3153
2,0.3101
3,0.3093
0.3085
2,0.3077
0.3061
2,0.3053
0.3045
2,0.3001
0.2993
3,0.2985
4,0.2977
0.2969
2,0.2885
0.2869
0.2861
0.2785
0.2777
0.2769
2,0.2761
0.2745
0.2677
2,0.2669
4,0.2661
0.2621
2,0.2569
3,0.2561
0.2545
2,0.2537
0.2529
0.2477
0.2469
3,0.2461
4,0.2453
4,0.2445
0.2361
0.2353
0.2345
0.2337
2,0.2329
2,0.2253
0.2245
4,0.2237
0.2221
0.2213
0.2205
0.2145
5,0.2137
4,0.2129
4,0.2121
0.2097
0.2045
0.2029
4,0.2021
2,0.2013
2,0.1997
3,0.1937
5,0.1929
0.1921
3,0.1913
0.1905
0.1897
2,0.1889
5,0.1821
4,0.1813
3,0.1805
0.1789
0.1773
0.1729
0.1721
4,0.1713
3,0.1705
4,0.1697
2,0.1681
0.1665
0.1613
2,0.1605
0.1597
2,0.1589
3,0.1573
0.1513
0.1505
5,0.1497
4,0.1489
0.1481
2,0.1473
2,0.1465
0.1457
2,0.1389
8,0.1381
2,0.1373
0.1365
6,0.1289
6,0.1281
3,0.1273
2,0.1265
0.1257
0.1189
0.1181
5,0.1173
5,0.1165
4,0.1157
0.1149
2,0.1081
2,0.1073
10,0.1065
7,0.1057
8,0.0973
5,0.0965
7,0.0957
7,0.0949
0.0941
8,0.0865
15,0.0857
9,0.0849
2,0.0841
13,0.0757
3,0.0749
11,0.0741
0.0658
19,0.0649
5,0.0641
3,0.0633
22,0.0541
5,0.0533
0.0461
0.0442
38,0.0433
5,0.0425
RDF42
Potato,
Fresh,
NB=
PB,
PDA
vs.
GFA,
1,759
"
detects"
[
MRID
Nos
43299002/
43385001]
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
5%
TOTALZ=
33421
1266,0.0325
1.2073
1.1401
0.6681
0.6465
0.6253
0.5701
0.5381
0.5169
0.3981
0.3889
0.3873
0.3757
0.3409
0.3385
0.3225
0.3101
0.3093
0.3009
0.2985
0.2917
0.2885
0.2809
0.2793
0.2701
0.2685
0.2661
0.2637
0.2637
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
86
of
203
0.2577
0.2569
0.2553
0.2529
0.2477
0.2429
0.2361
0.2345
3,0.2321
0.2269
2,0.2261
0.2245
2,0.2229
0.2221
0.2161
2,0.2153
0.2145
0.2121
0.2105
0.2097
0.2037
2,0.2029
2,0.2013
0.1945
3,0.1937
0.1921
0.1905
0.1897
3,0.1837
0.1829
0.1821
2,0.1813
4,0.1805
2,0.1789
2,0.1729
2,0.1721
2,0.1713
2,0.1689
2,0.1681
0.1621
0.1613
0.1605
0.1589
2,0.1581
3,0.1513
0.1497
2,0.1489
0.1481
2,0.1473
7,0.1405
2,0.1397
3,0.1389
2,0.1381
6,0.1373
0.1349
7,0.1297
2,0.1289
3,0.1281
7,0.1273
0.1265
0.1257
9,0.1189
0.1181
3,0.1173
5,0.1165
2,0.1157
6,0.1081
3,0.1073
2,0.1065
5,0.1057
16,0.0973
5,0.0965
6,0.0957
4,0.0949
18,0.0865
4,0.0857
9,0.0849
0.0841
26,0.0757
9,0.0749
9,0.0741
45,0.0649
12,0.0641
7,0.0633
79,0.0541
4,0.0533
0.0525
54,0.0433
3,0.0425
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
87
of
203
RDF43
Potato,
Proc.
NB=
PB,
PDA
vs.
GFA,
1,759
"
detects"
[
MRID
Nos
43299002/
43385001]
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
24%
TOTALZ=
5570
1266,0.0325
1.2073
1.1401
0.6681
0.6465
0.6253
0.5701
0.5381
0.5169
0.3981
0.3889
0.3873
0.3757
0.3409
0.3385
0.3225
0.3101
0.3093
0.3009
0.2985
0.2917
0.2885
0.2809
0.2793
0.2701
0.2685
0.2661
0.2637
0.2637
0.2577
0.2569
0.2553
0.2529
0.2477
0.2429
0.2361
0.2345
3,0.2321
0.2269
2,0.2261
0.2245
2,0.2229
0.2221
0.2161
2,0.2153
0.2145
0.2121
0.2105
0.2097
0.2037
2,0.2029
2,0.2013
0.1945
3,0.1937
0.1921
0.1905
0.1897
3,0.1837
0.1829
0.1821
2,0.1813
4,0.1805
2,0.1789
2,0.1729
2,0.1721
2,0.1713
2,0.1689
2,0.1681
0.1621
0.1613
0.1605
0.1589
2,0.1581
3,0.1513
0.1497
2,0.1489
0.1481
2,0.1473
7,0.1405
2,0.1397
3,0.1389
2,0.1381
6,0.1373
0.1349
7,0.1297
2,0.1289
3,0.1281
7,0.1273
0.1265
0.1257
9,0.1189
0.1181
3,0.1173
5,0.1165
2,0.1157
6,0.1081
3,0.1073
2,0.1065
5,0.1057
16,0.0973
5,0.0965
6,0.0957
4,0.0949
18,0.0865
4,0.0857
9,0.0849
0.0841
26,0.0757
9,0.0749
9,0.0741
45,0.0649
12,0.0641
7,0.0633
79,0.0541
4,0.0533
0.0525
54,0.0433
3,0.0425
RDF44:
Potato,
PB,
processed.
Farmgate
Monitoring,
PNW
+
FL,
104
composites
Estimated
Max.
%
CT
=
24%
TOTALZ=
329
0.42877
0.31665
0.29901
0.25089
0.19793
0.15878
0.15117
0.14725
0.12582
0.12486
0.12293
0.11565
0.11258
0.09726
0.08946
0.0863
0.08429
0.07458
0.0703
0.06706
0.06497
0.06382
0.06329
0.06166
0.06058
0.06053
0.0595
0.05734
2,0.05518
0.0541
0.05405
0.05302
0.05017
0.04978
0.04973
2,0.0487
0.04762
0.04654
0.04546
0.0433
0.04045
0.03677
2,0.03569
0.03461
34,0.0325
0.03029
0.02921
0.02813
2,0.02597
2,0.02489
0.02381
2,0.02273
13,0.01625
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
88
of
203
RDF45:
Potato,
PB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
5%
TOTALZ=
6498
0.172925
0.151125
0.107045
0.090245
0.087445
2,0.059525
0.048725
0.043325
0.036745
0.035665
0.030265
8,0.012985
322,0.007585
RDF46:
Potato,
NB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
160
individuals
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
5%
TOTALZ=
3040
0.402325
0.315725
0.265525
0.259325
0.246325
0.234325
0.226925
0.209525
0.183725
0.179885
0.169725
0.157125
0.140525
0.123445
0.109325
0.101605
0.087485
0.086525
0.084365
0.082685
0.080045
0.077885
0.077765
2,0.076805
0.073565
0.072005
2,0.071405
0.070325
0.069485
0.068165
0.066985
0.066365
0.064885
0.062765
0.061585
0.060725
5,0.057933
0.056185
0.053285
0.053285
2,0.053045
0.051965
0.050885
0.048625
0.046565
0.046465
0.045385
0.044305
0.042245
3,0.041165
0.041065
0.034585
0.033605
0.032938
0.032425
0.031085
0.029485
0.028205
0.027125
3,0.027025
2,0.025945
0.023785
0.022705
0.021625
0.020545
0.019465
0.018485
0.018385
2,0.016253
14,0.012985
64,0.007585
RDF47:
Potato,
PB,
processed,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
24%
TOTALZ=
1083
0.172925
0.151125
0.107045
0.090245
0.087445
2,0.059525
0.048725
0.043325
0.036745
0.035665
0.030265
8,0.012985
322,0.007585
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
89
of
203
RDF48:
Potato,
PB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
5%
TOTALZ=
6498
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
RDF49:
Potato,
NB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
160
individuals
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
5%
TOTALZ=
3040
0.3994
0.3128
0.2626
0.2564
0.2434
0.2314
0.224
0.2066
0.1808
0.17696
0.1668
0.1542
0.1376
0.12052
0.1064
0.09868
0.08456
0.0836
0.08144
0.07976
0.07712
0.07496
0.07484
2,0.07388
0.07064
0.06908
2,0.06848
0.0674
0.06656
0.06524
0.06406
0.06344
0.06196
0.05984
0.05866
0.0578
5,0.055008
0.05326
2,0.05036
2,0.05012
0.04904
0.04796
0.0457
0.04364
0.04354
0.04246
0.04138
0.03932
3,0.03824
0.03814
0.03166
0.03068
0.030013
0.0295
0.02816
0.02656
0.02528
0.0242
3,0.0241
2,0.02302
0.02086
0.01978
0.0187
0.01762
0.01654
0.01556
0.01546
2,0.013328
14,0.01006
64,0.00466
RDF50:
Potato,
PB,
processed,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
24%
TOTALZ=
1083
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
90
of
203
RDF51:
Sweet
Potato
Composites,
Field
Trial
Data
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
37%
TOTALZ=
91
22,0.005
0.009
0.011
2,0.01625
0.044814
0.055458
0.043042
0.031062
0.035182
0.027486
0.015154
0.011642
0.011714
0.022134
0.014144
0.006242
0.022334
0.011390
0.011622
0.013978
0.012330
0.014286
0.013986
0.021702
0.035966
0.020234
0.014490
0.016518
0.016042
0.014902
0.019346
0.015450
RDF52:
Sweet
Potato,
Single
Unit
Residue
Values,
Field
Trials
Estimated
Max
%
CT
=
37%
TOTALZ=
91
2,0.02125
27,0.01625
0.13645
0.12953
0.11425
0.11193
0.11009
0.07561
0.07217
0.06473
0.05885
0.05785
0.05665
0.05577
0.05197
0.05045
0.04937
0.04645
0.03613
0.03605
0.03413
0.03245
0.02873
0.02597
0.02489
0.02273
0.02165
RDF53:
Sweet
Potato,
Composite
Samples,
USDA­
PDP
Monitoring
Data
Estimated
Max.
%
CT=
37%
TOTALZ=
769
446,0.026279
0.146240
0.182280
0.102680
0.040040
0.025880
0.025880
RDF54:
Sweet
Potato,
Composite
Samples,
USDA­
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
Sensitivity
Analysis
Estimated
Max.
%
CT=
37%
TOTALZ=
1215
0.146240
0.182280
0.102680
0.040040
0.025880
0.025880
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
91
of
203
RDF55:
Sweet
Potato,
NB
From
PDP
Potato
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Study,
160
tubers
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
37%
TOTALZ=
272
0.402325
0.315725
0.265525
0.259325
0.246325
0.234325
0.226925
0.209525
0.183725
0.179885
0.169725
0.157125
0.140525
0.123445
0.109325
0.101605
0.087485
0.086525
0.084365
0.082685
0.080045
0.077885
0.077765
2,0.076805
0.073565
0.072005
2,0.071405
0.070325
0.069485
0.068165
0.066985
0.066365
0.064885
0.062765
0.061585
0.060725
5,0.057933
0.056185
0.053285
0.053285
2,0.053045
0.051965
0.050885
0.048625
0.046565
0.046465
0.045385
0.044305
0.042245
3,0.041165
0.041065
0.034585
0.033605
0.032938
0.032425
0.031085
0.029485
0.028205
0.027125
3,0.027025
2,0.025945
0.023785
0.022705
0.021625
0.020545
0.019465
0.018485
0.018385
2,0.016253
14,0.012985
64,0.007585
RDF56:
Sweet
Potato,
PB,
PDP
Potato
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
37%
TOTALZ=
582
0.172925
0.151125
0.107045
0.090245
0.087445
2,0.059525
0.048725
0.043325
0.036745
0.035665
0.030265
8,0.012985
322,0.007585
RDF57:
Sweet
Potato,
NB
From
PDP
Potato
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Study,
160
tubers
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
37%
TOTALZ=
272
0.3994
0.3128
0.2626
0.2564
0.2434
0.2314
0.224
0.2066
0.1808
0.17696
0.1668
0.1542
0.1376
0.12052
0.1064
0.09868
0.08456
0.0836
0.08144
0.07976
0.07712
0.07496
0.07484
2,0.07388
0.07064
0.06908
2,0.06848
0.0674
0.06656
0.06524
0.06406
0.06344
0.06196
0.05984
0.05866
0.0578
5,0.055008
0.05326
2,0.05036
2,0.05012
0.04904
0.04796
0.0457
0.04364
0.04354
0.04246
0.04138
0.03932
3,0.03824
0.03814
0.03166
0.03068
0.030013
0.0295
0.02816
0.02656
0.02528
0.0242
3,0.0241
2,0.02302
0.02086
0.01978
0.0187
0.01762
0.01654
0.01556
0.01546
2,0.013328
14,0.01006
64,0.00466
RDF58:
Sweet
Potato,
PB,
PDP
Potato
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
37%
TOTALZ=
582
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
92
of
203
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
RDF59:
Bananas,
proposed
use
Estimated
Market
Share
=
45%
TOTALZ=
55
45,0.0069
RDF60:
Potato,
PB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
9%
TOTALZ=
3458
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
RDF61:
Potato,
NB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
160
individuals
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
9%
TOTALZ=
1618
0.3994
0.3128
0.2626
0.2564
0.2434
0.2314
0.224
0.2066
0.1808
0.17696
0.1668
0.1542
0.1376
0.12052
0.1064
0.09868
0.08456
0.0836
0.08144
0.07976
0.07712
0.07496
0.07484
2,0.07388
0.07064
0.06908
2,0.06848
0.0674
0.06656
0.06524
0.06406
0.06344
0.06196
0.05984
0.05866
0.0578
5,0.055008
0.05326
2,0.05036
2,0.05012
0.04904
0.04796
0.0457
0.04364
0.04354
0.04246
0.04138
0.03932
3,0.03824
0.03814
0.03166
0.03068
0.030013
0.0295
0.02816
0.02656
0.02528
0.0242
3,0.0241
2,0.02302
0.02086
0.01978
0.0187
0.01762
0.01654
0.01556
0.01546
2,0.013328
14,0.01006
64,0.00466
RDF62:
Potato,
PB,
processed,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
36%
TOTALZ=
608
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
RDF63:
Potato,
PB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Six
Midwestern
States
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
93
of
203
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
7%
TOTALZ=
4544
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
RDF64:
Potato,
NB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
160
individuals
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Six
Midwestern
States
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
7%
TOTALZ=
2126
0.3994
0.3128
0.2626
0.2564
0.2434
0.2314
0.224
0.2066
0.1808
0.17696
0.1668
0.1542
0.1376
0.12052
0.1064
0.09868
0.08456
0.0836
0.08144
0.07976
0.07712
0.07496
0.07484
2,0.07388
0.07064
0.06908
2,0.06848
0.0674
0.06656
0.06524
0.06406
0.06344
0.06196
0.05984
0.05866
0.0578
5,0.055008
0.05326
2,0.05036
2,0.05012
0.04904
0.04796
0.0457
0.04364
0.04354
0.04246
0.04138
0.03932
3,0.03824
0.03814
0.03166
0.03068
0.030013
0.0295
0.02816
0.02656
0.02528
0.0242
3,0.0241
2,0.02302
0.02086
0.01978
0.0187
0.01762
0.01654
0.01556
0.01546
2,0.013328
14,0.01006
64,0.00466
RDF65:
Potato,
PB,
processed,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Six
Midwestern
States
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
28%
TOTALZ=
879
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
RDF66:
Potato,
PB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Shorter
PHI
+
Six
Midwestern
States
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
10%
TOTALZ=
3078
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
RDF67:
Potato,
NB,
fresh,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
160
individuals
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Shorter
PHI
+
Six
Midwestern
States
Attachment
4.
Summary
of
Aldicarb
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDFs)
for
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analysis.

Page
94
of
203
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
10%
TOTALZ=
1440
0.3994
0.3128
0.2626
0.2564
0.2434
0.2314
0.224
0.2066
0.1808
0.17696
0.1668
0.1542
0.1376
0.12052
0.1064
0.09868
0.08456
0.0836
0.08144
0.07976
0.07712
0.07496
0.07484
2,0.07388
0.07064
0.06908
2,0.06848
0.0674
0.06656
0.06524
0.06406
0.06344
0.06196
0.05984
0.05866
0.0578
5,0.055008
0.05326
2,0.05036
2,0.05012
0.04904
0.04796
0.0457
0.04364
0.04354
0.04246
0.04138
0.03932
3,0.03824
0.03814
0.03166
0.03068
0.030013
0.0295
0.02816
0.02656
0.02528
0.0242
3,0.0241
2,0.02302
0.02086
0.01978
0.0187
0.01762
0.01654
0.01556
0.01546
2,0.013328
14,0.01006
64,0.00466
RDF68:
Potato,
PB,
processed,
PDP
Monitoring
Data,
1997
Special
Study,
342
composites
Assuming
aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm;
Shorter
PHI
+
Six
Midwestern
States
Estimated
Max
%
CT=
40%
TOTALZ=
513
0.170000
0.148200
0.104120
0.087320
0.084520
2,0.056600
0.045800
0.040400
0.033820
0.032740
0.027340
8,0.010060
322,0.004660
Attachment
5
Existing
Registrations
.

Page
95
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
existing
registrations
5.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
43:
56/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
27GFctff.
rdf
2
6
28GFctfp.
rdf
3
6
34LEctff.
rdf
4
6
33LIctff.
rdf
5
6
16OGctff.
rdf
6
6
17OGctfp.
rdf
7
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
8
6
46POmnfr.
rdf
9
6
47POmppr.
rdf
10
6
55SWmssp.
rdf
11
6
56SWmcsp.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
Attachment
5
Existing
Registrations
.

Page
96
of
203
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
6
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
6
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
6
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
6
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
6
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
6
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.061400
1.000
1.000
7
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.002503
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002503
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
Attachment
5
Existing
Registrations
.

Page
97
of
203
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002503
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.002503
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.002503
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
8
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
9
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
9
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
8
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
9
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
8
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
9
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
Attachment
5
Existing
Registrations
.

Page
98
of
203
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
10
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
11
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
11
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
11
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
existing
registrations
5.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
17:
50:
12
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
43:
56/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000009
1.79
0.000051
10.16
0.000358
71.63
All
infants:
0.000007
1.39
0.000065
12.96
0.000463
92.52
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000023
4.67
0.000108
21.52
0.000797
159.45
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000021
4.19
0.000088
17.60
0.000643
128.52
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000013
2.70
0.000061
12.16
0.000457
91.38
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000009
1.88
0.000043
8.52
0.000312
62.48
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000007
1.44
0.000039
7.85
0.000298
59.56
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
1.19
0.000054
10.78
0.000320
64.06
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000007
1.31
0.000038
7.60
0.000282
56.40
Attachment
5
Existing
Registrations
.

Page
99
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
existing
registrations
5.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
19:
04:
11
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
17:
00:
47/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================
Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000009
1.19
0.000051
6.77
0.000358
47.75
All
infants:
0.000007
0.93
0.000065
8.64
0.000463
61.68
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000023
3.11
0.000108
14.35
0.000797
106.30
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000021
2.79
0.000088
11.73
0.000643
85.68
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000013
1.80
0.000061
8.11
0.000457
60.92
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000009
1.25
0.000043
5.68
0.000312
41.65
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000007
0.96
0.000039
5.23
0.000298
39.71
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
0.79
0.000054
7.19
0.000320
42.71
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000007
0.87
0.000038
5.07
0.000282
37.60
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
existing
registrations
5.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
14:
10:
39
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
53:
57/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================
Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000009
1.38
0.000051
7.82
0.000358
55.10
All
infants:
0.000007
1.07
0.000065
9.97
0.000463
71.17
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000023
3.59
0.000108
16.55
0.000797
122.65
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000021
3.22
0.000088
13.54
0.000643
98.86
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000013
2.08
0.000061
9.36
0.000457
70.29
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000009
1.44
0.000043
6.56
0.000312
48.06
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000007
1.11
0.000039
6.04
0.000298
45.82
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
0.91
0.000054
8.29
0.000320
49.28
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000007
1.00
0.000038
5.85
0.000282
43.38
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.
.

Page
100
of
203
Analysis
2:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classifica
tion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
36LOD+
347Z
(
18)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­
Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
76LOD+
307Z
(
19)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
76LOD+
307Z
(
19)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
36LOD+
347Z
(
18)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
76LOD+
307Z
(
19)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
36LOD+
347Z
(
18)
Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
76LOD+
307Z
(
19)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
160Z
(
29)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­
Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
109Z
(
30)

Grapefruit
­
Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
109Z
(
30)

Grapefruit
­
Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
160Z
(
29)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
37LOD+
160Z
(
29)
Grapefruit
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
54LOD+
92Z
(
30)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Boiled
B
P
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
Potatoes/
whitedry
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
0.001732
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Potatoes/
whitepeeled
Uncooked
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.
.

Page
101
of
203
Analysis
2:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classifica
tion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
(
single
units)

Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
whitepeel
only
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)

Potatoes/
whiteunspec
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)
Potatoes/
whitewhole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.
2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.
5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.
7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

.

Analysis
2:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).

[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes]

%
CT
2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classifica
tion
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
Beans
(
dry)/
0.1
1
2
FT
B
Baked,
boiled,
fried,

canned:
cooked;

canned:
boiled;

cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.000200
Coffee
Beans/
0.1
20
20
FT/
PS
B
Boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.002
Cottonseed/
0.

1
27
33
FT/
PS
B
Cottonseed
meal
N/
A
0.016995
B
Cottonseed
oil
N/
A
0.000495
Lemon/
0.3
1
3
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit:

uncooked;
cooked;

canned,
NFS;
Peel:

uncooked,
baked,

boiled,
canned,

frozen;
Juice:
canned,

frozen
Juice
concentrate:

frozen,
cooked,
baked,

boiled,
canned
16
Det.+
37LOD+
1,725Z
(
36)
N/
A
Limes/
0.3
4
7
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit;
Peel:

baked,
boiled;
Juice:

uncooked,
canned,

frozen;
Juice
concentrate:
cooked,

frozen
16
Det.+
37LOD+
709Z
(
35)
N/
A
Peanuts
30
47
FT
B
Peanuts,
hulled;

Peanuts
­
butter;
N/
A
0.002585
Peanuts,
oil
N/
A
0.000705
Pecans/
0.5
4
8
FT
PB
Unbaked,
baked,
boiled
22
detects
+
253Z
(
1)
N/
A
Sorghum,

grain/
0.2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Boiled
N/
A
0.002
Soybeans/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Soybean
flour
(
defatted,
full
fat);

mature
seeds,
dry;

protein
isolate;
N/
A
0.0001
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

.

Analysis
2:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).

[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes]

%
CT
2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classifica
tion
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
sprouted
seeds)

B
soybean
oil
N/
A
0.00005
Sugarcane/
0.0
2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Sugar­
cane,
refined;

sugar­
cane/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sugar
beets/
0.05
9
11
FT
B
Sugar
beet,
refined;

sugar
beet/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sweet
potato/
0.1
15
37
PDP
potato
(
single
s)
NB
Cooked,
baked,
boiled,

fried
160
Det.+
272Z
(
57)
N/
A
PDP
Composi
tes
PB
Canned
(
NFS,
cooked,

boiled)
342
Det.+
582Z
(
58)
N/
A
1
The
relevant
commodities
are
shown
along
with
the
reassessed
tolerances
from
the
6/
2/
00
Residue
Chemistry
Chapter.

2
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
Max.
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).

3
FT
=
Field
Trials;
PS
=
Processing
Study;
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force;
PDP
=
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
(
monitoring
data).

4
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.

5
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.

6
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.

7
For
blended
commodities,
a
point
estimate
was
used
for
the
acute
analysis,
with
the
%
CT
incorporated
into
the
AR
(
i.
e.,

Adj.
Factor
2
was
set
to
1).
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
104
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
existing
registrations
aldicarb
zero
6.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
44:
22/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
29GFctfs.
rdf
2
6
30GFctps.
rdf
3
6
36LEctfs.
rdf
4
6
35LIctfs.
rdf
5
6
18OGctfs.
rdf
6
6
19OGctps.
rdf
7
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
8
6
49POmnfr.
rdf
9
6
50POmppr.
rdf
10
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
11
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
105
of
203
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
6
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
6
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
6
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
6
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
6
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
6
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.061400
1.000
1.000
7
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
106
of
203
0.001732
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.001732
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
8
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
9
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
9
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
8
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
9
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
8
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
9
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
107
of
203
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
10
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
11
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
11
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
11
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
existing
registrations
aldicarb
zero
6.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
17:
57:
38
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
44:
22/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000007
1.32
0.000044
8.88
0.000349
69.71
All
infants:
0.000005
1.01
0.000042
8.32
0.000443
88.64
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000017
3.41
0.000093
18.63
0.000773
154.66
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000015
3.05
0.000077
15.36
0.000623
124.70
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000010
1.97
0.000052
10.50
0.000443
88.58
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
1.28
0.000035
6.99
0.000304
60.85
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
1.01
0.000035
6.99
0.000290
58.01
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.89
0.000051
10.13
0.000314
62.89
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.92
0.000033
6.52
0.000274
54.85
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
108
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
existing
registrations
aldicarb
zero
6.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
10:
55:
14
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
17:
01:
09/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000007
0.88
0.000044
5.92
0.000349
46.47
All
infants:
0.000005
0.67
0.000042
5.54
0.000443
59.09
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000017
2.27
0.000093
12.42
0.000773
103.11
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000015
2.03
0.000077
10.24
0.000623
83.13
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000010
1.31
0.000052
7.00
0.000443
59.06
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
0.85
0.000035
4.66
0.000304
40.56
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.67
0.000035
4.66
0.000290
38.67
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.59
0.000051
6.76
0.000314
41.93
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.62
0.000033
4.35
0.000274
36.57
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
existing
registrations
aldicarb
zero
6.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
14:
16:
43
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
54:
18/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000007
1.02
0.000044
6.83
0.000349
53.62
All
infants:
0.000005
0.78
0.000042
6.40
0.000443
68.18
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000017
2.62
0.000093
14.33
0.000773
118.97
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000015
2.35
0.000077
11.81
0.000623
95.92
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000010
1.51
0.000052
8.07
0.000443
68.14
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
0.98
0.000035
5.37
0.000304
46.81
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.78
0.000035
5.38
0.000290
44.62
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.69
0.000051
7.80
0.000314
48.38
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.71
0.000033
5.02
0.000274
42.20
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
109
of
203
Summary
of
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDF)
RDF
File
N
residues
N
residues
N
LODs
LOD
N
Zeros
#
Name
w
freq's
w/
o
freq's
Value
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­
1
29GFctfs.
rdf
1
16
0
0
160
2
30GFctps.
rdf
1
16
0
0
109
3
36LEctfs.
rdf
1
16
0
0
1725
4
35LIctfs.
rdf
1
16
0
0
709
5
18OGctfs.
rdf
1
16
0
0
347
6
19OGctps.
rdf
1
16
0
0
307
7
1Pecanft.
rdf
5
10
0
0
253
8
49POmnfr.
rdf
11
59
0
0
3040
9
50POmppr.
rdf
3
10
0
0
1083
10
57SWmssp.
rdf
11
59
0
0
272
11
58SWmcsp.
rdf
3
10
0
0
582
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Analysis
3:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;

Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­
Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­

Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­

Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­

Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Grapefruit
­

Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Potatoes/

whitedry
Boiled
B
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
0.001732
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Analysis
3:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;

Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Canned:

Boiled
B
P
Frozen:

Cooked
B
P
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)

Canned:

Cooked
PB
P
Canned:

Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:

Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Potatoes/

whitepeeled
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/

whitepeel
only
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)

Potatoes/

whiteunspec
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Potatoes/

whitewhole
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Analysis
3:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;

Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.

2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.

3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.

4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.

5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).

6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.

7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.

Analysis
3:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).

[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;

Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

%
CT
2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classifica
tion
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
Beans
(
dry)/
0.1
1
2
FT
B
Baked,
boiled,
fried,
canned:
cooked;

canned:
boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.000200
Coffee
Beans/
0.1
20
20
FT/
PS
B
Boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.002
Cottonseed/
0.

1
27
33
FT/
PS
B
Cottonseed
meal
N/
A
0.016995
B
Cottonseed
oil
N/
A
0.000495
Lemon/
0.3
1
3
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit:
uncooked;
cooked;
canned,
NFS;

Peel:
uncooked,
baked,
boiled,
canned,
frozen;

Juice:
canned,
frozen
Juice
concentrate:
frozen,
cooked,
baked,
boiled,

canned
16
Det.+
1,762Z
(
38)
N/
A
Limes/
0.3
4
7
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit;
Peel:
baked,
boiled;
Juice:
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Analysis
3:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).

[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;

Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

%
CT
2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classifica
tion
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
uncooked,
canned,
frozen;
Juice
concentrate:

cooked,
frozen
Peanuts
30
47
FT
B
Peanuts,
hulled;
Peanuts
­
butter;
N/
A
0.002585
Peanuts,
oil
N/
A
0.000705
Pecans/
0.5
4
8
FT
PB
Unbaked,
baked,
boiled
22
detects
+
253Z
(
1)
N/
A
Sorghum,

grain/
0.2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Boiled
N/
A
0.002
Soybeans/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Soybean
flour
(
defatted,
full
fat);
mature
seeds,

dry;
protein
isolate;
sprouted
seeds)
N/
A
0.0001
B
soybean
oil
N/
A
0.00005
Sugarcane/
0.0
2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Sugar­
cane,
refined;
sugar­
cane/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sugar
beets/
0.05
9
11
FT
B
Sugar
beet,
refined;
sugar
beet/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sweet
potato/
0.1
15
37
PDP
potato
(
single
s)
NB
Cooked,
baked,
boiled,
fried
160
Det.+
272Z
(
57)
N/
A
PDP
Composi
tes
PB
Canned
(
NFS,
cooked,
boiled)
342
Det.+
582Z
(
58)
N/
A
1
The
relevant
commodities
are
shown
along
with
the
reassessed
tolerances
from
the
6/
2/
00
Residue
Chemistry
Chapter.

2
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
Max.
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).

3
FT
=
Field
Trials;
PS
=
Processing
Study;
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force;
PDP
=
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
(
monitoring
data).

4
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.

5
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.

6
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.

7
For
blended
commodities,
a
point
estimate
was
used
for
the
acute
analysis,
with
the
%
CT
incorporated
into
the
AR
(
i.
e.,

Adj.
Factor
2
was
set
to
1).
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
114
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
ER
aldicarb
zero
citrus
nondects
zero
7.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
42:
05/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
49POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
50POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
115
of
203
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.614000
1.000
1.000
6
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
116
of
203
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.001732
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
9
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
117
of
203
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
aldicarb
zero
citrus
nondects
zero
7.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
18:
04:
37
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
42:
05/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
1.23
0.000044
8.84
0.000348
69.61
All
infants:
0.000003
0.65
0.000042
8.31
0.000444
88.87
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000015
3.02
0.000091
18.27
0.000772
154.45
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000014
2.89
0.000076
15.27
0.000623
124.61
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000009
1.84
0.000051
10.27
0.000443
88.55
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
1.20
0.000035
6.99
0.000301
60.18
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.95
0.000035
6.99
0.000290
58.08
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.83
0.000051
10.13
0.000314
62.85
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.81
0.000033
6.51
0.000274
54.89
Attachment
6:
Analysis
2
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm.

Page
118
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
aldicarb
zero
citrus
nondects
zero
7.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
11:
05:
29
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
59:
23/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
0.82
0.000044
5.90
0.000348
46.41
All
infants:
0.000003
0.44
0.000042
5.54
0.000444
59.24
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000015
2.01
0.000091
12.18
0.000772
102.97
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000014
1.93
0.000076
10.18
0.000623
83.08
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000009
1.23
0.000051
6.85
0.000443
59.04
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
0.80
0.000035
4.66
0.000301
40.12
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.63
0.000035
4.66
0.000290
38.72
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.55
0.000051
6.76
0.000314
41.90
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.54
0.000033
4.34
0.000274
36.60
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
aldicarb
zero
citrus
nondects
zero
7.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
14:
24:
14
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
51:
33/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
0.95
0.000044
6.80
0.000348
53.55
All
infants:
0.000003
0.50
0.000042
6.39
0.000444
68.36
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000015
2.32
0.000091
14.05
0.000772
118.81
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000014
2.22
0.000076
11.74
0.000623
95.86
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000009
1.41
0.000051
7.90
0.000443
68.12
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
0.92
0.000035
5.38
0.000301
46.29
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.73
0.000035
5.38
0.000290
44.68
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.64
0.000051
7.80
0.000314
48.35
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.62
0.000033
5.01
0.000274
42.23
Attachment7:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
119
of
203
Analysis
4:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Adds
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classification3
F/
P4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­
Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)
Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­
Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)
Grapefruit
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Boiled
B
P
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
Potatoes/
white­
dry
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
0.001732
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
white­
peeled
Boiled
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)
Attachment7:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
120
of
203
Analysis
4:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Adds
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classification3
F/
P4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Fried
NB
F
Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
white­
peel
only
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)

Potatoes/
white­
unspec.
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)
Potatoes/
white­
whole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.
2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.
5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.
7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.

Analysis
4:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).
Adds
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

%
CT2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source3
Commodity
Classification4
Food
Forms5
Acute
RDF6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR7
Beans
(
dry)/
0.1
1
2
FT
B
Baked,
boiled,
fried,
canned:
cooked;
canned:
boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.000200
Coffee
Beans/
0.1
20
20
FT/
PS
B
Boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.002
Cottonseed/
0.1
27
33
FT/
PS
B
Cottonseed
meal
N/
A
0.016995
B
Cottonseed
oil
N/
A
0.000495
Attachment7:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEM
 
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
121
of
203
Analysis
4:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).
Adds
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

%
CT2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source3
Commodity
Classification4
Food
Forms5
Acute
RDF6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR7
Lemon/
0.3
1
3
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit:
uncooked;
cooked;
canned,
NFS;
Peel:
uncooked,
baked,
boiled,
canned,
frozen;
Juice:
canned,
frozen
Juice
concentrate:
frozen,
cooked,
baked,
boiled,
canned
16
Det.+
1,762Z
(
38)
N/
A
Limes/
0.3
4
7
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit;
Peel:
baked,
boiled;
Juice:
uncooked,
canned,
frozen;
Juice
concentrate:
cooked,
frozen
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Kumquat
(
0.3)
4
7
CTF
PB
Kumquat
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Tangelo
(
0.3)
4
7
CTF
NB
Tangelo
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Tangerine
(
0.3)
4
7
CTF
NB
Uncooked
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
PB
Tangerine:
canned,
frozen;
Juice:
uncooked,
canned,
frozen;
Juice
Concentrate:
concentrate
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Citrus
citron
(
0.3)
4
7
CTF
PB
Baked,
boiled
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Peanuts
30
47
FT
B
Peanuts,
hulled;
Peanuts
­
butter;
N/
A
0.002585
Peanuts,
oil
N/
A
0.000705
Pecans/
0.5
4
8
FT
PB
Unbaked,
baked,
boiled
22
detects
+
253Z
(
1)
N/
A
Sorghum,
grain/
0.2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Boiled
N/
A
0.002
Soybeans/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Soybean
flour
(
defatted,
full
fat);
mature
seeds,
dry;
protein
isolate;
sprouted
seeds)
N/
A
0.0001
B
soybean
oil
N/
A
0.00005
Sugarcane/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Sugar­
cane,
refined;
sugarcane
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sugar
beets/
0.05
9
11
FT
B
Sugar
beet,
refined;
sugar
beet/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sweet
potato/
0.1
15
37
PDP
potato
(
singles)
NB
Cooked,
baked,
boiled,
fried
160
Det.+
272Z
(
57)
N/
A
PDP
Composites
PB
Canned
(
NFS,
cooked,
boiled)
342
Det.+
582Z
(
58)
N/
A
1
The
relevant
commodities
are
shown
along
with
the
reassessed
tolerances
from
the
6/
2/
00
Residue
Chemistry
Chapter.
2
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
Max.
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
3
FT
=
Field
Trials;
PS
=
Processing
Study;
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force;
PDP
=
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
(
monitoring
data).
4
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
5
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
6
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
7
For
blended
commodities,
a
point
estimate
was
used
for
the
acute
analysis,
with
the
%
CT
incorporated
into
the
AR
(
i.
e.,
Adj.
Factor
2
was
set
to
1).
Attachment
8:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
122
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
ER
7
plus
more
citrus
8.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
41:
20/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
49POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
50POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
11
6
39CIctfs.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
10001060
10
Citrus
citron
0.000158
1.000
1.000
11
10001070
10
Citrus
hybrids
0.000158
1.000
1.000
11
10001080
10
Citrus,
oil
0.000158
1.000
1.000
11
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001970
10
Kumquat
0.000158
1.000
1.000
11
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
Attachment
8:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
123
of
203
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.614000
1.000
1.000
6
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
Attachment
8:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
124
of
203
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.001732
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
10003070
10
Pummelo
0.000158
1.000
1.000
11
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
Attachment
8:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
125
of
203
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
9
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
10003690
10
Tangerine
0.000158
1.000
1.000
11
10003700
10
Tangerine,
juice
0.000158
1.000
1.000
11
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
plus
more
citrus
8.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
18:
20:
10
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
41:
20/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
1.24
0.000044
8.85
0.000348
69.53
All
infants:
0.000003
0.66
0.000042
8.33
0.000454
90.86
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000015
3.02
0.000091
18.25
0.000764
152.75
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000015
2.90
0.000077
15.38
0.000613
122.60
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000009
1.85
0.000052
10.45
0.000456
91.15
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
1.20
0.000035
7.03
0.000300
59.94
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.95
0.000035
6.95
0.000293
58.64
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.83
0.000050
10.09
0.000307
61.44
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.81
0.000032
6.48
0.000281
56.24
Attachment
8:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
126
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
plus
more
citrus
8.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
11:
12:
43
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
58:
07/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
0.82
0.000044
5.90
0.000348
46.35
All
infants:
0.000003
0.44
0.000042
5.55
0.000454
60.57
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000015
2.02
0.000091
12.17
0.000764
101.84
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000015
1.93
0.000077
10.25
0.000613
81.73
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000009
1.23
0.000052
6.97
0.000456
60.77
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
0.80
0.000035
4.69
0.000300
39.96
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.63
0.000035
4.64
0.000293
39.10
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.55
0.000050
6.73
0.000307
40.96
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.54
0.000032
4.32
0.000281
37.49
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
plus
more
citrus
8.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
14:
31:
47
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
49:
19/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
0.95
0.000044
6.81
0.000348
53.49
All
infants:
0.000003
0.51
0.000042
6.40
0.000454
69.89
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000015
2.33
0.000091
14.04
0.000764
117.50
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000015
2.23
0.000077
11.83
0.000613
94.31
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000009
1.42
0.000052
8.04
0.000456
70.11
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
0.93
0.000035
5.41
0.000300
46.11
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.73
0.000035
5.35
0.000293
45.11
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.64
0.000050
7.76
0.000307
47.26
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.62
0.000032
4.98
0.000281
43.26
Attachment
8:
Analysis
4
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance.

Page
127
of
203
Summary
of
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDF)

RDF
File
N
residues
N
residues
N
LODs
LOD
N
Zeros
#
Name
w
freq's
w/
o
freq's
Value
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­
1
31GFctfsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
197
2
32GFctpsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
146
3
38LEctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
1762
4
37LIctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
746
5
20OGctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
383
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
5
10
0
0
253
7
49POmnfr.
rdf
11
59
0
0
3040
8
50POmppr.
rdf
3
10
0
0
1083
9
57SWmssp.
rdf
11
59
0
0
272
10
58SWmcsp.
rdf
3
10
0
0
582
11
39CIctfs.
rdf
1
16
0
0
709
Attachment
9:
Analysis
5
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
128
of
203
Analysis
5:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Adds
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
on
Potatoes
in
PNW
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classifica
tion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­
Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)
Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­
Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)
Grapefruit
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Boiled
B
P
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
Potatoes/
white­
dry
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
26/
36
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
0.002518
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
whitepeeled
Boiled
NB
F
7/
9
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1618Z
(
61)
Attachment
9:
Analysis
5
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
129
of
203
Analysis
5:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Adds
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
on
Potatoes
in
PNW
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classifica
tion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Fried
NB
F
Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
26/
36
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
608Z
(
62)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
white­
peel
only
Fried
NB
F
7/
9
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1618Z
(
61)

Potatoes/
whiteunspec
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
26/
36
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
608Z
(
62)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
7/
9
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1618Z
(
61)
Potatoes/
whitewhole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
26/
36
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
608Z
(
62)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.
2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.
5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.
7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.

[
Refer
to
Table
7
in
the
Document
for
the
Remaining
Residue
Inputs]
Attachment
9:
Analysis
5
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW.

Page
130
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
ER
7
shorter
PHI
potatoes
9.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
41:
37/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
61POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
62POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
Attachment
9:
Analysis
5
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW.

Page
131
of
203
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.061400
1.000
1.000
6
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.002518
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002518
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002518
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002518
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002518
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002518
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002518
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002518
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002518
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
Attachment
9:
Analysis
5
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW.

Page
132
of
203
0.002518
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002518
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.002518
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002518
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.002518
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.002518
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.002518
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002518
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.002518
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.002518
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002518
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.002518
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.002518
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.002518
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.002518
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
9
Attachment
9:
Analysis
5
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW.

Page
133
of
203
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
shorter
PHI
potatoes
9.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
18:
26:
33
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
41:
37/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000008
1.68
0.000076
15.22
0.000469
93.81
All
infants:
0.000007
1.38
0.000046
9.14
0.000608
121.70
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000020
3.99
0.000164
32.87
0.001031
206.24
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000018
3.52
0.000137
27.46
0.000845
168.99
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000012
2.44
0.000096
19.17
0.000601
120.25
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000008
1.61
0.000067
13.43
0.000436
87.16
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000006
1.30
0.000065
12.92
0.000392
78.42
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
1.27
0.000079
15.86
0.000403
80.53
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000006
1.17
0.000061
12.12
0.000373
74.53
Attachment
9:
Analysis
5
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW.

Page
134
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
shorter
PHI
potatoes
9.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
11:
19:
34
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
58:
38/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000008
1.12
0.000076
10.15
0.000469
62.54
All
infants:
0.000007
0.92
0.000046
6.10
0.000608
81.13
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000020
2.66
0.000164
21.91
0.001031
137.49
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000018
2.35
0.000137
18.30
0.000845
112.66
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000012
1.63
0.000096
12.78
0.000601
80.17
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000008
1.08
0.000067
8.95
0.000436
58.11
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000006
0.86
0.000065
8.62
0.000392
52.28
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
0.85
0.000079
10.58
0.000403
53.69
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000006
0.78
0.000061
8.08
0.000373
49.69
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
shorter
PHI
potatoes
9.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
14:
39:
09
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
50:
03/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000008
1.29
0.000076
11.71
0.000469
72.16
All
infants:
0.000007
1.06
0.000046
7.03
0.000608
93.61
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000020
3.07
0.000164
25.29
0.001031
158.64
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000018
2.71
0.000137
21.12
0.000845
130.00
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000012
1.88
0.000096
14.74
0.000601
92.50
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000008
1.24
0.000067
10.33
0.000436
67.05
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000006
1.00
0.000065
9.94
0.000392
60.33
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
0.98
0.000079
12.20
0.000403
61.95
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000006
0.90
0.000061
9.32
0.000373
57.33
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
135
of
203
Analysis
6:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
Adds
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
Six
Midwestern
States
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­
Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)
Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­
Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)
Grapefruit
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Boiled
B
P
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Potatoes/
whitedry
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
21/
28
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composite
s)
0.002021
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
136
of
203
Analysis
6:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
Adds
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
Six
Midwestern
States
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
6/
7
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
2126Z
(
64)

Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Potatoes/
whitepeeled
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
21/
28
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composite
s)
342
Det.+
879Z
(
65)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
whitepeel
only
Fried
NB
F
6/
7
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
2126Z
(
64)

Potatoes/
whiteunspec
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
21/
28
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composite
s)
342
Det.+
879Z
(
65)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
6/
7
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
2126Z
(
64)
Potatoes/
whitewhole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
21/
28
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composite
s)
342
Det.+
879Z
(
65)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.
2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.
5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.
7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.

[
Refer
to
Table
7
for
the
Remaining
Residue
Inputs]
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
137
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
ER
7
midwest
potatoes
10.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
40:
59/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
64POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
65POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
138
of
203
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.061400
1.000
1.000
6
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.002021
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002021
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002021
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002021
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002021
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002021
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002021
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002021
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002021
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
139
of
203
0.002021
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002021
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.002021
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002021
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.002021
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.002021
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.002021
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002021
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.002021
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.002021
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002021
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.002021
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.002021
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.002021
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.002021
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
406003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
140
of
203
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
9
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
midwest
potatoes
10.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
18:
32:
26
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
40:
59/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000007
1.42
0.000060
11.94
0.000412
82.47
All
infants:
0.000005
0.97
0.000044
8.70
0.000531
106.15
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000017
3.48
0.000128
25.62
0.000900
180.00
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000016
3.16
0.000107
21.47
0.000742
148.49
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000010
2.08
0.000073
14.68
0.000525
105.07
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000007
1.37
0.000051
10.26
0.000371
74.20
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000006
1.11
0.000050
9.94
0.000346
69.12
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000005
1.03
0.000065
13.04
0.000363
72.56
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.97
0.000047
9.30
0.000326
65.27
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
141
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
midwest
potatoes
10.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
11:
26:
35
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
57:
37/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000007
0.95
0.000060
7.96
0.000412
54.98
All
infants:
0.000005
0.64
0.000044
5.80
0.000531
70.77
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000017
2.32
0.000128
17.08
0.000900
120.00
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000016
2.11
0.000107
14.31
0.000742
98.99
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000010
1.39
0.000073
9.79
0.000525
70.05
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000007
0.91
0.000051
6.84
0.000371
49.46
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000006
0.74
0.000050
6.63
0.000346
46.08
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000005
0.69
0.000065
8.69
0.000363
48.37
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.65
0.000047
6.20
0.000326
43.51
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
midwest
potatoes
10.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
15:
03:
43
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
48:
51/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000007
1.10
0.000060
9.19
0.000412
63.44
All
infants:
0.000005
0.74
0.000044
6.69
0.000531
81.66
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000017
2.68
0.000128
19.70
0.000900
138.46
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000016
2.43
0.000107
16.52
0.000742
114.22
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000010
1.60
0.000073
11.29
0.000525
80.82
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000007
1.06
0.000051
7.89
0.000371
57.07
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000006
0.86
0.000050
7.65
0.000346
53.17
Adults
50+
yrs:
Attachment
10:
Analysis
6
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
142
of
203
0.000005
0.79
0.000065
10.03
0.000363
55.82
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.75
0.000047
7.16
0.000326
50.20
Summary
of
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDF)

RDF
File
N
residues
N
residues
N
LODs
LOD
N
Zeros
#
Name
w
freq's
w/
o
freq's
Value
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­
1
31GFctfsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
197
2
32GFctpsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
146
3
38LEctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
1762
4
37LIctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
746
5
20OGctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
383
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
5
10
0
0
253
7
64POmnfr.
rdf
11
59
0
0
2126
8
65POmppr.
rdf
3
10
0
0
879
9
57SWmssp.
rdf
11
59
0
0
272
10
58SWmcsp.
rdf
3
10
0
0
582
Attachment
11:
Analysis
7
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
143
of
203
Analysis
7:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Adds
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
and
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
Six
Midwestern
States
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­
Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)
Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­
Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)
Grapefruit
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Boiled
B
P
Potatoes/
whitedry
Fried
B
P
29/
40
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites
)
0.002887
Attachment
11:
Analysis
7
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
144
of
203
Analysis
7:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Adds
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
and
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
Six
Midwestern
States
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
8/
10
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1440Z
(
67)

Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Potatoes/
whitepeeled
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
29/
40
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites
)
342
Det.+
513Z
(
68)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
whitepeel
only
Fried
NB
F
8/
10
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1440Z
(
67)

Potatoes/
whiteunspec
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
29/
40
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites
)
342
Det.+
513Z
(
68)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
8/
10
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1440Z
(
67)
Potatoes/
whitewhole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
29/
40
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites
)
342
Det.+
513Z
(
68)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes
2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.
5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.
7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.[
Refer
to
Table
7
for
the
Remaining
Residue
Inputs]
Attachment
11:
Analysis
7
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW
and
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
145
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
ER
7
midwest
potatoes
and
shorter
PHI
11.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
40:
40/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
67POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
68POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
Attachment
11:
Analysis
7
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW
and
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
146
of
203
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.061400
1.000
1.000
6
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.002887
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002887
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
Attachment
11:
Analysis
7
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Shorter
PHI
for
Potatoes
in
the
PNW
and
Use
on
Potatoes
in
6
Midwestern
States.

Page
147
of
203
0.002887
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
148
of
203
0.002887
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002887
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.002887
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.002887
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
149
of
203
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
9
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
midwest
potatoes
and
shorter
PHI
11.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
17:
39:
24
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
40:
40/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000009
1.83
0.000084
16.80
0.000495
99.07
All
infants:
0.000008
1.62
0.000047
9.38
0.000648
129.69
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000021
4.21
0.000183
36.53
0.001081
216.12
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000019
3.75
0.000152
30.48
0.000890
177.91
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000013
2.60
0.000106
21.25
0.000637
127.32
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000009
1.72
0.000075
14.96
0.000463
92.61
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000007
1.40
0.000072
14.36
0.000415
82.90
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000007
1.39
0.000086
17.23
0.000421
84.16
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000006
1.30
0.000067
13.42
0.000393
78.64
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
150
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
midwest
potatoes
and
shorter
PHI
11.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
12:
03:
31
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
57:
14/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================
Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):
95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000009
1.22
0.000084
11.20
0.000495
66.05
All
infants:
0.000008
1.08
0.000047
6.26
0.000648
86.46
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000021
2.81
0.000183
24.35
0.001081
144.08
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000019
2.50
0.000152
20.32
0.000890
118.61
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000013
1.73
0.000106
14.17
0.000637
84.88
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000009
1.15
0.000075
9.97
0.000463
61.74
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000007
0.93
0.000072
9.57
0.000415
55.27
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000007
0.93
0.000086
11.49
0.000421
56.11
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000006
0.87
0.000067
8.95
0.000393
52.42
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
midwest
potatoes
and
shorter
PHI
11.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
25­
2006/
14:
27:
14
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
48:
28/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000009
1.41
0.000084
12.93
0.000495
76.21
All
infants:
0.000008
1.25
0.000047
7.22
0.000648
99.76
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000021
3.24
0.000183
28.10
0.001081
166.24
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000019
2.89
0.000152
23.45
0.000890
136.85
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000013
2.00
0.000106
16.34
0.000637
97.94
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000009
1.32
0.000075
11.50
0.000463
71.24
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000007
1.07
0.000072
11.05
0.000415
63.77
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000007
1.07
0.000086
13.25
0.000421
64.74
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000006
1.00
0.000067
10.32
0.000393
60.49
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
151
of
203
Analysis
8:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
Adds
Proposed
Use
on
Bananas
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classification
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­
Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)
Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­
Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)
Grapefruit
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Boiled
B
P
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Potatoes/
wh
ite­
dry
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composit
es)
0.001732
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
152
of
203
Analysis
8:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
Adds
Proposed
Use
on
Bananas
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classification
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)

Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Potatoes/
wh
ite­
peeled
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composit
es)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
wh
ite­
peel
only
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)

Potatoes/
wh
ite­
unspec.
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composit
es)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)
Potatoes/
wh
ite­
whole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composit
es)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.
2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.
5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.
7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
153
of
203
Analysis
8:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

%
CT
2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classifica
tion
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
NB
Uncooked,
cooked:
NFS,
baked,
boiled,
fried
Bananas/
0.03,
Prop.
NA
45
FT
PB
Canned:
NFS,
canned:
cooked;
Bananas­
dried:
baked,
fried,
dried,
canned:
cooked;
Bananas­
juice:
uncooked,
canned:
NFS
45
LOD
+
55
Zeroes
NA
Beans
(
dry)/
0.1
1
2
FT
B
Baked,
boiled,
fried,
canned:
cooked;
canned:
boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.000200
Coffee
Beans/
0.1
20
20
FT/
PS
B
Boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.002
Cottonseed/
0.
1
27
33
FT/
PS
B
Cottonseed
meal
N/
A
0.016995
B
Cottonseed
oil
N/
A
0.000495
Lemon/
0.3
1
3
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit:
uncooked;
cooked;
canned,
NFS;
Peel:
uncooked,
baked,
boiled,
canned,
frozen;
Juice:
canned,
frozen
Juice
concentrate:
frozen,
cooked,
baked,
boiled,
canned
16
Det.+
1,762Z
(
38)
N/
A
Limes/
0.3
4
7
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit;
Peel:
baked,
boiled;
Juice:
uncooked,
canned,
frozen;
Juice
concentrate:
cooked,
frozen
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Peanuts
30
47
FT
B
Peanuts,
hulled;
Peanuts
­
butter;
N/
A
0.002585
Peanuts,
oil
N/
A
0.000705
Pecans/
0.5
4
8
FT
PB
Unbaked,
baked,
boiled
22
detects
+
253Z
(
1)
N/
A
Sorghum,
grain/
0.2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Boiled
N/
A
0.002
Soybeans/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Soybean
flour
(
defatted,
full
fat);
mature
seeds,
dry;
protein
isolate;
sprouted
seeds)
N/
A
0.0001
B
soybean
oil
N/
A
0.00005
Sugarcane/
0.0
2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Sugar­
cane,
refined;
sugar­
cane/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sugar
beets/
0.05
9
11
FT
B
Sugar
beet,
refined;
sugar
beet/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
154
of
203
Analysis
8:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

%
CT
2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classifica
tion
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
Sweet
potato/
0.1
15
37
PDP
potato
(
single
s)
NB
Cooked,
baked,
boiled,
fried
160
Det.+
272Z
(
57)
N/
A
PDP
Composi
tes
PB
Canned
(
NFS,
cooked,
boiled)
342
Det.+
582Z
(
58)
N/
A
1
The
relevant
commodities
are
shown
along
with
the
reassessed
tolerances
from
the
6/
2/
00
Residue
Chemistry
Chapter,
with
the
exception
of
bananas,
for
which
a
tolerance
is
proposed
but
not
established.

2
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
Max.
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).

3
FT
=
Field
Trials;
PS
=
Processing
Study;
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force;
PDP
=
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
(
monitoring
data).

4
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.

5
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.

6
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.

7
For
blended
commodities,
a
point
estimate
was
used
for
the
acute
analysis,
with
the
%
CT
incorporated
into
the
AR
(
i.
e.,
Adj.
Factor
2
was
set
to
1).
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Import
Tolerance
on
Bananas.

Page
155
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
ER
aldicarb
zero
citrus
nondects
zero
plus
banana
12.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
42:
39/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
49POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
50POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
11
6
59BNtol.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
95000230
O
Banana
0.006900
1.000
1.000
11
95000231
O
Banana­
babyfood
0.006900
1.000
1.000
11
95000240
O
Banana,
dried
0.006900
1.000
1.000
11
95000241
O
Banana,
dried­
babyfood
0.006900
1.000
1.000
11
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Import
Tolerance
on
Bananas.

Page
156
of
203
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.614000
1.000
1.000
6
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Import
Tolerance
on
Bananas.

Page
157
of
203
0.001732
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.001732
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Import
Tolerance
on
Bananas.

Page
158
of
203
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
9
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
aldicarb
zero
citrus
nondects
zero
plus
banana
12.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
18:
39:
13
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
42:
39/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000013
2.68
0.000061
12.19
0.000350
70.03
All
infants:
0.000039
7.77
0.000096
19.18
0.000469
93.83
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000060
11.91
0.000129
25.79
0.000770
153.90
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000043
8.55
0.000103
20.51
0.000614
122.82
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000019
3.79
0.000067
13.40
0.000446
89.21
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000009
1.82
0.000038
7.55
0.000316
63.18
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000011
2.24
0.000038
7.53
0.000292
58.42
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000013
2.59
0.000052
10.34
0.000311
62.26
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000012
2.40
0.000035
7.00
0.000282
56.32
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Import
Tolerance
on
Bananas.

Page
159
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
aldicarb
zero
citrus
nondects
zero
plus
banana
12.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
15:
17:
46
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
59:
44/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000013
1.79
0.000061
8.12
0.000350
46.69
All
infants:
0.000039
5.18
0.000096
12.79
0.000469
62.55
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000060
7.94
0.000129
17.19
0.000770
102.60
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000043
5.70
0.000103
13.68
0.000614
81.88
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000019
2.53
0.000067
8.94
0.000446
59.48
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000009
1.21
0.000038
5.03
0.000316
42.12
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000011
1.50
0.000038
5.02
0.000292
38.95
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000013
1.72
0.000052
6.89
0.000311
41.51
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000012
1.60
0.000035
4.67
0.000282
37.55
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
7
plus
more
citrus
8.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
14:
31:
47
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
49:
19/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
0.95
0.000044
6.81
0.000348
53.49
All
infants:
0.000003
0.51
0.000042
6.40
0.000454
69.89
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000015
2.33
0.000091
14.04
0.000764
117.50
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000015
2.23
0.000077
11.83
0.000613
94.31
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000009
1.42
0.000052
8.04
0.000456
70.11
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000006
0.93
0.000035
5.41
0.000300
46.11
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.73
0.000035
5.35
0.000293
45.11
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000004
0.64
0.000050
7.76
0.000307
47.26
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.62
0.000032
4.98
0.000281
43.26
Attachment
12:
Analysis
8
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
the
Proposed
Import
Tolerance
on
Bananas.

Page
160
of
203
Summary
of
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDF)

RDF
File
N
residues
N
residues
N
LODs
LOD
N
Zeros
#
Name
w
freq's
w/
o
freq's
Value
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­
1
31GFctfsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
197
2
32GFctpsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
146
3
38LEctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
1762
4
37LIctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
746
5
20OGctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
383
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
5
10
0
0
253
7
49POmnfr.
rdf
11
59
0
0
3040
8
50POmppr.
rdf
3
10
0
0
1083
9
57SWmssp.
rdf
11
59
0
0
272
10
58SWmcsp.
rdf
3
10
0
0
582
11
59BNtol.
rdf
1
0
0
0
55
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
161
of
203
Analysis
9:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Adds
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
Adds
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
and
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
Six
Midwestern
States
Adds
Proposed
Use
on
Bananas
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­
Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­
Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­
Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)
Oranges
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­
Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­
Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)
Grapefruit
­
Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Boiled
B
P
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
Potatoes/
white­
dry
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
29/
40
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
0.002887
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Potatoes/
whitepeeled
Baked
NB
F
8/
10
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1440Z
(
67)
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
162
of
203
Analysis
9:
Summary
of
Orange,
Grapefruit,
and
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Adds
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
Adds
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
and
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
Six
Midwestern
States
Adds
Proposed
Use
on
Bananas
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classificat
ion
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
29/
40
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
513Z
(
68)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/
white­
peel
only
Fried
NB
F
8/
10
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1440Z
(
67)

Potatoes/
whiteunspec
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
29/
40
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
513Z
(
68)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
8/
10
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
1440Z
(
67)
Potatoes/
white­
whole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
29/
40
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composites)
342
Det.+
513Z
(
68)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.

2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.

3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.

4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.

5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).

6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.

7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
163
of
203
Analysis
9:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).
Adds
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
Adds
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
and
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
Six
Midwestern
States
Adds
proposed
Use
on
Bananas
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

%
CT
2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classifica
tion
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
NB
Uncooked,
cooked:
NFS,
baked,
boiled,
fried
Bananas/
0.03,
Prop.
NA
45
FT
PB
Canned:
NFS,
canned:
cooked;
Bananas­
dried:
baked,
fried,
dried,
canned:
cooked;
Bananas­
juice:
uncooked,
canned:
NFS
45
LOD
+
55
Zeroes
NA
Beans
(
dry)/
0.1
1
2
FT
B
Baked,
boiled,
fried,
canned:
cooked;
canned:
boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.000200
Coffee
Beans/
0.1
20
20
FT/
PS
B
Boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.002
Cottonseed/
0.
1
27
33
FT/
PS
B
Cottonseed
meal
N/
A
0.016995
B
Cottonseed
oil
N/
A
0.000495
Lemon/
0.3
1
3
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit:
uncooked;
cooked;
canned,
NFS;
Peel:
uncooked,
baked,
boiled,
canned,
frozen;
Juice:
canned,
frozen
Juice
concentrate:
frozen,
cooked,
baked,
boiled,
canned
16
Det.+
1,762Z
(
38)
N/
A
Limes/
0.3
4
7
CTF
PB
Peeled
fruit;
Peel:
baked,
boiled;
Juice:
uncooked,
canned,
frozen;
Juice
concentrate:
cooked,
frozen
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Kumquat
(
0.3)
4
7
CTF
PB
Kumquat
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Tangelo
(
0.3)
4
7
CTF
NB
Tangelo
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Tangerine
(
0.3)
4
7
CTF
NB
Uncooked
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
PB
Tangerine:
canned,
frozen;
Juice:
uncooked,
canned,
frozen;
Juice
Concentrate:
concentrate
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Citrus
citron
(
0.3)
4
7
CTF
PB
Baked,
boiled
16
Det.+
746Z
(
37)
N/
A
Peanuts
30
47
FT
B
Peanuts,
hulled;
Peanuts
­
butter;
N/
A
0.002585
Peanuts,
oil
N/
A
0.000705
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
164
of
203
Analysis
9:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Orange,
Grapefruit
and
Potato).
Adds
Proposed
Citrus
Crop
Group
Tolerance
Adds
Proposed
Shorter
PHI
in
PNW
and
Proposed
Use
on
Potatoes
in
Six
Midwestern
States
Adds
proposed
Use
on
Bananas
[
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus
and
Potatoes;
Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

%
CT
2
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classifica
tion
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
Pecans/
0.5
4
8
FT
PB
Unbaked,
baked,
boiled
22
detects
+
253Z
(
1)
N/
A
Sorghum,
grain/
0.2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Boiled
N/
A
0.002
Soybeans/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Soybean
flour
(
defatted,
full
fat);
mature
seeds,
dry;
protein
isolate;
sprouted
seeds)
N/
A
0.0001
B
soybean
oil
N/
A
0.00005
Sugarcane/
0.0
2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Sugar­
cane,
refined;
sugar­
cane/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sugar
beets/
0.05
9
11
FT
B
Sugar
beet,
refined;
sugar
beet/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sweet
potato/
0.1
15
37
PDP
potato
(
single
s)
NB
Cooked,
baked,
boiled,
fried
160
Det.+
272Z
(
57)
N/
A
PDP
Composi
tes
PB
Canned
(
NFS,
cooked,
boiled)
342
Det.+
582Z
(
58)
N/
A
1
The
relevant
commodities
are
shown
along
with
the
reassessed
tolerances
from
the
6/
2/
00
Residue
Chemistry
Chapter.
2
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
Max.
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
3
FT
=
Field
Trials;
PS
=
Processing
Study;
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force;
PDP
=
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
(
monitoring
data).
4
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
5
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
6
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.

7
For
blended
commodities,
a
point
estimate
was
used
for
the
acute
analysis,
with
the
%
CT
incorporated
into
the
AR
(
i.
e.,
Adj.
Factor
2
was
set
to
1).
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
165
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
all
proposed
label
amendments
13.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
40:
12/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
67POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
68POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
11
6
59BNtol.
rdf
12
6
39CIctfs.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
95000230
O
Banana
0.006900
1.000
1.000
11
95000231
O
Banana­
babyfood
0.006900
1.000
1.000
11
95000240
O
Banana,
dried
0.006900
1.000
1.000
11
95000241
O
Banana,
dried­
babyfood
0.006900
1.000
1.000
11
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
10001060
10
Citrus
citron
0.000158
1.000
1.000
12
10001070
10
Citrus
hybrids
0.000158
1.000
1.000
12
10001080
10
Citrus,
oil
0.000158
1.000
1.000
12
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001970
10
Kumquat
0.000158
1.000
1.000
12
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
166
of
203
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.061400
1.000
1.000
6
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.002887
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002887
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
167
of
203
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002887
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.002887
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002887
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.002887
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.002887
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.002887
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.002887
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
10003070
10
Pummelo
0.000158
1.000
1.000
12
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
168
of
203
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
9
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
10003690
10
Tangerine
0.000158
1.000
1.000
12
10003700
10
Tangerine,
juice
0.000158
1.000
1.000
12
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
all
proposed
label
amendments
13.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
17:
31:
32
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
40:
12/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000016
3.22
0.000090
18.05
0.000497
99.47
All
infants:
0.000041
8.21
0.000102
20.31
0.000671
134.11
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000064
12.85
0.000189
37.86
0.001082
216.34
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000047
9.30
0.000158
31.67
0.000884
176.72
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000024
4.85
0.000109
21.79
0.000657
131.40
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000012
2.45
0.000077
15.32
0.000461
92.19
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000013
2.59
0.000073
14.53
0.000418
83.66
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000015
2.93
0.000088
17.52
0.000423
84.63
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000013
2.68
0.000068
13.52
0.000397
79.45
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment.

Page
169
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
all
proposed
label
amendments
13.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
12:
12:
21
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
47:
29/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000016
2.15
0.000090
12.03
0.000497
66.31
All
infants:
0.000041
5.47
0.000102
13.54
0.000671
89.41
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000064
8.57
0.000189
25.24
0.001082
144.22
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000047
6.20
0.000158
21.12
0.000884
117.81
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000024
3.23
0.000109
14.52
0.000657
87.60
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000012
1.64
0.000077
10.21
0.000461
61.46
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000013
1.72
0.000073
9.69
0.000418
55.78
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000015
1.95
0.000088
11.68
0.000423
56.42
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000013
1.79
0.000068
9.02
0.000397
52.97
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
all
proposed
label
amendments
13.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
15:
29:
18
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
47:
56/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000016
2.48
0.000090
13.88
0.000497
76.52
All
infants:
0.000041
6.31
0.000102
15.62
0.000671
103.17
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000064
9.89
0.000189
29.12
0.001082
166.41
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000047
7.15
0.000158
24.36
0.000884
135.94
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000024
3.73
0.000109
16.76
0.000657
101.08
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000012
1.89
0.000077
11.78
0.000461
70.91
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000013
1.99
0.000073
11.18
0.000418
64.36
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000015
2.25
0.000088
13.47
0.000423
65.10
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000013
2.06
0.000068
10.40
0.000397
61.11
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
All
Proposed
Label
Amendments.

Page
170
of
203
Summary
of
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDF)

RDF
File
N
residues
N
residues
N
LODs
LOD
N
Zeros
#
Name
w
freq's
w/
o
freq's
Value
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­
1
31GFctfsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
197
2
32GFctpsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
146
3
38LEctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
1762
4
37LIctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
746
5
20OGctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
383
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
5
10
0
0
253
7
67POmnfr.
rdf
11
59
0
0
1440
8
68POmppr.
rdf
3
10
0
0
513
9
57SWmssp.
rdf
11
59
0
0
272
10
58SWmcsp.
rdf
3
10
0
0
582
11
59BNtol.
rdf
1
0
0
0
55
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
All
Proposed
Label
Amendments.

Page
171
of
203
Analysis
10:
Summary
of
Potato
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Excludes
Citrus
Commodities
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Potatoes]

Commodity
1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classification
3
F/
P
4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source
6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Cooked
(
NFS)
B
P
Baked
B
P
Boiled
B
P
Fried
B
P
Canned
(
NFS)
B
P
Canned:
Boiled
B
P
Potatoes/
white­
dry
Frozen:
Cooked
B
P
17/
24
PDP
­
Special
Survey
(
composit
es)
0.001732
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Uncooked
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)

Canned:
Cooked
PB
P
Canned:
Boiled
PB
P
Frozen:
Cooked
PB
P
Frozen:
Baked
PB
P
Potatoes/

whitepeeled
Frozen:
Fried
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composit
es)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Baked
NB
F
Potatoes/

whitepeel
only
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)

Potatoes/

whiteunspec
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composit
es)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Baked
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
Fried
NB
F
4/
5
PDP
Special
Survey
(
single
units)
160
Det.+
3040Z
(
49)
Potatoes/

whitewhole
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
24
PDP
Special
Survey
(
composit
es)
342
Det.+
1083Z
(
50)

1
The
reassessed
tolerance
is
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.
2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.
5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
6
PDP
=
Pesticide
Data
Program.

7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.
Attachment
13:
Analysis
9
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Including
All
Proposed
Label
Amendments.

Page
172
of
203
Analysis
10:
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Analyses
(
Except
Potato).
Excludes
Citrus
Commodities
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Potatoes;]

%
CT32
Commodity/
Reassessed
Tol.
1
Ave.
Max.
Data
Source
3
Commodity
Classification
4
Food
Forms
5
Acute
RDF
6
(
RDF
#)
Acute
AR
7
Beans
(
dry)/
0.1
1
2
FT
B
Baked,
boiled,
fried,
canned:
cooked;
canned:
boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.000200
Coffee
Beans/
0.1
20
20
FT/
PS
B
Boiled;
cooked:
NFS
N/
A
0.002
Cottonseed/
0.
1
27
33
FT/
PS
B
Cottonseed
meal
N/
A
0.016995
B
Cottonseed
oil
N/
A
0.000495
Peanuts
30
47
FT
B
Peanuts,
hulled;
Peanuts
­
butter;
N/
A
0.002585
Peanuts,
oil
N/
A
0.000705
Pecans/
0.5
4
8
FT
PB
Unbaked,
baked,
boiled
22
detects
+
253Z
(
1)
N/
A
Sorghum,
grain/
0.2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Boiled
N/
A
0.002
Soybeans/
0.02
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Soybean
flour
(
defatted,
full
fat);
mature
seeds,
dry;
protein
isolate;
sprouted
seeds)
N/
A
0.0001
B
soybean
oil
N/
A
0.00005
Sugarcane/
0.0
2
0
(
1)
0
(
1)
FT
B
Sugar­
cane,
refined;
sugarcane
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sugar
beets/
0.05
9
11
FT
B
Sugar
beet,
refined;
sugar
beet/
molasses
N/
A
N/
A
Sweet
potato/
0.1
15
37
PDP
potato
(
single
s)
NB
Cooked,
baked,
boiled,
fried
160
Det.+
272Z
(
57)
N/
A
PDP
Composi
tes
PB
Canned
(
NFS,
cooked,
boiled)
342
Det.+
582Z
(
58)
N/
A
1
The
relevant
commodities
are
shown
along
with
the
reassessed
tolerances
from
the
6/
2/
00
Residue
Chemistry
Chapter.
2
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
Max.
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).
3
FT
=
Field
Trials;
PS
=
Processing
Study;
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force;
PDP
=
USDA
Pesticide
Data
Program
(
monitoring
data).
4
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.
5
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.
6
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
7
For
blended
commodities,
a
point
estimate
was
used
for
the
acute
analysis,
with
the
%
CT
incorporated
into
the
AR
(
i.
e.,
Adj.
Factor
2
was
set
to
1).
Attachment
14:
Analysis
10
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Excluding
Citrus
Commodities.

Page
173
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
ER
no
citrus
aldicarb
zero
14.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
43:
02/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
49POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
50POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.061400
1.000
1.000
6
01032960
1C
Potato,
chips
0.001732
1.000
1.000
01032970
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.001732
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.001732
0.190
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.001732
0.300
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.001732
0.150
1.000
01032971
1C
Potato,
dry
(
granules/
flakes)­
b
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
Attachment
14:
Analysis
10
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Excluding
Citrus
Commodities.

Page
174
of
203
01032980
1C
Potato,
flour
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.001732
0.300
1.000
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
214­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried/
baked
0.002503
0.190
1.000
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.002503
0.150
1.000
220­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
222­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
230­
Cooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
231­
Cooked;
Dried;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
250­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.002503
0.300
1.000
251­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Baked
0.002503
0.300
1.000
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.002503
0.150
1.000
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.002503
0.190
1.000
01032981
1C
Potato,
flour­
babyfood
0.002503
1.000
1.000
01032990
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01032991
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
peel­
babyfood
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
01033000
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
7
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
223­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Fried
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
232­
Cooked;
Dried;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
233­
Cooked;
Dried;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
8
252­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Boiled
0.010430
0.500
1.000
7
253­
Cooked;
Cured
etc;
Fried
0.010430
0.620
1.000
7
01033001
1C
Potato,
tuber,
w/
o
peel­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.010430
1.000
1.000
8
Attachment
14:
Analysis
10
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Excluding
Citrus
Commodities.

Page
175
of
203
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
01033660
1CD
Sweet
potato
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
213­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Fried
0.004238
0.620
1.000
9
215­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
9
242­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
245­
Cooked;
Canned;
Boiled/
baked
0.004238
0.500
1.000
10
01033661
1CD
Sweet
potato­
babyfood
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.004238
1.000
1.000
9
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.004238
1.000
1.000
10
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
no
citrus
aldicarb
zero
14.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
18:
45:
07
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
43:
02/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000005
1.07
0.000032
6.48
0.000337
67.46
All
infants:
0.000003
0.54
0.000040
7.97
0.000433
86.51
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000013
2.64
0.000056
11.29
0.000755
150.94
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000012
2.46
0.000043
8.68
0.000597
119.44
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000008
1.62
0.000031
6.30
0.000452
90.32
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000005
1.09
0.000023
4.69
0.000300
59.92
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.83
0.000024
4.87
0.000283
56.70
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000003
0.63
0.000042
8.46
0.000307
61.33
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000003
0.68
0.000022
4.43
0.000270
53.96
Attachment
14:
Analysis
10
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Excluding
Citrus
Commodities.

Page
176
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
no
citrus
aldicarb
zero
14.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
13:
53:
19
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
17:
00:
03/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000005
0.71
0.000032
4.32
0.000337
44.97
All
infants:
0.000003
0.36
0.000040
5.31
0.000433
57.67
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000013
1.76
0.000056
7.53
0.000755
100.62
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000012
1.64
0.000043
5.79
0.000597
79.63
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000008
1.08
0.000031
4.20
0.000452
60.21
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000005
0.73
0.000023
3.13
0.000300
39.95
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.55
0.000024
3.25
0.000283
37.80
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000003
0.42
0.000042
5.64
0.000307
40.89
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000003
0.45
0.000022
2.95
0.000270
35.97
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
no
citrus
aldicarb
zero
14.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
15:
37:
40
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
52:
32/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000005
0.82
0.000032
4.98
0.000337
51.89
All
infants:
0.000003
0.42
0.000040
6.13
0.000433
66.54
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000013
2.03
0.000056
8.69
0.000755
116.10
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000012
1.90
0.000043
6.68
0.000597
91.88
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000008
1.24
0.000031
4.85
0.000452
69.48
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000005
0.84
0.000023
3.61
0.000300
46.09
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000004
0.64
0.000024
3.75
0.000283
43.61
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000003
0.48
0.000042
6.50
0.000307
47.18
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000003
0.52
0.000022
3.40
0.000270
41.51
Attachment
15:
Analysis
11
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm.

Summary
of
Residue
Distribution
Files
(
RDF)

RDF
File
N
residues
N
residues
N
LODs
LOD
N
Zeros
#
Name
w
freq's
w/
o
freq's
Value
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­

1
31GFctfsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
197
2
32GFctpsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
146
3
38LEctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
1762
4
37LIctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
746
5
20OGctsn.
rdf
0
16
0
0
383
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
5
10
0
0
253
7
49POmnfr.
rdf
11
59
0
0
3040
8
50POmppr.
rdf
3
10
0
0
1083
9
57SWmssp.
rdf
11
59
0
0
272
10
58SWmcsp.
rdf
3
10
0
0
582
Attachment
15:
Analysis
11
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm.

Analysis
11:
Summary
of
Orange
and
Grapefruit
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Excludes
Potatoes
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus;

Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classifi
cation3
F/

P4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges­

Juice
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­

Juice
Conc.
All
7
food
forms
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
PB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Oranges
­

Peel
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
7/
13
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)

Oranges
­

Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
11/
23
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
383Z
(
20)
Attachment
15:
Analysis
11
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm.

Analysis
11:
Summary
of
Orange
and
Grapefruit
Residue
Inputs
for
Aldicarb
Acute
Dietary
Exposure
Excludes
Potatoes
[
Sensitivity
Analysis
­
Assumes
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
in
Citrus;

Assumes
2
LOD
Residues
in
Citrus
Monitoring
Samples
were
True
Zeroes]

Commodity1
Food
Form
(
FF)
2
Classifi
cation3
F/

P4
%
CT
(
A/
M)
5
Data
Source6
Acute
RDF
(
RDF
#)
7
Uncooked
PB
F
Boiled
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
Grapefruit
­

Juice
Frozen
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­

Juice
Conc.
Frozen
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

Grapefruit
­

Peel
Peel
PB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Uncooked
NB
F
Cooked
(
NFS)
NB
F
Boiled
NB
F
16/
25
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
197Z
(
31)

Grapefruit
­

Peeled
Fruit
Canned
(
NFS)
PB
P
17/
33
CTF
­
single
oranges
16
Det.+
146Z
(
32)

1
The
reassessed
tolerances
are:
0.3
ppm
in
orange
and
grapefruit;
and
0.2
ppm
in
potatoes.

2
Food
forms
shown
in
the
table
are
taken
directly
from
the
DEEM
software.

3
Refer
to
HED
SOP99.6.
NB
=
Not
Blended;
PB
=
Partially
Blended;
B
=
Blended.

4
F
=
Fresh
commodity;
P
=
Processed
commodity.

5
BEAD
estimated
percent
crop
treated;
M
=
estimated
Maximum
(
for
acute
exposure).

6
CTF
=
Carbamate
Task
Force.

7
RDF
=
Residue
Distribution
File.
Det.
=
detect;
LOD
=
residues
at
2
LOD;
Z
=
zeroes.
Numbered
RDFs
are
shown
in
detail
in
Attachment
4.
For
dried
potatoes,
a
point
estimate
AR
was
used.

[
Refer
to
Table
7
for
the
Remaining
Residue
Inputs]
Attachment
15:
Analysis
11
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm,
and
Excluding
Potato
Commodities.

Page
180
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
Residue
file
name:
C:\$
MyFiles\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
dietary
Apr
2006\
ER
no
potatos
aldicarb
+
citrus
nondects
zero
15.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
19­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
43:
27/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
31GFctfsn.
rdf
2
6
32GFctpsn.
rdf
3
6
38LEctsn.
rdf
4
6
37LIctsn.
rdf
5
6
20OGctsn.
rdf
6
6
1Pecanft.
rdf
7
6
49POmnfr.
rdf
8
6
50POmppr.
rdf
9
6
57SWmssp.
rdf
10
6
58SWmcsp.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
06030300
6C
Bean,
black,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030320
6C
Bean,
broad,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030340
6C
Bean,
cowpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030350
6C
Bean,
great
northern,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030360
6C
Bean,
kidney,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030380
6C
Bean,
lima,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030390
6C
Bean,
mung,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030400
6C
Bean,
navy,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030410
6C
Bean,
pink,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030420
6C
Bean,
pinto,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030980
6C
Chickpea,
seed
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030981
6C
Chickpea,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
0.050
1.000
06030990
6C
Chickpea,
flour
0.000200
0.050
1.000
95001150
O
Coffee,
roasted
bean
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001160
O
Coffee,
instant
0.002000
1.000
1.000
95001280
O
Cottonseed,
oil
0.000495
1.000
1.000
95001281
O
Cottonseed,
oil­
babyfood
0.000495
1.000
1.000
10001800
10
Grapefruit
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
1.000
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
1.000
1.000
2
10001810
10
Grapefruit,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000747
0.014
1.000
1
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000922
0.014
1.000
2
06031820
6C
Guar,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06031821
6C
Guar,
seed­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10001990
10
Lemon
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
Attachment
15:
Analysis
11
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm,
and
Excluding
Potato
Commodities.

Page
181
of
203
10002000
10
Lemon,
juice
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002001
10
Lemon,
juice­
babyfood
0.000074
0.460
1.000
3
10002010
10
Lemon,
peel
0.000074
1.000
1.000
3
06032030
6C
Lentil,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
10002060
10
Lime
0.000200
1.000
1.000
4
10002070
10
Lime,
juice
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002071
10
Lime,
juice­
babyfood
0.000200
0.460
1.000
4
10002400
10
Orange
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
10002410
10
Orange,
juice
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
120­
Uncooked;
Frozen;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
130­
Uncooked;
Dried;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
0.580
1.000
5
221­
Cooked;
Frozen;
Baked
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002411
10
Orange,
juice­
babyfood
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
0.580
1.000
5
10002420
10
Orange,
peel
110­
Uncooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
210­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
211­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Baked
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
212­
Cooked;
Fresh
or
N/
S;
Boiled
0.000374
1.000
1.000
5
240­
Cooked;
Canned;
Cook
Meth
N/
S
0.000440
1.000
1.000
5
06032560
6C
Pea,
dry
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032561
6C
Pea,
dry­
babyfood
0.000200
1.000
1.000
06032580
6C
Pea,
pigeon,
seed
0.000200
1.000
1.000
95002630
O
Peanut
0.002585
1.000
1.000
95002640
O
Peanut,
butter
0.002585
1.890
1.000
95002650
O
Peanut,
oil
0.000705
1.000
1.000
14002690
14
Pecan
0.614000
1.000
1.000
6
06003470
6
Soybean,
seed
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003480
6
Soybean,
flour
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003481
6
Soybean,
flour­
babyfood
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003490
6
Soybean,
soy
milk
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003491
6
Soybean,
soy
milk­
babyfood
or
in
0.000100
1.000
1.000
06003500
6
Soybean,
oil
0.000050
1.000
1.000
06003501
6
Soybean,
oil­
babyfood
0.000050
1.000
1.000
Attachment
15:
Analysis
11
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm,
and
Excluding
Potato
Commodities.

Page
182
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
no
potatos
aldicarb
+
citrus
nondects
zero
15.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
19­
2006/
18:
53:
15
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
43:
27/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000003
0.54
0.000009
1.81
0.000063
12.62
All
infants:
0.000000
0.08
0.000002
0.49
0.000025
5.03
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000007
1.50
0.000022
4.38
0.000199
39.73
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000008
1.69
0.000020
4.05
0.000162
32.48
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000005
1.02
0.000013
2.57
0.000101
20.21
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000002
0.36
0.000007
1.44
0.000067
13.46
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.37
0.000006
1.16
0.000050
10.02
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000002
0.37
0.000006
1.28
0.000052
10.32
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.33
0.000005
1.05
0.000055
10.96
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
no
potatos
aldicarb
+
citrus
nondects
zero
15.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
13:
59:
20
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
17:
00:
27/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000003
0.36
0.000009
1.21
0.000063
8.42
All
infants:
0.000000
0.05
0.000002
0.32
0.000025
3.35
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000007
1.00
0.000022
2.92
0.000199
26.49
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000008
1.13
0.000020
2.70
0.000162
21.65
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000005
0.68
0.000013
1.71
0.000101
13.47
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000002
0.24
0.000007
0.96
0.000067
8.98
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.25
0.000006
0.78
0.000050
6.68
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000002
0.25
0.000006
0.85
0.000052
6.88
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.22
0.000005
0.70
0.000055
7.31
Attachment
15:
Analysis
11
­
Residue
Inputs
and
DEEMJ
Files
for
Acute
Exposure
Assessment,
Assuming
Aldicarb
per
se
=
0
ppm
and
Assuming
Citrus
Nondetects
=
0
ppm,
and
Excluding
Potato
Commodities.

Page
183
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
ER
no
potatos
aldicarb
+
citrus
nondects
zero
15.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
20­
2006/
16:
01:
34
Residue
file
dated:
04­
19­
2006/
16:
53:
01/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000003
0.42
0.000009
1.39
0.000063
9.71
All
infants:
0.000000
0.06
0.000002
0.37
0.000025
3.87
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000007
1.15
0.000022
3.37
0.000199
30.56
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000008
1.30
0.000020
3.12
0.000162
24.98
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000005
0.78
0.000013
1.97
0.000101
15.55
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000002
0.28
0.000007
1.11
0.000067
10.36
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.29
0.000006
0.90
0.000050
7.71
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000002
0.29
0.000006
0.98
0.000052
7.94
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.25
0.000005
0.81
0.000055
8.43
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
184
of
203
Surface
Water
­
MS
Cotton
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
MS
COTTON
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
Water
MS
cotton.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
16:
21/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.00075
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
MScotton
TS.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
1.000000
1.000
1.000
1
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
1.000000
1.000
1.000
1
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
MS
COTTON
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
MS
cotton.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
13:
08:
37
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
16:
21/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Rat
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000025
5.04
0.000160
31.91
0.000642
128.49
All
infants:
0.000078
15.54
0.000557
111.40
0.002292
458.31
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000037
7.45
0.000240
48.07
0.000970
193.99
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000035
7.06
0.000224
44.83
0.000903
180.67
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000024
4.86
0.000154
30.76
0.000627
125.33
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000018
3.50
0.000115
22.97
0.000488
97.56
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000024
4.76
0.000150
29.99
0.000589
117.90
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000027
5.32
0.000161
32.24
0.000569
113.82
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000024
4.72
0.000150
30.07
0.000591
118.20
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
185
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
MS
COTTON
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
MS
cotton.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
13:
20:
19
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
16:
21/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Rat
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000025
3.36
0.000160
21.28
0.000642
85.66
All
infants:
0.000078
10.36
0.000557
74.27
0.002292
305.54
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000037
4.96
0.000240
32.05
0.000970
129.33
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000035
4.70
0.000224
29.89
0.000903
120.44
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000024
3.24
0.000154
20.51
0.000627
83.56
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000018
2.34
0.000115
15.31
0.000488
65.04
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000024
3.17
0.000150
20.00
0.000589
78.60
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000027
3.55
0.000161
21.49
0.000569
75.88
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000024
3.15
0.000150
20.05
0.000591
78.80
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
MS
COTTON
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
MS
cotton.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
13:
14:
03
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
16:
21/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000025
3.88
0.000160
24.55
0.000642
98.84
All
infants:
0.000078
11.95
0.000557
85.69
0.002292
352.54
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000037
5.73
0.000240
36.98
0.000970
149.23
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000035
5.43
0.000224
34.48
0.000903
138.97
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000024
3.73
0.000154
23.67
0.000627
96.41
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000018
2.70
0.000115
17.67
0.000488
75.05
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000024
3.66
0.000150
23.07
0.000589
90.69
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000027
4.09
0.000161
24.80
0.000569
87.56
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000024
3.63
0.000150
23.13
0.000591
90.92
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
186
of
203
Surface
Water
­
FL
Citrus
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
FL
CITRUS
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
Water
FL
citrus.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
15:
14/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
FL
Citrus.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
1.000000
1.000
1.000
1
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
1.000000
1.000
1.000
1
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
FL
CITRUS
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
FL
citrus.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
49:
45
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
15:
14/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Rat
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
1.15
0.000045
9.05
0.000233
46.51
All
infants:
0.000015
3.09
0.000152
30.44
0.000850
170.01
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000008
1.64
0.000068
13.59
0.000360
71.95
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000008
1.59
0.000064
12.72
0.000329
65.84
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000005
1.08
0.000044
8.76
0.000226
45.29
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000004
0.75
0.000032
6.46
0.000175
35.00
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
1.09
0.000043
8.51
0.000216
43.25
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
1.28
0.000046
9.14
0.000215
42.95
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
1.07
0.000042
8.45
0.000217
43.31
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
187
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
FL
CITRUS
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
FL
citrus.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
56:
42
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
15:
14/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Rat
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
0.77
0.000045
6.04
0.000233
31.01
All
infants:
0.000015
2.06
0.000152
20.29
0.000850
113.34
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000008
1.09
0.000068
9.06
0.000360
47.97
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000008
1.06
0.000064
8.48
0.000329
43.89
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000005
0.72
0.000044
5.84
0.000226
30.19
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000004
0.50
0.000032
4.31
0.000175
23.33
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.73
0.000043
5.67
0.000216
28.83
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
0.86
0.000046
6.09
0.000215
28.63
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.72
0.000042
5.63
0.000217
28.88
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
FL
CITRUS
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
FL
citrus.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
11:
04:
02
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
15:
14/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000006
0.89
0.000045
6.96
0.000233
35.78
All
infants:
0.000015
2.38
0.000152
23.41
0.000850
130.77
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000008
1.26
0.000068
10.45
0.000360
55.35
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000008
1.22
0.000064
9.79
0.000329
50.64
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000005
0.83
0.000044
6.74
0.000226
34.84
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000004
0.58
0.000032
4.97
0.000175
26.92
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.84
0.000043
6.55
0.000216
33.27
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000006
0.99
0.000046
7.03
0.000215
33.04
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000005
0.83
0.000042
6.50
0.000217
33.32
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
188
of
203
Surface
Water
­
ID
Potato
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
ID
POTATO
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
Water
ID
potato.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
15:
42/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.00075
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
RDL
indices
and
parameters
for
Monte
Carlo
Analysis:
Index
Dist
Parameter
#
1
Param
#
2
Param
#
3
Comment
#
Code
­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
1
6
ID
Potato.
rdf
EPA
Crop
Food
Name
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
RDL
Code
Grp
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
Pntr
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
1.000000
1.000
1.000
1
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
1.000000
1.000
1.000
1
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
ID
POTATO
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
ID
potato.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
11:
14:
26
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
15:
42/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Rat
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000002
0.46
0.000022
4.49
0.000119
23.84
All
infants:
0.000006
1.25
0.000072
14.47
0.000441
88.16
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000003
0.66
0.000033
6.70
0.000186
37.26
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000003
0.64
0.000032
6.30
0.000170
34.07
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000002
0.44
0.000021
4.26
0.000117
23.50
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000002
0.30
0.000016
3.18
0.000090
18.08
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.43
0.000021
4.22
0.000111
22.20
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000003
0.51
0.000023
4.64
0.000110
21.92
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.43
0.000021
4.22
0.000113
22.59
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
189
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
ID
POTATO
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
ID
potato.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
11:
32:
33
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
15:
42/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Rat
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000002
0.31
0.000022
2.99
0.000119
15.89
All
infants:
0.000006
0.83
0.000072
9.64
0.000441
58.77
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000003
0.44
0.000033
4.46
0.000186
24.84
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000003
0.43
0.000032
4.20
0.000170
22.71
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000002
0.29
0.000021
2.84
0.000117
15.66
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000002
0.20
0.000016
2.12
0.000090
12.06
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.29
0.000021
2.81
0.000111
14.80
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000003
0.34
0.000023
3.09
0.000110
14.62
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.29
0.000021
2.81
0.000113
15.06
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
ID
POTATO
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
Water
ID
potato.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
11:
20:
48
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
15:
42/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
MC
iterations
=
1000
MC
list
in
residue
file
MC
seed
=
10
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000002
0.35
0.000022
3.45
0.000119
18.34
All
infants:
0.000006
0.96
0.000072
11.13
0.000441
67.81
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000003
0.51
0.000033
5.15
0.000186
28.66
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000003
0.49
0.000032
4.85
0.000170
26.21
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000002
0.34
0.000021
3.28
0.000117
18.07
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000002
0.23
0.000016
2.45
0.000090
13.91
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.33
0.000021
3.25
0.000111
17.08
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000003
0.39
0.000023
3.57
0.000110
16.86
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000002
0.33
0.000021
3.24
0.000113
17.38
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
190
of
203
Groundwater
­
AL
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
AL
GROUNDWATER
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
GW
AL.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
11:
34/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.00075
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
EPA
Crop
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
Code
Grp
Food
Name
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
0.020000
1.000
1.000
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
0.020000
1.000
1.000
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
AL
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
AL.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
20:
06
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
11:
34/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001045
139.30
0.001962
261.65
0.003926
523.51
All
infants:
0.003939
525.21
0.005647
752.93
0.010116
1348.74
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001639
218.58
0.002738
365.03
0.003982
530.88
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001498
199.67
0.002347
312.97
0.003831
510.81
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001043
139.00
0.001733
231.13
0.002367
315.64
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000848
113.01
0.001426
190.14
0.002565
341.98
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000968
129.06
0.001621
216.14
0.002932
390.96
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000874
116.55
0.001250
166.68
0.002027
270.30
Females
13­
49
yrs:
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
191
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
AL
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
AL.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
20:
06
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
11:
34/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001045
139.30
0.001962
261.65
0.003926
523.51
All
infants:
0.003939
525.21
0.005647
752.93
0.010116
1348.74
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001639
218.58
0.002738
365.03
0.003982
530.88
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001498
199.67
0.002347
312.97
0.003831
510.81
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001043
139.00
0.001733
231.13
0.002367
315.64
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000848
113.01
0.001426
190.14
0.002565
341.98
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000968
129.06
0.001621
216.14
0.002932
390.96
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000874
116.55
0.001250
166.68
0.002027
270.30
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000973
129.80
0.001567
208.90
0.002778
370.46
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
AL
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
AL.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
18:
59
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
11:
34/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001045
160.73
0.001962
301.91
0.003926
604.05
All
infants:
0.003939
606.02
0.005647
868.77
0.010116
1556.24
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001639
252.21
0.002738
421.19
0.003982
612.56
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001498
230.39
0.002347
361.12
0.003831
589.40
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001043
160.39
0.001733
266.68
0.002367
364.20
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000848
130.40
0.001426
219.39
0.002565
394.59
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000968
148.92
0.001621
249.39
0.002932
451.11
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000874
134.48
0.001250
192.32
0.002027
311.88
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000973
149.76
0.001567
241.04
0.002778
427.45
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
192
of
203
Groundwater
­
CA
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
CA
GROUNDWATER
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
GW
CA.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
12:
12/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.00075
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
EPA
Crop
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
Code
Grp
Food
Name
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
0.006400
1.000
1.000
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
0.006400
1.000
1.000
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
CA
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
CA.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
24:
07
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
12:
12/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Rat
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000334
66.87
0.000628
125.59
0.001256
251.28
All
infants:
0.001261
252.10
0.001807
361.41
0.003237
647.40
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000525
104.92
0.000876
175.21
0.001274
254.82
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000479
95.84
0.000751
150.23
0.001226
245.19
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000334
66.72
0.000555
110.94
0.000758
151.51
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000271
54.25
0.000456
91.27
0.000821
164.15
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000310
61.95
0.000519
103.75
0.000938
187.66
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000280
55.94
0.000400
80.01
0.000649
129.74
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000312
62.30
0.000501
100.27
0.000889
177.82
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
193
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
CA
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
CA.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
25:
52
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
12:
12/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000334
44.58
0.000628
83.73
0.001256
167.52
All
infants:
0.001261
168.07
0.001807
240.94
0.003237
431.60
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000525
69.95
0.000876
116.81
0.001274
169.88
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000479
63.90
0.000751
100.15
0.001226
163.46
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000334
44.48
0.000555
73.96
0.000758
101.01
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000271
36.16
0.000456
60.84
0.000821
109.43
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000310
41.30
0.000519
69.16
0.000938
125.11
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000280
37.30
0.000400
53.34
0.000649
86.50
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000312
41.53
0.000501
66.85
0.000889
118.55
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
CA
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
CA.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
25:
11
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
12:
12/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000334
51.44
0.000628
96.61
0.001256
193.30
All
infants:
0.001261
193.93
0.001807
278.01
0.003237
498.00
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000525
80.71
0.000876
134.78
0.001274
196.02
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000479
73.73
0.000751
115.56
0.001226
188.61
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000334
51.32
0.000555
85.34
0.000758
116.54
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000271
41.73
0.000456
70.21
0.000821
126.27
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000310
47.65
0.000519
79.80
0.000938
144.36
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000280
43.03
0.000400
61.54
0.000649
99.80
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000312
47.92
0.000501
77.13
0.000889
136.79
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
194
of
203
Groundwater
­
FL
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
FL
GROUNDWATER
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
GW
FL.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
12:
39/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.00075
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
EPA
Crop
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
Code
Grp
Food
Name
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
0.009300
1.000
1.000
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
0.009300
1.000
1.000
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
FL
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
FL.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
27:
23
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
12:
39/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000486
97.16
0.000913
182.50
0.001826
365.15
All
infants:
0.001832
366.34
0.002626
525.17
0.004704
940.75
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000762
152.46
0.001273
254.61
0.001851
370.29
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000696
139.27
0.001091
218.30
0.001781
356.29
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000485
96.96
0.000806
161.21
0.001101
220.16
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000394
78.83
0.000663
132.62
0.001193
238.53
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000450
90.02
0.000754
150.75
0.001363
272.70
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000406
81.29
0.000581
116.26
0.000943
188.53
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000453
90.53
0.000729
145.71
0.001292
258.40
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
195
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
FL
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
FL.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
28:
54
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
12:
39/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
RAT
Brain
===============================================================================
Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000486
64.78
0.000913
121.67
0.001826
243.43
All
infants:
0.001832
244.22
0.002626
350.11
0.004704
627.17
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000762
101.64
0.001273
169.74
0.001851
246.86
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000696
92.85
0.001091
145.53
0.001781
237.53
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000485
64.64
0.000806
107.47
0.001101
146.77
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000394
52.55
0.000663
88.41
0.001193
159.02
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000450
60.01
0.000754
100.50
0.001363
181.80
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000406
54.20
0.000581
77.51
0.000943
125.69
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000453
60.35
0.000729
97.14
0.001292
172.26
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
FL
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
FL.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
28:
54
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
12:
39/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
==============================================================================
Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000486
64.78
0.000913
121.67
0.001826
243.43
All
infants:
0.001832
244.22
0.002626
350.11
0.004704
627.17
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000762
101.64
0.001273
169.74
0.001851
246.86
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000696
92.85
0.001091
145.53
0.001781
237.53
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000485
64.64
0.000806
107.47
0.001101
146.77
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000394
52.55
0.000663
88.41
0.001193
159.02
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000450
60.01
0.000754
100.50
0.001363
181.80
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000406
54.20
0.000581
77.51
0.000943
125.69
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000453
60.35
0.000729
97.14
0.001292
172.26
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
196
of
203
Groundwater
­
ID
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
ID
GROUNDWATER
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
GW
ID.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
13:
13/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.00075
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
EPA
Crop
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
Code
Grp
Food
Name
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
0.002100
1.000
1.000
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
0.002100
1.000
1.000
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
ID
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
ID.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
30:
29
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
13:
13/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Rat
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000110
21.94
0.000206
41.21
0.000412
82.45
All
infants:
0.000414
82.72
0.000593
118.59
0.001062
212.43
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000172
34.43
0.000287
57.49
0.000418
83.61
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000157
31.45
0.000246
49.29
0.000402
80.45
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000109
21.89
0.000182
36.40
0.000249
49.71
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000089
17.80
0.000150
29.95
0.000269
53.86
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000102
20.33
0.000170
34.04
0.000308
61.58
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000092
18.36
0.000131
26.25
0.000213
42.57
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000102
20.44
0.000165
32.90
0.000292
58.35
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
197
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
ID
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
ID.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
32:
09
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
13:
13/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Rat
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000110
14.63
0.000206
27.47
0.000412
54.97
All
infants:
0.000414
55.15
0.000593
79.06
0.001062
141.62
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000172
22.95
0.000287
38.33
0.000418
55.74
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000157
20.97
0.000246
32.86
0.000402
53.64
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000109
14.60
0.000182
24.27
0.000249
33.14
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000089
11.87
0.000150
19.96
0.000269
35.91
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000102
13.55
0.000170
22.69
0.000308
41.05
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000092
12.24
0.000131
17.50
0.000213
28.38
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000102
13.63
0.000165
21.93
0.000292
38.90
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
ID
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
ID.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
31:
08
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
13:
13/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000110
16.88
0.000206
31.70
0.000412
63.42
All
infants:
0.000414
63.63
0.000593
91.22
0.001062
163.41
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000172
26.48
0.000287
44.22
0.000418
64.32
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000157
24.19
0.000246
37.92
0.000402
61.89
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000109
16.84
0.000182
28.00
0.000249
38.24
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000089
13.69
0.000150
23.04
0.000269
41.43
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000102
15.64
0.000170
26.19
0.000308
47.37
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000092
14.12
0.000131
20.19
0.000213
32.75
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000102
15.73
0.000165
25.31
0.000292
44.88
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
198
of
203
Groundwater
­
RI
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
RI
GROUNDWATER
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
GW
RI.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
09:
48:
43/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
EPA
Crop
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
Code
Grp
Food
Name
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
0.024000
1.000
1.000
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
0.024000
1.000
1.000
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
RI
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
RI.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
09:
50:
26
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
09:
48:
43/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Rat
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001254
250.75
0.002355
470.97
0.004712
942.31
All
infants:
0.004727
945.39
0.006776
1355.28
0.012139
2427.74
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001967
393.44
0.003285
657.05
0.004778
955.59
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001797
359.41
0.002817
563.35
0.004597
919.46
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001251
250.21
0.002080
416.03
0.002841
568.15
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.001017
203.42
0.001711
342.25
0.003078
615.56
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.001162
232.31
0.001945
389.04
0.003519
703.74
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.001049
209.79
0.001500
300.02
0.002433
486.54
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.001168
233.63
0.001880
376.02
0.003334
666.83
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
199
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
RI
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
RI.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
09:
53:
40
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
09:
48:
43/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Rat
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001254
166.06
0.002355
311.90
0.004712
624.05
All
infants:
0.004727
626.08
0.006776
897.53
0.012139
1607.77
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001967
260.56
0.003285
435.13
0.004778
632.84
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001797
238.02
0.002817
373.08
0.004597
608.92
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001251
165.70
0.002080
275.52
0.002841
376.26
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.001017
134.72
0.001711
226.66
0.003078
407.65
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.001162
153.85
0.001945
257.65
0.003519
466.05
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.001049
138.94
0.001500
198.69
0.002433
322.21
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.001168
154.72
0.001880
249.02
0.003334
441.61
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
RI
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
RI.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
09:
55:
06
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
09:
48:
43/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001254
191.41
0.002355
359.52
0.004712
719.32
All
infants:
0.004727
721.67
0.006776
1034.56
0.012139
1853.24
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001967
300.34
0.003285
501.57
0.004778
729.45
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001797
274.36
0.002817
430.04
0.004597
701.88
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001251
191.00
0.002080
317.58
0.002841
433.71
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.001017
155.28
0.001711
261.26
0.003078
469.89
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.001162
177.34
0.001945
296.98
0.003519
537.20
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.001049
160.15
0.001500
229.02
0.002433
371.40
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.001168
178.34
0.001880
287.04
0.003334
509.03
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
200
of
203
Groundwater
­
WI
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
WI
GROUNDWATER
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
GW
WI.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
13:
50/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.0005
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
EPA
Crop
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
Comment
Code
Grp
Food
Name
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
0.023000
1.000
1.000
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
0.023000
1.000
1.000
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
WI
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
WI.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
34:
36
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
13:
50/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Rat
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001201
240.30
0.002257
451.35
0.004515
903.05
All
infants:
0.004530
906.00
0.006494
1298.81
0.011633
2326.58
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001885
377.05
0.003148
629.67
0.004579
915.77
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001722
344.44
0.002699
539.88
0.004406
881.15
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001199
239.78
0.001993
398.69
0.002722
544.48
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000975
194.95
0.001640
327.99
0.002950
589.91
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.001113
222.63
0.001864
372.83
0.003372
674.41
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.001005
201.05
0.001438
287.52
0.002331
466.27
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.001119
223.90
0.001802
360.35
0.003195
639.04
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
201
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
WI
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
WI.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
36:
08
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
13:
50/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Rat
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001201
160.20
0.002257
300.90
0.004515
602.03
All
infants:
0.004530
604.00
0.006494
865.87
0.011633
1551.05
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001885
251.37
0.003148
419.78
0.004579
610.51
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001722
229.62
0.002699
359.92
0.004406
587.43
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001199
159.85
0.001993
265.80
0.002722
362.99
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000975
129.96
0.001640
218.66
0.002950
393.27
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.001113
148.42
0.001864
248.56
0.003372
449.61
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.001005
134.03
0.001438
191.68
0.002331
310.85
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.001119
149.26
0.001802
240.23
0.003195
426.03
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
WI
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
WI.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
35:
23
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
13:
50/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.001201
184.84
0.002257
347.19
0.004515
694.65
All
infants:
0.004530
696.92
0.006494
999.08
0.011633
1789.68
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.001885
290.04
0.003148
484.36
0.004579
704.44
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.001722
264.95
0.002699
415.29
0.004406
677.81
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.001199
184.45
0.001993
306.69
0.002722
418.83
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000975
149.96
0.001640
252.30
0.002950
453.78
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.001113
171.26
0.001864
286.80
0.003372
518.78
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.001005
154.66
0.001438
221.17
0.002331
358.67
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.001119
172.23
0.001802
277.19
0.003195
491.57
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
202
of
203
Groundwater
­
WY
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
Acute
analysis
for
ALDICARB
WY
GROUNDWATER
Residue
file
name:
P:\
FFORT\$
My
Files\
Aldicarb
Dietary\
water
April
2006\
GW
WY.
R98
Analysis
Date
04­
26­
2006
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
14:
32/
8
Reference
dose
(
aRfD)
=
0.00075
mg/
kg
bw/
day
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
EPA
Crop
Def
Res
Adj.
Factors
Code
Grp
Food
Name
(
ppm)
#
1
#
2
­­­­­­­­
­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­
­­­­­­
86010000
O
Water,
direct,
all
sources
0.009700
1.000
1.000
86020000
O
Water,
indirect,
all
sources
0.009700
1.000
1.000
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
WY
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
WY.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
41:
21
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
14:
32/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
RAT
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000507
101.34
0.000952
190.35
0.001904
380.85
All
infants:
0.001910
382.09
0.002739
547.76
0.004906
981.21
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000795
159.02
0.001328
265.56
0.001931
386.22
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000726
145.26
0.001138
227.69
0.001858
371.62
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000506
101.13
0.000841
168.14
0.001148
229.63
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000411
82.22
0.000692
138.33
0.001244
248.79
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000469
93.89
0.000786
157.24
0.001422
284.43
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000424
84.79
0.000606
121.26
0.000983
196.64
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000472
94.43
0.000760
151.97
0.001348
269.51
Attachment
16:
Analysis
12
­
Drinking
Water
Assessments
­
Food
Residues
Not
Included.

Page
203
of
203
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
WY
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
WY.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
42:
42
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
14:
32/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Rat
Brain
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000507
67.56
0.000952
126.90
0.001904
253.90
All
infants:
0.001910
254.73
0.002739
365.17
0.004906
654.14
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000795
106.01
0.001328
177.04
0.001931
257.48
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000726
96.84
0.001138
151.79
0.001858
247.74
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000506
67.42
0.000841
112.10
0.001148
153.09
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000411
54.81
0.000692
92.22
0.001244
165.86
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000469
62.60
0.000786
104.83
0.001422
189.62
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000424
56.53
0.000606
80.84
0.000983
131.10
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000472
62.95
0.000760
101.32
0.001348
179.67
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Ver.
2.02
DEEM­
FCID
ACUTE
Analysis
for
ALDICARB
WY
GROUNDWATER
(
1994­
98
data)
Residue
file:
GW
WY.
R98
Adjustment
factor
#
2
NOT
used.
Analysis
Date:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
42:
02
Residue
file
dated:
04­
26­
2006/
10:
14:
32/
8
Daily
totals
for
food
and
foodform
consumption
used.
Run
Comment:
Human
RBC
===============================================================================

Summary
calculations
(
per
capita):

95th
Percentile
99th
Percentile
99.9th
Percentile
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
Exposure
%
aRfD
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
U.
S.
Population:
0.000507
77.96
0.000952
146.42
0.001904
292.96
All
infants:
0.001910
293.92
0.002739
421.35
0.004906
754.78
Children
1­
2
yrs:
0.000795
122.32
0.001328
204.28
0.001931
297.09
Children
3­
5
yrs:
0.000726
111.74
0.001138
175.14
0.001858
285.86
Children
6­
12
yrs:
0.000506
77.79
0.000841
129.34
0.001148
176.64
Youth
13­
19
yrs:
0.000411
63.24
0.000692
106.40
0.001244
191.38
Adults
20­
49
yrs:
0.000469
72.23
0.000786
120.95
0.001422
218.79
Adults
50+
yrs:
0.000424
65.22
0.000606
93.28
0.000983
151.26
Females
13­
49
yrs:
0.000472
72.64
0.000760
116.90
0.001348
207.32
