UNITED
STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
WASHINGTON
D.
C.,
20460
OFFICE
OF
PREVENTION,
PESTICIDES
AND
TOXIC
SUBSTANCES
October
25,
2005
PC
Code:
109702
DP
Barcode:
D293412
MEMORANDUM
Subject:
Revised
EFED
Risk
Assessment
for
the
Reregistration
Eligibility
Decision
(
RED)
on
Cypermethrin
After
30­
Day
"
Error
Only"
Comment
Period
To:
Veronique
LaCapra,
Chemical
Review
Manager
Yan
Donovan,
Chemical
Review
Manager
Margaret
Rice,
Branch
Chief
Reregistration
Branch
II
Special
Review
and
Reregistration
Division
(
7505C)

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

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

This
memorandum
summarizes
the
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division's
(
EFED)
screening­
level
Environmental
Risk
Assessment
for
the
Reregistration
Eligibility
Decision
(
RED)
of
Cypermethrin.
This
compound
is
a
synthetic
pyrethroid
that
is
used
as
a
broad­
spectrum
insecticide
for
agricultural
and
non­
agricultural
uses,
as
well
as
commercial/
industrial/
institutional/
non­
food
areas.
EFED
has
concluded
that
the
available
data
on
cypermethrin
shows
that
the
compound
has
very
low
mobility,
moderate
persistence
and
binds
readily
to
soils
and
surfaces.
An
evaluation
of
environmental
risk
to
aquatic
and
terrestrial
organisms
is
included
in
the
Executive
Summary
and
the
Risk
Characterization
chapters.

Outstanding
Data
Requirements
and
Data
Gaps
Environmental
Fate:

The
environmental
fate
database
is
substantially
complete
and
consists
mostly
of
acceptable
studies.
The
database
is
sufficient
to
conduct
a
Tier
1
Risk
Assessment
of
Terrestrial
Food
uses.
At
this
time,
no
additional
data
are
required.
ii
Ecological
Effects:

Although
the
ecological
database
is
fairly
complete
there
are
a
few
endpoints
that
must
be
addressed.

72­
4
(
b)
Life­
Cycle
Aquatic
Invertebrate,
Freshwater:
Adequate
data
were
not
submitted
so
the
Agency
extrapolated
a
NOAEC
by
using
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method.
However,
to
confirm
risk
assessment
assumptions
data
is
needed.

The
following
sediment
tests
are
needed
by
the
Agency
in
order
to
better
understand
the
potential
acute
and
long
term
exposure
risk
of
cypermethrin
to
benthic
organisms.
However,
currently
the
Pyrethroid
Working
Group
(
PWG)
is
completing
these
studies.

850.1735:
Acute
Sediment
(
freshwater)
­
Test
organism:
Hyalella
azteca
and
Chironomus
tentans.
­
Duration:
10
days,
endpoint
is
survival.

EPA/
600/
R­
99/
064:
Chronic
Freshwater
Sediment
Testing
­
65
day
test
on
Chironomus
tentans
­
Survival.
­
Growth
rate.
­
Reproduction
(#
eggs/
female,
time
to
oviposition,
proportion
of
females
ovipositing,
%
hatch).

EPA/
600/
R01/
020:
Chronic
Estuarine/
Marine
Sediment
Testing
­
28
day
test
on
Leptocheirus
plumulosus,
­
Percentage
of
neonates
that
survive
as
adults.
­
Growth
rate.
­
Reproduction
(#
eggs/
female,
etc.).
­
Behavior.

71­
4
(
a)
Avian
Reproduction
Quail:
Reproductive
studies
were
tested
at
a
maximum
of
50
ppm
while
the
criteria
suggest
that
maximum
testing
be
completed
at
1,000
ppm.
Although
there
were
no
treatment
related
effects
at
the
exposure
levels
listed,
including
50
ppm,
expected
exposure
in
cotton
can
be
66
ppm
(
short
grass).

Uncertainties:

Environmental
Fate
and
Exposure
There
is
a
possible
uncertainty
related
to
the
exposure
levels
estimated
to
the
lettuce
scenario.
In
the
coastal
southern
California,
lettuce
is
a
year­
round
crop
so
the
application
of
cypermethrin
may
vary.
According
to
the
label,
the
maximum
application
rate
is
0.6
lb
a.
i./
A/
season.
The
exposure
scenarios
modeled
in
this
assessment
assumed
only
one
season
per
year.
iii
and
a
special
run
was
performed
with
two
applications
per
year.
However,
the
exposure
may
be
considerably
higher
if
more
than
two
seasons
occur.

There
is
uncertainty
with
respect
to
the
level
of
mitigation
that
a
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
plus
a
vegetative
strip
of
10
ft
can
provide.
The
estimation
of
spray
drift
was
obtained
from
AgDRIFT
®
;
however,
there
is
no
way
to
know
how
well
the
buffer
zone
will
protect
the
bodies
of
water
from
runoff.
In
certain
cases,
the
level
of
runoff
is
the
most
important
factor,
rather
than
the
level
of
spray
drift.
Furthermore,
for
the
California
lettuce
scenario,
there
is
uncertainty
in
the
level
of
spray
drift
because
data
from
weather
stations
in
proximity
to
the
use
areas
indicate
that
the
wind
speed
is
generally
at
or
above
10
mph
during
the
application
period
(
late
Summer).
This
is
an
assumption
made
in
the
Tier
I
calculation
of
AgDRIFT
®
.
It
is
noted,
however,
that
the
label
instructions
recommend
applications
at
wind
speeds
of
3­
10
mph
(
but
always
at
<
15
mph).
The
level
of
spray
drift
may
have
been
underestimated
only
for
the
California
lettuce
scenario
(
3.9
%
vs.
4.1
%).

Cypermethrin
is
a
mixture
of
four
diastereoisomers,
each
of
which
is
present
as
a
pair
of
enantiomers,
resulting
in
eight
isomers.
Different
ratios
of
the
eight
isomers
have
resulted
in
four
different
cypermethrin
products
(
alpha­,
beta­,
theta­,
and
zeta­
cypermethrin)
all
of
which
have
similar
environmental
fate
properties,
but
slightly
different
toxicities
depending
upon
the
isomeric
mixture
of
compounds.
The
cis:
tran
ratio
of
cypermethrin
isomers
was
found
to
vary
in
different
toxicity
tests
(
e.
g.,
48.8:
42.7,
55:
45,
53.6:
46.4,
54:
46).
However
the
cis:
trans
ratio
is
close
to
a
50:
50
ratio
suggesting
that
toxicity
profiles
should
be
accurate.
An
enhanced
zeta­
cypermethrin
is
not
under
review
with
this
cypermethrin
risk
assessment.
This
refined
cypermethrin
compound
has
an
equivalent
toxicity
profile
to
the
cypermethrin
enantiomeric
mixture
but
is
more
efficacious
(
half
the
application
rate
of
the
enantiomeric
mixture).

This
aquatic
exposure
assessment
represents
a
range
of
water
concentrations
expected
from
aerial
applications,
following
the
label
instructions.
The
results
of
a
simple
spray
drift
and
buffer
zones
analysis,
with
only
one
representative
PRZM
scenario,
indicated
that
the
concentrations
resulting
from
actual
applications
of
cypermethrin
could
be
significantly
higher
depending
upon
actual
application
practices.
Using
stringent
measures,
will
result
in
smaller
EECs,
while
using
other
application
parameters
could
result
in
higher
EECs.

Ecological
Effects:

There
are
uncertainties
associated
with
cypermethrin
exposure
in
the
environment,
especially
regarding
possible
impact
to
aquatic
ecosystems.
Since
cypermethrin
is
toxic
to
invertebrates
(
aquatic
insects,
bivalves,
shrimp,
etc.)
there
is
a
question
of
sustaining
functional
diversity,
genetic
diversity,
as
well
as
population
abundance
in
an
aquatic
system
that
has
been
exposed
to
cypermethrin
drift
and/
or
runoff.
Proponents
for
cypermethrin
use
argue
that
invertebrates
are
resilient
and
effected
populations
will
reintroduce
themselves
in
time.
EFED
feels
that
the
degree
of
reintroduction
of
species
that
are
keystone
to
an
ecosystem
is
unknown
and
the
impact
of
diminished
invertebrate
diversity
on
ecosystem
integrity
has
not
been
adequately
evaluated.
The
argument
that
aquatic
systems
usually
sustain
macroinvertebrate
functional
redundancy
has
also
not
been
adequately
substantiated
and
presents
uncertainty
as
to
the
iv
magnitude
of
pyrethroid
toxic
effects
to
various
functional
groups
and
the
ultimate
effect
on
aquatic
ecosystem
structure.

The
Agency
has
not
received
sediment
toxicity
studies
for
cypermethrin
that
represent
equilibrated
spiked
sediments.
Therefore
in
order
to
complete
the
RED
the
risk
assessors
have
relied
upon
the
equilibrium
partitioning
approach
for
estimates
of
potential
cypermethrin
exposure
to
macroinvertebrates
from
the
sediment/
pore
water.
The
key
limitation
of
the
equilibrium
partitioning
approach
that
concerns
the
Agency
is
the
magnitude
of
variation
in
toxicant
uptake
caused
by
biological
factors
such
as
feeding
pathways
(
Landrum,
et.
al.,
1994;
McGroddy
et
al.,
1996;
Bott
and
Standley
2000),
organism
life
stage
(
Leppanen
and
Kukkonen
1998),
and
population­
level
effects
versus
individual
responses
(
Hallam
et
al.,
1990).
Because
criteria
are
supposed
to
protect
biota,
inherent
variations
in
biological
uptake
need
to
be
considered.

EFED
Label
Recommendations
i.
Manufacturing
Use
Product:

This
pesticide
is
toxic
to
fish
and
aquatic
invertebrates.
Do
not
discharge
effluent
containing
this
product
into
lakes,
streams,
ponds,
estuaries,
oceans,
or
other
waters
unless
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
a
National
Pollutant
Discharge
Elimination
System
(
NPDES)
permit
and
the
permitting
authority
has
been
notified
in
writing
prior
to
discharge.
For
guidance,
contact
your
State
Water
Board
or
Regional
Office
of
the
EPA.

ii.
End­
Use
Product:

This
pesticide
is
extremely
toxic
to
fish
and
aquatic
invertebrates.
Do
not
apply
directly
to
water,
to
areas
where
surface
water
is
present
or
to
intertidal
areas
below
the
mean
high
water
mark.
Do
not
apply
when
weather
conditions
favor
drift
from
treated
areas.
Drift
and
runoff
from
treated
areas
may
be
hazardous
to
aquatic
organisms
in
neighboring
areas.
Do
not
contaminate
water
when
disposing
of
equipment
washwaters
or
rinsate.

This
product
is
highly
toxic
to
bees
exposed
to
direct
treatment
or
residues
on
blooming
crops
or
weeds.
Do
not
apply
this
product
or
allow
it
to
drift
to
blooming
crops
if
bees
are
visiting
the
treatment
area.

iii.
Label
statements
for
spray
drift
management:

The
Agency
has
been
working
with
the
Spray
Drift
Task
Force,
EPA
Regional
Offices
and
State
Lead
Agencies
for
pesticide
regulation
and
other
parties
to
develop
the
best
spray
drift
management
practices.
The
Agency
is
proposing
interim
mitigation
measures
for
aerial
applications
that
should
be
placed
on
product
labels/
labeling.
The
Agency
has
completed
its
evaluation
of
the
new
database
submitted
by
the
Spray
Drift
Task
Force,
a
membership
of
U.
S.
pesticide
registrants,
and
is
developing
a
policy
on
how
to
appropriately
apply
the
data
and
the
AgDRIFT
computer
model
to
its
risk
assessments
for
pesticides
applied
by
air,
orchard
airblast
and
ground
hydraulic
methods.
After
the
policy
is
in
place,
the
Agency
may
impose
further
v
refinements
in
spray
drift
management
practices
to
reduce
off­
target
drift
and
risks
associated
with
aerial
as
well
as
other
application
types
where
appropriate.

Table
I­
1.
Cypermethrin
Table
of
Environmental
Fate
Data
Requirements
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
MRID
#
Study
Classification
Are
Additional
Data
Needed
for
Risk
Assessment?

161­
1
Hydrolysis
42620501
Acceptable
no
161­
2
Photodegradation
in
Water
42395701
Supplemental
no
161­
3
Photodegradation
on
Soil
42129001
Supplemental
no
161­
4
Photodegradation
in
Air
No
Data
Waived
no
162­
1
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
42156601
Acceptable
no
162­
2
Anaerobic
Soil
Metabolism
42156602
Acceptable
no
162­
3
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
44876105
Acceptable
no
162­
4
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
45920801
Acceptable
no
163­
1
Leaching­
Adsorption/
Desorption
42129003,
42129002
Acceptable
no
163­
2
Laboratory
Volatility
No
Data
Waived
no
163­
3
Field
Volatility
No
Data
Waived
no
164­
1
Terrestrial
Field
Dissipation
42459601
Acceptable
no
164­
2
Aquatic
Field
Dissipation
44876107
Supplemental
no
aquatic
uses
164­
3
Forestry
Dissipation
No
Data
N/
A
no
165­
4
Accumulation
in
Fish
42868203
Acceptable
no
vi
Table
I­
2.
Ecological
Effects
Data
Requirements
for
Cypermethrin
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
Formulation
MRID
or
Acc.
Number
Study
Classification
Are
Additional
Data
Needed
for
Ecological
Risk
Assessment?

71­
1
Avian
Acute
Oral
Toxicity
Technical
Technical
Technical
241598
44546024
90070
Acceptable
Acceptable
Invalid
No
71­
2
Avian
Subacute
Dietary
Toxicity
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
90071
90072
44546025
44546026
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
No
71­
4
Avian
Reproduction
Toxicity
Technical
Technical
90073
90074
Supplemental
Supplemental
Yes
72­
1
Freshwater
Fish
LC50
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Formulation
Formulation
Formulation
Metabolite
(
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid)
62792
65812
44546028
44546030
41968209
41968208
44546027
44546029
241598
88948
41068004
65813
88947
89036
89037
89038
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable/
Supplemental
Invalid
Supplemental
Acceptable
Supplemental
Supplemental
Acceptable
Acceptable
No
Table
I­
2.
Ecological
Effects
Data
Requirements
for
Cypermethrin
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
Formulation
MRID
or
Acc.
Number
Study
Classification
Are
Additional
Data
Needed
for
Ecological
Risk
Assessment?

vii
72­
2
Freshwater
Invertebrate
Acute
LC50
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Formulation
Formulation
Formulation
Metabolite
(
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid)
62793
44546032
44546031
42444601
44074401
44074402
44074406
41968210
43293501
44423501
62793
89040
88949
42444601
152739
89046
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable/
Supplemental
Supplemental
Supplemental
Supplemental
Invalid
Supplemental
Supplemental
Supplemental
Supplemental
Supplemental
Acceptable
Acceptable
Supplemental
No
72­
3(
a)
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
LC50
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
44546033
41968212
41968211
44546034
90075
41068003
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Supplemental
Supplemental
No
72­
3(
b)
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
(
Mollusk
)
Technical
42444601
89049
Acceptable
Acceptable
No
72­
3(
c)
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
(
Mysid)
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Unknown
42444601
44561210
42444601
44561209
41968213
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Invalid
No
72­
3
(
d)
Estuarine/
Marine
Crustacean
Technical
Technical
89045
41068003
Supplemental
Supplemental
No
Table
I­
2.
Ecological
Effects
Data
Requirements
for
Cypermethrin
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
Formulation
MRID
or
Acc.
Number
Study
Classification
Are
Additional
Data
Needed
for
Ecological
Risk
Assessment?

viii
72­
4
(
a)
Freshwater
Fish
Early
Life­
Stage
Technical
89039
Acceptable
No
72­
4
Aquatic
Invertebrate
Life­
Cycle
(
Freshwater)
Technical
Unknown
428983­
01
89047
Invalid
Invalid
Yes
72­
4
Aquatic
Invertebrate
Life­
Cycle
(
Marine)
Chronic
Toxicity
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
42444601
42725301
44546035
42898301
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Invalid
No
72­
5
Freshwater
Fish
Full
Life­
Cycle
No
Data
Submitted
NA
NA
NA
72­
7
Aquatic
Field
Study
Formulation
Formulation
155770
152737
Supplemental
Supplemental
No
141­
1
Acute
Honeybee
Contact
Toxicity
Test
Technical
Technical
Formulation
260647
44544208
260647
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
No
141­
2
Residues
on
Foliage
Honeybee
Toxicity
Test
Formulation
40274001
Acceptable
No
141­
4
Subacute
Honeybee
Feeding
Toxicity
Test
Technical
Technical
Formulation
260647
44544208
260647
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
No
ix
Preliminary
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Assessment
Science
Chapter
for
the
Reregistration
Elegibility
Decision
of
CYPERMETHRIN
Prepared
by:

Miachel
Rexrode,
Ph.
D.,
Fishery
Biologist
Michael
D.
Hoffmann,
Biologist
José
L.
Meléndez,
Chemist
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division
Environmental
Risk
Branch
V
Ariel
Rios
Building
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW
Mail
Code
7507C
Washington,
DC
20460
Reviewed
by:
Faruque
Khan,
Ph.
D.,
Environmental
Scientist
Jean
Holmes,
RAPL
Ronald
Parker,
Ph.
D.,
Environmental
Engineer
Mah
T.
Shamim,
Ph.
D.,
Chief
Environmental
Risk
Branch
V
­
x­
Table
of
Contents
I.
Executive
Summary
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
A.
Nature
of
Chemical
Stressor
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
B.
Potential
Risks
to
Non­
Target
Organisms
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
C.
Conclusions
­
Exposure
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
D.
Conclusions
­
Effects
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
E.
Uncertainties
and
Data
Gaps
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
II.
Problem
Formulation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
A.
Stressor
Source
and
Distribution
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
1.
Source
and
Intensity
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
2.
Physical/
Chemical/
Fate
and
Transport
Properties
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
3.
Pesticide
Type,
Class,
and
Mode
of
Action
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
4.
Overview
of
Pesticide
Usage
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
B.
Receptors
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
1.
Aquatic
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
2.
Terrestrial
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
3.
Ecosystems
at
Risk
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
C.
Assessment
Endpoints
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
D.
Conceptual
Model
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
1.
Risk
Hypotheses
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
2.
Diagram
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
E.
Analysis
Plan
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
1.
Preliminary
Identification
of
Data
Gaps
and
Methods
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
2.
Measures
to
Evaluate
Risk
Hypotheses
and
Conceptual
Model
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
a.
Measures
of
Exposure
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
b.
Measures
of
Effect
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
c.
Measures
of
Ecosystem
and
Receptor
Characteristics
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
III.
Analysis
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
A.
Use
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
B.
Exposure
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
1.
Environmental
Fate
and
Transport
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
a.
Summary
of
Empirical
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
30
b.
Degradation
and
Metabolism
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
30
c.
Transport
and
Mobility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
d.
Bioaccumulation
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
e.
Field
Studies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
34
2.
Measures
of
Aquatic
Exposure
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
34
a.
Aquatic
Exposure
Modeling
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
48
b.
Aquatic
Exposure
Monitoring
and
Field
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
49
3.
Measures
of
Terrestrial
Exposure
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
49
a.
Terrestrial
Exposure
Modeling
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
50
­
xib
Residue
Studies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
50
C.
Ecological
Effects
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
51
1.
Aquatic
Effects
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
56
a.
Aquatic
Animals
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
56
(
1).
Acute
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
56
(
2).
Chronic
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
59
(
3).
Sublethal
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
61
(
4).
Field
Studies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
63
b.
Plants
Inhabiting
Aquatic
Areas
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
64
2.
Terrestrial
Effects
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
64
a.
Terrestrial
Animals
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
65
(
1).
Acute
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
65
(
2).
Chronic
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
67
(
3).
Sublethal
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
67
(
4).
Field
Studies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
68
b.
Terrestrial
Plants
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
68
IV.
Risk
Characterization
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
68
A.
Risk
Estimation
­
Integration
of
Exposure
and
Effects
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
68
1.
Non­
Target
Aquatic
Animals
and
Plants
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
69
a.
Water
Column
Exposure
­
Acute
and
Chronic
Risk
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
69
b.
Sediment
Exposure
­
Acute
and
Chronic
Risk
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
71
c.
Use
of
Buffer
Zones
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
72
d.
Aquatic
Plants
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
74
2.
Non­
Target
Terrestrial
Animals
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
74
a.
Acute
Risk
to
Mammals
and
Birds
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
74
b.
Chronic
Risk
to
Mammals
and
Birds
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
77
c.
Risk
to
Terrestrial
Invertebrates
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
80
3.
Non­
target
Plants
Inhabiting
Terrestrial
and
Semi­
Aquatic
Areas
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
80
B.
Risk
Description
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
80
1.
Risks
to
Aquatic
Organisms
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
81
a.
Estimating
Risk
to
Aquatic
Systems
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
82
b.
Aquatic
Animals
(
Water
Column
Exposure)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
83
c.
Aquatic
Animals
(
Sediment
Exposure)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
84
d.
Aquatic
Plants
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
85
e.
Other
Special
Considerations
for
Evaluating
Aquatic
Risk
.
.
.
.
.
85
f.
Summary
of
Risk
to
Aquatic
Systems
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
86
2.
Risks
to
Terrestrial
Organisms
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
88
a.
Terrestrial
Animals
(
Mammals
and
Birds)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
88
b.
Non­
Target
Terrestrial
Insects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
88
c.
Terrestrial
Plants
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
88
3.
Review
of
Incident
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
89
a.
Incidents
Involving
Aquatic
Organisms
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
90
b.
Incidents
Involving
Terrestrial
Organisms
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
90
4.
Endocrine
Effects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
90
­
xii­
5.
Federally
Threatened
and
Endangered
(
Listed)
Species
Concerns
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
91
a.
Action
Area
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
91
b.
Taxonomic
Groups
Potentially
at
Risk
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
92
(
1)
Discussion
of
Risk
Quotients
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
92
c.
Critical
Habitat
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
95
C.
Description
of
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
96
1.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
Exposure
For
All
Taxa
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
96
2.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
Exposure
For
Aquatic
Species
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
97
3.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
Exposure
For
Terrestrial
Species
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
97
4.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
Effects
Assessment
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
100
5.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
the
Acute
and
Chronic
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
101
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
102
V.
Literature
Cited
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
103
VI.
Appendices
A.
Environmental
Fate
Studies
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A1
B.
Aquatic
Exposure
Model
Output
(
AGDISP
Linked
to
PRZM/
EXAMS)
.
.
.
.
.
B1
C.
TERRPLANT
Model
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
C1
D.
T­
REX
Model
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
D1
E.
Ecological
Effects
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
E1
F.
The
Risk
Quotient
Method
and
Levels
of
Concern
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
F1
G.
Detailed
Risk
Quotients
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
G1
H.
Summary
of
Endangered/
Threatened
Species
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
H1
I.
Data
Requirement
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I1
J.
Incident
Reports
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
J1
K.
ECOTOX
Literature
Searches
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
K1
L.
Use
Characterization
Maps
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
L1
M.
Equilibrium
Partitioning
and
Concentration
in
the
Sediment
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
M1
N.
Environmental
Fate
and
Monitoring
Bibliography
and
Ecotoxicology
Bibliography
N1
O.
Spray
Drift/
Buffer
Zone
Analysis
Raw
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
O1
List
of
Tables
Table
1.
Physical
and
Chemical
Properties
of
Cypermethrin
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
Table
2.
Taxonomic
Groups
and
Test
Species
Evaluated
for
Ecological
Effects
in
Screening­
Level
Risk
Assessments
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
­
xiii­
Table
3.
Summary
of
Assessment
and
Measures
of
Effect
for
Cypermethrin
(
TGAI).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
12
Table
4.
Usage
Rates
for
Cypermethrin
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
Table
5.
Physical,
Chemical
and
Environmental
Fate
Properties
of
Cypermethrin
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
Table
6a.
Use
Patterns
of
Cypermethrin
for
Cotton,
Pecans
and
Lettuce
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
35
Table
6b.
PRZM/
EXAMS
Inputs
for
Cypermethrin
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
36
Table
7.
Cypermethrin
Surface
Water,
Pore
Water
and
Sediment
EECs
(
ppb
or
:
g/
L)
Obtained
From
PRZM/
EXAMS
Cotton
Crop
Use
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
39
Table
8.
Cypermethrin
Surface
Water,
Pore
Water
and
Sediment
EECs
(
ppb
or
:
g/
L)
Obtained
From
PRZM/
EXAMS
Georgia
Pecans
Crop
Use
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
40
Table
9a.
Cypermethrin
Surface
Water,
Pore
Water
and
Sediment
EECs
(
ppb
or
:
g/
L)
Obtained
From
PRZM/
EXAMS
California
Lettuce
Crop
Use
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
41
Table
9b.
Cypermethrin
Surface
Water,
Pore
Water
and
Sediment
EECs
(
ppb
or
:
g/
L)
Obtained
From
PRZM/
EXAMS
California
Lettuce
Two
Crops
per
Year
.
.
.
.
.
41
Table
10.
Input
Parameters
Used
in
T­
REX
v1.12
to
Determine
Terrestrial
EECs
for
Cypermethrin
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
49
Table
11.
Peak
Terrestrial
EECs
Estimated
for
Cypermethrin
Using
Kenaga
Values
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
50
Table
12.
Cypermethrin
Toxicity
Reference
Values
(
TRVs)
(:
g
of
active
ingredient/
L)
for
Aquatic
Organisms
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
53
Table
13.
Cypermethrin
Toxicity
Reference
Values
(
TRVs)
for
Terrestrial
Organisms
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
65
Table
14.
Acute
RQs
for
Freshwater
Fish,
Freshwater
Invertebrates,
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
and
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
70
Table
15.
Chronic
RQs
for
Freshwater
Fish,
Freshwater
Invertebrates,
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
and
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
71
Table
16.
Acute
and
Chronic
RQs
for
Benthic
Organisms
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
72
Table
17.
Dose­
based
Acute
RQs
and
Dietary­
based
Acute
RQs
for
Birds
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
Based
on
Upper
Bound
Residues
as
Calculated
by
TREX
.
.
.
.
76
Table
18.
Dose­
based
Acute
RQs
for
Mammals
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
Based
on
Upper
Bound
Residues
as
Calculated
by
TREX
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
77
Table
19.
Dietary­
based
Chronic
RQs
for
Birds
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
Based
on
Upper
Bound
Residues
as
Calculated
by
T­
REX
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
78
Table
20.
Dose­
based
Chronic
RQs
and
Dietary­
based
Chronic
RQs
for
Mammals
Based
on
Upper
Bound
Residues
as
Calculated
by
T­
REX
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
79
Table
21.
Number
of
Listed
Species
by
Taxa
per
State
for
the
Following
Crops:
Cotton,
Pecans,
Lettuce,
Bulb
Vegetables
(
Onions,
Garlic),
Brassica,
(
Brussel
Sprouts,
Broccoli,
Cauliflower,
Cabbage),
Leafy
Brassica,
(
Collards,
Kale,
Mustard
Greens,
Spinach,
Canola)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
91
Supplementary
Table
A.
Spray
Drift
Scenarios
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
43
Supplementary
Table
B.
Levels
of
Spray
Drift
Predicted
by
AgDrift
®
for
Buffer
Zones
from
0
to
200
ft
with
Low,
Typical,
and
High
End
Drift
Scenarios
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
44
Supplementary
Table
C.
PRZM/
EXAMS
Inputs
for
Cypermethrin
Runs
With
NC
Cotton
.
.
.
.
44
Supplementary
Table
D.
Surface
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
Ecological
Risk
­
xiv­
Asssessment,
Based
on
North
Carolina
Cotton
(
Special
Runs)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
46
Supplementary
Table
E.
Surface
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
Ecological
Risk
Asssessment,
Based
on
North
Carolina
Cotton
(
Buffer
Zone
Analysis)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
46
Supplementary
Table
F.
Pore
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
Ecological
Risk
Assessment,
Based
on
North
Carolina
Cotton
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
47
Supplementary
Table
G.
Percent
Reduction
of
the
NC
cotton
Peak
EEC
for
the
Buffer
Zones
of
150
and
200
ft,
to
Observe
if
Substantial
Additional
Reduction
is
Obtained
by
Increasing
the
Buffer
Zone
Imposed
by
the
Registrant's
Label
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
47
Supplementary
Table
H.
Acute
Risk
Quotients
for
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Using
Different
Buffer
Zones
and
Levels
of
Spray
Drift.
Peak
Surface
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
Ecological
Risk
Assessment,
Based
on
NC
cotton
(
Surrogate
Scenario
for
Estuarine/
Marine
Environments).
Use
of
Most
Sensitive
Species,
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
(
Mysid
shrimp)
LC
50
=
0.00475
ppb
(
special
runs).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
72
Supplementary
Table
I.
Acute
Risk
Quotients
for
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Using
Different
Buffer
Zones
and
Levels
of
Spray
Drift.
Peak
Surface
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
Ecological
Risk
Assessment,
Based
on
NC
cotton
(
Surrogate
Scenario
for
Estuarine/
Marine
Environments).
Use
of
Most
Sensitive
Species,
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
(
Mysid
Shrimp)
LC
50
=
0.00475
ppb
(
Buffer
Zone
Runs)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
72
List
of
Figures
Figure
1
General
Conceptual
Model
for
a
Screening
Level
Ecological
Risk
Assessment
for
Cypermethrin.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
Figure
L­
2
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
All
Crops.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
Figure
L­
3
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Cotton.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
25
Figure
L­
4
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Lettuce.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
26
Figure
L­
5
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Pecans.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
27
Figure
2
Cypermethrin
and
its
Degradation
Products.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
33
­
1­
I.
Executive
Summary
A.
Nature
of
Chemical
Stressor
Cypermethrin
(
CAS
number
52315­
07­
8)
is
a
pyrethroid
pesticide
prepared
from
the
esterification
of
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde
and
3­(
2,2­
dichlorovinyl)­
2,2­
dimethylcyclopropane
carboxylic
acid.
It
consists
of
a
mixture
of
four
diastereoisomers,
each
of
which
is
present
as
a
pair
of
enantiomers,
resulting
in
eight
geometrical
and
optical
isomers.
Cleavage
at
the
ester
moiety
of
cypermethrin
results
in
two
primary
degradation
products,
3­(
2,2­
dichloroethenyl)­
2,2­
dimethylcyclopropane
carboxylic
acid
(
DCVA)
and
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde,
which
degrades
further
to
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
3­
PBA).
Cypermethrin
is
used
to
control
many
pests,
including
those
of
cotton,
fruit,
and
vegetable
crops.
It
also
has
several
non­
agricultural
uses,
such
as
for
crack,
crevice,
and
spot
treatment
to
control
insect
pests
in
stores,
warehouses,
industrial
buildings,
houses,
apartment
buildings,
greenhouses,
laboratories,
and
on
ships,
railcars,
buses,
trucks,
and
aircraft.
It
may
also
be
used
in
non­
food
areas
in
schools,
nursing
homes,
hospitals,
restaurants,
hotels,
in
food
processing
plants,
and
as
a
barrier
treatment
insect
repellent
for
horses.
Cypermethrin
is
usually
formulated
as
an
emulsifiable
concentrate
or
wettable
powder,
and
is
usually
applied
by
ground
or
aerial
application
as
a
foliar
spray.
Like
all
pyrethroids,
cypermethrin
is
efficacious
to
insects
by
acting
as
a
neural
toxin
that
can
result
in
muscle
spasms,
paralysis
and
death.

B.
Potential
Risks
to
Non­
Target
Organisms
Although
difficult
to
model
and
quantify,
urban
uses
of
pyrethroids
have
the
potential
to
impact
aquatic
systems.
However,
at
this
time
the
Agency
is
evaluating
appropriate
models
that
might
be
useful
for
future
assessments
of
urban
pesticide
uses.
Therefore,
the
Agency's
Tier
I
screening­
level
(
deterministic)
risk
assessment
is
focused
on
maximum
proposed
uses
of
cypermethrin
on
crops
that
are
representative
of
all
registered
agricultural
use
patterns.
The
current
assessment
suggests
that
levels
of
cypermethrin
residues
in
the
environment,
when
compared
with
the
most
sensitive
environmental
endpoints,
are
likely
to
result
in
acute
and
chronic
adverse
effects
to
non­
target
aquatic
organisms
(
both
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine).
In
addition,
there
is
a
potential
for
acute
and
chronic
adverse
effects
to
non­
target
mammals,
although
the
potential
for
risk
for
this
group
of
organisms
is
more
dependent
upon
specific
crop
exposure
scenarios.
To
assess
risks
to
aquatic
organisms,
six
crop
scenarios
were
evaluated
with
the
Tier
II
aquatic
model
PRZM/
EXAMS:
CA
cotton,
MS
cotton,
NC
cotton,
TX
cotton,
GA
pecans,
and
CA
lettuce
(
head).
To
assess
risks
to
terrestrial
organisms,
four
crop
uses
were
evaluated
with
the
Tier
I
terrestrial
model
T­
REX:
cotton,
lettuce,
pecans,
and
canola.
Although
the
Agency
does
not
calculate
risk
quotients
for
honey
bees,
a
qualitative
assessment
is
presented
after
reviewing
toxicity
test
on
beneficial
insects.
This
assessment
shows
that
cypermethrin
has
the
potential
for
acute
risk
to
bees
and
beneficial
insects.
Risks
to
aquatic
and
terrestrial
plants
were
not
assessed
because
data
are
not
available
and
the
Agency
does
not
expect
that
the
cypermethrin
mode
of
action
to
be
a
phytotoxic
concern.
In
addition,
the
Agency
has
not
reviewed
any
incident
data
pertaining
to
phytotoxicity
from
cypermethrin
or
other
pyrethroid
exposure.
Risk
to
aquatic
invertebrates
from
exposure
to
cypermethrin
residues
in
the
sediment
was
estimated
by
using
the
equilibrium
partitioning
model
that
predicts
pore
water
concentrations,
based
upon
­
2­
hydrophobicity
and
concentrations
of
the
chemical
normalized
to
organic
carbon
(
OC)
in
the
sediment
(
De
Toro
et
al.
1991).
Sediment
toxicity
was
predicted
by
comparing
pore
water
concentrations
with
dissolved
concentrations
that
caused
toxicity
in
bioassays.
Specific
risks
to
non­
target
organisms
are
summarized
below.

Risk
to
Aquatic
Organisms:

°
Acute
risks
to
aquatic
organisms
(
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine
fish
and
invertebrates,
that
include
those
organisms
living
in
the
water
column
and
the
benthos)
are
significant
with
RQs
exceeding
LOCs
for
acute
risk,
restricted
use,
and
endangered
species
for
all
crop
scenarios.
The
greatest
acute
risk
(
i.
e.,
highest
RQ
values
exceeding
the
acute
LOCs)
among
aquatic
receptors
evaluated
is
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
Results
of
available
field
studies
support
these
conclusions,
demonstrating
that
adverse
effects
on
aquatic
ecosystems
occurred
following
application
of
cypermethrin
under
conditions
of
recommended
use.

°
Chronic
risks
to
aquatic
organisms
exceed
the
LOC
for
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
and
fish.
In
addition,
there
are
chronic
exceedances
for
organisms
living
in
or
on
the
sediment
for
both
freshwater
and
estuarine
organisms.

Risk
to
Terrestrial
Organisms:

°
Acute
risks
to
mammals
are
expected
for
listed
species
in
the
15
g
size
range.
The
exposure
route
of
concern
is
short
grass
for
cypermethrin
use
on
cotton.
No
other
acute
LOC
criteria
are
exceeded.
However,
chronic
risk
criteria
are
exceeded
for
all
modeled
crop
uses
for
several
feeding
strategies
that
include,
mammals
feeding
on
short
grass,
tall
grass
and
broadleaf
plants/
small
insects.

°
Cypermethrin
exposure
does
not
appear
to
present
acute
risk
to
avian
species
(
LOC
criteria
were
not
exceeded).
Avian
risks
associated
with
chronic
exposure
can
not
be
fully
assessed
at
this
time.
Reproductive
studies
were
tested
at
a
maximum
of
50
ppm
while
the
criteria
suggest
that
maximum
testing
be
completed
at
1000
ppm.
Although
there
were
no
treatment
related
effects
at
the
exposure
levels
listed,
including
50
ppm,
expected
exposure
in
cotton
can
be
66
ppm
(
short
grass).
However,
LOC
criteria
are
not
exceeded
for
the
other
modeled
crop
uses.

°
Cypermethrin
exposure
can
present
acute
toxic
risk
to
beneficial
non­
target
insects,
such
as
honey
bees,
and
to
earthworms.
This
risk
concern
is
extended
to
listed
insects
also.

Risk
from
Degradates:

°
Results
of
acute
toxicity
studies
in
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates
indicate
that
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
is
much
less
toxic
than
the
­
3­
parent
compound.
No
information
is
available
on
the
toxicity
of
other
cypermethrin
degradates.
However,
based
on
the
assumption
that
cleavage
of
the
ester
bond
in
the
parent
compound
results
in
biologically
inactive
degradates,
these
compounds
should
not
present
a
significant
risk
to
non­
target
organisms.

C.
Conclusions
­
Exposure
Characterization
The
environmental
fate
and
effects
database
is
extensive
and
sufficient
to
support
terrestrial
food
uses.
Based
on
mostly
valid
studies,
the
behavior
of
cypermethrin
in
the
environment
can
be
predicted
with
reasonable
certainty.
The
terrestrial
field
dissipation
studies
appear
to
corroborate
the
predictions
of
the
laboratory
studies.
It
appears
that
cypermethrin
degradation
is
mainly
the
product
of
metabolic
activity.
Aerobic
and
anaerobic
soil
metabolism
were
found
to
be
about
60
and
52­
63
days,
respectively.
In
contrast,
the
rates
for
aerobic
and
anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
were
9­
10
and
14­
17
days,
respectively.
All
abiotic
processes
appeared
to
represent
relatively
insignificant
dissipation
mechanisms
for
cypermethrin.
Cypermethrin
appears
to
be
stable
to
hydrolysis
(
except
in
alkaline
media
at
pH
9,
t
½
.2
days)
and
in
the
presence
of
light
(
photolysis
in
water
was
36
days
and
on
soil,
100
days,
dark
control
corrected).
The
basic
mechanism
of
degradation
of
cypermethrin
is
cleavage
at
the
ester
moiety,
which
results
in
two
primary
degradation
products,
3­(
2,2­
dichloroethenyl)­
2,2­
dimethylcyclopropane
carboxylic
acid
(
trans­
DCVA,
max.
79%
in
pH
9
solution,
and
34%
in
anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
study)
and
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde,
which
is
further
oxidized
to
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
3­
PBA,
max.
35%
in
aqueous
photolysis
study).
Another
degradation
product
was
cyperamide.
This
product
keeps
a
similar
structure
to
that
of
the
parent;
however,
it
was
observed
only
in
one
laboratory
study,
the
soil
photolysis
study,
at
a
maximum
of
13.3%,
which
approaches
the
limit
that
EFED
generally
considers
of
concern
(
10%
of
the
applied).

Cypermethrin
is
not
likely
to
leach
to
ground
water,
as
shown
by
an
adsorption/
desorption
batch
equilibrium
study
(
Koc
=
20,800
­
328,500
L/
Kg)
and
an
aged
leaching
study.
Cypermethrin
shows
a
relatively
low
potential
for
volatilization
from
soil
and
water
(
vapor
pressure
2.5x10­
9
mm
Hg
and
Henry's
Law
constant
3.4x10­
7
atm
m3/
mol),
relatively
low
solubility
in
water
(
0.0040
mg/
L,
high
soil/
water
partitioning).

There
are
four
field
studies,
two
terrestrial
and
two
aquatic.
The
terrestrial
field
dissipation
studies
were
conducted
in
CA
and
LA
(
bare
soils),
using
the
EC
formulation.
The
calculated
half­
lives
of
cypermethrin
were
12.2
and
3.2
days,
respectively.
The
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
was
detected
through
3
days
after
the
last
application,
while
trans­
DCVA
was
detected
only
twice
in
the
LA
study
only.
There
was
no
substantial
leaching
in
either
study.
The
supplemental
aquatic
field
dissipation
studies,
conducted
in
rice
plots
in
CA
and
LA,
appeared
to
indicate
a
much
higher
persistence,
with
reported
half­
lives
of
181
and
126
days,
respectively.
Results
of
this
study
disagree
with
the
laboratory
studies,
which
yielded
shorter
halflives
both
under
aerobic
and
anaerobic
conditions;
however,
the
reported
half­
lives
in
the
field
study,
included
the
sediment
only.

Due
to
the
relatively
low
mobility
of
cypermethrin,
it
is
expected
to
reach
adjacent
bodies
of
water
via
spray
drift
or
through
runoff
events
accompanied
by
erosion,
when
it
is
applied
to
the
­
4­
field.
Once
there,
cypermethrin
may
be
expected
to
remain
adsorbed
to
suspended
solids
in
the
water
column,
or
partition
with
the
sediment
phase,
where
it
could
persist
(
the
aerobic
and
anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
studies
for
cypermethrin
indicate
that
the
chemical
is
not
persistent;
however,
field
studies
conducted
on
rice,
with
zeta­
cypermethrin,
show
high
persistence
in
aquatic
environments).
If
cypermethrin
is
applied
repeatedly,
it
is
possible
that
the
chemical
can
accumulate
in
the
sediment
in
ever
larger
amounts,
with
slow
biodegradation.
Generally
cypermethrin
is
not
expected
to
leach
substantially
into
groundwaters.

Cypermethrin
shows
a
moderate
potential
to
bioaccumulate
in
fish,
with
maximum
BCF
of
468
for
whole
fish
in
a
28
day
study.
Depuration
appeared
to
be
moderately
slow,
with
near
10­
15%
of
the
initial
residues
remaining
after
21
days.

For
more
details
about
the
environmental
fate
characteristics
of
this
chemical
and
its
degradation
products,
please,
refer
to
section
III.
B.
1.
Environmental
Fate
and
Transport
Characteristics.

Estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
for
cypermethrin
calculated
using
the
Tier
II
PRZM/
EXAMS
models
and
employing
maximum
application
rates,
indicate
that
cypermethrin
preferentially
partitions
to
the
sediment
compartment
in
model
water
bodies.
Three
crop
usage
scenarios,
which
constitute
over
90%
of
cypermethrin's
total
crop
usage,
were
considered:
cotton,
lettuce
and
pecans.
These
model
results
suggest
that
the
highest
EECs
are
observed
for
cotton
crops
in
North
Carolina
and
Mississippi.

In
order
to
evaluate
the
extent
to
which
the
buffer
zone
imposed
by
the
registrant
in
its
label
(
for
standard
aerial
applications)
might
mitigate
the
level
of
spray
drift
and
how
important
it
is
a
transport
process
to
bodies
of
water
close
to
treated
areas,
EFED
conducted
a
brief
buffer
zone/
spray
drift
analysis
of
the
NC
cotton
scenario
as
a
representative
one
for
the
cotton
scenarios.
First,
EFED
ran
PRZM/
EXAMS
to
compare
the
standard
run
with
spray
drift
of
5%
(
no
buffer
zone)
vs
a
similar
run
with
drift=
0%;
comparison
of
the
results
indicated
that
the
percent
of
the
peak
EEC
that
was
attributable
to
spray
drift
was
9.6%
for
this
scenario.
It
has
a
relatively
small
component
of
drift.
Furthermore,
various
additional
runs
were
performed,
simulating
aerial
runs
with
buffer
zones
of
up
to
200
ft
with
three
levels
of
drift
(
high,
low
and
typical).
Acute
risk
quotient
(
RQ)
values
were
calculated
for
the
most
sensitive
estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
species
(
mysid
shrimp),
relative
to
buffer
zones
of
0
to
200
ft
and
the
assigned
spray
drift
values
for
the
specific
drift
scenarios.
The
results
for
all
scenarios
yielded
RQs
that
exceeded
all
LOCs.
The
low
end
drift
scenario
yielded
lower
levels
of
drift,
as
expected,
and
consequently
lower
EECs
and
RQs.
The
low
end
drift
scenario,
with
buffer
zones
of
0
ft,
yielded
an
RQ
of
a
similar
order
of
magnitude
as
the
one
produced
by
ground
applications.

For
the
NC
cotton
scenario
a
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
reduced
the
peak
EECs
(
and
consequently
the
RQs)
by
about
4.4%
for
the
low
end
drift
scenario,
14.1%
for
the
typical
drift
scenario
and
18.9%
for
the
high
end
drift
scenario,
compared
to
the
equivalent
conditions
with
no
buffer
zone.
For
the
NC
cotton
scenario,
the
acute
RQ
for
the
typical
drift
scenario,
with
a
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
is
approximately
990X
the
LOC
of
acute
high
risk
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
If
the
application
is
made
under
more
stringent
measures,
and
the
low
end
drift
­
5­
scenario
is
used,
the
RQ
decreases
slightly
to
about
918X
the
LOC
of
the
acute
high
risk.

Ecological
exposure
can
occur
through
several
pathways.
Terrestrial
and
avian
species
may
inadvertently
be
exposed
to
cypermethrin
as
a
result
of
its
direct
application
to
crops
(
both
dermal
and
inhalation
pathways
are
possible)
and
from
residues
found
on
food
items
and
in
water.
Cypermethrin
exposure
to
aquatic
organisms
can
result
from
spray
drift
from
the
target
area
as
well
as
runoff
and
erosion
of
residues.

For
the
terrestrial
assessment,
EECs
for
cypermethrin
were
calculated
using
the
Tier
I
model
T­
REX
for
four
crop
scenarios:
cotton,
lettuce,
pecans,
and
canola.
The
highest
EECs
were
observed
for
cypermethrin
application
to
cotton.

D.
Conclusions
­
Effects
Characterization
Results
of
acute
toxicity
studies
in
freshwater
fish,
freshwater
invertebrates
(
e.
g.
daphnids,
midge,
amphipods,
and
gastropods),
estuarine/
marine
fish,
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
(
e.
g.
shrimp
and
crustaceans),
show
that
technical
grade
cypermethrin
is
very
highly
toxic
on
an
acute
basis.
The
lowest
acute
LC
50
values
reported
for
freshwater
fish,
freshwater
invertebrates
and
estuarine/
marine
fish
range
from
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
freshwater
fish
to
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
sheepshead
minnow.
These
results
suggest
that
freshwater
fish,
freshwater
invertebrates,
and
estuarine/
marine
fish
have
a
similar
susceptibility
to
cypermethrin
toxicity.
For
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates,
the
lowest
acute
LC
50
value
reported
is
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L,
approximately
100
times
lower
than
the
LC
50
values
reported
for
other
aquatic
animals,
indicating
that
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
are
more
sensitive
to
cypermethrin
toxicity
than
other
types
of
aquatic
animals.
Thus,
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
are
expected
to
be
the
species
at
greatest
risk
for
acute
effects
(
lethality).
Cypermethrin
is
categorized
as
highly
toxic
in
oysters
(
370
ppb).

Results
of
acute
toxicity
studies
on
cypermethrin
formulations
in
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates
show
that
cypermethrin
formulations
are
also
very
highly
toxic,
with
LC
50
values
that
are
similar
to
those
reported
for
technical
grade
cypermethrin.
Acute
toxicity
studies
on
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
in
freshwater
fish
(
LC
50
=
13.3
­
36.3
ppm)
and
invertebrates
(
EC
50
=
89
­
111
ppm)
show
that
the
degradate
is
much
less
toxic
than
the
parent
compound.

Chronic
toxicity
studies
are
available
for
freshwater
fish
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
Results
in
freshwater
fish
show
a
LOAEC
for
early
life
stage
effects
at
0.33
ug
ai/
L
(
NOAEC
=
0.14
ug
ai/
L),
while
chronic
exposure
to
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
produced
NOAEC
at
0.781
ng
ai/
L.

In
addition
to
lethality
data,
acute
toxicity
studies
describe
sublethal
effects
of
cypermethrin
in
fish
and
invertebrates,
including
rapid
and
erratic
swimming,
partial/
complete
loss
of
equilibrium,
lethargy,
immobilization,
and
darkened
pigmentation.
In
most
toxicity
studies,
acute
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
are
approximately
2­
to
3­
fold
lower
than
the
corresponding
LC
50
values.
However,
in
rainbow
trout
and
bluegill
sunfish,
the
acute
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
are
several
orders
of
magnitude
lower
than
the
corresponding
LC
50
­
6­
values,
indicating
that
sublethal
effects
can
occur
at
exposure
levels
far
below
the
concentrations
that
cause
lethality.

Results
of
acute
toxicity
studies
on
birds
suggest
that
cypermethrin
is
practically
non­
toxic
to
slightly
toxic
to
avian
species
(
LD
50
>
2,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
LC
50
>
2,634
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
on
an
acute
basis.
Chronic
avian
studies
showed
no
adverse
effects
at
50
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
the
highest
does
tested)
but
the
studies
were
incomplete
because
a
LOAEC
was
not
determined.(
insufficient
number
of
concentrations
tested).
Chronic
risk
to
birds
is
inconclusive
at
this
point
in
the
risk
assessment
and
the
Agency
suggests
that
the
avian
reproduction
studies
be
repeated.
Mammalian
data
suggest
that
cypermethrin
is
moderately
toxic
(
LD
50
=
247
mg/
kg
body
weight
)
on
an
acute
basis.
A
mammalian
chronic
study
shows
adverse
effects
(
decreased
body
weight
and
body
weight
gain)
on
adults
and
offspring
(
NOAEC
=
7.5
mg
a.
i./
kg/
day;
150
ppm).
Results
of
available
toxicity
studies
indicate
that
cypermethrin
is
highly
toxic
to
honey
bees
(
LD
50
=
0.023
­
0.56
ug/
bee)
and
very
toxic
to
earthworms
(
LC50
=
26.09
ug/
cm2)
on
an
acute
contact
basis.
Thus,
honey
bees
and
other
non­
target
terrestrial
invertebrates
(
e.
g.
beneficial
insects
and
listed
insects)
are
expected
to
be
at
risk
for
acute
effects
(
lethality).

E.
Uncertainties
and
Data
Gaps
The
environmental
fate
database
for
cypermethrin
is
considered
to
be
complete.
However,
monitoring
data
for
cypermethrin
in
U.
S.
groundwater,
drinking
water,
surface
water,
and
sediment
were
not
identified
in
searches
of
the
National
Drinking
Water
Contaminant
Occurrence
Database
(
NCOD),
National
Water
Quality
Assessment
Program
(
NAWQA),
or
the
Storage
and
Retrieval
(
STORET)
database.

Estimations
regarding
the
spray
drift
fraction
in
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
model
runs
were
based
upon
the
assumption
that
the
wind
speeds
at
each
site
are
generally
below
10
mph.
Meteorological
data
from
the
four
cotton
scenarios
and
the
Georgia
pecan
scenario
indicated
that
the
assumption
is
generally
true
during
the
application
season.
However,
for
the
coastal
regions
in
California
where
lettuce
is
grown,
the
data
suggest
that
this
assumption
may
not
be
accurate
for
this
particular
scenario.
As
a
consequence,
slightly
higher
levels
of
spray
drift
were
observed
(
3.9
%
vs
4.1%)
suggesting
that
the
aquatic
exposure
may
have
been
slightly
underestimated.
This
brings
a
level
of
uncertainty
to
the
calculated
exposure
only
for
the
California
lettuce
scenario.

Data
gaps
for
ecological
effects
have
been
identified
as
follows:

°
No
scientifically
valid
chronic
toxicity
studies
for
freshwater
invertebrates
were
submitted
by
the
registrant.
Therefore,
an
NOAEC
value
was
estimated
for
freshwater
invertebrates
based
on
an
acute
to
chronic
ratio
method
using
data
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.

°
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
for
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted
by
the
registrant
for
cypermethrin.
Therefore,
an
NOAEC
value
was
estimated
for
estuarine/
marine
fish
using
an
acute
to
chronic
ratio
method
using
data
for
freshwater
fish.
­
7­
°
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
for
benthic
organisms
were
submitted
by
the
registrant
for
cypermethrin.
Therefore,
an
NOAEC
value
was
estimated
for
benthic
organisms
based
on
an
acute
to
chronic
ratio
method
using
data
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.

°
The
available
LC
50
value
for
benthic
organisms
is
expressed
in
terms
of
sediment
concentration
of
cypermethrin.
To
assess
risk
to
benthic
organisms
in
terms
of
pore
water,
a
surrogate
benthic
organism
LC
50
value
for
pore
water
was
derived
using
the
sediment
LC
50
value
and
the
average
K
oc
value
for
cypermethrin
(
141,700).
Sediment
studies
are
to
be
submitted
by
the
registrant,

.
Avian
Reproductive
studies
were
tested
at
a
maximum
of
50
ppm
while
the
criteria
suggest
that
maximum
testing
be
completed
at
1,000
ppm.
Although
there
were
no
treatment
related
effects
at
the
exposure
levels
listed,
including
50
ppm,
expected
exposure
in
cotton
can
be
66
ppm
(
short
grass).

°
Risks
to
plants
(
terrestrial
plants
and
plants
inhabiting
aquatic
and
semi­
aquatic
areas)
were
not
evaluated
because
toxicity
data
on
these
receptors
are
not
available.
In
addition,
the
Agency
data
base
has
not
shown
incidents
of
phytotoxicity
that
were
conclusively
connected
to
cypermethrin
or
other
pyrethroid
exposure.
The
neuraltoxic
mode
of
action
also
precludes
cypermethrin
phytotoxicity.

II.
Problem
Formulation
A.
Stressor
Source
and
Distribution
1.
Source
and
Intensity
Cypermethrin
((
RS)­
a­
cyano­
3­
phenoxybenzyl
(
1RS,
3RS;
1RS,
3SR)­
3­(
2,2­
dichlorovinyl)­
2,2­
dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate)
is
considered
a
third
generation
pyrethroid,
that
is,
more
light­
stable
and
persistent
in
the
environment
than
early
pyrethroids
like
allethrin,
phenothrin
and
resmethrin.
Like
all
pyrethroids,
cypermethrin
has
an
effective
"
knockdown"
action
(
induction
of
temporary
paralysis)
for
most
flying
insects
and
is
a
contact
poison
which
can
quickly
penetrate
the
neural
system.
Cypermethrin
is
a
mixture
of
four
diastereoisomers,
each
of
which
is
present
as
a
pair
of
enantiomers,
resulting
in
eight
isomers.
It
is
prepared
by
the
esterification
of
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde
and
3­(
2,2­
dichlorovinyl)­
2,2­
dimethylcyclopropane
carboxylic
acid.
Different
ratios
of
the
eight
isomers
have
resulted
in
four
different
cypermethrin
products
(
alpha­,
beta­,
theta­,
and
zeta­
cypermethrin)
all
of
which
have
similar
environmental
fate
properties,
but
slightly
different
toxicities
depending
upon
the
isomeric
mixture
of
compounds.
The
major
degradation
products
of
cypermethrin
in
the
environment
are
DCVA,
3­
PBA,
and
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde.
However
the
available
toxicity
data
suggest
that
degradates
should
not
be
considered
as
major
stressor
sources
because
of
efficacious
inactivity
of
the
parent
compound
after
the
ester
bond
has
been
cleaved.
­
8­
Agricultural
uses
of
cypermethrin
in
the
United
States
appear
to
be
focused
on
controlling
pests
on
three
crops
:
cotton,
lettuce
and
pecans,
with
the
predominant
use
being
cotton
(
approximately
80%
of
the
agricultural
use
of
cypermethrin
is
for
cotton
crops).
It
is
occasionally
used
alone
or
in
conjunction
with
organophosphate
pesticides
to
control
budworm
and
bollworm
populations
on
cotton,
aphids
and
mites
on
pecans,
and
worms
and
aphids
on
lettuce.

There
are
also
several
non­
agricultural
uses
of
cypermethrin.
These
uses
include:
pest
management
inside
greenhouses,
food
processing,
storage,
dairy
facilities
(
non­
contact
food
uses
only),
animal
kennels,
commercial
storage
facilities,
automobile
and
taxi
services,
wood
treatment
applications,
and
applications
to
drainage
systems.

The
wood
treatment
uses
involve
treatment
of
wood
outside
of
structures,
spot
treatments
and
treatment
of
preconstruction
lumber
and
logs.
These
uses
appear
not
to
involve
substantial
exposure
to
wildlife.

2.
Physical/
Chemical/
Fate
and
Transport
Properties
Cypermethrin
is
expected
to
have
little
mobility
in
soil
surfaces
(
K
OC
$
20,800
L/
Kg)
and
leaching
into
groundwater
is
not
expected
to
be
an
important
transport
process.
Volatilization
is
not
expected
to
be
an
important
transport
process
either,
since
cypermethrin
has
a
relatively
low
vapor
pressure
and
Henry's
Law
constant
(
refer
to
Table
1).
Cypermethrin
is
moderately
persistent
in
the
environment
and
degrades
through
a
combination
of
biotic
and
abiotic
mechanisms.
Cypermethrin
is
relatively
stable
to
hydrolysis
at
acidic
and
neutral
pH
levels,
but
degrades
in
a
few
days
under
alkaline
conditions
(
pH
9,
t
½
.
2
days).
Cypermethrin
is
more
light
stable
than
the
first
or
second
generation
pyrethroids
like
allethrin
and
resmethrin,
but
still
undergoes
photolysis
in
water,
with
half­
lives
of
about
a
month
or
more
in
distilled
water.
The
rate
of
photolysis
appears
to
be
enhanced
in
natural
waters
(
which
contain
photosensitizing
agents
like
humic
and
fulvic
acids),
where
the
accelerated
degradation
results
in
half­
lives
of
a
few
days.
Cypermethrin
photodegrades
on
soil
with
a
dark
control
corrected
half­
life
of
around
100
days.
Under
both
aerobic
and
anaerobic
soil
conditions,
cypermethrin
biodegrades
relatively
slowly
in
soils,
with
half­
lives
on
the
order
of
about
2
months.
In
contrast,
under
aerobic
and
anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
conditions,
the
degradation
rate
is
enhanced,
with
half­
lives
of
around
9
to
17
days.
If
released
to
water,
cypermethrin
partitions
to
sediment
and
may
degrade
slowly.
Degradates
observed
in
laboratory
studies
result
from
cleavage
at
the
ester
moiety
of
cypermethrin,
which
formed
3­(
2,2­
dichloro­
ethenyl)­
2,2­
dimethylcyclopropane
carboxylic
acid
(
DCVA,
max.
79%
in
pH
9
solution,
and
34%
in
anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
study)
and
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde
(
max.
65%
in
pH
9
solution).
The
latter
one
is
further
oxidized
to
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
3­
PBA,
max.
35%
in
aqueous
photolysis
study).
Another
product
observed
in
the
soil
photolysis
study
only
was
cyperamide
(
max.
13.3%).
For
more
details
about
the
environmental
fate
and
transport
of
this
chemical
and
its
degradation
products,
please,
refer
to
section
III.
B.
1.
Environmental
Fate
and
Transport
Characteristics.
The
chemical
and
physical
properties
of
cypermethrin
are
summarized
in
Table
1.
­
9­
Table
1.
Physical
and
Chemical
Properties
of
Cypermethrin.

Property
Value
Reference
Molecular
weight
416.3
Laskowski
(
2002)

SMILES
notation
ClC(
Cl)=
CC1C(
C)(
C)
C1C(=
O)
OC(
C#
N)
c2cccc(
Oc3ccccc3)
c2
CAS
number
52315­
07­
8
Laskowski
(
2002)

Water
solubility
4.0x10­
3
mg/
L
Laskowski
(
2002)

Melting
point
78­
81
oC
Tomlin
1994
Boiling
point
200
oC
at
9.3
Pa
Tomlin
1994
Vapor
pressure
2.5x10­
9
mm
Hg
Laskowski
(
2002)

log
Kow
6.54
Laskowski
(
2002)

Henry's
Law
constant
3.4x10­
7
atm­
m3/
mol
Laskowski
(
2002)

3.
Pesticide
Type,
Class,
and
Mode
of
Action
Cypermethrin
is
classified
as
a
type
II
pyrethroid,
with
a
cyano
group
at
the
"
carbon
position
of
the
alcohol
moiety.
Cypermethrin
has
three
optically
active
centers
and
is
composed
of
8
isomers.
The
insecticidal
effect
of
pyrethroids
is
characterized
by
a
rapid
"
knock
down",
or
paralysis,
of
insects.
In
insects,
the
type
II
pyrethroids
predominantly
cause
ataxia
and
uncoordinated
movement.
All
pyrethroids
act
as
axonic
poisons,
affecting
both
the
peripheral
and
central
nervous
systems,
and
share
similar
modes
of
action.
Pyrethroids,
including
cypermethrin,
stimulate
repetitive
action
in
the
nervous
system
by
binding
to
voltage­
gated
sodium
channels,
prolonging
the
sodium
ion
permeability
during
the
excitatory
phase
of
the
action
potential.
This
action
leads
to
spontaneous
depolarizations,
augmented
neurotransmitter
secretion
rate
and
neuromuscular
block,
which
ultimately
results
in
paralysis
of
the
insect.

4.
Overview
of
Pesticide
Usage
In
the
United
States,
the
largest
agricultural
use
of
cypermethrin
involves
its
application
to
cotton
crops
for
the
control
of
pests
such
as
the
budworm
and
bollworm.
See
section
III.
A.
Use
Characterization
for
additional
details
about
pesticide
usage.
Also,
refer
to
Appendix
L
for
maps
of
cypermethrin
use.
The
maximum
seasonal
application
rate
of
cypermethrin
ranges
from
0.4
to
0.6
lbs
a.
i./
A.
However,
since
insecticide
resistance
is
a
primary
concern
in
the
application
of
cypermethrin
to
agricultural
crops,
the
maximum
seasonal
application
rates
are
not
always
employed.

Cypermethrin
is
registered
for
several
nonagricultural
uses
that
include
insect
pest
control
products
sold
to
the
general
public,
protection
of
wood
structures
(
fences,
decks,
etc),
control
of
pests
in
kennels,
barns,
automobile
(
taxi)
services,
commercial
storage
facilities
(
indoor
and
­
10­
outdoor
use),
eating
establishments
(
non
food
contact
only),
dairy
facilities
(
non
food
contact
only),
food
stores
or
processing
plants
(
non
food
contact
only),
greenhouses,
lawns,
poultry
processing
facilities
(
non
food
contact
only),
and
swimming
pool
water
systems.
Although
it
is
difficult
to
evaluate
the
potential
for
toxic
exposure
from
non­
agricultural
uses,
monitoring
of
streams
adjacent
to
urban
areas
(
sudivisions)
has
shown
that
toxic
levels
of
pyrethroids,
including
cypermethrin
can
be
found
in
sediments
as
a
possible
result
of
residue
runoff
from
urban
uses
(
lawn
care).

B.
Receptors
Each
assessment
endpoint
requires
one
or
more
measures
of
ecological
effect,
which
are
defined
as
changes
in
the
attributes
of
an
assessment
endpoint
itself
or
changes
in
a
surrogate
entity
or
attribute
in
response
to
exposure
to
a
pesticide.
Ecological
measures
of
effect
for
the
screening
level
risk
assessment
are
based
on
a
suite
of
registrant­
submitted
toxicity
studies
performed
on
a
limited
number
of
organisms
in
broad
groupings
listed
in
Table
2.

Within
each
of
these
very
broad
taxonomic
groups,
an
acute
and/
or
chronic
endpoint
is
selected
from
the
available
test
data.
Additional
ecological
effects
data
for
cypermethrin
are
available
for
honey
bees
(
Apis
mellifera)
and
benthic
organisms
and
have
been
incorporated
into
the
risk
characterization
as
an
additional
line
of
evidence.
A
complete
discussion
of
all
toxicity
data
available
for
this
risk
assessment
and
the
resulting
measures
of
effect
selected
for
each
taxonomic
group
are
included
in
Appendix
E.

Table
2.
Taxonomic
Groups
and
Test
Species
Evaluated
for
Ecological
Effects
in
Screening­
Level
Risk
Assessments.

Taxonomic
group
Example(
s)
of
representative
species
Birds
a
Mallard
duck
(
Anas
platyrhynchos)
Bobwhite
quail
(
Colinus
virginianus)

Mammals
Laboratory
rat
(
Rattus
norvegicus)

Freshwater
fish
b
Bluegill
sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus)
Rainbow
trout
(
Oncorhynchus
mykiss)

Freshwater
invertebrates
Water
flea
(
Daphnia
magna)

Estuarine/
marine
fish
Sheepshead
minnow
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus)

Estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
Eastern
oyster
(
Crassostrea
virginica)
Mysid
shrimp
(
Americamysis
bahia)

Notes:

a
Birds
represent
surrogates
for
reptiles.
b
Freshwater
fish
may
be
surrogates
for
amphibians
(
aquatic
phase).
­
11­
1.
Aquatic
Effects
For
aquatic
effects,
registrant­
submitted
studies
on
cypermethrin
technical
grade
active
ingredient
(
TGAI)
are
available
for
acute
and
chronic
exposure
of
freshwater
fish,
acute
exposure
of
freshwater
invertebrates,
acute
exposure
of
estuarine/
marine
fish,
and
acute
and
chronic
exposure
of
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
No
scientifically
valid
studies
on
cypermethrin
TGAI
were
submitted
by
the
registrant
for
chronic
exposure
of
freshwater
invertebrates
or
estuarine/
marine
fish.
No
toxicity
studies
on
cypermethrin
were
submitted
for
algae
or
aquatic
macrophytes.

Additional
ecological
effects
data
are
available
from
registrant­
submitted
studies
of
acute
cypermethrin
exposure
to
benthic
organisms.
Data
from
aquatic
field
studies
using
cypermethrin
formulations
were
identified
from
registrant­
submitted
studies
and
open
literature
studies
obtained
through
the
ECOTOX
database.

In
addition
to
studies
on
the
parent
compound,
ecological
effects
data
for
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
are
available
for
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates.
However,
cleavage
of
the
ester
bond
in
the
parent
compound
makes
the
degradates
less
efficacious
and
also
less
of
a
toxicity
risk
to
non­
target
organisms.
Registrant­
submitted
studies
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
formulated
products
are
also
available
for
acute
exposure
of
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates.

Acute
and
chronic
laboratory
tests
on
cypermethrin
provide
quantitative
information
regarding
lethality,
as
well
as
sublethal
measures
of
effect.
Results
of
field
studies
on
cypermethrin
provide
information
on
the
potential
effects
on
the
abundance
and
diversity
of
aquatic
organisms,
especially
aquatic
invertebrates.

2.
Terrestrial
Effects
For
terrestrial
effects,
registrant­
submitted
studies
on
cypermethrin
TGAI
are
available
for
acute
exposure
to
birds
and
mammals.
Although
avian
reproduction
studies
are
of
limited
use
for
this
assessment,
data
on
chronic
exposure
to
mammals
are
available.
Additional
ecological
effects
data
for
cypermethrin
are
available
for
honey
bees
(
Apis
mellifera)
and
earthworms;
results
of
these
studies
have
been
incorporated
into
the
risk
characterization
as
an
additional
line
of
evidence.
No
toxicity
studies
on
cypermethrin
were
submitted
for
plants
inhabiting
terrestrial
areas.
Toxicity
data
of
terrestrial
organisms
to
cypermethrin
degradates
were
not
submitted.
However,
since
there
is
a
decline
in
efficacy
after
the
ester
bond
is
cleaved
in
the
parent
compound,
the
Agency
does
not
expect
toxic
concern
from
cypermethrin
degradates.

3.
Ecosystems
at
Risk
Ecosystems
potentially
at
risk
are
expressed
in
terms
of
the
selected
assessment
measures
of
effect.
The
typical
assessment
measures
of
effect
for
screening­
level
pesticide
ecological
risk
assessments
are
reduced
survival,
and
reproductive
and
growth
impairment
for
both
aquatic
and
terrestrial
animal
species.
Aquatic
animal
species
of
potential
concern
include
freshwater
fish
and
­
12­
invertebrates,
estuarine/
marine
fish
and
invertebrates,
and
amphibians.
Terrestrial
animal
species
of
potential
concern
include
birds,
mammals,
and
beneficial
insects.
For
both
aquatic
and
terrestrial
animal
species,
direct
acute
and
direct
chronic
exposures
are
considered.
In
order
to
protect
threatened
and
listed
species,
all
assessment
endpoints
are
measured
at
the
individual
level.
Although
all
endpoints
for
non­
endangered
species
are
measured
at
the
individual
level,
they
provide
insight
about
risks
at
higher
levels
of
biological
organization
(
e.
g.
populations
and
communities).
For
example,
pesticide
effects
on
individual
survivorship
have
important
implications
for
both
population
rates
of
increase
and
habitat
carrying
capacity.
The
types
of
toxicity
studies
available
for
cypermethrin
are
summarized
in
Table
3.

In
addition
to
guideline­
required
studies,
ecological
effects
data
for
cypermethrin
are
available
for
honey
bees
(
Apis
mellifera),
earthworms,
and
other
invertebrates
(
e.
g.,
aquatic
benthic
organisms).
Several
field
studies
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
aquatic
ecosystems
are
also
available.
Results
of
these
additional
studies
have
been
incorporated
into
the
risk
characterization
as
an
additional
line
of
evidence.

The
ecological
relevance
of
selecting
the
above­
mentioned
assessment
measures
of
effect
is
as
follows:
1)
complete
exposure
pathways
exist
for
these
receptors;
2)
the
receptors
may
be
potentially
sensitive
to
pesticides
in
affected
media
and
in
residues
on
plants,
seeds,
and
insects;
and
3)
the
receptors
could
potentially
inhabit
areas
where
pesticides
are
applied,
or
areas
where
runoff
and/
or
spray
drift
may
impact
the
sites.

Table
3.
Summary
of
Assessment
and
Measures
of
Effect
for
Cypermethrin
(
TGAI).

Assessment
Endpoint
Measure
of
Effect
1.
Survival,
reproduction,
and
growth
of
individuals
and
populations
of
birds.
1a.
Bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
duck
acute
oral
LD50.
1b.
Bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
duck
subacute
dietary
LC50.
1c.
Bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
duck
chronic
reproduction
>
NOAEC.

2.
Survival,
reproduction,
and
growth
of
individuals
and
populations
of
mammals.
2a.
Laboratory
rat
acute
oral
LD50.
2b.
Laboratory
rat
3­
generation
reproduction
chronic
NOAEC
and
LOAEC.

3.
Survival
and
reproduction
of
individuals
and
communities
of
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates.
3a.
Rainbow
trout
and
bluegill
sunfish
acute
LC50
(
guideline­
recommended
species).
Acute
LC50
in
several
other
species
of
freshwater
fish
3b.
Fathead
minnow
chronic
(
early­
life)
NOAEC
and
LOAEC.
3c.
Water
flea
acute
LC50
and
EC50
(
guidelinerecommended
species).
Acute
LC50
and
EC50
in
several
other
species
of
freshwater
invertebrates.
3d.
Field
studies
in
aquatic
ecosystems
(
information
regarding
abundance,
diversity,
and
recovery).
Table
3.
Summary
of
Assessment
and
Measures
of
Effect
for
Cypermethrin
(
TGAI).

­
13­
4.
Survival
and
reproduction
of
individuals
and
communities
of
estuarine/
marine
fish
and
invertebrates.
4a.
Sheepshead
minnow
acute
LC50.
4b.
Eastern
oyster
and
mysid
shrimp
acute
LC50
and
EC50
(
guideline­
recommended
species).
Acute
LC50
and
EC50
in
several
other
species
of
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates,
crustaceans,
and
molluscs.
4c.
Mysid
shrimp
chronic
NOAEC
and
LOAEC.

5.
Survival
of
individuals
and
communities
of
freshwater
benthic
organisms.
5a.
Midge
and
amphipod
acute
LC50.

6.
Survival
of
terrestrial
invertebrate
populations
(
beneficial
insects
and
earthworms).
6a.
Honeybee
acute
contact
LD50.
6b.
NOAEC
in
several
beneficial
insects.
6c.
Earthworm
acute
contact
LC50
LD50
=
Lethal
dose
to
50%
of
the
test
population.
LC50
(
EC50)
=
Lethal
(
effective)
concentration
to
50%
of
the
test
population.
NOAEC
=
No­
observed­
adverse­
effect
concentration.
LOAEC
=
Lowest­
observed­
adverse­
effect
concentration.

C.
Assessment
Endpoints
Assessment
endpoints
are
defined
as
"
explicit
expressions
of
the
actual
environmental
value
that
is
to
be
protected."
Defining
an
assessment
endpoint
involves
two
steps:
1)
identifying
the
valued
attributes
of
the
environment
that
are
considered
to
be
at
risk;
and
2)
operationally
defining
the
assessment
endpoint
in
terms
of
an
ecological
entity
(
i.
e.,
a
community
of
fish
and
aquatic
invertebrates)
and
its
attributes
(
i.
e.,
survival
and
reproduction).
Therefore,
selection
of
the
assessment
endpoints
is
based
on
valued
entities
(
i.
e.,
ecological
receptors),
the
ecosystems
potentially
at
risk,
the
migration
pathways
of
pesticides,
and
the
routes
by
which
ecological
receptors
are
exposed
to
pesticides.
The
selection
of
clearly
defined
assessment
endpoints
is
important
because
they
provide
direction
and
boundaries
in
the
risk
assessment
for
addressing
risk
management
issues
of
concern.

This
ecological
risk
assessment
considers
maximum
application
rates
of
cypermethrin
to
fields
that
have
vulnerable
soils,
maximum
number
of
applications,
and
minimum
intervals
for
uses
on
representative
crops
to
estimate
exposure
concentrations.
In
addition,
this
assessment
is
not
intended
to
represent
a
site­
or
time­
specific
analysis.
Instead,
this
assessment
is
intended
to
represent
high­
end
exposures
at
a
national
level.
Likewise,
the
most
sensitive
toxicity
measures
of
effect
are
used
from
surrogate
test
species
to
estimate
treatment­
related
direct
effects
on
acute
mortality
and
chronic
reproductive,
growth
and
survival
assessment
endpoints.
Toxicity
tests
are
intended
to
determine
effects
of
cypermethrin
exposure
on
birds,
mammals,
fish,
terrestrial
and
aquatic
invertebrates,
and
plants.
These
tests
include
short­
term
acute,
subacute,
and
reproduction
studies
and
are
typically
arranged
in
a
hierarchical
or
tiered
system
that
progresses
from
basic
laboratory
tests
to
applied
field
studies.
The
toxicity
studies
are
used
to
evaluate
the
potential
of
a
cypermethrin
to
cause
adverse
effects,
to
determine
whether
further
testing
is
required,
and
to
determine
the
need
for
precautionary
label
statements
to
minimize
the
potential
­
14­
adverse
effects
to
non­
target
animals
and
plants
(
CFR
40
§
158.202,
2002).
A
summary
of
measures
of
effects
selected
to
characterize
potential
ecological
risks
associated
with
exposure
to
cypermethrin
is
provided
in
Table
3.

D.
Conceptual
Model
1.
Risk
Hypotheses
Risk
hypotheses
are
specific
assumptions
about
potential
adverse
effects
(
i.
e.,
changes
in
assessment
endpoints)
and
may
be
based
on
theory
and
logic,
empirical
data,
mathematical
models,
or
probability
models
(
US
EPA
2004).
For
this
assessment,
the
risk
is
stressor­
initiated,
where
the
stressor
is
the
release
of
cypermethrin
to
the
environment.
The
following
risk
hypothesis
is
presumed
for
this
screening
level
assessment:

The
use
of
cypermethrin
as
an
insecticide
in
agricultural
settings
involves
situations
where
terrestrial
and/
or
aquatic
animals
may
be
exposed
to
the
chemical.
Based
on
information
on
persistence,
mode
of
action,
direct
toxicity
and
potential
indirect
effects
to
trophic
food
webs,
EFED
assumes
that
cypermethrin
has
the
potential
to
cause
reduced
survival
and
reproductive
impairment
to
both
terrestrial
and
aquatic
animals.

In
order
for
a
chemical
to
pose
an
ecological
risk,
it
must
reach
ecological
receptors
in
biologically
significant
concentrations.
An
exposure
pathway
is
the
means
by
which
a
pesticide
moves
in
the
environment
from
a
source
to
an
ecological
receptor.
For
an
ecological
exposure
pathway
to
be
complete,
it
must
have
a
source,
a
release
mechanism,
an
environmental
transport
medium,
a
point
of
exposure
for
ecological
receptors,
and
a
feasible
route
of
exposure.
In
addition,
the
potential
mechanisms
of
transformation
(
i.
e.,
which
degradates
may
form
in
the
environment,
in
which
media,
and
quantity
formed)
must
be
understood,
especially
for
a
chemical
whose
metabolites/
degradates
are
of
greater
toxicological
concern
than
the
parent
compound.
The
assessment
of
ecological
exposure
pathways,
therefore,
includes
an
examination
of
the
source
and
potential
migration
pathways
for
constituents,
and
the
determination
of
potential
exposure
routes
(
e.
g.,
ingestion,
inhalation,
dermal
absorption).

Ecological
receptors
that
may
potentially
be
exposed
to
cypermethrin
include
terrestrial
and
semi­
aquatic
wildlife
(
i.
e.,
mammals,
birds,
and
reptiles),
terrestrial
plants
and
terrestrial
plants
in
semi­
aquatic
areas,
and
soil
invertebrates.
In
addition
to
terrestrial
ecological
receptors,
aquatic
receptors
(
e.
g.,
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine
fish
and
invertebrates,
and
amphibians)
may
also
be
exposed
to
cypermethrin
by
its
migration
from
the
site
of
application
to
various
watersheds
and
other
aquatic
environments
via
runoff
and
spray
drift.
Data
from
toxicity
studies
formed
the
basis
for
identifying
potential
endpoints,
stressors,
and
ecological
effects
associated
with
uses
of
cypermethrin.
Although,
cypermethrin
degradate
exposure
to
aquatic
and
terrestrial
organisms
is
also
possible,
the
available
data
suggest
that
these
residues
are
not
expected
to
be
toxic.
­
15­
2.
Diagram
The
conceptual
model
(
Figure
1)
is
a
generic
graphic
depiction
of
the
risk
hypothesis.
It
includes
the
potential
pesticide
or
stressor
(
cypermethrin),
the
source
of
the
pesticide
and/
or
transport
pathways,
exposure
media,
exposure
point,
biological
receptor
types,
and
attribute
changes.

In
the
specific
case
of
cypermethrin,
the
source
and
mechanism
of
release
may
include
ground
or
aerial
spray
applications
to
agricultural
crops.
Surface
runoff
from
the
areas
of
application
is
assumed
to
depend
on
factors
such
as
topography,
irrigation,
and
rainfall
events.
Additional
transport
mechanisms
include
spray
drift
and
wind
erosion,
which
may
potentially
transport
contaminants
to
the
surrounding
sites.
In
addition,
direct
deposition
may
result
in
contamination
of
food
items
that
may
be
consumed
by
terrestrial
organisms.

The
major
point
of
exposure
for
aquatic
organisms
is
direct
effects
from
the
water
column,
as
well
as
sediment
and
pore
water
(
gill/
integument
uptake).
However,
indirect
effects
to
aquatic
organisms
(
especially
fish)
can
also
occur
through
impact
to
various
food
chains.
Cypermethrin
exposure
to
terrestrial
animals
is
expected
through
ingestion
of
food
items
such
as
grass,
foliage,
and
small
insects.
An
evaluation
of
aquatic
or
terrestrial
plants
was
not
conducted
in
this
assessment
because
of
the
lack
of
data.
However,
a
review
of
available
incident
reports
submitted
to
the
Agency
did
not
find
any
reports
noting
toxicity
to
terrestrial
or
aquatic
plants.
In
addition,
incidents
of
phytotoxicity
have
not
been
reported
for
other
synthetic
pyrethroids.

The
receptors
identified
in
the
conceptual
model
were
identified
through
a
preliminary
iterative
process
of
examining
environmental
fate
and
ecological
effects
data.
Based
on
review
of
the
available
data,
it
is
hypothesized
that
both
aquatic
and
terrestrial
receptors
are
at
risk
from
cypermethrin
exposure.
For
aquatic
receptors,
representative
species
are
certain
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine
fish
and
invertebrates.
For
terrestrial
receptors,
representative
species
are
certain
mammals.
The
attribute
changes
used
to
assess
risk
for
aquatic
and
terrestrial
receptors
depends
upon
the
type
of
test
(
e.
g.
reduced
survival,
growth,
or
reproduction).
Although
the
Agency
does
not
currently
assess
quantitative
risk
to
non­
target
beneficial
insects,
results
of
laboratory
studies
are
used
for
a
qualitative
evaluation.
­
16­

Cypermethrin
applied
as
ground/
aerial
spray
to
an
agricultural
field
Figure
1.
Ecological
Conceptual
Exposure
Model
for
Screening­
Level
Risk
assessment
of
Cypermethrin
Applied
to
Agricultural
Fields
Volitilization/

Wind
Suspension
Leaching
(
Infiltration/
Percolation)

Direct
Deposition
Spray
Drift
Runoff/
Erosion
Terrestrial
Food
Residues
(
foliage,

fruit,
insects)
Water
column,

Sediment
Groundwater
Ingestion
Gil/
Integument
Uptake
Terrestrial
Vertebrates
Birds,
Mammals,

Reptiles
Aquatic
Invertebrates
Aquatic
Vertebrates
Amphibians
Individual
Animals
Reduced
survival
Reduced
growth
Individual
Vertebrates
Reduced
survival
Reduced
growth
Reduced
reproduction
Bioaccumulation
Receptors
Attribute
Changes
Exposure
Point
Source/
Exposure
Media
Source/
Transport
Pathways
­
17­
E.
Analysis
Plan
This
document
characterizes
risks
associated
with
proposed
label
uses
of
cypermethrin.
This
initial
analysis
will
be
referred
to
as
Tier
I
screening
and
is
based
on
the
deterministic
or
risk
quotient
(
RQ)
method.
As
noted
in
the
USEPA
1998,
Part
A
Section
5.1.3,
"
Typically,
the
ratio
(
or
quotient)
is
expressed
as
an
exposure
concentration
divided
by
an
effects
concentration".
Therefore
the
RQ
is
the
ratio
of
the
estimated
environmental
concentration
(
EEC)
of
a
chemical
to
a
toxicity
test
effect
(
e.
g.,
LC
50
)
for
a
given
species.
The
RQ
as
an
index
of
potential
adverse
effects
is
then
compared
to
an
Agency
established
Level
of
Concern
(
LOC)
in
order
to
identify
when
the
potential
adverse
effect
is
a
concern
to
the
Agency.
These
LOCs
are
the
Agency's
interpretive
policy
and
are
used
to
analyze
potential
risk
to
non­
target
organisms
and
the
need
to
consider
regulatory
action.
Appendix
D
of
this
document
summarizes
the
LOCs
used
in
this
risk
assessment.
Risks
to
aquatic
species
were
based
on
estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
using
the
Tier
II
model
PRZM/
EXAMS
with
the
help
of
AgDRIFT
to
estimate
the
levelof
spray
drift
to
prescribed
buffer
zones.
For
aquatic
receptors,
the
main
pathway
of
exposure
is
water
column
and
sediment/
pore
water
as
a
result
of
drift
and
runoff
from
agricultural
fields
and
other
sites
of
application.
Risks
to
aquatic
species
were
based
on
estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
in
the
water
column,
as
well
as
the
sediment/
pore
water
using
the
Tier
II
model
PRZM/
EXAMS.
Since
cypermethrin
like
other
pyrethroids
binds
to
organic
matter
(
Koc
=
141,700
mg/
L)
and
eventually
accumulates
in
aquatic
sediment,
toxic
exposure
to
organisms
living
in
this
media
is
a
concern.
However,
the
lack
of
appropriate
sediment
toxicity
studies
presents
an
uncertainty
regarding
a
sediment
risk
assessment.
Therefore,
EFED
has
estimated
cypermethrin
sediment
exposure
to
benthic
organisms
by
calculating
sediment
and
pore
water
exposure
values
using
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
model.
The
assumptions
for
the
model
that
pertain
to
these
calculations
are
based
on
the
equilibrium
partitioning
(
EqP)
theory.
This
theory
holds
that
a
nonionic
compound
in
the
sediment
partitions
between
sediment
organic
carbon,
interstitial
(
pore)
water
and
benthic
organisms
(
Di
Toro
et
al.,
1991,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
2000c).
At
equilibrium,
if
the
concentration
in
any
one
phase
is
known,
then
the
concentration
in
the
others
can
be
predicted
(
Appendix
M).
Since,
EFED
is
assuming
that
benthic
organisms
are
no
more
sensitive
to
toxic
compounds
that
those
organisms
living
in
the
water
column,
measures
of
effects
used
in
calculating
RQ
values
for
sediment/
pore
water
exposure
were
derived
from
standard
water
column
studies
(
e.
g.,
LC
50
,
EC
50
).
EFED
understands
that
the
model
generated
sediment/
pore
water
values
may
be
an
overestimation
or
underestimation
of
actual
exposure
values
noted
in
the
laboratory
or
field.
However,
without
adequate
sediment
toxicity
studies
this
estimation
approach
appears
prudent
for
a
screening
level
assessment
of
the
potential
for
toxic
risk
to
aquatic
benthic
organisms
(
Walter
Berry,
U.
S.
EPA
Laboratory,
Narragansett
RI,
personal
communication).
Residues
in
potential
dietary
sources
for
mammals
and
birds
(
e.
g.,
vegetation
and
insects)
were
estimated
using
the
conceptual
approach
given
in
the
Tier
I
model
TREX
Integration
of
effects
and
potential
exposure
provide
an
estimate
of
the
risk
to
non­
target
listed/
threatened
and
non­
listed
animals
and
plants
that
could
potentially
impact
the
registration
decision
of
cypermethrin
under
the
Federal
Insecticide,
Fungicide
and
Rodenticide
Act
(
FIFRA),
the
Food
Quality
Protection
Act,
and
the
Listed
Species
Act.

1.
Preliminary
Identification
of
Data
Gaps
and
Methods
­
18­
The
adequacy
of
the
submitted
data
was
evaluated
relative
to
Agency
guidelines.
The
following
identified
data
gaps
for
ecological
toxicity
endpoints
result
in
a
degree
of
uncertainty
in
evaluating
the
ecological
risk
of
cypermethrin.

°
No
scientifically
valid
chronic
toxicity
studies
for
freshwater
invertebrates
were
submitted
by
the
registrant
for
cypermethrin.
Although
this
presents
an
uncertainty,
the
Agency
has
extrapolated
a
chronic
NOAEC
value
based
on
an
acute
to
chronic
ratio
method.
Therefore,
chronic
toxicity
data
for
freshwater
invertebrates
(
invertebrate
life­
cycle)
are
needed
to
fully
characterize
effects
to
these
animals.

°
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
for
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted
by
the
registrant
for
cypermethrin.
The
Agency
has
extrapolated
a
chronic
NOAEC
value
based
on
an
acute
to
chronic
ratio
method.

°
Risks
to
terrestrial
plants
and
terrestrial
plants
in
semi­
aquatic
areas
were
not
evaluated
because
toxicity
data
on
these
receptors
are
not
available.
However,
there
is
no
information
in
the
incident
data
reported
to
EPA
that
would
indicate
that
cypermethrin
has
phytotoxic
properties.
Since
the
neural
toxic
mode
of
action
of
this
compound
precludes
toxic
effects
to
plants,
the
Agency
does
not
require
phytoxicity
studies
for
cypermethrin
at
this
time.

.
The
potential
exposure
of
cypermethrin
residues
in
the
sediment
presents
an
uncertainty
regarding
direct
toxicity
to
benthic
macroinvertebrates.
However,
acute
and
chronic
sediment
toxicity
studies
are
currently
being
conducted
by
the
PWG
for
cypermethrin.
­
19­
2.
Measures
to
Evaluate
Risk
Hypotheses
and
Conceptual
Model
a.
Measures
of
Exposure
°
The
major
routes
of
dissipation
of
cypermethrin
in
the
soil
are
photolysis
and
aerobic
biodegradation.
Cypermethrin
is
relatively
stable
to
hydrolysis
at
pH
5
and
7,
but
degrades
relatively
quickly
under
alkaline
conditions.
Cypermethrin
adsorbs
strongly
to
soil
surfaces
and
can
generally
be
considered
immobile
in
soils.
Cypermethrin
is
unlikely
to
reach
ground
water,
but
can
reach
surface
waters
via
spray
drift
and
rainfall
events
that
cause
runoff
accompanied
by
erosion.
Once
in
the
water,
cypermethrin
is
expected
to
partition
in
the
sediment.

C
For
agricultural
uses,
exposure
concentrations
for
aquatic
ecosystems
assessments
were
estimated
based
on
EFED's
aquatic
Tier
II
model
PRZM/
EXAMS.
A
graphical
user
interface
(
pe4v01.
pl),
developed
by
the
EPA
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
oppefed1/
models/
water),
was
used
to
facilitate
inputting
chemical
and
use
specific
parameters
into
the
appropriate
PRZM
input
files
(
inp)
and
EXAMS
chemical
files.
This
approach
employs
PRZM,
which
simulates
the
processes
in
the
agricultural
field,
such
as
runoff
and
erosion,
on
a
daily
time
step.
The
runoff
and
erosion
flux
output
data
from
PRZM
are
used
as
chemical
loadings
to
EXAMS,
which
simulates
surface
water
in
order
to
predict
the
EECs.
Six
PRZM
field
(
crop)
scenarios
were
modeled:
GA
Pecans,
CA
Lettuce,
CA
Cotton,
MS
Cotton,
NC
Cotton,
and
TX
Cotton.
These
scenarios
were
selected
to
represent
the
major
crop
uses
of
cypermethrin
in
the
United
States
(
see
Appendix
L,
Use
Maps).
EECs
for
ecological
risk
assessment
were
determined
using
a
pond
modeling
scenario
which
describes
a
generic
scenario
for
the
EXAMS
component
of
the
modeling
exercise.

C
The
effect
of
buffer
zones
on
the
level
of
spray
drift,
and
subsequently,
the
exposure
to
bodies
of
water
adjacent
to
treated
areas
was
investigated
using
the
AgDRIFT
®
model.
The
simulations
were
performed
using
AgDRIFT
®
with
spray
drift
levels
for
buffer
zones
of
150
ft.
as
prescribed
by
the
label
for
aerial
spray
applications
and
25
ft
for
ground
applications
(
for
GA
pecans).
The
levels
of
spray
drift
obtained
from
AgDRIFT
®
were
used
as
input
values
in
PRZM/
EXAMS.

C
Residues
in
potential
dietary
sources
(
e.
g.,
vegetation
and
insects)
for
mammals
and
birds
were
estimated
using
the
conceptual
approach
given
in
the
Tier
1
model
T­
REX
Version
1.1
(
T­
REX,
2004).
This
model
provides
estimates
of
concentrations
(
maximum,
or
upper
bound,
and
average)
of
chemical
residues
on
the
surfaces
of
different
forage
that
may
be
sources
of
dietary
exposure
for
avian,
mammalian,
reptilian,
or
terrestrial­
phase
amphibian
receptors.
The
surface
residue
concentration
(
ppm)
is
estimated
by
multiplying
the
application
rate
(
pounds
active
ingredient
per
acre)
by
a
value
specific
to
each
food
item.
The
T­
REX
model
was
run
for
four
crop
uses:
cotton,
lettuce,
pecans,
and
canola.
These
scenarios
were
selected
to
represent
a
variety
of
crops
and
use
sites
in
the
continental
US.

C
The
effect
of
spray
drift
and
buffer
zones
on
exposure
to
bodies
of
water
adjacent
to
­
20­
treated
areas
was
investigated
using
the
AgDRIFT
®
model.
As
a
first
step,
the
evaluation
of
spray
drift
as
a
possible
predominant
route
of
exposure
for
a
North
Carolina
crop
scenario
(
NC
cotton)
was
performed
using
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
model.
Both
crops
were
run
with
spray
drift
set
to
0%
(
to
estimate
the
extent
of
spray
drift
for
that
crop
scenario),
compared
to
the
default
value
of
5%.
Furthermore,
EFED
bracketed
the
spray
drift
options
by
running
a
"
high
end"
(
conservative),
"
typical,"
and
a
"
low
end"
drift
scenarios.
The
simulations
were
performed
using
AgDRIFT
®
with
spray
drift
levels
for
buffer
zones
of
0
to
200
ft.
at
the
"
low"
end,
"
typical,"
and
"
high"
end
drift
scenarios.
The
output
values
from
AgDRIFT
®
were
used
as
input
values
in
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b.
Measures
of
Effect
Measures
of
ecological
effects
are
obtained
from
a
suite
of
registrant­
submitted
guideline
studies
conducted
with
a
limited
number
of
surrogate
species.
The
test
species
are
not
intended
to
be
representative
of
the
most
sensitive
species
but
rather
were
selected
based
on
their
ability
to
thrive
under
laboratory
conditions.
Registrant­
submitted
data
are
available
for
cypermethrin
TGAI,
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid,
and
cypermethrin
formulated
products.
A
complete
summary
of
the
measures
of
effect
based
on
toxicity
studies
for
different
ecological
receptors
and
measures
of
effect
(
acute/
chronic)
for
cypermethrin
(
TGAI)
is
given
in
Table
3,
with
study
details
provided
in
Appendix
E.
Examples
of
measures
of
acute
effects
(
e.
g.,
lethality)
include
an
oral
LD
50
for
mammals
and
LC
50
for
fish
and
invertebrates.
Examples
of
measures
of
chronic
effects
include
NOAEC
values
for
birds
or
mammals
based
on
reproduction
or
developmental
measurements.

A
search
of
the
open
literature
using
EPA's
Ecotoxicology
database
ECOTOX
was
conducted
to
identify
studies
o
the
following:
(
1)
information
to
fill
data
gaps
for
chronic
cypermethrin
exposure
to
freshwater
invertebrates
and
chronic
estuarine/
marine
fish,
and
(
2)
field
studies
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
aquatic
and
terrestrial
populations.
Search
of
the
ECOTOX
database
did
not
identify
chronic
exposure
studies
in
freshwater
invertebrates
and
estuarine/
marine
fish.
Several
aquatic
field
studies
were
identified;
this
literature
is
summarized
and
included
as
supporting
lines
of
evidence
for
the
risk
characterization.

c.
Measures
of
Ecosystem
and
Receptor
Characteristics
For
the
assessments
using
the
Tier
II
aquatic
model
PRZM/
EXAMS
and
the
Tier
I
terrestrial
model
T­
REX,
the
ecosystems
that
are
modeled
are
intended
to
be
generally
representative
of
any
aquatic
or
terrestrial
ecosystem
associated
with
areas
where
cypermethrin
is
used.
The
receptors
addressed
by
the
aquatic
and
terrestrial
risk
assessments
for
cypermethrin
are
summarized
in
Table
3.
For
aquatic
assessments,
fish
and
aquatic
invertebrates
in
both
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine
environments
are
represented.
For
terrestrial
assessments,
three
different
size
classes
of
birds
and
mammals
are
represented,
along
with
four
potential
foraging
categories.

III.
Analysis
­
21­
A.
Use
Characterization
The
use
rates
and
patterns
of
usage
for
cypermethrin
on
some
important
crops
are
shown
in
Table
4.

Table
4.
Usage
Rates
for
Cypermethrin
1.

Crop
or
Crop
Group
Maximum
Single
Application
Rate
(
lb
a.
i./
A)
Maximum
Number
of
Applications
Minimum
Application
Interval
(
days)
Maximum
Application
Rate
per
Season
(
lb
a.
i./
A/
season)
PHI2
Cotton
0.1
6
3
0.6
14
Pecans
0.1
6
53
0.6
21
Lettuce,
head
0.1
6
74
0.6
5
Bulb
vegetables
(
includes
dry
bulb
onions,
green
onions,
garlic,
scallions)
0.1
5
7
0.5
7
Head
and
stem
Brassica
(
includes
broccoli,
Brussel
sprouts,
cauliflower,
kohlrabi,
cabbage)
0.1
6
7
0.6
1
Leafy
Brassica
(
includes
broccoli
Raab,
Chinese
cabagge,
collards,
kale,
mustard
greens,
mustard
spinach,
canola)
0.1
4
7
0.4
1
(
1).
Data
obtained
from
label
for
Ammo
2.5
EC
(
EPA
Reg.
No.
279­
3027)
(
2)
PHI.
Pre­
harvest
interval
is
the
minimum
number
of
days
which
the
pesticide
can
be
applied
prior
to
harvest.
(
3)
Not
provided
on
the
label;
estimated
from
use
pattern
data
(
4)
Not
provided
on
the
label.

The
dominant
agricultural
use
of
cypermethrin
in
the
United
States
is
related
to
its
use
in
pest
management
of
cotton
crops
(
80%
of
the
total
cypermethrin
use),
with
lesser
amounts
used
for
lettuce
(
11%),
pecans
(
5%)
and
onions
(
4.8%).
The
crop
use
patterns
maps
in
the
United
States
obtained
from
the
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Use
Policy
Pesticide
Use
Database
are
provided
in
Appendix
L.
[
Note:
Due
to
the
clarity
of
the
data
included
in
Appendix
L,
selected
figures
(
Figures
L­
2
to
L­
5),
were
brought
forward,
and
are
shown
at
the
end
of
this
section.]
­
22­
The
1997
estimated
annual
use
of
cypermethrin
on
all
crops
in
the
United
States,
obtained
from
the
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy
National
Pesticide
Use
Database
(
NCFAP
2005)
summarized
by
state,
are
provided
in
Figure
L­
1,
along
with
a
list
of
crop
use
patterns
(
see
Appendix
L).
The
highest
total
application
of
cypermethrin
was
in
the
state
of
Georgia
for
1997
(
37%
of
national
use).
The
1997
estimated
annual
application
rate
of
cypermethrin
on
all
crops
summarized
by
county
is
shown
in
Figure
L­
2,
along
with
a
list
of
crop
use
patterns.
It
provides
similar
information
to
that
included
in
Figure
L­
1,
but
in
another
format.
Greatest
application
rates
were
in
the
following
regions;
Upper
Coastal
Plain
of
Georgia,
Inner
Coastal
Plain
of
North
Carolina,
Mississippi
Valley,
and
the
central
coast
of
California.

Cotton
An
individual
map
of
cypermethrin's
use
for
cotton
crop
is
shown
in
Figure
L­
3
(
presented
at
the
end
of
this
section).
This
map
also
illustrates
the
PRZM
model
scenarios
used
in
the
surface
water
exposure
assessments
as
well
as
the
NAWQA
surface
water
stations
throughout
the
country.
Cypermethrin
use
on
cotton
is
greatest
in
the
state
of
Georgia.
Cotton
harvest
data
by
county
for
1997
for
the
United
States
were
obtained
from
the
National
Agricultural
Statistics
Service
(
NASS)
and
are
shown
in
Figure
L­
6
(
Appendix
L).
Use
of
cypermethrin
on
cotton
in
1997
by
county
where
harvested
is
shown
in
Figure
L­
7
(
Appendix
L).
The
greatest
application
of
cypermethrin
on
cotton
was
in
the
Upper
Coastal
Plain
region
of
Georgia;
other
regions
of
high
cypermethrin
application
include
the
South
Atlantic
Inner
Coastal
Plain,
Mississippi
Valley,
North
Texas
Plains,
and
the
Central
Valley
of
California.

The
timing
of
cypermethrin
applications
varies
from
crop
to
crop
based
on
planting
date,
harvesting
schedule,
crop
maturity
date,
insect
pressure
and
the
type
of
insects
to
be
controlled.
Cotton
crops
are
usually
planted
in
the
early
spring
and
cypermethrin
is
frequently
employed
in
order
to
control
cotton
bollworm
and
tobacco
budworm,
which
may
begin
to
infest
the
crop
before
the
first
bloom.
Treatment
is
advised
when
15
small
larvae
are
found
per
100
plant
terminals,
or
20%
of
squares
are
damaged
(
Roof
2004).
More
often
damage
is
noted
following
the
first
bloom
(
usually
occurring
in
early
to
mid
summer
depending
upon
planting
date).
It
is
advised
that
pyrethroid
insecticides
such
as
cypermethrin
not
be
used
on
cotton
prior
to
July
1
unless
infestations
are
high,
to
reduce
selection
pressure
for
resistance
in
tobacco
budworm
and
cotton
bollworm
(
Roof
2004).

Lettuce
An
individual
map
of
cypermethrin's
use
for
lettuce
crop
is
shown
in
Figure
L­
4
(
presented
at
the
end
of
this
section).
This
map
also
illustrates
the
PRZM
model
scenario
used
in
the
surface
water
exposure
assessment
as
well
as
the
NAWQA
surface
water
stations
throughout
the
country.
Cypermethrin
use
on
lettuce
is
greatest
in
the
state
of
California.
In
coastal
southern
California,
lettuce
is
a
year­
round
crop,
so
the
application
of
cypermethrin
can
vary.
The
major
production
areas
for
iceberg
(
crisphead)
lettuce
(
Lactuca
sativa)
in
California
are
the
central
coast
(
Monterey,
San
Luis
Obispo,
San
Benito,
Contra
Costa,
and
Santa
Clara
Counties),
the
southern
coast
(
Santa
Barbara
and
Ventura
Counties),
the
Central
Valley
(
Fresno,
Kings,
and
Kern
Counties),
and
the
southern
deserts
(
Imperial
and
Riverside
Counties)
(
Jackson
et.
al.
1996).
Production
is
highest
in
Monterey
County,
followed
by
Imperial
County.
Planting
to
harvest
typically
requires
70
to
80
days
for
midsummer
planting
and
up
to130
days
for
late­
fall
planting.
Lettuce
is
a
cool­
season
­
23­
crop
with
certain
temperature
requirements.
The
optimal
growing
temperatures
are
73
/

F
(
23
/

C)
during
the
day
and
45
/

F
(
7
/

C)
at
night.
Most
California
lettuce
growing
regions
have
daytime
temperatures
that
range
from
63
/

to
83
/

F
(
17
/

to
28
/

C)
and
night
temperatures
that
range
from
37
/

to
53
/

F
(
3
/

to
12
/

C).
At
the
high
end
of
the
temperature
range,
lettuce
may
bolt,
causing
bitterness
and
loose,
fluffy
heads,
and
tipburn
is
also
common.
At
temperatures
near
freezing,
young
plants
are
not
damaged,
but
growth
is
stunted.
Freezing
can
damage
the
outer
leaves
of
mature
lettuce,
leading
to
decay
in
handling
(
Jackson
et.
al.
1996).

Pecan
An
individual
map
of
cypermethrin's
use
for
pecan
crop
is
shown
in
Figure
L­
5
(
presented
at
the
end
of
this
section).
This
map
also
illustrates
the
PRZM
model
scenario
used
in
the
surface
water
exposure
assessments
as
well
as
the
NAWQA
surface
water
stations
throughout
the
country.
Cypermethrin
use
pecans
is
greatest
in
the
state
of
Georgia.
Aphids,
mites
and
shuckworms
are
common
pests
for
pecan
crops.
Hickory
shuckworms
are
present
throughout
the
season,
but
damaging
numbers
usually
do
not
occur
until
June
or
later
(
Gorsuch
2003).
Georgia
pecans
become
mature
in
October
and
are
harvested
from
October
through
December.
Applying
cypermethrin
too
early
in
the
season
may
kill
beneficial
insects
such
as
lady
beetles
and
lacewings
which
suppress
mites
and
aphids.
Therefore,
applications
early
in
the
season
should
be
avoided.
Pecan
aphids
have
been
shown
to
become
resistant
to
pyrethroids
very
rapidly.
It
is
suggested
that
pyrethroids
be
used:
(
1)
only
late
in
the
season
(
to
lessen
the
number
of
aphid
generations
exposed);
(
2)
only
if
other
materials
fail
to
adequately
suppress
aphids
or
other
pests;
(
3)
in
combination
with
an
organophosphate
material;
(
4)
in
no
more
than
two
consecutive
sprays;
and
(
5)
not
after
the
third
week
of
September
(
Gorsuch
2003).
­
24­
Figure
L­
2:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
All
Crops
Caution:
The
pesticide
use
maps
available
from
this
site
show
regional­
scale
patterns
of
use
intensity
within
the
United
States
and
are
not
intended
for
making
local­
scale
estimates
of
pesticide
use,
such
as
for
individual
counties.
The
maps
are
based
state­
level
estimates
of
pesticide
use
rates
for
individual
crops,
which
have
been
compiled
by
the
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy
(
NCFAP)
for
1995­
1998,
and
on
1997
Census
of
Agriculture
county
crop
acreage.
Key
limitations
include:
(
1)
state
use­
coefficients
represent
an
average
for
the
entire
state
and
consequently
do
not
reflect
the
local
variability
of
pesticide
management
practices
found
within
many
states
and
counties,
and
(
2)
the
county­
level
acreage
are
based
on
the
1997
Census
of
Agriculture
and
may
not
represent
all
crop
acreage
due
to
Census
non­
disclosure
rules.
Please
refer
to
Method
for
Estimating
Pesticide
Use
for
a
detailed
discussion
of
how
the
pesticide
use
data
were
developed.
http://
ca.
water.
usgs.
gov/
cgi­
bin/
pnsp/
pesticide_
use_
maps_
1997.
pl?
map=
W6011
­
25­
Figure
L­
3:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Cotton
­
26­
Figure
L­
4:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Lettuce
­
27­
Figure
L­
5:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Pecan
­
28­
B.
Exposure
Characterization
The
chemical
and
physical,
and
environmental
fate
properties
of
cypermethrin
are
summarized
in
Table
5.

Table
5.
Physical
and
Chemical
and
Environmental
Fate
Properties
of
Cypermethrin.

Property
Value
Reference
Molecular
weight
416.3
Laskowski
(
2002)

SMILES
notation
ClC(
Cl)=
CC1C(
C)(
C)
C1C(=
O)
OC(
C#
N)
c2cccc(
Oc3ccccc3)
c2
CAS
number
52315­
07­
8
Laskowski
(
2002)

Water
solubility
4.0x10­
3
mg/
L
Laskowski
(
2002)

Melting
point
78­
81
oC
Tomlin
1994
Boiling
point
200
oC
at
9.3
Pa
Tomlin
1994
Vapor
pressure
2.5x10­
9
mm
Hg
Laskowski
(
2002)

log
Kow
6.54
Laskowski
(
2002)

Henry's
Law
constant
3.4x10­
7
atm­
m3/
mol
Laskowski
(
2002)

Hydrolysis
half­
life:
pH
5
pH
7
pH
9
stable
stable
1.8
and
2.5
days
cis/
trans­
DCVA
(
max.
79%
at
120
hr)
and
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde
(
max.
65%
at
120
hr)
MRID
42620501
Aqueous
photolysis
half­
life
36.2
days
3­
PBA
(
max.
35%
at
35
days)
MRID
42395701
Soil
photolysis
half­
life
sandy
loam
55
days
cyperamide
(
steadily
increased
to
a
max.
of
13.3%)
MRID
42129001
Aerobic
soil
metabolism
half­
life
60.7
days
59.8
days
cis/
trans­
DCVA
(
max.
24%
at
62
days,
study
duration
150
days)
MRID
42156601
Anaerobic
soil
metabolism
half­
life
53.3
days
63
days
cis/
trans­
DCVA
(
max.
33%
30
days
after
flooding),
3­
PBA
(
max.
26%
at
60
days
after
flooding
or
end
of
study)
MRID
42156602
Table
5.
Physical
and
Chemical
and
Environmental
Fate
Properties
of
Cypermethrin.

Property
Value
Reference
­
29­
Aerobic
aquatic
half­
life
8.9
days
10.1
days
trans­
DCVA
(
max.
49%
at
30
days),
cis­
DCVA
(
max.
19%
at
30
days),
3­
PBA
(
max.
42%
at
30
days);
study
duration,
90
or
183
days.
MRID
45920801
Anaerobic
aquatic
half­
life
13.8
days
16.5
days
DCVA
(
max.
34%
at
71
days)
MRID
44876105
Adsorption
coefficient
Koc
(
L/
Kg)

­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­
Aged
Column
Leaching
Study
328,500
(
Sand)
134,900
(
Sandy
loam)
82,600
(
Silty
loam)
20,800
(
Clay
loam)
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
Degradate
cis/
trans­
DCVA
found
at
up
to
13.2%
in
the
leachate
MRID
42129003
­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­
­
MRID
42129002
Bioconcentration
factor
(
BCF)
161X
edible
portion
448X
whole
fish
883X
non­
edible
moderately
slow
depuration,
with
10­
15%
of
residues
remaining
after
21
days
of
depuration
MRID
42868203
1.
Environmental
Fate
and
Transport
Characterization
The
environmental
fate
data
for
cypermethrin
was
developed
mostly
with
studies
on
cypermethrin;
however,
some
studies
were
conducted
on
zeta­
cypermethrin.
Both,
cypermethrin
and
zeta­
Cypermethrin
are
expected
to
have
similar
fate
in
the
environment.

a.
Summary
of
Empirical
Data
Laboratory
studies
have
indicated
that
cypermethrin
degrades
through
a
combination
of
biotic
and
abiotic
reactions
and
is
moderately
persistent
in
the
environment.
Under
acidic
and
neutral
conditions
this
compound
is
relatively
stable,
but
is
readily
hydrolyzed
under
alkaline
conditions
with
a
half­
life
of
approximately
2
days
at
pH
9.
Cypermethrin
is
relatively
stable
to
photolysis
in
laboratory
studies
using
distilled
water
at
pH
7,
with
a
half­
life
of
approximately
36
days.
Cypermethrin
has
been
shown
to
biodegrade
in
aerobic
and
anaerobic
soils
with
half­
lives
on
the
order
of
about
2
months
and
in
aerobic
and
anaerobic
aquatic
systems
with
half­
lives
on
the
order
of
one
to
two
weeks.
Cypermethrin
is
considered
immobile
in
soils
and
its
potential
to
leach
into
groundwater
is
low.
If
released
to
water,
cypermethrin
will
rapidly
partition
to
the
sediment
compartment
which
acts
as
an
environmental
sink
for
this
compound.
Cypermethrin
­
30­
bioaccumulates
moderately
in
fish
(
448X
in
whole
fish),
with
moderate
depuration.
Besides
carbon
dioxide,
important
transformation
products
observed
in
laboratory
studies
included
trans­
DCVA,
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde,
3­
PBA,
and
3­
cyperamide.
Except
for
cyperamide,
these
transformation
products
result
from
the
cleavage
at
the
ester
moiety
of
cypermethrin.
They
do
not
retain
the
basic
structure
of
the
parent.
Cyperamide
was
observed
in
the
lower
end
of
the
concentrations
for
which
EFED
requires
identification
(
max.
13.3%,
only
in
the
soil
photolysis
study).
In
terrestrial
field
dissipation
studies
cypermethrin
does
not
appear
to
be
very
persistent
in
soils
or
leach
substantially
(
half­
lives
1­
2
weeks).
In
supplemental
aquatic
field
dissipation
studies
(
zeta­
cypermethrin),
the
chemical
appears
to
persist
in
the
sediment,
with
reported
half­
lives
of
126
and
181
days
in
LA
and
CA,
respectively.

b.
Degradation
and
Metabolism
Cypermethrin
labeled
with
14C
at
the
cyclopropyl
and
benzyl
moieties
was
relatively
stable
at
pH
5
and
7
buffered
solutions,
but
degraded
rapidly
with
half­
lives
of
approximately
2
days
in
pH
9
solutions.
The
major
degradation
products
of
the
base
catalyzed
hydrolysis
of
cypermethrin
were
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA
(
maximum
79%
at
120
hours
or
study
duration)
and
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde
(
maximum
65%
at
120
hours).
Photolysis
of
cypermethrin
in
distilled
water
occurs
slowly,
but
the
rate
of
degradation
appears
to
be
enhanced
in
natural
waters,
which
contain
humic
and
fulvic
acids.
A
photolysis
half­
life
of
36
days
was
observed
for
cypermethrin
in
pH
7
aqueous
buffered
solution
exposed
to
sunlight
in
California
from
March
to
April.
Shorter
half­
lives
on
the
order
of
less
than
1
to
4
days
were
observed
for
cypermethrin
dissolved
in
river
water,
seawater
and
distilled
water
with
1%
humic
acid
exposed
to
sunlight
(
Takahashi
et
al.
1985).
The
half­
life
for
thin
films
of
cypermethrin
in
a
sandy
loam
soil
matrix
was
approximately
55
days;
however,
degradation
was
also
observed
in
control
samples
and
the
dark
control
corrected
half­
life
is
over
100
days.
The
only
transformation
product
observed
was
cyperamide,
at
13.3%
at
the
end
of
the
study
(
35
days).
Cypermethrin
degraded
with
a
half­
life
of
approximately
60
days
in
a
fine
sandy
loam
soil
maintained
at
25
oC
and
held
under
aerobic
conditions.
Carbon
dioxide
and
a
mixture
of
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA
(
maximum
24%
at
62
days
in
a
150
day
study)
were
the
major
degradation
products.

Under
aquatic
conditions,
zeta­
cypermethrin
degraded
more
rapidly
(
8.9­
10.1
days
in
a
supplemental
aerobic
aquatic
study
and
13.8­
16.5
days
in
an
anaerobic
aquatic
study).
Degradation
products
under
aerobic
aquatic
conditions
included
trans­
DCVA
(
max.
49%
at
30
days),
cis­
DCVA
(
max.
19%
at
30
days)
and
3­
PBA
(
max.
42%
at
30
days,
study
duration
183
days).
Under
anaerobic
conditions,
the
only
degradation
product
was
DCVA
at
34%
at
71
days
(
study
duration
90
days
for
benzyl
label
and
183
days
for
cyclopropyl
label).

c.
Transport
and
Mobility
Cypermethrin
is
considered
immobile
in
soil.
Soil
organic
carbon
adsorption
coefficients
(
K
oc
)
for
cypermethrin
ranged
from
approximately
21,000
to
385,000
L/
Kg
in
four
soils
(
sand,
sandy
loam,
silty
loam
and
clay).
If
released
into
water,
cypermethrin
rapidly
partitions
to
the
sediment
column.
The
tendency
to
adsorb
to
soil
and
sediment
along
with
the
relatively
low
vapor
pressure
(
2.5x10­
9
mm
Hg)
and
Henry's
law
constant
(
3.4x10­
7
atm­
m3/
mol),
indicates
that
­
31­
volatilization
from
water
and
soil
will
not
be
an
important
transport
process.
It
can
be
concluded
that
the
cypermethrin
degradates
3­
PBA
and
trans­
DCVA
have
a
high
potential
for
mobility
as
they
were
weakly
sorbed
to
four
soils
tested.
3­
PBA
was
slightly
more
sorbed
(
K
oc
values
ranging
from
118
to
215)
to
the
tested
soils
than
was
trans­
DCVA
(
K
oc
values
ranging
from
18
to
48).

d.
Bioaccumulation
Cypermethrin
shows
a
high
potential
for
bioaccumulation
in
fish,
with
maximum
BCFs
of
161X
for
edible
tissue,
833X
for
viscera,
and
444X
for
whole
fish
(
for
the
cyclopropyl
label)
at
28
day
(
last
day
of
the
study).
A
steady
state
may
not
have
been
reached
after
the
study
duration,
therefore,
the
BCFs
may
be
underestimated.
Depuration
appeared
to
be
moderately
slow,
with
near
10­
15%
of
the
initial
residues
remaining
after
21
days.

e.
Field
Studies
Terrestrial
field
dissipation
studies
conducted
in
Madera,
CA
and
Cheneyville,
LA
indicated
that
the
field
dissipation
half­
life
of
cypermethrin
is
approximately1
to
2
weeks.

Cypermethrin
in
the
form
of
Ammo
2.5
EC
was
applied
three
times
at
0.2
lb
ai/
acre/
application
to
a
bare
silt
loam
soil
(
78­
82%
sand,
14­
20%
silt,
2­
4%
clay,
0.2­
0.6%
OM,
pH
6.5­
7.2)
located
in
Madera,
California
and
soil
samples
were
analyzed
for
cypermethrin
and
potential
degradates
cis­
DCVA,
trans­
DCVA,
and
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid.
Cypermethrin
was
detected
in
3­
6"
cores
collected
immediately
after
each
application
(
18,
8,
and
33
µ
g/
kg),
and
on
day
2
(
20
µ
g/
kg)
and
day
4
(
29
µ
g/
kg)
following
the
third
application.
Cypermethrin
was
detected
at
10
µ
g/
kg
in
one
6­
12"
core
collected
2
days
after
the
final
application,
but
it
was
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
soil
cores
collected
below
this
depth.
The
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
was
detected
in
0­
3"
cores
collected
immediately
after
the
second
application
(
8
µ
g/
kg),
immediately
after
the
third
application
(
17
µ
g/
kg),
and
the
following
days
after
the
third
application:
day
2
(
25
µ
g/
kg),
day
4
(
32
µ
g/
kg),
day
7
(
25
µ
g/
kg),
day
14
(
24
µ
g/
kg),
day
21
(
8
µ
g/
kg),
and
day
28
(
7
µ
g/
kg).
It
was
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
soil
cores
collected
below
3
inches.
Potential
degradates
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA
were
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
of
the
soil
cores.
An
analysis
of
the
cypermethrin
concentration
as
a
function
of
time
yielded
a
field
dissipation
half­
life
of
13
days.

Cypermethrin
in
the
form
of
Ammo
2.5
EC
was
applied
three
times
at
0.2
lb
ai/
acre/
application
to
a
bare
loamy
sand
soil
(
30%
sand,
64%
silt,
6%
clay,
0.7%
OM,
pH
7.0)
located
in
Cheneyville,
LA.
The
soil
cores
were
analyzed
for
cypermethrin
and
potential
degradates
cis­
DCVA,
trans­
DCVA,
and
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid.
Based
upon
dissipation
in
the
top
0­
3"
soil
cores,
the
dissipation
half­
life
for
cypermethrin
was
5
days.
Cypermethrin
was
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
cores
collected
below
3
inches.
The
degradate
trans­
DCVA
was
detected
in
0­
3"
cores
collected
on
the
following
days
after
the
third
application:
day
2
(
16
µ
g/
kg)
and
day
7
(
8
µ
g/
kg).
The
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
was
detected
in
0­
3"
cores
collected
immediately
after
the
second
application
(
10
µ
g/
kg),
immediately
after
the
third
application
(
20
µ
g/
kg),
and
2
days
after
the
3rd
application
(
44
µ
g/
kg).
The
degradate
cis­
DCVA
was
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
of
the
soil
cores.
­
32­
None
of
the
analytes
were
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
of
the
soil
cores
collected
below
3
inches.

Cypermethrin
is
not
used
in
aquatic
sites;
however,
there
are
two
supplemental
studies
conducted
with
zeta­
cypermethrin
in
California
and
Louisiana.
The
half­
lives
were
181
days
and
126
days,
respectively.
These
half­
lives
are
not
similar
to
those
observed
in
the
laboratory
studies.
Nevertheless,
the
reported
half­
lives
included
the
sediments
only.
­
33­
Figure
2.
Cypermethrin
and
its
Degradation
Products
O
CN
O
O
Cl
Cl
COOH
Cl
Cl
DCVA
O
COOH
O
CHO
Cypermethrin
3­
Phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
3­
PBA
or
m­
PBA)

3­
Phenoxybenzaldehyde
O
C
O
O
Cl
Cl
O
NH2
Cyperamide
­
34­
2.
Measures
of
Aquatic
Exposure
a.
Aquatic
Exposure
Modeling
Estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
of
cypermethrin
in
surface
water
were
calculated
using
the
Tier
II
aquatic
model
PRZM/
EXAMS.
Certain
subroutines
of
the
graphical
interface
(
shell,
pe4),
enabled
the
determination
of
the
pore
water
concentrations
and
the
sediment
concentrations.
The
levels
of
spray
drift
corresponding
to
the
buffer
zones
imposed
by
the
labels
were
obtained
from
AgDRIFT
®
.

The
Tier
II
approach
employs
PRZM
(
Pesticide
Root
Zone
Model;
version
3.12
Beta
compiled
May
24,
2001)
and
EXAMS
(
Exposure
Analysis
Modeling
System;
version
2.98.04
compiled
November
12,
2002).
PRZM
simulates
runoff
and
erosion
from
an
agricultural
field
on
a
daily
time
step.
The
runoff
and
erosion
flux
output
data
from
PRZM
are
used
as
chemical
loadings
to
the
EXAMS
surface
water
program
in
order
to
predict
the
EECs.
A
graphical
user
interface
(
pe4v01.
pl)
developed
by
the
EPA
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
oppefed1/
models/
water)
was
used
to
facilitate
inputting
chemical
and
use
specific
parameters
into
the
appropriate
PRZM
input
files
(
inp)
and
EXAMS
chemical
files.
The
"
write
benthic
pore
water
concentrations"
and
"
write
benthic
sediment
file"
instructions
of
the
interface
were
activated
to
obtain
the
pore
water
concentrations
and
the
sediment
concentrations.
EXAMS
is
a
model
that
has
a
set
of
process
modules
that
link
fundamental
chemical
properties
to
limnological
processes
that
control
the
kinetics
and
transport
of
chemicals
in
aquatic
systems.
It
provides
facilities
for
steady
state
or
long­
term
evaluation
of
chronic
chemical
discharges,
initial­
value
approaches
for
studying
shortterm
contaminant
releases,
and
full
kinetic
simulations
that
allow
for
monthly
variation
in
mean
climatological
factors,
and
changes
in
contaminant
loadings
on
daily
time
scales.
It
is
fairly
and
relatively
complex
model
that
requires
more
input
variables,
ranging
from
hydro­
geological
and
weather
data
to
pesticide
physicochemical
properties,
mobility
coefficients,
and
degradation
rate
constants
in
the
aqueous
and
sediment
phases.

The
label
of
cypermethrin
requires
the
following
buffer
zones:
25
ft
for
ground
applications;
150
ft
for
aerial
applications;
and
450
ft
for
ultra
low
volume
(
ULV)
aircraft
application.
A
vegetative
filter
strip
is
also
required
(
10
ft)
to
protect
any
aquatic
area
from
runoff.
For
aerial
applications,
spray
should
be
released
at
the
lowest
height
consistent
with
adequate
pest
control
and
flight
safety.
Applications
more
than
10
ft
above
the
crop
canopy
are
discouraged.
Formation
of
very
small
droplets
may
be
minimized
by
appropriate
nozzle
selection,
by
orientating
nozzles
away
from
the
air
stream
as
much
as
possible,
and
avoiding
excessive
boom
pressure.
The
labels
for
cypermethrin
recommend
that
the
boom
(
release)
height
be
#
10
ft
and
the
wind
speed
during
application
favors
on
target
product
deposition
(
recommended
wind
speed
3­
10
mph,
but
do
not
apply
when
wind
speed
exceeds
15
mph).

The
spray
drift
program
AgDRIFT
®
was
employed
in
the
Tier
I
mode
to
refine
the
drift
estimate
in
order
to
accommodate
the
label
requirements
of
cypermethrin.
The
default
value
of
spray
drift
assigned
for
aerial
applications
is
5%.
Using
the
model,
a
spray
drift
value
of
3.9%
was
obtained
in
the
Tier
I
mode,
using
a
buffer
zone
of
150
ft.
This
assumption
in
AgDRIFT
®
is
appropriate
if
the
meteorology
of
the
growing
area
is
consistent
with
a
wind
speed
of
#
10
mph.
­
35­
The
wind
speeds
of
Jackson,
MS
(
representative
of
the
MS
cotton
scenario),
Wilmington,
NC
(
representative
of
the
NC
cotton
scenario),
Bakersfield,
CA
(
representative
of
the
CA
cotton
scenario),
Austin
and
Lubbock,
TX,
(
representative
of
the
TX
cotton
scenario)
and
Macon
GA
(
representative
of
the
GA
pecans
scenario)
were
analyzed
using
the
AgDRIFT
®
database
(
which
contains
data
of
numerous
weather
stations
in
the
nation).
In
each
case,
the
75th
percentile
of
the
average
wind
speed
is
below
10
mph
during
the
application
period
(
late
Summer)
and
the
assumption
that
the
wind
speed
will
be
at
or
below
10
mph
is
generally
justified
for
the
selected
crop
scenarios.
On
the
other
hand,
California
lettuce
is
grown
in
several
areas
of
the
state,
with
the
heavier
growth
in
Monterey,
San
Luis
Obispo
and
Santa
Barbara
counties.
All
three
of
these
counties
are
coastal
regions
with
varying
wind
speeds
throughout
the
year.
Data
from
surrogate
weather
stations
located
in
San
Francisco
(
close
to
Monterey,
to
the
North)
and
Los
Angeles
(
close
to
Santa
Barbara)
indicate
that
the
assumption
that
wind
speeds
are
usually
below
10
mph
during
the
application
period
may
be
inaccurate.
Therefore,
the
assumption
of
a
level
of
spray
drift
of
3.9%
for
the
California
lettuce
scenario
may
not
be
too
conservative.
This
brings
an
uncertainty
to
the
level
of
spray
drift
only
for
the
California
lettuce
scenario.

The
GA
pecans
are
different
in
that
they
are
representative
of
ground
applications.
Applications
to
pecans
are
done
usually
by
airblast.
The
Tier
1
Airblast
mode
of
AgDRIFT
®
was
used
to
determine
the
level
of
spray
drift.
The
vegetation
type
selected
was
"
Dense
(
Citrus,
Tall
Trees)."
This
composite
orchard
combines
almonds,
oranges,
grapefruit,
small
grapefruit
(
mist
blower),
and
pecans.
The
level
of
spray
drift
was
obtained
for
25
ft
buffer
zone,
using
the
"
Toolbox"
Aquatic
Assessment,
it
was
multiplied
by
3,
as
per
current
guidelines,
to
obtain
an
approximation
of
the
90th
percentile
value
[(
0.0074)(
3)
=
0.0222
=
2.22%
spray
drift].
Since
pecans
can
be
very
tall
trees,
to
characterize
the
upperbound
levels
of
spray
drift
that
might
be
found
in
the
field,
the
vegetation
type
"
Sparse
(
Young,
Dormant)"
was
also
calculated.
It
involves
the
most
conservative
scenario
for
airblast
applications.
For
a
buffer
zone
of
25
ft,
the
level
of
spray
drift
was
4.5%.
This
level
of
spray
drift
would
be
expected
on
pecans
only
under
exceptionally
conservative
conditions.

The
application
rates
and
other
use
data
for
cypermethrin
applied
to
cotton,
pecans
and
lettuce
are
presented
in
Table
6a.
Input
parameters
for
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
modeling
are
listed
in
Table
6b.
They
were
selected
according
to
current
guidelines
for
the
selection
of
input
parameters,
except
for
the
levels
of
spray
drift,
which
were
obtained
as
explained
in
the
previous
paragraphs.

Table
6a.
Use
Patterns
of
Cypermethrin
for
Cotton,
Pecans
and
Lettuce.
a
Crop
or
Crop
Group
Maximum
Single
Application
Rate
(
lb
a.
i./
A)
Maximum
Number
of
Applications
Minimum
Application
Interval
(
days)
Maximum
Application
Rate
per
Season
(
lb
a.
i./
A/
season)

Cotton
0.1
6
3
0.6
Pecans
0.1
6
5
b
0.6
Lettuce,
head
0.1
6
7
0.6
Table
6a.
Use
Patterns
of
Cypermethrin
for
Cotton,
Pecans
and
Lettuce.
a
­
36­
a
Data
obtained
from
label
for
Ammo
2.5
EC
(
EPA
Reg.
No.
279­
3027)
b
Not
specified
on
any
active
labels,
but
surmised
from
use
information
data.

Table
6b.
PRZM/
EXAMS
Inputs
for
Cypermethrin.

PARAMETER
VALUE
SOURCE
Application
date
Cotton
July
1st
Lettuce
August
1st
Pecans
August
1st
Crop
specific
a
Aerobic
soil
metabolism
half­
life
62
days
MRID
42156601
(
90%
C.
L.
on
the
mean,
n
=
2
observations)

Koc
141,700
MRID
42129003
(
mean
value,
n=
4)

Henry's
Law
Constant
3.4x10­
7
atm­
m3/
mol
Laskowski
(
2002)

Aerobic
aquatic
metabolism
11.3
days
MRID
45920801
(
90%
C.
L.
on
the
mean,
n
=
2
observations)

Anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
19.3
days
MRID
44876105
(
90%
C.
L.
on
the
mean,
n
=
2
observations)

Aqueous
photolysis
half­
life
36.2
days
MRID
42395701
Hydrolysis
half­
life
(
days)
pH
5
pH
7
pH
9
stable
stable
1.90
MRID
42620501
Molecular
weight
416.3
Laskowski
(
2002)

Solubility
(
WSOL)
0.04
ppm
Laskowski
(
2002)
(
solubility
x
10)

Vapor
pressure
(
VP)
2.5x10­
9
Laskowski
(
2002)

PLDKRT
(
foliage
pesticide
rate
constant)
0.13
days­
1
Willis
and
McDowell
(
1987)

FEXTRC
(
foliar
extraction)
0.5
EFED
Model
Input
Guidance,
Version
II
(
2002)

FILTRA
(
filtration
parameter;
required
if
CAM
set
to
3)
NA
­­

CAM
(
chemical
application
method)
2
Reflects
foliar
application
IPSCND
1
Surface
Applied
Table
6b.
PRZM/
EXAMS
Inputs
for
Cypermethrin.

PARAMETER
VALUE
SOURCE
­
37­
Application
efficiency
(
fraction)
0.99
for
pecans
0.95
for
other
crops
EFED
Model
Input
Guidance,
Version
II
(
2002)

Spray
drift
(
fraction)
0.022
for
pecans
0.039
for
other
crops
Calculated
with
AgDRIFT
®
(
Tier
1):
pecans
is
applied
by
ground
(
airblast)
with
a
buffer
zone
of
25
ft,
other
crops
aerially
with
a
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
a
See
overview
of
pesticide
use
section
for
more
information
For
cotton,
a
starting
application
date
of
July
1st
was
chosen
based
on
the
crop
emergence
dates
given
in
Tables
5­
9
of
the
PRZM
manual
and
the
recommendation
that
pyrethroid
insecticides
not
be
used
on
cotton
prior
to
July
1
unless
infestations
are
high,
to
reduce
selection
pressure
for
resistance
in
tobacco
budworm
and
cotton
bollworm.

Lettuce
is
a
year­
round
crop
in
California,
so
the
application
timing
of
cypermethrin
can
vary
(
Jackson
et
al.
1996).
In
the
southern
desert
areas,
iceberg
lettuce
is
planted
from
mid­
September
to
mid­
November
and
the
harvest
occurs
from
early
December
to
January
and
February.
In
the
lettuce­
growing
areas
of
the
central
coast,
where
temperatures
are
fairly
uniform
year­
round,
lettuce
is
planted
from
late
December
to
mid­
August
for
harvest
from
early
April
to
November.
Southern
coastal
areas
have
planting
dates
from
November
to
August
for
harvest
from
April
to
December.
In
the
Central
Valley,
iceberg
lettuce
is
planted
from
early
August
to
early
September
for
harvest
from
late
October
to
mid­
November.
Other
planting
are
made
from
early
November
to
late
December
for
harvest
in
April.
For
a
midsummer
planting,
the
harvest
usually
begins
70­
80
days
later.
One
advantage
of
winter
or
spring
lettuce
is
that
insect
pressure
is
generally
low,
minimizing
the
need
for
pesticide
applications.

Pecan
aphids
have
been
shown
to
become
resistant
to
pyrethroids
very
rapidly
and
it
is
suggested
that
pyrethroids
be
used
only
in
late
season
to
lessen
the
number
of
aphid
generations
exposed
(
Gorsuch
2003).
The
harvest
date
of
pecans
in
Georgia
begins
in
October.
To
accommodate
the
21
day
pre­
harvest
interval
for
cypermethrin
a
starting
application
date
of
August
1
was
selected.

Output
from
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
simulation
is
typically
a
series
of
estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
corresponding
to
multiple
years
of
meteorological
data.
Each
value
is
an
estimate
of
the
peak
concentrations
corresponding
to
a
specific
averaging
time
(
e.
g.,
96
hours,
21
days,
etc.).

The
raw
output
files
generated
by
PRZM/
EXAMS
are
summarized
in
Appendix
B.
Output
values
for
each
of
the
crop
scenarios
are
described
below.
­
38­
Cotton
There
are
three
QCed
PRZM
scenarios
for
cotton
crop
usage
:
California,
Mississippi
and
North
Carolina.
The
Texas
scenario
is
not
a
standard
scenario,
but
was
utilized
in
this
assessment
because
of
the
high
usage
of
cotton
of
this
chemical.
Each
of
these
were
modeled
using
the
same
application
rates
and
use
patterns
shown
in
Table
4
and
Table
6a.
The
California
scenario
is
based
on
data
from
Fresno
County
in
the
Central
Valley
region
using
a
Twisselman
clay
as
the
representative
soil
for
this
region.
This
soil
is
a
fine,
mixed,
calcareous,
thermic
Typic
Torriorthents
of
hydrologic
group
C.
The
Mississippi
scenario
arises
from
Yazoo
County
and
uses
a
Loring
silt
loam
as
the
representative
soil.
Loring
silt
loam
is
a
fine­
silty,
mixed,
active,
thermic,
Qxyaquic
Fragiudalfs
of
hydrologic
group
C.
The
representative
soil
in
the
North
Carolina
PRZM
scenario
is
a
Boswell
fine
sandy
loam
of
hydrologic
group
D,
characteristic
of
the
Piedmont/
Coastal
Plain
region.
The
soil
selected
to
simulate
the
Texas
scenario
is
a
Crockett
fine
sandy
loam.
Crockett
fine
sandy
loam
is
a
fine,
smectitic,
thermic
Udertic
Paleustalfs
of
hydrologic
group
C.

Since
cotton
growth
requires
a
relatively
long
period
of
warm
temperatures
(
190­
210
days
at
temperatures
of
60
°
F
and
above),
it
is
typically
planted
in
the
spring
with
crop
maturity
occurring
roughly
4
months
after
the
planting
date.
While
late
season
planting
can
occur
up
to
June
in
many
southern
states,
it
is
not
advisable
to
begin
planting
after
mid
May
because
of
the
steep
decline
in
yield
(
the
best
yields
usually
occur
with
early
season
planting,
optimal
soil
temperature
and
moisture
and
air
temperature).
Harvest
typically
occurs
from
September
1
through
December.
It
is
advisable
to
avoid
applying
pyrethroid
insecticides
on
cotton
crops
prior
to
July
1
unless
infestations
are
high,
in
order
to
avoid
insect
resistance
later
in
the
season
(
Roof
2004).

The
EECs
in
surface
water,
pore
water
and
sediment
for
the
cotton
use
scenarios
are
shown
in
Table
7.
­
39­
Table
7.
Cypermethrin
Surface
Water,
Pore
Water
and
Sediment
EECs
Obtained
from
PRZM/
EXAMS
COTTON
Crop
Use.
a
Site
Peak
21
day
60
day
90
day
Surface
Water
(
ug/
L)

California
0.178
0.055
0.022
0.015
Mississippi
1.28
0.188
0.102
0.072
North
Carolina
2.01
0.192
0.101
0.076
Texas
0.493
0.060
0.030
0.022
Pore
Water
(
ug/
L)

California
0.0044
0.0036
0.0024
0.0018
Mississippi
0.0280
0.0238
0.0164
0.0125
North
Carolina
0.0304
0.0253
0.0179
0.0147
Texas
0.0073
0.0054
0.0038
0.0032
Sediment
(
ug/
kg)

California
25.28
20.47
13.58
9.95
Mississippi
158.1
134.8
93.2
70.8
North
Carolina
171.8
143.9
101.9
83.2
Texas
47.8
30.6
21.4
18.2
a
1­
in­
10
year
probability
The
higher
EECs
observed
in
the
North
Carolina
and
Mississippi
sites
are
due
to
meteorologic
conditions
and
the
characteristics
of
the
fields
at
these
two
sites.
The
slope
of
the
fields
for
the
PRZM
scenarios
in
North
Carolina
and
Mississippi
is
6%
while
the
slope
at
the
Texas
and
California
sites
is
2.5%.
The
larger
slope
leads
to
a
greater
value
for
the
erosion
equation
topographic
factor
and
hence
greater
erosion
potential.
Furthermore,
an
analysis
of
the
PRZM
output
files
indicated
that
the
sites
in
North
Carolina
and
Mississippi
received
greater
rainfall
than
the
sites
located
in
California
and
Texas,
resulting
in
greater
erosion
and
runoff
flux
at
these
two
sites.
These
factors
lead
to
greater
cypermethrin
loadings
into
the
model
environmental
pond
employed
in
EXAMS,
and
hence
higher
EECs.

Pecans
There
is
only
one
QCed
PRZM
scenario
for
pecans
(
Georgia).
The
representative
soil
is
a
Greenville
fine
sandy
loam
of
hydrologic
Group
C.
The
harvest
date
of
pecans
in
Georgia
usually
begins
in
October,
but
pecans
may
be
harvested
any
time
after
the
shuck
opens
(
Georgia
­
40­
Pecan
Commission
2004).
In
the
southeastern
United
States,
September
is
the
most
critical
month
of
the
pecan
growing
season,
because
most
of
the
kernel
develops
during
this
month.
Late
season
pressure
from
aphids
and
other
pests
can
reduce
yields.
It
is
recommended
that
pyrethroid
insecticides
not
be
used
until
late
in
the
season,
in
order
to
avoid
resistance
and
to
avoid
killing
beneficial
insects,
such
as
lady
beetles
and
lacewings
which
naturally
suppress
mites
and
aphids
early
in
the
season.
The
surface
water,
pore
water
and
sediment
EECs
for
the
pecan
scenario
are
shown
in
Table
8.
Cypermethrin
is
applied
to
pecans
by
ground
methods
only.
The
level
of
spray
drift
for
pecans
was
obtained
from
AgDRIFT
®
,
at
the
Tier
1
level,
for
airblast
applications
of
dense
trees,
which
is
also
representative
of
pecans.
The
level
of
spray
drift
obtained
with
a
buffer
zone
of
25
ft
(
imposed
in
the
label)
was
multiplied
by
3
to
obtain
an
approximation
of
the
90th
percentile
of
the
deposition
value
(
according
to
current
guidelines).
The
level
of
spray
drift
was
0.022
or
2.2%.
It
was
used
in
this
assessment.
This
level
of
spray
drift
is
considered
typical
for
airblast
applications.
Since
pecans
can
be
very
tall
trees,
the
level
of
spray
drift
was
also
explored
with
sparse
and
young,
which
is
a
more
conservative
scenario.
The
level
of
spray
drift
was
0.045
or
4.5%.

Table
8.
Cypermethrin
Surface
Water,
Pore
Water
and
Sediment
EECs
Obtained
From
PRZM/
EXAMS
Georgia
PECANS
Crop
Use
(
Ground
Application,
Airblast).
a
Source
Peak
21
day
60
day
90
day
Surface
Water
(
ug/
L)
0.953
0.086
0.049
0.038
Pore
Water
(
ug/
L)
0.017
0.013
0.008
0.007
Sediment
(
ug/
kg)
93.7
72.3
46.6
41.8
a
1­
in­
10
year
probability
Lettuce
There
is
only
one
QCed
PRZM
scenario
currently
for
lettuce
(
California).
The
representative
soil
type
is
a
Placentia
sandy
loam
(
hydrologic
Group
D).
Lettuce
is
a
year­
round
crop
in
California,
so
the
application
timing
of
cypermethrin
can
vary
(
Jackson
et
al.
1996).
Lettuce
is
usually
planted
at
depths
of
approximately
1/
8
to
1/
4
inches
primarily
on
40­
inch
raised
beds
with
2
seed
lines
per
bed.
For
a
midsummer
planting,
the
harvest
usually
begins
70­
80
days
later
and
cypermethrin
is
typically
foliar
applied
as
needed
following
emergence.
The
surface
water,
pore
water
and
sediment
EECs
for
the
lettuce
scenario
are
provided
in
Table
9.
­
41­
Table
9a.
Cypermethrin
Surface
Water,
Pore
Water
and
Sediment
EECs
Obtained
From
PRZM/
EXAMS
California
LETTUCE
Crop
Use
with
One
Crop
per
Year.
a
Source
Peak
21
day
60
day
90
day
Surface
Water
(
ug/
L)
0.29
0.034
0.025
0.020
Pore
Water
(
ug/
L)
0.005
0.005
0.004
0.003
Sediment
(
ug/
kg)
30.5
27.8
23.7
21.0
a
1­
in­
10
year
probability
Multiple
Applications
There
is
a
possible
uncertainty
related
to
the
exposure
levels
estimated
to
the
lettuce
scenario.
In
coastal
southern
California,
lettuce
is
a
year­
round
crop
so
the
application
of
cypermethrin
may
vary.
According
to
the
label,
the
maximum
application
rate
is
0.6
lb
a.
i./
A/
season.
The
exposure
scenarios
modeled
in
this
assessment
assumed
only
one
season
per
year.
However,
the
exposure
may
be
considerably
higher
if
more
than
one
season
occurs.
For
this
reason,
the
EFED
conducted
a
special
run
with
the
California
lettuce
scenario,
with
applications
corresponding
to
crops
occurring
in
May
and
August
(
first
applications
on
05/
01
and
08/
01,
that
is,
two
applications
very
close
to
each
other).
The
input
parameters
were
the
same
as
those
indicated
in
Tables
6a
and
6b,
except
that
the
applications
started
on
05/
01,
and
the
application
intervals
were
arranged
so
that
the
second
set
of
applications
started
on
08/
01.
Results
were
as
follows:

Table
9b.
Cypermethrin
Surface
Water,
Pore
Water
and
Sediment
EECs
Obtained
From
PRZM/
EXAMS
California
LETTUCE
Crop
Use
with
Two
Crops
Per
Year.
a
Source
Peak
21
day
60
day
90
day
Surface
Water
(
ug/
L)
0.40
0.042
0.029
0.023
Pore
Water
(
ug/
L)
0.007
0.007
0.006
0.005
Sediment
(
ug/
kg)
42.4
38.8
33.0
29.2
a
1­
in­
10
year
probability
It
appears
that
the
peak
concentrations
are
the
most
affected.
The
peak
surface
water
EEC
is
higher
for
the
run
with
two
crops
by
about
38%,
while
the
peak
sediment
EEC
is
higher
for
the
run
with
two
crops
by
a
similar
percentage.
This
run
was
performed
assuming
that
the
two
crops
were
in
May
and
August,
that
is,
they
were
very
close
to
each
other.
In
the
field,
there
is
uncertainty
as
to
the
proximity
of
the
crops
during
the
year,
or
the
number
of
crops
per
year.
­
42­
Spray
Drift/
Buffer
Zone
Analysis:
The
extent
to
which
spray
drift
may
be
an
important
component
of
the
concentrations
of
cypermethrin
after
applications
of
final
products,
reaching
bodies
of
water
adjacent
to
treated
areas
was
investigated.
The
proposed
cypermethrin
label
[
Ammo
2.5
Insecticide,
EPA
Reg.
No.
279­
3027]
has
specific
restrictions
for
aerial
applications
related
to
the
imposition
of
buffer
zones
between
the
treated
areas
and
bodies
of
water
in
order
to
minimize
the
level
of
spray
drift.
The
imposed
buffer
zone
is
150
ft.
The
label
has
some
additional
directions
related
to
the
minimum
volume
of
finished
spray
in
gallons
per
acre
for
both
aerial
and
ground
applications.
For
the
aerial
applications,
the
minimum
volume
of
finished
spray
is
1
gallon
per
acre
if
the
chemical
is
applied
in
water
or
1
quart
per
acre
if
the
chemical
is
applied
in
refined
vegetable
oil;
however,
if
the
chemical
is
applied
in
water,
it
can
be
emulsified
with
1
quart
of
oil
to
add
a
total
of
1
gallon.
For
ground
applications,
it
should
be
applied
in
a
minimum
of
5
gallons
of
finished
spray.
The
label
does
not
establish
a
range
of
droplet
sizes,
but
it
makes
certain
recommendations
about
the
boom
height,
and
limits
the
wind
speed.
These
are
variables
that
play
a
critical
role
in
defining
the
level
of
spray
drift.
It
is
noted
that
the
label
has
other
language
related
to
spray
drift
and
buffer
zones:

C
Do
not
apply
by
ground
equipment
within
25
feet,
or
by
air
within
150
feet
of
lakes;
reservoirs,
rivers,
permanent
streams,
marshes
or
natural
ponds,
estuaries,
and
commercial
fish
farm
ponds.
Increase
the
buffer
zone
to
450
feet
when
ultra
low
volume
(
ULV)
application
is
made.

C
For
aerial
applications,
the
spray
boom
should
be
mounted
on
the
aircraft
so
as
to
minimize
drift
caused
by
wingtip
or
rotor
vortices.
The
minimum
practical
boom
length
should
be
used
and
must
not
exceed
75%
of
wing
span
or
rotor
diameter.

C
Use
the
largest
droplet
size
consistent
with
good
pest
control.
Formation
of
very
small
droplets
may
be
minimized
by
appropriate
nozzle
selection,
by
orienting
nozzle
away
from
the
air
stream
as
much
as
possible,
and
by
avoiding
excessive
spray
boom
pressure.

C
Spray
should
be
released
at
the
lowest
height
consistent
with
pest
control
and
flight
safety.
Applications
more
than
10
feet
above
the
crop
canopy
should
be
avoided.

C
Make
aerial
or
ground
applications
when
the
wind
velocity
favors
on
target
product
deposition
(
approximately
3
to
10
mph).
Do
not
apply
when
wind
velocity
exceeds
10
mph.
Avoid
applications
when
wind
gusts
approach
15
mph.

C
Risk
of
exposure
to
sensitive
aquatic
areas
can
be
reduced
by
avoiding
applications
when
wind
direction
is
toward
the
aquatic
area.

C
Do
not
cultivate
within
10'
of
the
aquatic
area
so
as
to
allow
growth
of
a
vegetative
filter
strip.

C
Low
humidity
and
high
temperatures
increase
the
evaporation
rate
of
spray
droplets
and
therefore,
the
likelihood
of
increased
spray
drift
to
aquatic
areas.
Avoid
spraying
during
conditions
of
low
humidity
and/
or
high
temperature.

C
Do
not
make
aerial
or
ground
applications
during
temperature
inversions,
inversions
are
characterized
by
stable
air
and
increasing
temperatures
with
height
above
the
ground.
Mist
or
fog
may
indicate
the
presence
of
an
inversion
in
humid
areas.
The
applicator
may
detect
the
presence
of
an
inversion
by
producing
smoke
and
observing
a
smoke
layer
near
the
ground
surface.
1
AgDRIFT
®
is
a
computer
program
provided
by
the
Agency's
OPP,
as
a
product
of
the
Cooperative
Research
and
Development
Agreement
(
CRADA),
between
the
EPA's
Office
of
Research
and
Development,
and
the
Spray
Drift
Task
Force
(
SDTF,
a
coalition
of
pesticide
registrants
formed
to
develop
a
comprehensive
database
of
off­
target
drift
information
in
support
of
pesticide
registration
requirements).

2
American
Society
for
Agricultural
Engineers
3
DV0.5
half
of
the
volume
is
contained
in
droplets
smaller
than
this
value
and
half
of
the
volume
is
contained
in
droplets
larger
than
this
value.

­
43­
Traditionally,
the
EFED
uses
a
default
level
of
spray
drift
for
aerial
applications
of
5%.
It
is
beneficial
to
compare
this
value
to
the
data
from
AgDRIFT
®
1.
A
cursory
review
of
the
AgDRIFT
®
data
indicates
that
the
"
standard"
level
of
5%
spray
drift
is
adequate
for
ASAE2
Coarse
to
Very
Coarse
and
ASAE
Medium
to
Coarse
droplet
size
sprays,
but
the
level
of
spray
drift
may
be
underestimated
for
ASAE
Fine
to
Medium
and
ASAE
Very
Fine
to
Fine
droplet
size
sprays.

EFED
used
the
NC
cotton
crop
scenario
to
represent
the
crops
assessed
in
this
document
in
a
buffer
zone/
spray
drift
analysis.
First,
EFED
ran
PRZM/
EXAMS
with
the
same
input
parameters
as
the
standard
run,
except
that
the
spray
drift
level
was
set
to
0%
and
5%.
These
are
representative
runs
of
no
drift
and
no
buffer
zone
runs.
When
the
results
of
the
run
with
spray
drift
of
5%
were
compared
with
the
special
run
with
spray
drift
of
0%,
the
results
indicated
that
the
percent
of
the
peak
EEC
that
was
attributable
to
spray
drift
was
9.6%
for
NC
cotton
(
Supplementary
Table
D).
This
scenario
has
a
relatively
small
component
of
drift.
Some
scenarios
will
be
driven
by
runoff,
while
others
will
be
driven
by
spray
drift,
depending
on
the
properties
of
the
chemical
and
the
PRZM
scenario,
the
weather,
soil
type
and
porosity,
site
slope,
interception,
irrigation,
and
other
factors.

As
a
second
step,
a
number
of
PRZM/
EXAMS
were
run,
to
anticipate
the
possible
effect
of
buffer
zones
of
up
to
200
ft.
The
level
of
spray
drift
was
determined
with
the
help
of
AgDRIFT
®
.
Since
the
label
for
Ammo
2EC
Insecticide
provided
some
limitations
and
recommendations
for
the
aerial
applications,
EFED
bracketed
the
options
by
running
a
"
low
end
drift,"
a
"
typical
drift,"
and
a
"
high
end
drift"
(
most
conservative)
scenarios.
These
scenarios
are
summarized
in
Supplementary
Table
A.

Supplementary
Table
A.
Spray
drift
scenarios
Low
End
Spray
Drift
Scenario
(
not
conservative)
Typical
Spray
Drift
Scenario
High
End
Spray
Drift
Scenario
(
conservative)

release
height,
8
ft
release
height,
10
ft
release
height,
15
ft
wind
speed,
3
mph
wind
speed,
10
mph
wind
speed,
15
mph
large
droplets,
ASAE
Medium
to
Coarse
droplets
(
DV0.5
=
340.86
:
m)
3
ASAE
Fine
to
Medium
droplets
(
DV0.5
=
254.72
:
m)
small
droplets,
ASAE
Very
Fine
droplets
(
DV0.5
=
81.52
:
m)
­
44­
In
AgDRIFT
®
,
this
is
considered
a
Tier
2
calculation;
nevertheless,
all
parameters
were
maintained
at
the
AgDRIFT
®
default
value,
except
for
the
ones
mentioned
above,
the
spray
volume,
which
is
set
to
1
gal/
A
in
water
or
1
quart/
A
in
oil,
as
per
label
recommendations
(
minimum
volume
recommended),
and
the
boom
length,
which
was
set
to
75%
of
wing
span,
as
per
label
recommendations.
Two
quick
representative
calculations
with
1
gallon
of
water
and
1
quart
of
oil
yielded
higher
percentage
of
drift
with
water;
therefore,
all
the
study
was
conducted
with
the
more
conservative
1
gal
water/
A.

Once
the
AgDRIFT
®
calculations
were
done,
the
levels
of
spray
drift
at
various
buffer
zones
were
obtained
with
the
help
of
the
"
toolbox"
`
Aquatic
Assessment'.
This
level
of
spray
drift
was
used
as
the
input
value
in
PRZM/
EXAMS,
modeled
accordingly.
The
results
are
summarized
in
Supplementary
Table
B
and
D­
F
for
NC
cotton;
the
raw
data
(
input
and
output
files)
from
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
and
AgDRIFT
®
models
appear
in
the
Appendix
O.

Supplementary
Table
B.
Levels
of
Spray
Drift
Predicted
by
AgDRIFT
®
for
Buffer
Zones
from
0
to
200
ft.
with
the
Low,
Typical,
and
High
End
Spray
Drift
Scenarios.

Buffer
Zone
(
feet)
Low
End
Drift
(
Not
conservative)
Scenario
(%)
Typical
Drift
Scenario
(%)
High
End
Drift
(
Very
conservative)
Scenario
(%)

0
2.8
13.0
35.6
100
0.9
5.5
21.9
150
0.6
4.3
18.9
200
0.5
3.6
16.1
One
PRZM
field
scenario
was
modeled,
the
North
Carolina
cotton,
for
agricultural
crops.
This
scenario
was
selected
to
represent
the
crops
for
which
the
registrant
is
requesting
reregistration
for
aerial
applications.
EECs
for
ecological
risk
assessment
were
determined
using
the
farm
pond
scenario.
The
specified
input
parameters
used
for
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
modeling
are
shown
in
Supplementary
Table
C.
All
the
input
parameters
are
similar
to
those
used
in
the
risk
assessment,
except
for
the
spray
drift,
which
is
as
indicated
in
the
Supplementary
Table
B.
With
the
exception
of
the
special
run
that
simulates
a
ground
application,
the
singular
parameter
that
differs
in
this
particular
study
is
the
level
of
spray
drift.

Supplementary
Table
C.
PRZM/
EXAMS
Inputs
for
Cypermethrin
Runs
With
NC
Cotton.

PARAMETER
VALUE
SOURCE
Application
date
Cotton
July
1st
Crop
specific
a
Supplementary
Table
C.
PRZM/
EXAMS
Inputs
for
Cypermethrin
Runs
With
NC
Cotton.

PARAMETER
VALUE
SOURCE
­
45­
Application
rate
0.1
lb
a.
i./
A
=
0.112
Kg
a.
i./
ha
Product
label
Maximum
number
of
applications
6
Product
label
Incorporation
depth
0.0
Aerial
Application
Aerobic
soil
metabolism
half­
life
62
days
MRID
42156601
(
90%
C.
L.
on
the
mean,
n
=
2
observations)

Koc
141,700
MRID
42129003
(
mean
value,
n=
4)

Henry's
Law
Constant
3.4x10­
7
atm­
m3/
mol
Laskowski
(
2002)

Aerobic
aquatic
metabolism
11.3
days
MRID
45920801
(
90%
C.
L.
on
the
mean,
n
=
2
observations)

Anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
19.3
days
MRID
44876105
(
90%
C.
L.
on
the
mean,
n
=
2
observations)

Aqueous
photolysis
half­
life
36.2
days
MRID
42395701
Hydrolysis
half­
life
(
days)
pH
7
stable
MRID
42620501
Molecular
weight
416.3
Laskowski
(
2002)

Solubility
(
WSOL)
0.04
ppm
Laskowski
(
2002)
(
solubility
x
10)

Vapor
pressure
(
VP)
2.5x10­
9
Laskowski
(
2002)

PLDKRT
(
foliage
pesticide
rate
constant)
0
EFED
Model
Input
Guidance,
Version
II
(
2002)

FEXTRC
(
foliar
extraction)
0.5
EFED
Model
Input
Guidance,
Version
II
(
2002)

FILTRA
(
filtration
parameter;
required
if
CAM
set
to
3)
NA
­­

CAM
(
chemical
application
method)
2
Reflects
foliar
application
IPSCND
1
Surface
Applied
Application
efficiency
(
fraction)
0.99
for
ground
application
0.95
for
aerial
applications
EFED
Model
Input
Guidance,
Version
II
(
2002)
Supplementary
Table
C.
PRZM/
EXAMS
Inputs
for
Cypermethrin
Runs
With
NC
Cotton.

PARAMETER
VALUE
SOURCE
­
46­
Spray
drift
(
fraction)
0.01
for
ground
application
0.05
for
standard
run
with
no
buffer
0.00
for
special
run
with
no
drift
refer
to
Supplementary
Table
B
for
other
runs
Calculated
with
AgDRIFT
®
(
Tier
1):
pecans
is
applied
by
ground
(
airblast)
with
a
buffer
zone
of
25
ft,
other
crops
aerially
with
a
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
a
See
overview
of
pesticide
use
section
for
more
information
PRZM/
EXAMS
modeling
was
conducted
with
all
the
parameters
as
discussed
above.
The
results
are
summarized
in
the
following
tables
for
NC
cotton:

Supplementary
Table
D.
Surface
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
ecological
risk
assessment,
based
on
North
Carolina
cotton
(
Special
Runs)

ID
%
drift
peak
21­
day
60­
day
reference
run
0
2.155
0.253
0.122
std.
ground
applic.
1,
99%
applic.
efficiency
2.292
0.265
0.129
std.
aerial
applic.
5
2.385
0.260
0.142
Three
significant
figures
after
the
decimal
were
provided
for
illustration
purposes.

Supplementary
Table
E.
Surface
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
ecological
risk
assessment,
based
on
North
Carolina
cotton
(
Buffer
Zone
Analysis).

Buffer
Zone
(
ft)
Low
end
drift
scenario,
release
height
8
ft,
wind
speed
3
mph,
ASAE
medium
to
coarse
droplets
(
EECs)
Typical
drift
scenario,
release
height
10
ft,
wind
speed
10
mph,
ASAE
fine
to
medium
droplets
(
EECs)
High
end
(
very
conservative)
drift
scenario,
release
height
15
ft,
wind
speed
15
mph,
ASAE
very
fine
droplets
(
EECs)

%
drift
peak
21­
day
60­
day
%
drift
peak
21­
day
60­
day
%
drift
peak
21­
day
60­
day
0
2.8
2.284
0.256
0.131
13.0
2.737
0.342
0.188
35.6
3.676
0.663
0.319
100
0.9
2.196
0.254
0.124
5.5
2.408
0.260
0.145
21.9
3.104
0.468
0.239
150
0.6
2.183
0.254
0.123
4.3
2.352
0.258
0.138
18.9
2.980
0.426
0.222
200
0.5
2.178
0.254
0.123
3.6
2.320
0.257
0.134
16.1
2.865
0.386
0.206
­
47­
Pore
water
concentrations
were
obtained
for
all
runs,
but
results
are
shown
only
for
the
typical
drift
scenario,
with
the
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
(
refer
to
Supplementary
Table
F).

Supplementary
Table
F.
Pore
Water
Concentrations
EECs
(
ppb)
for
ecological
risk
assessment,
based
on
North
Carolina
in
North
Carolina
cotton.

Crop
Scenario
Typical
drift
scenario,
release
height
10
ft,
wind
speed
10
mph,
ASAE
fine
to
medium
droplets,
buffer
zone
150
ft
(
ppb)

%
drift
peak
21­
day
60­
day
NC
cotton
4.3
0.046
0.039
0.025
The
low
end
drift
scenario
resulted
in
percentages
of
spray
drift
ranging
from
0.5­
2.8%
for
buffer
zones
of
0­
200
ft.
The
high
end
drift
scenario
resulted
in
percentages
of
spray
drift
ranging
from
16.1­
35.6%,
using
buffer
zones
of
0­
200
ft.
The
typical
drift
scenario
resulted
in
percentages
of
spray
drift
ranging
from
3.6­
13.0%
for
buffer
zones
of
0
to
200
ft.
The
level
of
spray
drift
for
the
buffer
zone
imposed
by
the
registrant
of
150
ft
using
the
typical
drift
scenario
is
4.3%.
This
value
may
be
compared
to
the
default
level
of
5%
that
is
the
standard
input
value
for
aerial
applications
without
a
buffer
zone.
The
high
end
scenario
levels
of
spray
drift
were
approximately
13­
32
times
higher
than
the
corresponding
low
end
scenario
spray
drift
levels.
It
is
expected,
that
the
low
end
drift
scenario
will
result
in
lower
EEC's.
This
effect
will
be
more
substantial
for
scenarios
that
have
large
components
of
spray
drift.
The
typical
drift
scenario
levels
of
spray
drift
were
approximately
5­
7
times
higher
than
the
corresponding
low
end
scenario
spray
drift
levels.
It
is
also
noted
that
the
levels
of
spray
drift
of
the
low
end
scenario
with
buffer
zones
(
0.5­
0.9%
with
buffer
zones
of
100
to
200
ft.)
were
of
similar
order
of
magnitude
than
the
level
of
spray
drift
assigned
to
standard
ground
applications
(
1%).
For
an
aerial
application,
a
low
wind
speed,
low
boom
height,
large
droplets,
and
a
buffer
zone
of
100
ft
or
more,
are
necessary
to
achieve
a
level
of
spray
drift
of
less
than
1%.

Supplementary
Table
G.
Percent
reduction
of
the
NC
cotton
peak
EECs
for
the
buffer
zones
of
150
and
200
ft,
to
observe
if
substantial
additional
reduction
is
obtained
by
increasing
the
buffer
zone
imposed
by
the
registrants
in
the
label.

ID
Low
end
drift
scenario
Typical
drift
scenario
High
end
drift
scenario
Peak
EECs
for
Buffer
Zone
of
0
ft
(
ppb)
2.284
2.737
3.676
Peak
EECs
for
Buffer
Zone
of
150
ft
(
ppb)
2.183
2.352
2.980
Percent
reduction
with
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
4.4
14.1
18.9
Peak
EECs
for
Buffer
Zone
of
200
ft
(
ppb)
2.178
2.320
2.865
Percent
reduction
with
buffer
zone
of
200
ft
4.6
15.2
22.1
Supplementary
Table
G.
Percent
reduction
of
the
NC
cotton
peak
EECs
for
the
buffer
zones
of
150
and
200
ft,
to
observe
if
substantial
additional
reduction
is
obtained
by
increasing
the
buffer
zone
imposed
by
the
registrants
in
the
label.

ID
Low
end
drift
scenario
Typical
drift
scenario
High
end
drift
scenario
­
48­
Additional
reduction
with
buffer
zone
of
200
ft
in
percentage
0.2
1.1
3.2
With
respect
to
the
EECs,
the
discussion
is
more
meaningful
in
relationship
to
the
peak
EECs
because
they
are
the
most
sensitive
to
the
levels
of
spray
drift.
Supplementary
Table
G
shows
the
percent
reduction
of
the
peak
EECs
for
the
runs
corresponding
to
buffer
zones
of
150
ft
and
200
ft,
compared
to
the
respective
runs
with
no
buffer
zone.
For
the
NC
cotton
scenario,
the
peak
EECs
for
the
runs
related
to
the
no
buffer
zone
(
0
ft.)
were
2.284,
2.737
and
3.676
ppb
for
the
low
end,
typical
drift,
and
high
end
drift
scenarios,
respectively,
compared
to
the
EECs
for
the
runs
related
to
the
150
ft.
buffer
zone,
they
were,
2.183,
2.352
and
2.980
ppb,
respectively.
This
corresponds
to
a
4.4,
14.1
and
18.9%
reduction,
respectively.
The
EECs
for
the
200
ft
buffer
zone
runs
were
2.178,
2.320
and
2.865
ppb
for
the
low
end,
typical
drift,
and
high
end
drift
scenarios,
respectively,
corresponding
to
a
4.6,
15.2
and
22.1%
reduction,
respectively.
For
the
low
end
and
typical
drift
scenario,
the
additional
reduction
was
relatively
little;
however,
for
the
high
end
drift
scenario,
the
additional
reduction
was
more
meaningful.

This
limited
analysis
has
specific
uncertainties.

C
It
is
assumed
that
the
level
of
runoff
is
similar
in
all
PRZM/
EXAMS
runs.
The
current
version
of
PRZM/
EXAMS
cannot
take
into
consideration
the
fact
that
there
are
buffer
zones
ranging
from
0
to
200
ft,
that
might
mitigate
the
level
of
runoff
(
particularly
for
the
peak
values),
or
the
mandatory
vegetative
strip
included
in
the
label.

C
Only
one
scenario
was
explored
and
was
considered
representative
for
all
the
areas
where
aerial
applications
of
cypermethrin
occur.
It
was
found
that
this
scenario
has
a
relatively
small
component
of
spray
drift.
Ideally
various
scenarios
would
be
explored,
and
data
compared
among
each
other.

C
The
scope
of
this
analysis
is
limited.
It
constitutes
only
an
overview,
with
calculations
performed
with
NC
cotton
only.

b.
Aquatic
Exposure
Monitoring
and
Field
Data
A
variety
of
sources
were
searched
for
surface
and
groundwater
monitoring
data
on
cypermethrin,
including
registrant­
submitted
studies,
and
federal,
state
and
local
agencies.
An
internet
search
was
conducted
for
ground
and/
or
surface
water
monitoring
data
on
cypermethrin.
The
following
websites
were
searched:
USGS
National
Water
Quality
Assessment
(
NAWQA)
Program,
EPA
STORET,
and
the
NCOD.
Among
these
sites,
no
data
were
located
related
to
ground
or
surface
water
detections
of
cypermethrin.
It
cannot
be
expected
that
the
temporal
or
spatial
design
of
these
studies
would
necessarily
have
taken
place
in
vulnerable
portions
of
the
cypermethrin
use
area.
In
addition,
some
monitoring
data
may
be
collected
from
areas
that
are
not
­
49­
representative
of
potential
susceptible
surface
water
or
drinking
water
sources.
Therefore,
although
no
monitoring
data
were
located,
this
lack
of
data
does
not
conclusively
indicate
that
cypermethrin
concentrations
do
not
exist
in
surface
and
ground
water
bodies.
Moreover,
cypermethrin
is
very
hydrophobic
and
rapidly
partitions
to
the
sediment
compartment
when
released
to
water
bodies.
Monitoring
studies
that
include
analysis
of
the
surface
sediments
of
water
bodies
would
be
beneficial
when
analyzing
for
hydrophobic
pyrethroid
pesticides
such
as
cypermethrin.

3.
Measures
of
Terrestrial
Exposure
a.
Terrestrial
Exposure
Modeling
The
EFED
terrestrial
exposure
model
T­
REX
(
T­
REX,
Version
1.12,
dated
December
7,
2004)
is
used
to
estimate
exposures
and
risks
to
avian
and
mammalian
species.
Input
values
for
avian
and
mammalian
toxicity
as
well
as
chemical
application
and
foliar
dissipation
half­
life
data
are
required
to
run
the
model.
The
model
provides
estimates
of
exposure
concentrations
and
risk
quotients
(
RQs).
Specifically,
the
model
provides
estimates
of
concentrations
(
maximum,
or
upper
bound,
and
average,
or
mean)
of
chemical
residues
on
the
surface
of
different
types
of
foliage
and
insects
that
may
be
dietary
sources
of
exposure
to
avian,
mammalian,
reptilian,
or
terrestrial­
phase
amphibian
receptors.
The
surface
residue
concentration
(
ppm)
is
estimated
by
multiplying
the
application
rate
(
pounds
active
ingredient
per
acre)
by
a
value
specific
to
each
food
item.
These
values
(
termed
the
Hoerger­
Kenaga
estimates)
along
with
a
more
detailed
discussion
of
the
methodology
implemented
by
T­
REX,
are
presented
in
Appendix
D
(
T­
REX
Model).
T­
REX
was
run
for
four
crop
uses
(
cotton,
lettuce,
pecans,
and
canola),
using
the
input
values
provided
in
Table
10.

Table
10.
Input
Parameters
Used
in
T­
REX
v1.12
to
Determine
Terrestrial
EECs
for
Cypermethrin.

Input
Variable
Parameter
Value
Source
Maximum
single
application
rate
Cotton:
0.1
lb
a.
i./
A
Pecans:
0.1
lb
a.
i./
A
Canola:
0.1
lb
a.
i./
A
Lettuce:
0.1
lb
a.
i./
A
Product
Label
Maximum
number
of
applications
per
year
Cotton:
6
Pecans:
6
Canola:
4
Lettuce:
6
Product
Label
Minimum
application
interval
Cotton:
3
days
Pecans:
5
days
Canola:
7
days
Lettuce:
7
days
Product
Label
Table
10.
Input
Parameters
Used
in
T­
REX
v1.12
to
Determine
Terrestrial
EECs
for
Cypermethrin.

Input
Variable
Parameter
Value
Source
­
50­
Foliar
dissipation
half­
life
5.3
days
Willis
and
McDowell
1987
A
summary
of
the
terrestrial
EECs
generated
by
T­
REX
for
the
four
crop
uses
is
presented
in
Table
11.
More
detailed
summaries
of
the
T­
REX
output
are
presented
in
Appendix
D.
Cypermethrin
residues
ranged
from
66.93
ppm
(
cotton,
short
grass)
to
2.44
ppm
(
canola,
fruits/
pods/
large
insects)
for
maximum
residues,
and
from
23.70
(
cotton,
short
grass)
to
1.14
ppm
(
canola,
fruits/
pods/
large
insects)
for
mean
residues.

Table
11.
Peak
Terrestrial
EECs
Estimated
for
Cypermethrin
Using
Kenaga
Values.

Crop
Use
Forage
Type
Maximum
Residues
(
ppm)
Mean
Residues
(
ppm)

Cotton
short
grass
66.93
23.70
tall
grass
30.68
10.04
broadleaf
plants
and
small
insects
37.65
12.55
fruits/
pods/
large
insects
4.18
1.95
Lettuce
short
grass
39.86
14.12
tall
grass
18.27
5.98
broadleaf
plants
and
small
insects
22.42
7.47
fruits/
pods/
large
insects
2.49
1.16
Pecans
short
grass.
49.01
17.36
tall
grass
22.46
7.35
broadleaf
plants
and
small
insects
27.57
9.19
fruits/
pods/
large
insects
3.06
1.43
Canola
short
grass
38.99
13.81
tall
grass
17.87
5.85
broadleaf
plants
and
small
insects
21.93
7.31
fruits/
pods/
large
insects
2.44
1.14
­
51­
b.
Residue
Studies
No
terrestrial
residue
studies
were
located
for
cypermethrin.

C.
Ecological
Effects
Characterization
In
screening­
level
ecological
risk
assessments,
effects
characterization
describes
the
types
of
effects
a
pesticide
can
have
on
aquatic
or
terrestrial
organisms.
This
characterization
is
based
on
registrant­
submitted
studies
that
describe
information
regarding
acute
and
chronic
effects
toxicity
for
various
aquatic
and
terrestrial
animals.
Appendix
E
summarizes
the
results
of
the
registrant­
submitted
toxicity
studies
used
to
characterize
effects
for
this
risk
assessment.
Toxicity
testing
reported
in
this
section
does
not
represent
all
species
of
birds,
mammals,
or
aquatic
organisms.
Only
a
few
surrogate
species
for
both
freshwater
fish
and
birds
are
used
to
represent
all
freshwater
fish
(
2000+)
and
bird
(
680+)
species
in
the
United
States.
For
mammals,
acute
studies
are
usually
limited
to
the
Norway
rat
or
the
house
mouse.
Estuarine/
marine
testing
is
usually
limited
to
a
crustacean,
a
mollusk,
and
a
fish.
Also,
testing
for
reptiles
and
amphibians
are
not
required.
The
risk
assessment
assumes
that
avian
and
reptilian
toxicities
are
similar.
The
same
assumption
is
used
for
fish
and
amphibians.

In
general,
categories
of
acute
toxicity
ranging
from
"
practically
nontoxic"
to
"
very
highly
toxic"
have
been
established
for
aquatic
organisms
(
based
on
LC
50
values),
terrestrial
mammals
(
based
on
LD
50
values),
avian
species
(
based
on
LC
50
values),
and
non­
target
insects
(
based
on
LD
50
values
for
honey
bees)
(
U.
S.
EPA
2001).
These
categories
are
presented
in
Appendix
E.

1.
Aquatic
Effects
Characterization
The
most
sensitive
acute
and
chronic
toxicity
reference
values
associated
with
cypermethrin
exposure
to
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine
species
are
summarized
in
Table
12.
All
toxicity
reference
values
used
to
assess
the
potential
risks
of
cypermethrin
exposure
are
obtained
from
studies
using
technical
grade
cypermethrin,
rather
than
from
studies
using
cypermethrin
metabolites
or
formulated
product.
A
more
detailed
summary
of
the
aquatic
toxicity
data
available
to
characterize
risks
associated
with
cypermethrin
applications
is
given
in
Appendix
E.

Results
of
acute
toxicity
studies
in
freshwater
fish,
freshwater
invertebrates,
estuarine/
marine
fish,
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
(
shrimp
and
crustaceans),
and
benthic
organisms
indicate
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
very
highly
toxic
on
an
acute
basis.
The
lowest
acute
LC
50
values
reported
for
freshwater
fish,
freshwater
invertebrates
and
estuarine/
marine
fish
range
from
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
freshwater
fish
to
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
sheepshead
minnow.
These
results
suggest
that
freshwater
fish,
freshwater
invertebrates,
and
estuarine/
marine
fish
have
a
similar
susceptibility
to
cypermethrin
toxicity.
For
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates,
the
lowest
acute
LC
50
value
reported
is
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L,
approximately
100
times
lower
than
the
LC
50
values
reported
for
other
aquatic
animals,
indicating
that
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
are
more
sensitive
to
cypermethrin
toxicity
than
other
types
of
aquatic
animals.
Thus,
estuarine/
marine
­
52­
invertebrates
are
expected
to
be
the
species
at
greatest
risk
for
acute
effects
(
lethality).
Cypermethrin
is
categorized
very
highly
toxic
to
estuarine/
marine
shrimp
and
crustaceans
and
highly
toxic
in
oysters.
Results
of
acute
toxicity
studies
on
cypermethrin
formulations
in
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates
indicate
that
cypermethrin
formulations
are
also
very
highly
toxic,
with
LC
50
values
that
are
similar
to
those
reported
for
cypermethrin
TGAI.
Acute
toxicity
studies
on
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
in
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates
show
that
the
degradate
is
much
less
toxic
than
cypermethrin
TGAI.

In
addition
to
lethality
data,
several
acute
toxicity
studies
provide
information
regarding
sublethal
effects
of
cypermethrin.
For
fish,
sublethal
effects
include
rapid
and
erratic
swimming,
partial/
complete
loss
of
equilibrium,
jaw
spasms,
gulping
respiration,
lethargy,
and
darkened
pigmentation.
In
aquatic
invertebrates,
sublethal
effects
include
lethargy,
erratic
swimming
behavior,
loss
of
equilibrium,
surfacing,
immobilization,
and
decreased
movement
in
response
to
stimulation.
In
most
studies,
the
acute
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
are
approximately
2­
to
3­
fold
lower
than
the
corresponding
LC
50
values.
However,
in
rainbow
trout
and
bluegill
sunfish,
the
acute
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
are
several
orders
of
magnitude
lower
than
the
corresponding
LC
50
values,
indicating
that
sublethal
effects
can
occur
at
exposure
levels
far
below
the
concentrations
that
cause
lethality.

Chronic
toxicity
studies
are
available
for
freshwater
fish
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
Results
in
freshwater
fish
show
that
neonate
survival
is
adversely
affected
by
cypermethrin
exposure.
For
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates,
chronic
exposure
to
cypermethrin
produced
adverse
effects
on
reproductive
and
growth
parameters.

Results
of
aquatic
field
studies
conducted
with
cypermethrin
formulations
yield
a
wide
range
of
results,
from
no
observable
effects
to
catastrophic
drift
and
profound
decreases
in
population
diversity
and
abundance.
While
results
of
these
studies
show
that
cypermethrin
can
have
profound
effects
on
aquatic
populations,
particularly
freshwater
invertebrates
and
benthic
organisms,
due
to
the
variability
in
experimental
methodologies
and
the
lack
of
rigorous
monitoring
of
water
and
sediment
concentrations
of
cypermethrin,
results
of
these
studies
are
not
sufficient
for
use
in
quantitative
assessments.
However,
the
observations
made
in
field
studies
using
cypermethrin
demonstrate
that
the
laboratory
studies
are
predictive
of
the
types
of
toxicity
that
can
result
from
environmental
exposure
to
cypermethrin.

Calculations
for
sediment
and
pore
water
exposure
to
benthic
organisms
followed
the
equilibrium
partitioning
model
as
noted
previously
and
in
Appendix
M.
The
LC
50
value
of
0.00257
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
(
Table
12)
was
calculated
as
follows:
The
LC
50
value
from
whole
sediment
[
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment]
is
divided
by
the
proportion
of
organic
carbon
in
the
sediment
[
0.0099
kg
OC
/
kg
whole
sediment].
Thus,
the
LC
50
value
in
units
of
OC
is
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
[
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
÷
0.0099
kg
OC
/
kg
sediment].
The
equivalent
concentration
in
pore
water
is
based
on
the
definition
of
the
K
oc
,

K
oc
(
L/
kg
OC
)
=
Sediment
Conc
in
OC
(
mg/
kg
OC
)
÷
Conc
in
pore
water
(
mg/
L).

By
rearrangement,
­
53­
Conc
in
water
=
Sediment
Conc
in
units
of
OC
÷
K
oc
.

For
cypermethrin,
the
K
oc
is
taken
as
141,700
[
L/
kg
OC
].
Thus,
the
calculated
concentration
in
pore
water
corresponding
to
the
LC
50
value
of
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
is
0.00257
µ
g
a.
i./
L
[
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
÷
141,700
L/
kg
OC
].
­
54­
Table
12.
Cypermethrin
Toxicity
Reference
Values
(
TRVs)
(:
g
of
active
ingredient/
L)
for
Aquatic
Organisms.

Exposure
Scenario
Species
Exposure
Duration
Toxicity
Reference
Value
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Effects
Reference
Freshwater
Fish
Acute
rainbow
trout
96
hours
LC50
=
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L
Morbidity
MRID
44546027
Chronic
fathead
minnow
30
days
NOAEC
=
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L
LOAEC
=
0.33
ug
ai/
L
Growth
and
morbidity
MRID
89039
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Acute
waterflea
48
hours
EC50
=
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L
Lethargy
MRID
44546031
Chronic
No
adequate
data
submitted;
to
assess
chronic
risk
to
freshwater
invertebrates,
a
surrogate
NOAEC
value
of
0.069
:
g
a.
i./
L
was
derived
based
on
the
acute:
chronic
ratio
method
using
acute
and
chronic
data
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
a
Benthic
Organisms
Acute
amphipod
10
days
sediment
value
(
experimental
data):
LC50
=
3.6
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
pore
water
value
(
derived
data)
b:
LC50
=
0.00257
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
Morbidity
and
Growth
MRID
44074406
Chronic
No
chronic
data
submitted;
to
assess
chronic
risk
to
benthic
organisms,
surrogate
chronic
NOAEC
toxicity
values
for
sediment
of
0.59
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
c
and
for
pore
water
of
0.00042
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
d
were
derived
based
on
the
acute:
chronic
ratio
method
using
acute
and
chronic
data
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.

Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
Acute
sheepshead
minnow
96
hours
LC50
=
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L
Morbidity
MRID
90075
Chronic
No
data
submitted;
to
assess
chronic
risk
to
estuarine/
marine
fish,
a
surrogate
NOAEC
value
of
0.34
:
g
a.
i./
L
for
sheepshead
minnow
was
derived
based
on
the
acute:
chronic
ratio
method
using
acute
and
chronic
data
for
freshwater
fish.
e
Table
12.
Cypermethrin
Toxicity
Reference
Values
(
TRVs)
(:
g
of
active
ingredient/
L)
for
Aquatic
Organisms.

Exposure
Scenario
Species
Exposure
Duration
Toxicity
Reference
Value
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Effects
Reference
­
55­
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Acute
mysid
shrimp
96
hours
f
LC50
=
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L
Morbidity
Acc.
No.
42444601
Chronic
mysid
shrimp
28
days
g
NOAEC
=
0.000781
:
g
a.
i./
L
LOAEC
=
0.00197
ug/
L
NOAEC
=
0.0015
ug/
L
LOAEC
=
0.0028
ug/
L
Weight
of
Females
reduced
Number
of
offspring
MRID
42725301
Table
12.
Cypermethrin
Toxicity
Reference
Values
(
TRVs)
(:
g
of
active
ingredient/
L)
for
Aquatic
Organisms.

Exposure
Scenario
Species
Exposure
Duration
Toxicity
Reference
Value
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Effects
Reference
­
56­
a
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
waterflea
is
based
on
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Freshwater
invertebrate
LC50
(
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L)/
X
(
estimated
value
for
Freshwater
invertebrate
NOAEC),
where
X
=
0.069
:
g
a.
i./
L
b
For
benthic
organisms,
the
LC50
value
of
0.00257
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
was
calculated
as
follows.
The
LC50
value
in
whole
sediment
[
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment]
is
divided
by
the
proportion
of
organic
carbon
in
the
sediment
[
0.0099
kg
OC/
kg
whole
sediment].
Thus,
the
LC50
value
in
units
of
OC
is
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
[
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
÷
0.0099
kg
OC/
kg
sediment].
The
equivalent
concentration
in
pore
water
is
based
on
the
definition
of
the
Koc,
Koc
(
L/
kg
OC)
=
Sediment
Conc
in
OC
(
mg/
kg
OC)
÷
Conc
in
pore
water
(
mg/
L).

By
rearrangement,
Conc
in
water
=
Sediment
Conc
in
units
of
OC
÷
Koc.

For
cypermethrin,
the
Koc
is
taken
as
141,700
[
L/
kg
OC].
Thus,
the
calculated
concentration
in
pore
water
corresponding
to
the
LC50
value
of
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
is
0.00257
µ
g
a.
i./
L
[
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
÷
141,700
L/
kg
OC].
c
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
benthic
organisms
in
terms
of
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
is
based
on
the
acute­
tochronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Benthic
LC50
in
sediment
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
/
X
(
estimated
benthic
NOAEC
value
in
sediment),
where
X
=
0.59
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment.
d
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
benthic
organisms
in
units
of
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
pore
water
is
based
on
the
acuteto
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Benthic
LC50
in
pore
water
(
0.00257
µ
g
a.
i./
L
/
X
(
estimated
benthic
NOAEC
value
in
pore
water
),
where
X
=
0.00042
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water.
e
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
the
sheepshead
minnow
is
based
on
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:
Freshwater
LC50
(
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Freshwater
NOAEC
(
0.14:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Estuarine/
Marine
LC50
(
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L)/
X
(
estimated
value
for
Estuarine/
Marine
NOAEC),
where
X
=
0.34
:
g
a.
i./
L.
f
The
acute
toxicity
reference
value
identified
to
calculate
acute
RQs
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
is
for
a
96­
hour
exposure
duration,
rather
than
the
guideline
recommended
48­
hour
exposure
duration.
Although
48­
hour
LC50
value
have
been
reported
in
other
studies
(
see
Appendix
E),
these
values
are
higher
than
the
96­
hour
LC50
of
0.005
:
g
a.
i./
L.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
EFED
will
use
the
lowest
LC50
value
reported
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
g
The
exposure
duration
of
28
days
was
not
reported
in
the
DER
for
this
study.
Since
this
study
was
classified
as
"
Acceptable"
by
EFED,
an
exposure
duration
of
28
days
is
assumed.
­
57­
a.
Aquatic
Animals
(
1).
Acute
Effects
Freshwater
Fish
The
acute
toxicity
of
technical
grade
cypermethrin
to
freshwater
fish
was
evaluated
in
several
species,
with
96­
hour
LC
50
values
ranging
from
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
rainbow
trout
(
MRID
44546027)
to
4.5
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
bluegill
sunfish
(
MRID
44546030).
Details
of
these
studies
are
provided
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
1a.
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
is
categorized
as
very
highly
toxic
to
freshwater
fish
on
an
acute
basis.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
the
lowest
96­
hour
LC
50
of
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
rainbow
trout
is
used
to
evaluate
acute
toxic
exposure
to
freshwater
fish.

Studies
assessing
the
acute
toxicity
of
three
cypermethrin
formulations
in
rainbow
trout
were
submitted;
results
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
1b.
The
formulations
tested
were
WL
43467
40%
EC
(
40%
a.
i.),
and
GFU
070
(
25.1%
a.
i.).
The
96­
hour
LC
50
values
reported
for
GFU
061
and
GFU
070
are
4.7
:
g
formulation/
L
(
MRID
65813)
and
13.0
:
g
formulation/
L
(
MRID
88947),
respectively,
indicating
that
these
cypermethrin
formulations
are
very
highly
toxic
to
freshwater
fish.
Comparison
of
the
96­
hour
LC
50
values
for
cypermethrin
TGAI
(
0.39
to
3.3
:
g
a.
i./
L)
and
cypermethrin
formulations
(
4.7
to
13.0
:
g
formulation/
L;
equivalent
to
approximately
1.2
to
5.2
:
g
a.
i./
L)
indicates
that
the
formulated
products
have
a
similar
order
of
toxicity
to
technical
grade
cypermethrin.

Acute
toxicity
studies
in
freshwater
fish
were
also
submitted
for
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
in
rainbow
trout
(
MRID
89037)
and
bluegill
sunfish
(
MRID
89038).
Results
yield
96­
hour
LC
50
values
of
13.3
and
36.3
mg
degradate/
L
in
rainbow
trout
and
bluegill
sunfish,
respectively
(
details
provided
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
1c).
Based
on
these
96­
hour
LC
50
values,
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
is
categorized
as
slightly
toxic
to
freshwater
fish
on
an
acute
basis
and
is
much
less
toxic
than
cypermethrin
TGAI
to
freshwater
fish.

Freshwater
Invertebrates
Acute
toxicity
studies
of
technical
grade
cypermethrin
to
daphnids
yield
toxicity
values
ranging
from
a
48­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44546031)
to
a
24­
hour
EC
50
value
(
for
immobility)
of
2.0
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
Acc.
No.
42444601).
Study
details
are
provided
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
2a.
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
categorized
as
very
highly
toxic
on
an
acute
basis.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
the
lowest
LC
50
values
reported
(
48­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L)
is
used
to
assess
acute
risk
to
freshwater
invertebrates.

Studies
assessing
the
acute
toxicity
of
three
cypermethrin
formulations
to
daphnids
were
submitted;
results
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
3b.
The
formulations
tested
were
GFU
034/
A
(
36%
a.
i.),
GFU
061
(
36%
a.
i.),
and
GFU
070
(
24%
a.
i.).
Results
of
these
studies
were
reported
as
EC
50
values
(
for
immobility),
rather
than
LC
50
values.
The
48­
hour
EC
50
values
ranged
from
1.56
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
62793)
to
21.6
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
89040),
indicating
that
these
cypermethrin
formulations
are
very
highly
toxic
to
freshwater
invertebrates
on
an
acute
basis.
­
58­
Comparison
of
the
48­
hour
LC
50
/
EC
50
values
for
cypermethrin
TGAI
(
0.42
to
2.0
:
g
a.
i./
L)
and
cypermethrin
formulations
(
1.56
to
21.6
:
g
a.
i./
L)
indicates
that
the
formulated
products
have
a
similar
order
of
toxicity
to
technical
grade
cypermethrin.

Acute
toxicity
tests
in
freshwater
invertebrates
using
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
to
daphnids
were
also
submitted.
Results
yield
48­
hour
EC
50
values
of
89.0
mg
degradate/
L
(
MRID
152739)
and
111
mg
degradate/
L
(
Acc.
No.
42444601).
Based
on
these
acute
toxicity
values,
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
is
categorized
as
practically
non­
toxic
to
slightly
toxic
to
freshwater
invertebrates
on
an
acute
basis.
Thus,
the
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
degradate
is
much
less
toxic
than
cypermethrin
TGAI
to
freshwater
invertebrates.

Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
The
acute
toxicity
of
technical
grade
cypermethrin
to
estuarine/
marine
fish
was
evaluated
in
sheepshead
minnow
and
Atlantic
salmon,
with
96­
hour
LC
50
values
of
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
41068003)
and
4.3
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
41968212),
respectively,
indicating
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
very
highly
toxic
to
estuarine/
marine
fish
on
an
acute
basis.
Study
details
are
provided
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
5.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
the
lowest
96­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
sheepshead
minnow
will
be
used
to
evaluate
acute
toxic
exposure
to
estuarine/
marine
fish.
No
acute
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted.

Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Acute
toxicity
tests
with
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
using
the
cypermethrin
TGAI
were
conducted
in
shrimp,
molluscs,
and
crustaceans.
Study
details
are
provided
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
6.
Toxicity
values
(
EC
50
and
LC
50
)
reported
for
shrimp
range
from
the
96­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
Acc.
No.
42444601)
to
the
96­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.01
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
41068003).
Similar
results
were
observed
in
lobster
(
96­
hour
LC
50
=
0.04
:
g
a.
i./
L;
MRID
41068003)
and
fiddler
crab
(
96­
hour
LC
50
=
0.197
:
g
a.
i./
L;
MRID
89045).
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
categorized
as
very
highly
toxic
to
estuarine/
marine
shrimp
and
crustaceans.
Results
of
acute
toxicity
tests
in
molluscs
show
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
moderately
to
highly
toxic
in
oysters,
with
a
96­
hour
EC
50
value
of
0.37
mg
a.
i./
L
in
Eastern
oyster
(
MRID
89049)
and
a
48­
hour
LC
50
value
of
>
2.27
mg
a.
i./
L
in
Pacific
oyster
(
Acc.
No.
42444601).
Results
of
these
studies
indicate
that
molluscs
are
less
susceptible
than
shrimp
and
crustaceans
to
cypermethrin
toxicity
on
an
acute
basis.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
the
96­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
mysid
shrimp
will
be
used
to
categorize
acute
risk
to
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
No
acute
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
were
submitted.

Benthic
Organisms
Several
studies
on
the
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
TGAI
to
benthic
organisms
have
been
submitted;
details
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
4.
Studies
were
conducted
using
two
types
of
experimental
protocols,
exposure
in
a
water­
only
system
and
exposure
in
a
watersediment
system.
In
the
water
system
studies,
organisms
were
exposed
to
cypermethrin
in
overlying
(
surface)
water;
no
sediment
was
present
in
the
test
chamber.
For
studies
conducted
­
59­
using
the
water­
sediment
system
protocol,
cypermethrin
was
applied
to
water­
sediment
systems
and
allowed
to
settle
for
2
days;
organisms
were
introduced
to
the
above
water­
sediment
systems,
and
toxicity
was
assessed
after
a
10­
day
exposure
period.
However,
these
studies
present
a
degree
of
uncertainty
because
of
the
lack
of
equilibration
of
spiked
sediments
with
the
pore
water
(
e.
g.,
equilibration
should
have
occurred
for
at
least
one
month).
While
compounds
bound
to
the
sediment
present
potential
toxicity
concerns,
those
residues
that
have
reached
equilibrium
in
the
pore
water
are
considered
a
greater
source
of
toxic
risk
to
benthic
invertebrates
(
Di
Toro
et
al.,
1991).
Therefore
the
studies
presented
in
this
assessment
may
underestimate
sediment
toxicity.
The
registrant
is
currently
conducting
new
sediment
studies
in
order
to
address
this
uncertainty.

Two
studies
on
cypermethrin
TGAI
were
conducted
using
a
water­
sediment
system,
one
study
with
midge
(
MRID
44074402)
and
one
study
with
amphipod
(
MRID
44074406).
Both
studies
were
conducted
using
the
same
protocol,
as
described
above,
using
sediments
from
three
sources
(
Florissant,
Mississippi,
and
Duluth).
All
toxicity
values
for
these
studies
are
expressed
in
terms
of
the
concentration
of
cypermethrin
in
sediment
(:
g
a.
i./
kg)
on
Day
0.
Measurement
of
cypermethrin
in
sediment
and
surface
water
on
Days
0
and
10
of
exposure
indicates
that
the
water­
sediment
system
was
not
at
equilibrium,
thus
adding
uncertainty
to
the
results
of
these
studies.
Results
yield
10­
day
LC
50
values
ranging
from
3.6
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
(
Florrisant
sediment)
in
amphipods
to
67
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
in
midge
(
Mississippi
sediment).
In
general,
toxicity
decreased
(
as
reflected
by
higher
LC
50
values),
with
increasing
organic
carbon
content
of
the
sediment.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
the
lowest
10­
day
LC
50
value
of
3.6
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
in
amphipods
will
be
used
to
characterize
the
risk
of
acute
exposure
of
benthic
organisms
to
cypermethrin
TGAI
in
sediment.

In
order
to
assess
the
risk
of
acute
exposure
to
benthic
organisms
to
cypermethrin
TGAI
based
on
pore
water
concentrations,
the
equivalent
toxicity
value
in
pore
water
is
derived
using
the
lowest
10­
day
LC
50
value
of
3.6
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
in
amphipods
as
follows.
The
LC
50
value
in
whole
sediment
[
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment]
is
divided
by
the
proportion
of
organic
carbon
(
OC)
in
the
sediment
[
0.0099
kg
OC/
kg
whole
sediment].
Thus,
the
LC
50
value
in
units
of
OC
is
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
[
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
÷
0.0099
kg
OC/
kg
sediment].
The
equivalent
concentration
in
pore
water
is
based
on
the
definition
of
the
K
oc
,

K
oc
(
L/
kg
OC)
=
Sediment
Conc
in
OC
(
mg/
kg
OC)
÷
Conc
in
pore
water
(
mg/
L).

By
rearrangement,

Conc
in
water
=
Sediment
Conc
in
units
of
OC
÷
K
oc
.

For
cypermethrin,
the
K
oc
is
taken
as
141,700
[
L/
kg
OC]
(
MRID
42129003).
Thus,
the
calculated
concentration
in
pore
water
corresponding
to
the
LC
50
value
of
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
is
0.00257
µ
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
[
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
÷
141,700
L/
kg
OC].
To
assess
risk
of
acute
exposure
to
benthic
organisms
to
cypermethrin
TGAI
in
terms
of
pore
water
concentrations,
the
derived
LC
50
value
of
0.00257
µ
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
is
used.

No
toxicity
tests
on
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
freshwater
­
60­
benthic
organisms
were
submitted.

(
2).
Chronic
Effects
Freshwater
Fish
An
early
life­
stage
study
in
fathead
minnow
was
submitted
by
the
registrant
to
establish
the
chronic
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
freshwater
fish
(
MRID
89039);
data
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
2.
Results
of
this
30­
day
exposure
study
show
that
survival
was
significantly
reduced
compared
to
controls
at
0.33
:
g
a.
i./
L,
yielding
a
30­
day
NOAEC
value
for
survival
of
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L.
No
treatment­
related
effects
were
observed
for
hatchability
or
growth.
The
NOAEC
value
for
survival
of
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L
will
be
used
to
assess
the
risk
of
chronic
exposure
of
freshwater
fish
to
cypermethrin
TGAI.
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
freshwater
fish
were
submitted.

Freshwater
Invertebrates
No
valid
chronic
toxicity
studies
on
technical
grade
cypermethrin
in
freshwater
invertebrates
were
submitted.
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
waterflea
is
based
on
the
acuteto
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:

Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC
50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Freshwater
invertebrate
LC
50
(
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L)/
X
(
estimated
value
for
Freshwater
invertebrate
NOAEC),
where
X
=
0.069
:
g
a.
i./
L.

To
assess
the
risk
of
chronic
exposure
of
freshwater
invertebrates
to
cypermethrin
TGAI,
the
estimated
NOAEC
for
waterflea
of
0.069
:
g
a.
i./
L
is
used.
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
freshwater
invertebrates
were
submitted.
­
61­
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
No
valid
chronic
toxicity
studies
on
technical
grade
cypermethrin
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted.
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
the
sheepshead
minnow
is
based
on
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:

Freshwater
LC
50
(
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Freshwater
NOAEC
(
0.14:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Estuarine/
Marine
LC
50
(
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L)/
X
(
estimated
value
for
Estuarine/
Marine
NOAEC),
where
X
=
0.34
:
g
a.
i./
L.

To
assess
the
risk
of
chronic
exposure
of
estuarine/
marine
fish
to
cypermethrin
TGAI,
the
estimated
NOAEC
for
sheepshead
minnow
of
0.34
:
g
a.
i./
L
is
used.
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted.

Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Three
studies
involving
life­
cycle
tests
in
mysid
shrimp
were
submitted
by
the
registrant
to
establish
the
chronic
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates;
data
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
7.
The
NOAEC
values
reported
in
these
studies
range
from
0.781
ng
a.
i./
L
for
effects
on
first
generation
mortality,
male
length
and
weight
and
female
weight
(
MRID
42725301),
to
1.5
ng
a.
i./
L
for
number
of
offspring
(
MRID
42444601)
and
survival
and
reproduction
(
MRID
44546035).
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
the
lowest
NOAEC
value
of
0.781
ng
a.
i./
L
will
be
used
to
characterize
chronic
risk
to
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
were
submitted.

Benthic
Organisms
Chronic
toxicity
studies
in
benthic
organisms
were
not
submitted.
To
assess
chronic
risk
to
benthic
organisms,
chronic
toxicity
values
were
derived
for
both
sediment
and
pore
water.
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
benthic
organisms
in
terms
of
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
is
based
on
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:

Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC
50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Benthic
LC
50
in
sediment
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
/
X
(
estimated
benthic
NOAEC
value
in
sediment),
where
X
=
0.59
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment.
­
62­
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
benthic
organisms
in
units
of
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
pore
water
is
based
on
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:

Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC
50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Benthic
LC
50
in
pore
water
(
0.00257
µ
g
a.
i./
L
/
X
(
estimated
benthic
NOAEC
value
in
pore
water
),
where
X
=
0.00042
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water.
To
assess
chronic
risk
to
benthic
organisms,
the
estimated
NOAEC
values
of
0.59
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
and
0.00042
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
are
used.

No
chronic
toxicity
tests
on
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
freshwater
benthic
organisms
were
submitted.

(
3).
Sublethal
Effects
Freshwater
Fish
In
addition
to
lethality
endpoints,
sublethal
effects
of
acute
cypermethrin
(
TGAI)
exposure
were
assessed
in
studies
in
rainbow
trout
and
bluegill
sunfish.
Study
details
are
provided
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
1a.
The
sublethal
signs
of
toxicity
include
rapid
and
erratic
swimming,
partial/
complete
loss
of
equilibrium,
jaw
spasms,
gulping
respiration,
lethargy,
and
darkened
pigmentation.
The
acute
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
ranged
from
<
0.00068
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
rainbow
trout
(
Acc.
No.
241598)
to
2.1
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
bluegill
sunfish
(
MRID
44546030).
For
two
studies,
the
acute
NOAEC
value
for
sublethal
effects
was
several
orders
of
magnitude
lower
than
the
LC
50
value;
in
rainbow
trout,
the
acute
NOAEC
and
LC
50
values
were
0.00068
:
g
a.
i./
L
and
0.8
:
g
a.
i./
L,
respectively
(
Acc.
No.
241598),
and
in
bluegill
sunfish,
the
acute
NOAEC
and
LC
50
values
were
<
0.0022
:
g
a.
i./
L
and
2.2
:
g
a.
i./
L,
respectively
(
Acc.
No.
241598).
Thus,
sublethal
effects
can
occur
at
exposure
levels
far
below
the
concentrations
that
cause
lethality.

Similar
sublethal
effects
were
reported
in
an
acute
toxicity
study
in
rainbow
tout
using
the
cypermethrin
formulation
GFU
070
(
25.1%
a.
i.),
with
an
acute
NOAEC
value
of
1.15
:
g
formulation/
L
(
MRID
88947).
Acute
toxicity
studies
on
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
did
not
report
sublethal
effects.

Results
of
a
chronic
toxicity
study
in
fathead
minnow
report
that
no
significant
treatmentrelated
effects
on
hatchability
or
growth
were
observed
during
a
30­
day
exposure
to
technical
grade
cypermethrin
(
MRID
89039).
Thus,
no
sublethal
effects
were
observed
at
concentrations
up
to
0.33
:
g
a.
i./
L,
the
highest
dose
tested.

Freshwater
Invertebrates
The
sublethal
effects
of
acute
cypermethrin
(
TGAI)
exposure
were
assessed
in
studies
in
waterflea.
Study
details
are
provided
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
3a.
The
sublethal
signs
of
toxicity
include
immobilization
and
decreased
movement
in
response
to
stimulation.
Acute
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
range
from
0.085
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44546032)
to
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44546031).
­
63­
Similar
sublethal
effects
were
reported
following
acute
exposure
to
cypermethrin
formulations
(
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
3b),
however,
acute
NOAEC
values
were
not
reported.
Acute
toxicity
studies
on
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
did
not
report
sublethal
effects
(
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
3c).
No
valid
chronic
toxicity
studies
in
freshwater
invertebrates
were
submitted.
Thus,
no
information
is
available
regarding
the
sublethal
effects
of
chronic
exposure.

Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
Sublethal
effects
of
acute
cypermethrin
exposure
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
(
loss
of
equilibrium
and
lethargy)
were
reported
in
two
studies
of
sheepshead
minnow
(
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
5).
Acute
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
ranged
from
0.84
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44546034)
to
1.4
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44546034)
and
are
approximately
2­
to
3­
fold
lower
than
the
corresponding
LC
50
values
of
2.7
and
2.4
:
g
a.
i./
L,
respectively.
No
valid
chronic
toxicity
studies
on
technical
grade
cypermethrin,
cypermethrin
formulations,
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted.
Thus,
no
information
is
available
regarding
the
sublethal
effects
of
chronic
exposure.

Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Sublethal
effects
(
lethargy,
erratic
swimming
behavior,
loss
of
equilibrium,
and
surfacing)
of
cypermethrin
TGAI
in
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
were
reported
in
two
studies
of
mysid
shrimp
(
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
6).
Acute
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
range
from
1.7
ng
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44561210)
to
2.3
ng
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44561209)
and
are
approximately
2­
to
3­
fold
lower
than
the
corresponding
LC
50
values
of
5.5
and
5.9
ng
a.
i./
L,
respectively.

Results
of
chronic
toxicity
studies
in
mysid
shrimp
show
that
exposure
to
technical
grade
cypermethrin
had
adverse
effects
on
reproductive
and
growth
parameters;
study
details
are
provided
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
7.
For
decreased
number
of
young,
a
chronic
NOAEC
value
of
1.5
ng
a.
i./
L
was
reported
in
two
studies
(
Acc.
No.
42444601,
MRID
44546035).
For
decreased
growth
and
length,
the
chronic
NOAEC
value
reported
is
0.781
ng
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
42725301).
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
were
submitted.

Benthic
Organisms
Acute
toxicity
tests
using
the
water­
sediment
system
(
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
5)
report
decreased
growth
(
length
and
dry
weight)
in
both
amphipod
(
MRID
44074406)
and
midge
(
MRID
44074402).
Acute
NOAEC
values
range
from
<
1.8
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
in
amphipod
(
Florrisant
sediment)
and
25
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
in
midge
(
Mississippi
sediment).
Acute
toxicity
studies
in
benthic
organisms
using
the
water­
only
system
did
not
specifically
report
sublethal
effects
resulting
from
cypermethrin
exposure.
No
valid
chronic
toxicity
studies
on
technical
grade
cypermethrin,
cypermethrin
formulations,
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
benthic
organisms
were
submitted.
Thus,
no
information
is
available
regarding
the
sublethal
effects
of
chronic
exposure.

(
4).
Field
Studies
Several
aquatic
field
studies
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
formulations
have
been
­
64­
reviewed
for
this
risk
assessment.
Results
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
8.
Data
from
field
studies
were
obtained
from
studies
submitted
by
the
registrant
and
from
open
literature
studies
identified
from
searches
of
the
ECOTOX
database.
Results
of
these
studies
provide
information
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
fish
and
invertebrates
(
including
benthic
organisms)
in
freshwater
aquatic
environments.
However,
due
to
the
variability
in
experimental
techniques
and
methodologies
and
the
lack
of
rigorous
monitoring
of
water
and
sediment
concentrations
of
cypermethrin,
results
of
these
studies
are
not
sufficient
for
use
in
quantitative
assessments.
Thus,
information
provided
in
these
studies
will
be
used
qualitatively
for
this
assessment.

Freshwater
Fish
Data
from
field
studies
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
fish
were
obtained
from
three
registrant­
submitted
studies
(
MRID
155770,
MRID
155772,
MRID
152737,)
and
two
openliterature
studies
(
Crossland
et
al.,
1982;
Davies
and
Cook,
1993).
Results
of
the
registrantsubmitted
studies
using
single
applications
of
cypermethrin
at
rates
ranging
from
0.0012
lb
a.
i/
A
(
MRID
152737)
to
0.089
lb
a.
i./
A
(
MRID
155770)
show
no
lethal
or
sublethal
effects
on
fish
populations.
In
the
open
literature
studies,
application
rates
ranged
from
0.011
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Davies
and
Cook,
1993)
to
0.0623
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Crossland
et
al.,
1982).
Although
no
adverse
effects
were
observed
on
fish
populations
at
the
higher
application
rate
of
0.0623
lb
a.
i./
A,
sublethal
effects
(
including
loss
of
equilibrium,
lethargy,
and
muscle
tetany)
were
reported
following
single
application
of
0.011
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Davies
and
Cook,
1993).
In
this
study,
sublethal
effects
were
observed
for
8
days
following
application
and
were
attributed,
in
part,
to
exposure
to
cypermethrin
from
ingestion
of
dead
and
dying
invertebrates.

Freshwater
Invertebrates
and
Benthic
Organisms
In
field
studies
assessing
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
aquatic
invertebrates
and
benthic
populations,
results
range
from
no
observable
effects
to
catastrophic
drift
and
profound
decreases
in
population
diversity
and
abundance.
For
studies
reporting
no
adverse
effects
on
macroinvertebrate
populations
(
Acc.
No.
250506,
Supplemental;
MRID
155772,
application
rates
range
from
a
single
application
of
0.0623
lb
a.
i./
A
(
MRID
155772)
to
repeated
applications
of
0.126
lb
a.
i./
A
(
6
applications
at
5­
day
intervals
to
cotton
fields)
(
Acc.
No.
250506).
However,
results
of
several
field
studies
show
that
exposure
to
cypermethrin
at
application
rates
ranging
from
0.00025
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Mulla
et
al.
1978)
to
0.125
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Acc.
No.
250506;
Supplemental)
causes
significant
decreases
is
abundance
and
diversity
of
aquatic
invertebrate
populations.
Effects
include
catastrophic
drift
within
0­
90
minutes
after
application
of
cypermethrin
(
Crossland
et
al.,
1982;
Farmer
et.
al.,
1995;
Moshen
and
Mulla,
1982),
and
decreased
abundance
and
diversity
of
macroinvertebrates
over
a
longer
time­
period
(
several
weeks
to
several
months
(
MRID
155770;
MRID
152737;
Farmer
et
al.,
1995;
Kedwards
et
al.,
1999a,
b;
Mulla
et
al.,
1978;
Mulla
et
al.,
1982).
In
some
cases,
recovery
of
individual
species
was
rapid
(
MRID
155770;
Kedwards
et
al.,
1999a,
b);
however,
for
other
species,
recovery
did
not
occur
for
several
months
(
Kedwards
et
al.,
1999b;
Davies
and
Cook,
1993).

a.
Residue
Monitoring
(
non­
agricultural)
­
65­
Weston
et
al.,
(
2005)
recently
completed
monitoring
of
water
courses
draining
residential
areas
(
Roseville,
Placer
County,
Califorinia)
for
pyrethroid
residues
and
effects.
The
suburban
development
is
situated
adjacent
to
several
creeks
that
drain
the
sudivisions.
Weston's
findings
showed
that
nearly
all
creek
sediments
collected
caused
toxicity
to
the
amphipod
Hyallella
azteca
with
about
half
of
these
samples
causing
complete
mortality
to
the
test
organisms.
Although
the
pyrethroid
bifenthrin
was
implicated
as
the
prime
cause
of
toxicity,
additional
contributions
to
toxicity
also
occurred
from
cypermethrin
and
cyfluthrin.
All
of
these
pyrethroids
are
used
in
lawn
care
(
bifenthrin,
cyfluthrin)
and
structural
pest
control
(
cypermethrin,
cyfluthrin,
bifenthrin)
which
can
account
for
residue
runoff
to
these
adjacent
water
bodies.
In
2003
information
from
professional
applicators
in
Placer
County
show
that
cypermethrin
accounted
for
about
75%
of
the
structural
pest
control
which
include
below­
ground
use
as
termidicides.
Although
this
type
of
application
lessens
the
likelihood
of
runoff,
the
product
is
also
registered
for
above­
ground
application
which
may
account
for
cypermethrin
residues
in
the
samples.
The
uncertainty
brought
out
by
this
study
presents
the
question
of
whether
this
situation
is
unique
to
Roseville,
California
or
possible
representative
of
suburban
systems
in
general.

b.
Plants
Inhabiting
Aquatic
Areas
No
data
were
submitted
to
evaluate
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
exposure
to
non­
target
plants
inhabiting
aquatic
areas.
However
the
Agency
does
not
consider
cypermethrin
or
the
other
pyrethroids
as
being
phytotoxic
for
the
following
reasons:
1)
the
compound
is
used
as
a
spray
on
agricultural
crops
with
no
phytotoxic
effects;
2)
the
neural
toxic
mode
of
action
precludes
phytotoxic
concerns;
3)
the
Agency
is
not
aware
of
any
incidents
involving
plants
and
cypermethrin
alone.

2.
Terrestrial
Effects
Characterization
The
most
sensitive
acute
and
chronic
toxicity
reference
values
associated
with
cypermethrin
exposure
to
mammals
and
birds
are
summarized
in
Table
13.
A
more
detailed
summary
of
the
terrestrial
toxicity
data
available
to
characterize
risks
associated
with
cypermethrin
applications
is
given
in
Appendix
E.
Based
on
the
results
of
acute
oral
and
acute
dietary
toxicity
studies
in
birds,
cypermethrin
is
categorized
as
practically
non­
toxic
and
slightly
toxic,
respectively.
In
mammals,
results
of
acute
exposure
studies
indicate
that
cypermethrin
is
moderately
toxic.
Results
of
available
toxicity
studies
indicate
that
cypermethrin
is
highly
toxic
to
honey
bees
and
very
toxic
to
earthworms
on
an
acute
contact
basis.
Thus,
honey
bees
and
nontarget
insects
are
expected
to
be
the
species
at
risk
for
acute
effects
(
lethality).
Although
cypermethrin
exposure
does
not
appear
to
cause
chronic
toxicity
to
birds,
there
is
uncertainty
regarding
levels
above
50
ppm.
There
is
a
concern
for
chronic
risk
to
mammals,
based
on
parental
toxicity
and
toxicity
to
offspring
(
decreased
body
weight
and
body
weight
gain).
­
66­
Table
13.
Cypermethrin
Toxicity
Reference
Values
(
TRVs)
for
Terrestrial
Organisms.

Exposure
Scenario
Species
Exposure
Duration
Toxicity
Reference
Value
Reference
Mammals
Acute
(
Dose­
based)
rat
single
oral
dose
LD50
(
M):
247
mg/
kg
MRID
00056800
Chronic
(
Dietary­
based
and
Dose­
based)
rat
3
generation
reproduction
study
NOAEL
(
toxicity
to
parents
and
offspring)
=
5
mg/
kg/
day
[
equivalent
to
dietary
concentration
of
100
ppm
diet]
MRID
00090040
Birds
Acute
(
Dose­
based)
bobwhite
quail
single
oral
dose
LD50
>
2,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
wt
MRID
44546024
Acute
(
Dietary­
based)
mallard
duck
5­
day
dietary
LC50
>
20,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
MRID
90071
Chronic
(
Dietary­
based)
mallard
duck
and
bobwhite
quail
Avian
reproduction
study
(
dietary
exposure)
NOAEC
>
50
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
MRID
90072
MRID
90074
a.
Terrestrial
Animals
(
1).
Acute
Effects
Birds
Acute
toxicity
studies
on
technical
grade
cypermethrin
have
been
conducted
with
bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
ducks;
results
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Tables
E­
9
and
E­
10.
Results
of
acute
oral
toxicity
studies
in
mallard
ducks
(
Acc.
No.
241598
)
and
bobwhite
quail
(
MRID
44546024)
yield
LD
50
values
of
>
9,520
and
>
2,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight,
respectively,
indicating
that
cypermethrin
is
practically
non­
toxic
to
birds
on
an
acute
oral
basis.
Results
of
acute
dietary
toxicity
studies
in
mallard
ducks
and
bobwhite
quail
yield
LC
50
values
ranging
from>
20,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
mallard
ducks
(
MRID
90071)
to
>
5,290
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
mallard
ducks
(
MRID
44546025)
and
bobwhite
quail
(
MRID
44546026),
indicating
that
cypermethrin
is
categorized
as
practically
non­
toxic
to
slightly
toxic
on
an
acute
dietary
basis.
To
assess
acute
risk
of
cypermethrin
to
birds,
the
lowest
acute
oral
LD
50
value
of
>
2,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
and
the
lowest
acute
dietary
LC
50
value
of
>
20,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
are
used.
­
67­
No
acute
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
avian
species
were
submitted.

Mammals
Results
of
an
acute
oral
toxicity
study
in
rats
administered
single
doses
of
cypermethrin
TGAI
yield
LD
50
values
of
247
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
wt
in
males
and
309
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
females
(
MRID
00056800).
Results
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
12.
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
classified
as
moderately
toxic
to
mammals.
The
lowest
oral
LD
50
of
247
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
is
used
to
assess
acute
risk
in
mammals.

No
acute
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
mammals
were
submitted.

Terrestrial
Invertebrates
Results
of
an
acute
contact
study
in
honey
bees
using
technical
grade
cypermethrin
yield
a
48­
hour
LD
50
value
of
0.023
:
g
a.
i./
bee,
categorizing
cypermethrin
as
highly
toxic
to
honey
bees
(
Acc.
No.
260647).
Results
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
13a.
In
an
oral
exposure
study
in
honey
bees,
a
LD
50
value
of
0.172
:
g
a.
i./
bee
was
reported
(
Acc.
No.
260647).
Similar
results
were
obtained
from
acute
contact
studies
using
cypermethrin
formulations,
with
LD
50
values
ranging
from
0.088
:
g
a.
i./
bee
(
Acc.
No.
260647)
for
the
cypermethrin
formulation
GFU
061
to
0.13
:
g
formulation/
bee
for
a
formulation
containing
betacypermethrin
(%
a.
i.
not
specified)
(
MRID
44544208;
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
13b).

An
acute
contact
study
in
earthworms
was
identified
from
an
open
literature
study
(
Roberts
and
Dorough
1984;
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
14).
Results
of
this
study
yield
a
48­
hour
contact
LC
50
value
of
26.09
:
g
a.
i./
cm2
for
cypermethrin
applied
to
filter
paper,
categorizing
cypermethrin
as
very
toxic
to
earthworms.

No
acute
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
degradates
in
terrestrial
invertebrates
were
submitted.
­
68­
(
2).
Chronic
Effects
Birds
One­
generation
reproductive
studies
were
submitted
for
mallard
ducks
(
MRID
90073)
and
bobwhite
quail
(
MRID
90074).
Results
of
both
studies
show
no
treatment­
related
effects
on
adults,
reproductive
parameters,
or
offspring,
as
a
result
of
cypermethrin
exposure
at
dietary
concentrations
up
to
50
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
the
highest
dose
tested).
Since
a
LOAEC
was
not
established
there
is
uncertainty
regarding
the
NOAEC
especially
for
exposure
levels
above
50
ppm.
As
a
comparison,
the
Agency
evaluated
another
pyrethroid,
permethrin,
for
chronic
avian
toxicity
and
noted
that
the
NOAEC/
LOAEC
were
125/
500
ppm.

No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
avian
species
were
submitted.

Mammals
Results
of
3­
generation
reproduction
studies
in
rats
show
that
exposure
to
technical
grade
cypermethrin
results
in
decreased
body
weight
and
decreased
body
weight
gain
in
both
adults
and
offspring,
with
NOAELs
ranging
from
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
equivalent
to
5
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight/
day)
(
MRID
00090040)
to
150
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
equivalent
to
7.5
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight/
day)
(
MRIDs
00112912,
42068504,
9202704).
No
other
treatment­
related
effects
on
reproductive
parameters
were
reported
in
these
studies.
To
assess
chronic
risk
to
mammalian
species,
the
lowest
NOAEL
value
of
150
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
equivalent
to
7.5
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight/
day)
is
used.
Details
are
summarized
in
Appendix
E,
Table
E­
12.

No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
mammalian
species
were
submitted.

Terrestrial
Invertebrates
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
technical
grade
cypermethrin,
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
terrestrial
invertebrates
were
submitted.

(
3).
Sublethal
Effects
Birds
Acute
toxicity
studies
in
birds
report
aversion
to
feed
containing
cypermethrin
at
concentrations
greater
than
approximately
2,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
MRID
44546025,
MRID
44546026).
In
addition,
reductions
in
body
weight,
which
may
have
been
caused
by
aversion
to
feed,
were
reported,
with
NOAEC
values
ranging
from
1290
to
2550
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet.
No
other
gross
pathological
findings,
clinical
signs
of
toxicity,
or
adverse
effects
on
reproductive
parameters
or
offspring
were
reported
in
the
submitted
acute
and
chronic
toxicity
studies
in
avian
species.
­
69­
Mammals
Exposure
of
rats
to
a
single
dose
of
cypermethrin
produced
clinical
signs
of
neurotoxicity
and
abnormal
gait.
Results
of
chronic
toxicity
studies
show
that
exposure
to
technical
grade
cypermethrin
results
in
decreased
body
weight
and
decreased
body
weight
gain
in
both
adults
and
offspring,
with
NOAELs
ranging
from
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
equivalent
to
5
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight/
day)
(
MRID
00090040)
to
150
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
equivalent
to
7.5
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight/
day)
(
MRIDs
00112912,
42068504,
9202704).
No
treatment­
related
effects
on
reproductive
parameters
were
reported
in
these
studies.

Terrestrial
Invertebrates
No
information
on
sublethal
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
terrestrial
invertebrates
was
reported
in
the
available
studies
in
honey
bees
and
earthworms.

(
4).
Field
Studies
No
field
studies
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
terrestrial
organisms
were
submitted.

b.
Terrestrial
Plants
No
data
were
submitted
to
evaluate
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
exposure
to
non­
target
terrestrial
plants
or
terrestrial
plants
inhabiting
semi­
aquatic
areas.
However,
cypermethrin
as
well
as
other
pyrethroids
have
been
used
on
agricultural
crops
without
any
phytotoxic
effects.
The
neural
effects
caused
by
pyrethroids
appears
to
be
a
mode
of
action
that
does
not
trigger
a
toxic
response
in
plants.

IV.
Risk
Characterization
Risk
characterization
is
the
integration
of
exposure
and
effects
characterization
to
determine
the
ecological
risk
from
the
use
of
cypermethrin
and
the
likelihood
of
effects
on
aquatic
life
and
wildlife
based
on
varying
pesticide­
use
scenarios.
The
risk
characterization
provides
an
estimation
and
a
description
of
the
risk;
articulates
risk
assessment
assumptions,
limitations,
and
uncertainties;
synthesizes
an
overall
conclusion;
and
provides
the
risk
managers
with
information
to
make
regulatory
decisions.

A.
Risk
Estimation
­
Integration
of
Exposure
and
Effects
Data
Results
of
the
exposure
and
toxicity
effects
data
are
used
to
evaluate
the
likelihood
of
adverse
ecological
effects
on
non­
target
species.
For
the
assessment
of
cypermethrin
risks,
the
risk
quotient
(
RQ)
method
is
used
to
compare
exposure
and
measured
toxicity
values
(
see
Appendix
F).
Estimated
environmental
concentrations
(
EECs)
are
divided
by
acute
and
chronic
toxicity
values.
The
resulting
RQs
are
then
compared
to
the
Agency's
levels
of
concern
(
LOCs).
These
LOCs,
summarized
in
Appendix
F,
are
the
Agency's
interpretive
policy
used
to
analyze
potential
risk
to
non­
target
organisms
and
the
need
to
consider
regulatory
action.
For
non­
target
aquatic
animals
(
i.
e.,
fish
and
invertebrates),
surface
water,
pore
water,
and
sediment
EECs
were
­
70­
obtained
from
the
Tier
2
model
PRZM/
EXAMS
(
see
Tables
7­
9).
For
non­
target
terrestrial
animals
(
i.
e.,
birds
and
mammals),
EECs
and
RQs
were
obtained
from
T­
REX
(
see
Appendix
D).
Toxicity
reference
values
for
aquatic
and
terrestrial
organisms
exposed
to
cypermethrin
are
summarized
in
Table
12
and
Table
13,
respectively.
Details
of
all
RQs
are
provided
in
Appendix
G.

1.
Non­
Target
Aquatic
Animals
and
Plants
To
assess
risks
of
cypermethrin
to
non­
target
aquatic
animals
(
i.
e.,
fish
and
invertebrates),
surface
water,
pore
water,
and
sediment
EECs
were
obtained
from
the
Tier
II
model
PRZM/
EXAMS
(
see
Tables
7­
9).
The
PRZM/
EXAMS
model
was
run
using
the
following
six
scenarios:
California
cotton,
Mississippi
cotton,
North
Carolina
cotton,
Texas
cotton,
Georgia
pecans,
and
California
lettuce
(
head).
EFED
uses
the
peak
concentration
to
derive
RQs
for
acute
exposure
and
the
21­
day
average
concentration
to
derive
RQs
for
chronic
exposure.
Since
results
of
acute
toxicity
studies
in
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates
(
See
Appendix
E,
Tables
E­
1c
and
E­
3c)
indicate
that
the
major
cypermethrin
degradate
(
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid)
is
much
less
toxic
than
the
parent
compound,
EECs
and
RQs
were
derived
only
for
the
parent
compound,
not
for
total
residue
(
parent
plus
degradates).
The
major
biodegradation
degradates:
3­
PBA,
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA
and
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde,
are
the
result
of
the
cleavage
of
the
ester
moiety
of
the
parent
compound.

a.
Water
Column
Exposure
­
Acute
and
Chronic
Risk
Acute
RQs
for
aquatic
animals
are
summarized
in
Table
14.
The
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5)
is
exceeded
for
all
aquatic
animals
and
modeled
crop
scenarios,
except
CA
cotton
for
freshwater
invertebrates
and
estuarine/
marine
fish,
and
CA
lettuce
for
estuarine/
marine
fish.
LOCs
for
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1)
and
acute
listed
risk
(
LOC
0.05)
are
exceeded
for
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine
fish
and
invertebrates
for
all
six
crop
scenarios
considered
in
this
assessment,
The
highest
acute
RQs
are
observed
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates,
ranging
from
37
(
CA
cotton)
to
423
(
NC
cotton),
greatly
exceeding
all
acute
LOCs.
As
discussed
previously
(
Section
III.
C),
based
on
comparison
of
acute
LC
50
values,
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
appear
to
be
the
most
sensitive
aquatic
animal.
Thus,
acute
RQ
values
derived
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
are
much
higher
than
those
derived
for
the
other
aquatic
animals.
Because
acute
toxicity
values
for
freshwater
fish,
freshwater
invertebrates,
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
are
similar
in
magnitude,
the
ranges
of
acute
RQs
for
these
species
are
also
similar
(
0.5
to
5.2
for
freshwater
fish,
0.4
to
4.8
for
freshwater
invertebrates,
and
0.2
to
2.1
for
estuarine/
marine
fish).
For
all
aquatic
animal
species,
the
highest
acute
RQs
are
observed
for
the
NC
cotton
scenario,
and
the
lowest
acute
RQs
are
observed
for
the
CA
lettuce
scenario.
This
trend
reflects
the
same
trend
of
the
values
of
the
EECs,
which
are
used
in
the
calculation
of
the
RQs
(
see
Tables
7
to
9).
­
71­
Table
14.
Acute
RQs
for
Freshwater
Fish,
Freshwater
Invertebrates,
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
and
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin.
a
Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Freshwater
Fish
Acute
RQ
Freshwater
Invertebrate
Acute
RQ
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
Acute
RQ
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
Acute
RQ
Cotton
California
0.5
b,
c,
d
0.4
c,
d
0.2
c,
d
37
b,
c,
d
Mississippi
3.3
b,
c,
d
3.0
b,
c,
d
1.3
b,
c,
d
269
b,
c,
d
North
Carolina
5.2
b,
c,
d
4.8
b,
c,
d
2.1
b,
c,
d
423
b,
c
Texas
1.3
b,
c,
d
1.2
b,
c,
d
0.5
b,
c,
d
104
b,
c,
d
Pecans
Georgia
2.4
b,
c,
d
2.3
b,
c,
d
1.0
b,
c,
d
201
b,
c,
d
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
0.7
b,
c,
d
0.69
b,
c,
d
0.3
c,
d
61
b,
c,
d
a
RQs
=
EEC/
LC50,
where
EECs
are
the
peak
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS,
and
acute
toxicity
reference
values
are
as
follows:
freshwater
fish,
rainbow
trout
96­
hr
LC50
=
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L;
freshwater
invertebrates,
Daphnia
48­
hr
EC50
=
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L;
estuarine/
marine
fish,
sheepshead
minnow
96­
hour
LC50
=
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L;
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
mysid
shrimp
96­
hour
LC50
=
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L.
b
RQs
meet
or
exceed
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5).
c
RQs
meet
or
exceed
LOC
for
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1).
d
RQs
meet
or
exceed
LOC
for
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).

Chronic
RQs
for
aquatic
animals
are
summarized
in
Table
15.
For
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates,
chronic
RQs
exceed
the
chronic
LOC
(
LOC
1)
by
factors
ranging
from
44
to
246.
As
discussed
earlier
(
Section
III.
C),
results
from
chronic
toxicity
studies
indicate
that
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
are
far
more
sensitive
to
chronic
cypermethrin
exposure
than
other
species
of
aquatic
animals.
Thus,
as
anticipated,
chronic
RQs
derived
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
are
much
higher
than
those
derived
for
other
aquatic
animals.
For
freshwater
fish,
RQs
range
from
0.1
to
0.7.
Due
to
data
gaps
for
chronic
toxicity
studies
for
freshwater
invertebrates
and
estuarine/
marine
fish,
chronic
RQs
are
based
on
estimated
chronic
toxicity
values
(
detailed
description
provided
in
Section
III.
C),
adding
considerable
uncertainty
to
chronic
risk
estimates.
For
freshwater
invertebrates,
chronic
RQs
range
from
0.5
to
2.8,
exceeding
the
chronic
LOC
for
four
of
the
six
crop
scenarios.
For
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine
fish,
all
chronic
RQs
are
below
the
chronic
LOC.
­
72­
Table
15.
Chronic
RQs
for
Freshwater
Fish,
Freshwater
Invertebrates,
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
and
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin.
a
Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Freshwater
Fish
Chronic
RQ
Freshwater
Invertebrate
Chronic
RQ
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
Chronic
RQ
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
Chronic
RQ
Cotton
California
0.2
0.8
0.1
70
b
Mississippi
0.7
2.7
b
0.3
241
b
North
Carolina
0.7
2.8
b
0.3
246
b
Texas
0.2
0.9
b
0.1
77
b
Pecans
Georgia
0.3
1.2b
0.1
110b
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
0.1
0.5
0.1
44
b
a
RQs
=
EEC/
NOAEC,
where
EECs
are
the
21­
day
average
concentration
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS
is
used
to
calculate
chronic
RQs
for
invertebrates.
The
60­
day
PRZM/
EXAMS
output
was
used
to
calculate
potential
chronic
RQs
for
fish.
TRVe
values
are
as
follows:
freshwater
fish,
fathead
minnow
28­
day
NOAEC
=
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L;
freshwater
invertebrates,
estimated
chronic
NOAEC
=
0.069
:
g
a.
i./
L;
estuarine/
marine
fish,
estimated
chronic
NOAEC
=
0.34
:
g
a.
i./
L;
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates,
mysid
shrimp
28­
day
NOAEC
=
0.0.000781
:
g
a.
i./
L.
Details
for
all
estimated
chronic
toxicity
values
are
provided
in
Section
III.
C.
b
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).

b.
Sediment
Exposure
­
Acute
and
Chronic
Risk
Acute
and
chronic
RQs
have
been
derived
for
exposure
of
benthic
organisms
via
sediment
and
pore
water
(
Table
16).
All
acute
and
chronic
RQs
for
benthic
organisms
exceed
the
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
acute
listed
risk
(
LOC
0.05)
and
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1)
for
all
modeled
crop
uses.
There
are
several
uncertainties
regarding
both
acute
and
chronic
RQs.
Due
to
data
gaps,
acute
RQs
for
pore
water
and
chronic
RQs
for
sediment
and
pore
water
were
derived
from
estimated
toxicity
values
based
on
the
acute
sediment
toxicity
value
(
details
provided
in
Section
III.
C).
However,
there
is
considerable
uncertainty
surrounding
the
acute
sediment
toxicity
value,
since
this
value
was
obtained
from
a
study
using
a
water­
sediment
system
that
was
not
at
equilibrium
(
sediment
concentrations
decreased
throughout
the
exposure
period).
­
73­
Table
16.
Acute
and
Chronic
RQs
for
Benthic
Organisms
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Sediment
Acute
RQ
a,
e
Pore
Water
Acute
RQ
b,
e
Sediment
Chronic
RQ
c,
e
Pore
Water
Chronic
RQ
d,
e
Cotton
California
7
2
35
9
Mississippi
44
11
228
57
North
Carolina
48
12
244
60
Texas
13
3
52
13
Pecans
Georgia
26
7
123
31
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
8
2
47
12
a
Sediment
acute
RQs
=
EEC/
LC50,
where
EECs
are
the
peak
concentration
in
sediment
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS
and
acute
toxicity
reference
value
is
the
amphipod
10­
day
LC50
=
3.6
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
b
Pore
water
acute
RQs
=
EEC/
LC50,
where
EECs
are
the
peak
concentration
in
pore
water
from
PRZM/
EXAMS
and
estimated
acuteLC50
=
0.00257
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
(
details
for
estimated
toxicity
value
are
provided
in
Section
III.
C).
c
Sediment
chronic
RQs
=
EEC/
NOAEC,
where
EECs
are
the
21­
day
average
concentration
in
sediment
from
PRZM/
EXAMS
and
estimated
chronic
NOAEC
=
0.59
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
(
details
for
estimated
toxicity
value
are
provided
in
Section
III.
C).
d
Pore
water
chronic
RQs
=
EEC/
NOAEC,
where
EECs
are
the
21­
day
average
concentration
in
pore
water
from
PRZM/
EXAMS
and
estimated
chronic
NOAEC
=
0.00042
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
(
details
for
estimated
toxicity
value
are
provided
in
Section
III.
C).
e
All
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05),
and
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).

c.
Use
of
Buffer
Zones
For
the
Spray
Drift/
Buffer
Zone
Analysis,
risk
quotients
were
calculated
for
the
most
sensitive
species
on
an
acute
basis.
The
peak
EEC
is
the
EEC
most
sensitive
to
the
changes
to
the
values
of
spray
drift.
­
74­
Supplementary
Table
H.
Acute
Risk
Quotients
for
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Using
Different
Buffer
Zones
and
Levels
of
Spray
Drift.
Peak
Surface
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
Ecological
Risk
Assessment,
Based
on
NC
cotton
(
surrogate
scenario
for
estuarine/
marine
environments).
Use
of
Most
Sensitive
Species,
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
(
Mysid
Shrimp)
LC50
=
0.00475
ppb
(
special
runs).

Buffer
Zone
(
ft)
Typical
drift
scenario,
release
height
10
ft,
wind
speed
10
mph,
ASAE
fine
to
medium
droplets
(
EECs)

%
drift
peak
(
ppb)
RQ
reference
run
0
std.
ground
applic
1,
99%
app.
effic.
2.292
483
(
1,2,3)

std.
aerial
applic.
5
2.385
502
(
1,2,3)

For
run
with
0%
drift,
an
RQ
is
not
calculated
because
it
is
only
a
hypothetical
run,
not
likely
to
happen
in
the
field.
Risk
Presumption
1.
Acute
High
Risk
$
0.5
2.
Acute
Restricted
Use
$
0.1
3.
Acute
Endangered
Species
$
0.01
Supplementary
Table
I.
Acute
Risk
Quotients
for
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Using
Different
Buffer
Zones
and
Levels
of
Spray
Drift.
Peak
Surface
Water
Concentrations,
EECs
(
ppb)
for
Ecological
Risk
Assessment,
Based
on
NC
cotton
(
surrogate
scenario
for
estuarine/
marine
environments).
Use
of
Most
Sensitive
Species,
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
(
Mysid
Shrimp)
LC50
=
0.00475
ppb
(
Buffer
Zone
Runs).

Buffer
Zone
(
ft)
Low
end
drift
scenario,
release
height
8
ft,
wind
speed
3
mph,
ASAE
medium
to
coarse
droplets
(
EECs)
Typical
drift
scenario,
release
height
10
ft,
wind
speed
10
mph,
ASAE
fine
to
medium
droplets
(
EECs)
High
end
(
very
conservative)
drift
scenario,
release
height
15
ft,
wind
speed
15
mph,
ASAE
very
fine
droplets
(
EECs)

%
drift
peak
(
ppb)
RQ(
1,2,3)
%
drift
peak
(
ppb)
RQ(
1,2,3)
%
drift
peak
(
ppb)
RQ(
1,2,3)

0
2.8
2.284
481
13.0
2.737
575
35.9
3.676
774
100
0.9
2.196
462
5.5
2.408
506
21.9
3.104
653
1504
0.6
2.183
459
4.3
2.352
495
18.9
2.980
627
200
0.5
2.178
459
3.6
2.320
488
16.1
2.865
603
Risk
Presumption
1.
Acute
High
Risk
$
0.5
2.
Acute
Restricted
Use
$
0.1
3.
Acute
Endangered
Species
$
0.01
4.
150
ft
is
the
current
buffer
zone
imposed
in
the
label
for
aerial
applications.

Using
the
NC
cotton
scenario
as
a
surrogate
for
estuarine/
marine
scenario
and
using
the
most
sensitive
species
of
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
(
Mysid
Shrimp),
all
the
acute
RQs
exceed
all
the
LOCs
(
acute
high
risk,
acute
restricted
use
and
acute
endangered
species).
The
trends
in
the
­
75­
RQs
are
the
same
described
earlier
for
the
EECs
because
the
RQs
are
directly
proportional
to
the
EECs.
The
RQs
were
higher
for
the
high
end
drift
scenario
and
for
the
smaller
buffer
zones.
It
is
noted
that
even
using
a
ground
application,
the
corresponding
RQ
is
about
966X
the
LOC
for
the
acute
high
risk.
Using
the
150
ft.
buffer
zone
imposed
in
the
label,
with
the
typical
drift
scenario,
the
RQ
(
495)
is
around
990X
the
LOC
for
the
acute
high
risk.
With
the
more
conservative
scenario,
the
RQ
can
increase
to
627
(
or
around
1254X
the
LOC
for
the
acute
high
risk).
If
stringent
measures
of
caution
are
taken,
and
the
low
end
drift
scenario
is
used,
the
RQ
decreases
only
to
459
(
or
around
918X
the
LOC
for
the
acute
high
risk).
For
the
typical
drift
scenario,
if
the
buffer
zone
is
increased
from
150
ft
to
200
ft,
the
RQ
decreases
from
495
to
488
(
only
about
1%).
The
NC
cotton
scenario
has
a
relatively
small
component
of
drift;
however,
other
PRZM
scenarios
may
have
larger
components
of
drift
and
the
effect
of
the
buffer
zones
may
be
more
important.

d.
Aquatic
Plants
No
toxicity
data
in
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
aquatic
plants
are
available;
thus
RQs
cannot
be
derived.

2.
Non­
Target
Terrestrial
Animals
To
assess
risks
of
cypermethrin
to
non­
target
birds
and
mammals,
EECs
and
acute
and
chronic
RQs
for
residues
on
various
forage
categories
(
short
grass,
tall
grass.
broadleaf
plants/
small
insects,
fruits/
pods/
large
insects,
and
seeds)
were
obtained
from
the
Tier
I
model
TREX
for
four
crop
uses:
cotton,
lettuce,
pecans,
and
canola.

For
birds,
acute
RQs
are
derived
using
dose­
based
and
dietary­
based
acute
toxicity
values,
and
chronic
RQs
are
derived
using
a
dietary­
based
chronic
toxicity
value.
For
mammals,
acute
RQs
are
derived
using
a
dose­
based
acute
toxicity
value,
and
chronic
RQs
are
derived
using
a
dietary­
based
chronic
toxicity
value
and
a
calculated
dose­
based
chronic
toxicity
value
(
the
dietary­
based
chronic
toxicity
value
is
converted
to
a
dose­
based
chronic
toxicity
value
using
the
standard
FDA
lab
rat
conversion
by
T­
REX).

Dietary­
based
RQs
are
calculated
using
EECs
expressed
in
terms
of
residue
concentration
for
the
various
forage
categories,
and
toxicity
values
(
LC
50
or
NOAEC)
are
expressed
in
units
of
dietary
concentration.
Dose­
based
RQs
are
calculated
using
a
body
weight­
adjusted
LD
50
and
consumption­
weighted
equivalent
dose
sorted
by
food
source
and
body
size.
For
both
birds
and
mammals,
three
weight
categories
(
or
sizes)
are
considered.

a.
Acute
Risk
to
Mammals
and
Birds
Dose­
based
and
dietary­
based
acute
RQs
for
birds
are
summarized
in
Table
17.
All
dosebased
and
dietary­
based
avian
acute
RQs
are
below
the
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2),
and
acute
listed
risk
(
LOC
0.1).
The
highest
acute
RQs
are
associated
with
application
of
cypermethrin
to
cotton,
with
RQs
ranging
from
0.001
(
a
1000
g
bird
feeding
on
fruits/
pods/
large
insects)
to
0.05
(
20
g
bird
feeding
on
short
grass).
For
birds,
acute
RQs
are
­
76­
less
than
the
reported
value,
since
the
available
acute
toxicity
studies
did
not
establish
acute
LC
50
and
LC
50
values
(
toxicity
values
are
reported
as
"
greater
than"
the
highest
dose/
concentration
tested).
However,
since
all
avian
acute
RQs
are
well
below
LOCs
for
acute
risks,
this
uncertainty
does
not
affect
the
acute
avian
risk
characterization.

Dose­
based
acute
RQs
for
mammals
are
summarized
in
Table
18.
All
acute
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5)
and
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2)
for
all
crop
uses.
However,
the
acute
listed
LOC
(
0.1)
is
exceeded
by
two
RQs
associated
with
use
of
cypermethrin
on
cotton:
15
gram
mammals
feeding
on
short
grass
(
RQ
0.12)
and
35
gram
mammals
feeding
on
short
grass
(
RQ
0.10).
­
77­
Table
17.
Dose­
based
Acute
RQs
a
and
Dietary­
based
Acute
RQs
b
for
Birds
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
Based
on
Upper
Bound
Residues
as
Calculated
by
T­
REX.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Avian
Risk
Quotients
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/
Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/
Large
Insects
Dose­
based
Acute
Avian
RQs
Cotton
20
<
0.02
<
0.01
<
0.01
0.000
100
<
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.000
1000
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
Lettuce
20
<
0.02
<
0.01
<
0.01
0.000
100
<
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.000
1000
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
Pecans
20
<
0.02
<
0.01
<
0.01
0.000
100
<
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.000
1000
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
Canola
20
<
0.02
<
0.01
<
0.01
0.000
100
<
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.000
1000
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
Dietary­
based
Acute
Avian
RQs
Cotton
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.000
Lettuce
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.000
Pecans
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.000
Canola
0.0
0.0
0.00
0.000
a
Acute
dose­
based
RQ
=
EEC/
LD50,
where
EEC
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
T­
REX
and
the
toxicity
value
is
the
acute
dose­
based
LD50
>
2,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
bobwhite
quail.
See
Appendix
D
for
full
T­
REX
output.
b
Acute
dietary­
based
RQ
=
EEC/
LC50,
where
EEC
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX
and
the
toxicity
value
is
the
acute
dietary­
based
LC50
>
20,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
mallard
ducks.
See
Appendix
D
for
full
T­
REX
output.
c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.1).
­
78­
Table
18.
Dose­
based
Acute
RQs
a
for
Mammals
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
Based
on
Upper
Bound
Residues
as
Calculated
by
T­
REX.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Mammalian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/
Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/
Large
Insects
Seeds
Cotton
15
0.23c,
d
0.11d
0.13d
0.01
0.000
35
0.20cd
0.09
0.11d
0.01
0.000
1000
0.1d
0.05
0.06
0.010
0.000
Lettuce
15
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.000
35
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.000
1000
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.000
0.000
Pecans
15
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.000
35
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.000
1000
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.000
0.000
Canola
15
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.000
35
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.00
0.000
1000
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.000
0.000
a
Acute
dose­
based
RQ
=
EEC/
LD50,
where
EEC
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
T­
REX
and
the
toxicity
value
is
the
acute
dose­
based
LD50
=
247
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
rats.
See
Appendix
D
for
full
T­
REX
output.
b
RQs
meet
or
exceed
the
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5)
c
RQs
meet
or
exceed
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2)
d
RQs
meet
or
exceed
the
LOC
for
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.1).

b.
Chronic
Risk
to
Mammals
and
Birds
Dietary­
based
chronic
RQs
for
birds
are
summarized
in
Table
19.
Chronic
RQs
for
birds
are
below
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1),
except
for
one
exposure
scenario
(
birds
feeding
on
short
grass
for
application
of
cypermethrin
to
cotton,
RQ
<
2.65).
Chronic
RQs
for
birds
range
from
0.03
to<
2.65.
However,
since
the
chronic
toxicity
value
used
to
derive
chronic
avian
RQs
was
reported
as
"
greater
than"
the
highest
dietary
concentration
tested
(
i.
e.,
a
true
chronic
NOAEC
was
not
established),
chronic
RQs
are
actually
lower
than
those
reported.
Thus,
this
assessment
may
overestimate
chronic
risks
to
birds.
­
79­
Table
19.
Dietary­
based
Chronic
RQs
for
Birds
Exposed
to
Cypermethrin
Based
on
Upper
Bound
Residues
as
Calculated
by
T­
REX.

Crop
Use
Avian
Chronic
Risk
Quotients
(
all
RQs
are
<
the
reported
value)
a
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/
Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/
Large
Insects
Cotton
<
2.65
b
<
1.21
b
<
1.49
b
0.17
Lettuce
0.80
0.37
0.45
0.05
Pecans
0.48
0.22
0.27
0.03
Canola
0.48
0.22
0.27
0.03
a
Chronic
dietary­
based
RQ
=
EEC/
NOAEC,
where
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX
and
the
toxicity
value
is
the
chronic
dietary
NOAEC
value
of
>
50
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
ducks.
See
Appendix
D
for
full
T­
REX
output.
b
RQ
is
above
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).

Dose­
based
chronic
RQs
and
dietary­
based
chronic
RQs
for
mammals
are
summarized
in
Table
20.
Dose­
based
chronic
RQs
exceed
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1)
for
nearly
all
modeled
crop
uses
and
mammalian
weight
classes
for
exposure
via
short
grass,
tall
grass,
and
broadleaf
plants/
small
insects.
Chronic
dose­
based
RQs
for
mammals
feeding
on
short
grass
generally
exceed
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1),
ranging
from1.19
to
7.62)
for
all
crops.
Cotton
produced
the
highest
risk
to
all
size
groups
(
15,
35,
and
100
g)
with
chronic
RQ
exceedances
for
short
grass,
tall
grass
and
broadleaf
plants/
small
insects.
The
other
crops,
lettuce,
pecans,
and
canola
showed
potential
chronic
risk
to
the
15
and
35
g
size
groups
that
might
feed
on
short
grass.
Dietary­
based
chronic
RQs
range
from
0.01
(
mammals
feeding
on
fruits/
pods/
large
insects
for
cypermethrin
use
on
canola
and
lettuce)
to
0.88
(
mammals
feeding
on
short
grass
for
cypermethrin
use
on
cotton),
with
no
RQs
exceeding
the
chronic
LOC.
­
80­
Table
20.
Dose­
based
Chronic
RQs
a
and
Dietary­
based
Chronic
RQs
b
for
Mammals
Based
on
Maximum
Residues
as
Calculated
by
T­
REX.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Mammalian
Chronic
Risk
Quotients
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/
Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/
Large
Insects
Seeds
Dose­
based
Chronic
RQs
for
Mammals
Cotton
15
7.62
c
3.49
c
4.29
c
0.48
0.11
35
6.55
c
3.0
c
3.68
c
0.41
0.09
1000
3.44
c
1.58
c
1.93
c
0.21
0.04
Lettuce
15
1.38
c
0.6
0.8
0.09
0.02
35
1.19
c
0.5
0.7
0.07
0.02
1000
0.6
0.29
0.35
0.04
0.01
Pecans
15
1.38
c
0.6
0.8
0.90
0.02
35
1.19
c
0.5
0.7
0.07
0.02
1000
0.6
0.29
0.4
0.04
0.01
Canola
15
1.38
c
0.6
0.8
0.90
0.02
35
1.19
c
0.5
0.7
0.07
0.02
1000
0.6
0.29
0.4
0.04
0.01
Dietary­
based
Chronic
RQs
for
Mammals
Cotton
0.88
0.40
0.50
0.06
 

Lettuce
0.16
0.07
0.09
0.01
 

Pecans
0.16
0.07
0.09
0.01
 

Canola
0.16
0.07
0.09
0.01
 

a
Dose­
base
chronic
RQ
=
EEC/
NOAEL,
where
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
T­
REX
and
the
chronic
toxicity
value
is
the
chronic
NOAEL
=
5
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
rats,
converted
from
the
NOAEC
of
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
the
rat
using
the
standard
FDA
lab
rat
conversion
by
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D
for
full
T­
REX
output.
b
Dietary­
based
RQs
=
EEC/
NOAEC,
where
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX
and
the
toxicity
value
is
the
chronic
dietary
NOAEC
value
of
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
rats.
See
Appendix
D
for
full
T­
REX
output.
c
RQs
exceed
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).
­
81­
c.
Risk
to
Terrestrial
Invertebrates
Although
EFED
does
not
assess
risks
to
non­
target
terrestrial
invertebrates,
cypermethrin
toxicity
data
show
that
technical
grade
cypermethrin
is
very
toxic
to
honey
bees
and
earthworms.
As
reviewed
in
the
Ecological
Effects
Characterization
(
Section
III.
C),
cypermethrin
exposure
can
result
in
acute
toxicity
to
honey
bees,
and
is
considered
to
be
very
highly
toxic
on
both
an
acute
contact
and
an
acute
oral
basis
(
contact
48­
hour
LD
50
=
0.023
:
g
a.
i./
bee;
oral
48­
hour
LD
50
=
0.13
:
g
a.
i./
bee).
Similar
results
were
observed
for
acute
contact
and
oral
toxicity
studies
using
formulations
containing
cypermethrin
(
beta
cypermethrin
10
EC
and
Cypermethrin
Emulsifiable
Concentrate
GFU
061).
Cypermethrin
(
Cymbush
3E)
was
also
found
to
be
highly
toxic
on
an
acute
basis
to
honey
bees
exposed
to
oilseed
rape
seed
foliage
at
application
rates
of
approximately
0.06
to
0.13
lb
a.
i./
A.
Exposure
of
earthworms
to
cypermethrin
deposits
on
filter
paper
show
that
cypermethrin
is
highly
toxic
to
earthworms.

3.
Non­
target
Plants
Inhabiting
Terrestrial
and
Semi­
Aquatic
Areas
No
toxicity
data
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
terrestrial
plants
and
terrestrial
plants
in
semi­
aquatic
areas
plants
are
available;
thus
RQs
cannot
be
derived.

B.
Risk
Description
The
Agency
has
identified
acute
and
chronic
risk
concerns
to
aquatic
systems
for
cypermethrin
uses
(
especially
for
cotton,
pecans,
lettuce).
This
concern
includes
risk
to
listed
and
non­
listed
fish,
aquatic
crustaceans,
snails,
clams,
and
amphibians.
Although
this
compound
binds
readily
to
particulate
and
organic
carbon
in
the
water
column,
possibly
limiting
bioavailability
in
this
media
after
24
to
48
hours,
the
bound
residues
settle
onto
the
benthos,
increasing
their
concentrations
in
the
sediment.
Therefore
this
media
can
serve
as
a
repository
of
pesticide
residues
that
can
result
in
a
direct
toxic
risk
concern
for
benthic
and
epibenthic
aquatic
organisms
(
e.
g.
early
life
stage
of
many
invertebrates
and
fish,
as
well
as
crabs
and
shrimp).
The
data
pertaining
to
sediment
toxicity
shows
that
cypermethrin
is
still
potentially
very
highly
toxic
and
biologically
available.
Therefore,
coupled
with
cypermethrins
persistence
and
toxicity
profile,
sediment
bound
cypermethrin
presents
a
potential
for
direct
acute
and
chronic
toxic
risk
to
aquatic
life
in
the
water
column
and
the
benthos
(
e.
g.
invertebrates),
as
well
as
potential
indirect
sublethal
risk
to
fish
through
food
chain
alterations
that
can
affect
freshwater
and
estuarine
fish
year
classes.
Relative
to
the
use
patterns
identified
in
this
RED,
cypermethrin
exposure
to
terrestrial
organisms
is
not
expected
to
result
in
acute
risk
to
birds
or
mammals
(
listed
or
nonlisted
Although,
there
does
not
appear
to
be
the
potential
for
chronic
risk
to
birds,
there
is
uncertainty
regarding
chronic
risk
from
residues
>
50
ppm
(
e.
g.,
especially
to
birds
consuming
short
grass
or
young
plants).
This
assessment
also
suggests
that
there
can
be
chronic
risk
to
mammals
feeding
on
short
grass,
tall
grass
and
broadleaf
plants/
large
insects
which
also
raises
concerns
for
listed
mammals
(
15g
to
35g)..
EFED
is
also
concerned
with
the
potential
for
risk
to
terrestrial
invertebrates
such
as
non­
target
insects
(
i.
e.,
non­
listed
and
listed
species),
including
honey
bees
and
other
insect
pollinators,
as
well
as
earthworms.
­
82­
Cypermethrin
is
a
third
generation
synthetic
pyrethroid
that
is
moderately
persistent
in
the
environment,
and
readily
binds
to
soils
(
average
K
oc
=
141,700
L/
Kg).
It
is
relatively
stable
to
breakdown
from
sunlight,
with
an
aqueous
photolysis
half­
life
of
approximately
36
days
and
a
dark
control
corrected
soil
photolysis
half­
life
of
over
100
days),
and
biodegrades
slowly
with
a
half­
life
of
about
2
months
in
aerobic
and
anaerobic
soils.
If
released
to
water,
cypermethrin
will
rapidly
partition
to
the
sediment
compartment
which
acts
as
an
environmental
sink
for
this
compound.
Hydrolysis
occurs
slowly,
except
under
alkaline
conditions.
The
degradation
products
of
cypermethrin
occur
as
a
result
of
cleavage
of
ester
bond
moiety
of
the
parent
structure,
resulting
in
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA
and
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde,
which
is
subsequently
oxidized
to
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
3­
PBA)
However,
based
on
results
of
toxicity
studies
on
3­
PBA
in
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates,
effective
toxicities
of
the
cypermethrin
degradates
are
assumed
to
be
low
relative
to
toxicity
of
the
parent
compound.

1.
Risks
to
Aquatic
Organisms
This
risk
assessment
of
cypermethrin
shows
that
aquatic
systems
are
potentially
at
risk
from
acute
and
chronic
toxic
exposure
to
this
chemical.
Evaluation
of
this
risk
to
aquatic
organisms
was
approached
by
dividing
the
aquatic
system
into
two
general
compartments,
water
column
and
the
benthos.

The
first
compartment,
the
water
column,
which
is
defined
as
the
aquatic
area
between
surface
and
the
benthos
(
approximately
6
inches
above
the
bottom)
represents
an
area
where
organisms
are
free­
swimming
and
can
feed
and
breed
at
the
surface,
mid
water
and/
or
on
the
benthos
(
sediment).
Direct
pesticidal
contact
(
e.
g.,
gill
lamella,
ingestion,
and
integument)
to
these
organisms
is
assumed
to
be
from
the
surface
water
via
drift
and/
or
runoff.
The
toxicity
assessment
points
are
the
acute
LC
50
and
chronic
NOAEC
that
are
generated
through
standard
water
column
toxicity
tests.

The
second
aquatic
compartment
to
be
considered
is
the
benthos,
which
is
composed
of
sediments
and
an
area
6
inches
above
the
sediment
(
epibenthos).
The
benthos
is
composed
of
a
diversity
of
aquatic
invertebrates
(
e.
g.,
insect
larvae,
crustaceans,
mollusks)
and
species
of
fish
(
e.
g.,
catfish,
loachs),
as
well
as
certain
critical
life
stages
of
organisms
that
reside
in
the
water
column;
the
benthos
is
also
the
initial
breeding
strata
and
nursery
area
for
several
species
of
fish,
especially
commercial
species
such
as
salmonides.
The
benthos
can
also
be
a
source
of
food
items
for
several
species
of
fish
that
are
actively
feeding
on
the
organisms
in
the
sediment
and/
or
capturing
organisms
that
are
emerging
from
this
area.
The
Agency
is
concerned
with
the
toxic
exposure
of
these
organisms
to
compounds
in
the
sediment
is
a
result
of
chemical
binding
to
particulate
and
organic
carbon
in
the
water
column
and
the
eventual
settling­
out
and
accumulation
of
these
compounds
in
the
benthos.
­
83­
a.
Estimating
Risk
to
Aquatic
Systems
To
evaluate
the
potential
for
toxic
risk
from
cypermethrin
exposure
in
the
water
column,
EFED
uses
a
model­
generated
estimated
environmental
concentration
(
EEC)
divided
by
an
effects
endpoint
(
LC
50
,
EC
50
,
or
NOAEC)
to
generate
acute
and
chronic
RQ
values.
The
evaluation
of
toxic
risk
to
the
benthic
organisms
was
approached
by
assuming
equilibrium
partitioning
of
a
high
K
oc
compound
like
cypermethrin
between
the
sediment
and
the
pore
water
(
i.
e.,
the
water
found
between
particulates
in
the
sediment).
Risk
to
the
benthos
was
assessed
using
two
approaches:
(
1)
EECs
for
sediment
were
model­
generated
(
PRZM/
EXAMS)
and
compared
to
the
toxicity
value
as
reported
for
sediment
exposure
(
LC
50
);
and
(
2)
EECs
for
pore
water
were
modelgenerated
(
PRZM/
EXAMS)
and
compared
to
a
derived
toxicity
value
for
pore
water
(
based
on
the
sediment
exposure
toxicity
value).
The
Agency
is
also
concerned
with
possible
risk
from
urban
use
of
cypermethrin
and
is
exploring
potential
modeling
that
can
best
address
this
issue.

Chronic
exposure
of
a
pesticide
at
low
levels
is
likely
to
cause
toxic
responses
distinct
from
those
observed
after
acute
exposure
at
higher
concentrations.
Although
the
ratio
between
acute
and
chronic
toxicity
values
can
vary
depending
upon
the
pesticide,
a
median
ratio
range
of
acute
and
chronic
values
is
expected
to
be
about
5
­
25
as
noted
by
scientists
in
EFED
(
Brian
Montegue,
personal
communication).

Since
it
can
be
assumed
that
there
is
a
correlation
between
acute
and
chronic
toxicity
values,
extrapolations
can
sometimes
be
conducted
if
components
of
the
registrant­
submitted
data
package
are
missing.
This
extrapolation
method
consists
of
applying
the
lowest
observed
similar
species
acute
and
chronic
effects
values
as
a
ratio
(
e.
g.,
LC
50
/
NOAEC)
to
a
similar
relationship
in
another
aquatic
group
(
e.
g.,
freshwater
fish
vs.
estuarine/
marine
fish
and
freshwater
invertebrates
vs.
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates).

In
the
absence
of
data
on
the
chronic
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
freshwater
invertebrates,
estuarine/
marine
fish,
and
benthic
organisms,
EFED
assumes
that
there
are
physiological
similarities
(
e.
g.,
developmental,
reproduction,
etc.)
between
freshwater
invertebrates
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates;
freshwater
fish
and
estuarine/
marine
fish,
and
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
and
benthic
organisms.
Using
these
assumptions
to
estimate
a
chronic
value,
EFED
has
extrapolated
NOAEC
values
for
freshwater
invertebrates,
estuarine/
marine
fish,
and
benthic
organisms
by
using
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method
as
follows:

°
Chronic
NOAEC
for
Freshwater
Invertebrates
(
X)
=
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
LC
50
/
Estuarine/
Marine
NOAEC
×
Freshwater
Invertebrate
LC
50
/
X.

°
Chronic
NOAEC
for
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
(
X)
=
Freshwater
Fish
LC
50
/
Freshwater
Fish
NOAEC
×
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
LC
50
/
X.
­
84­
°
Chronic
NOAEC
for
Benthic
Organisms
(
X)
=
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
LC
50
/
Estuarine/
Marine
NOAEC
×
Benthic
Organisms
LC
50
/
X.

b.
Aquatic
Animals
(
Water
Column
Exposure)

In
evaluating
possible
cypermethrin
risk
to
aquatic
systems
from
use
on
agricultural
crops,
EFED
is
focusing
on
use
patterns
that
appear
to
have
the
greatest
potential
for
toxicity
exposure
to
non­
target
aquatic
wildlife.
These
agricultural
uses
include
application
to
cotton,
pecans
and
lettuce,
as
these
crops
have
the
highest
use.
Since
results
of
toxicity
studies
show
that
cypermethrin
is
very
highly
toxic
to
aquatic
animals,
the
potential
for
risk
to
aquatic
systems
is
anticipated.
Results
of
this
assessment
show
that
PRZM/
EXAMS
modeled
surface
water
concentrations
resulting
from
drift
and
runoff
from
agricultural
areas
pose
acute
and
chronic
risk
to
listed
and
non­
listed
fish
and
invertebrates
(
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine).
As
shown
in
Table
14,
almost
all
acute
RQs
exceed
the
LOC
for
acute
risk,
and
all
RQs
exceed
the
LOC
for
acute
restricted
risk
and
acute
listed
risk.
The
risk
to
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
appears
to
be
several
orders
of
magnitude
greater
that
the
potential
risk
to
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates,
and
to
estuarine/
marine
fish.
This
was
an
expected
outcome
of
this
risk
analysis,
based
on
comparison
of
toxicity
values
for
aquatic
animals.
As
shown
in
Table
15,
results
of
this
analysis
show
that
the
chronic
LOC
is
exceeded
for
some
crop
uses
for
freshwater
fish
(
cotton)
and
invertebrates
(
cotton
and
pecans),
and
for
all
crop
uses
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates,
and
cypermethrin
does
not
pose
a
chronic
risk
concern
for
estuarine/
marine
fish.
The
potential
for
chronic
risk
reflects
exposure
from
large
acreage
crops,
such
as
cotton.

Results
of
this
risk
analysis
identify
the
potential
for
acute
risks
to
aquatic
animals
based
on
measures
of
acute
lethality,
and
indicate
that
cypermethrin
exposure
has
the
potential
to
reduce
survival
of
aquatic
animal
populations.
However,
in
addition
to
acute
lethality,
results
of
acute
toxicity
studies
in
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates
show
that
sublethal
effects
can
occur
at
cypermethrin
concentrations
ranging
from
slightly
lower
to
several
orders
of
magnitude
lower
than
corresponding
acute
LC
50
values.
Development
of
these
sublethal
effects,
which
include
erratic
swimming,
partial/
complete
loss
of
equilibrium,
immobility,
lethargy,
and
darkened
pigmentation,
is
likely
to
leave
fish
and
invertebrates
more
vulnerable
to
predation
pressure,
resulting
in
indirect
effects
on
survival
of
aquatic
populations
(
Sousa,
1998;
Dionne,
1998)
Sublethal
effects
and
subsequent
indirect
effects
on
population
survival
are
anticipated
to
occur
at
concentrations
lower
than
those
triggering
acute
risks
to
aquatic
animals.

The
potential
for
cypermethrin
to
pose
acute
and
chronic
risks
to
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates
is
further
supported
by
results
of
field
studies
in
freshwater
aquatic
systems.
Results
of
these
studies
show
sublethal
effects
in
fish
following
application
of
cypermethrin
at
rates
ranging
from
0.0012
lb
a.
i/
A
to
0.089
lb
a.
i./
A,
and
significant
lethality
of
aquatic
invertebrates
at
4
Drift
is
the
the
dislodgement
of
macroinvertebrates
from
the
substrata
with
entry
into
the
water
column.
Catastrophic
drift
includes
those
organisms
that
are
forced
to
enter
the
water
column
by
disturbances
(
e.
g.,
exposure
to
pesticides).

­
85­
application
rates
ranging
from
0.00025
to
0.125
lb
a.
i/
A.
Since
rigorous
monitoring
of
surface
water
concentrations
was
not
conducted
in
these
studies,
comparison
of
the
exposure
levels
in
field
studies
to
the
modeled
water
column
concentrations
is
not
possible.
However,
results
of
field
studies
show
that
use
of
cypermethrin
at
application
rates
lower
than
those
modeled
for
this
risk
assessment
can
produce
sublethal
and
lethal
effects
to
aquatic
species.

c.
Aquatic
Animals
(
Sediment
Exposure)

Risk
estimates
for
benthic
organisms
show
that
cypermethrin
poses
acute
and
chronic
risks
to
benthic
organisms,
based
on
acute
and
chronic
RQs
calculated
using
both
sediment
and
pore
water
EECs
(
Table
16).
However,
as
discussed
in
Section
III.
C,
there
is
considerable
uncertainty
surrounding
the
acute
toxicity
value
obtained
from
the
available
sediment
toxicity
study.
In
this
study,
the
concentration
of
cypermethrin
in
sediment
decreased
over
time,
indicating
that
the
water­
sediment
system
had
not
reached
equilibrium.
If
the
exposure
system
had
been
at
equilibrium,
it
is
likely
that
the
toxicity
reference
value
would
be
lower,
resulting
in
RQs
that
are
higher
than
those
derived
in
this
assessment.
This
uncertainty
is
also
introduced
to
pore
water
acute
RQs
and
sediment
and
pore
water
chronic
RQs,
as
these
RQs
are
based
on
toxicity
values
derived
from
the
same
uncertain
acute
sediment
toxicity
value.
Even
with
this
uncertainty,
acute
and
chronic
RQs
for
benthic
organisms
exceed
the
chronic
LOC
for
all
modeled
crop
uses.

The
potential
for
cypermethrin
to
pose
acute
and
chronic
risk
to
sediment
dwelling
organisms
is
further
supported
by
results
of
field
studies
in
freshwater
aquatic
systems
(
Table
E­
8).
Results
of
these
studies
show
variable
immediate
and
longer­
term
effects
on
freshwater
invertebrates
and
benthic
organisms
exposed
to
cypermethrin,
ranging
from
no
observable
effects
to
catastrophic
drift4
and
profound
decreases
in
population
diversity
and
abundance.
Application
rates
for
cypermethrin
in
these
studies
varied
greatly,
from
0.00025
to
0.125
lb
a.
i./
A.
However,
results
of
the
available
field
studies
show
that
adverse
effects
on
sediment
dwelling
populations
can
occur
under
conditions
of
recommended
cypermethrin
label
use.
For
field
studies
assessing
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
aquatic
invertebrate
populations,
results
range
from
no
observable
effects
on
aquatic
invertebrate
and
benthic
populations
to
catastrophic
drift
and
profound
decreases
in
population
diversity
and
abundance.
For
studies
reporting
no
adverse
effects
on
macroinvertebrate
populations
(
Acc
No
250506,
Supplemental;
MRID
155772,
Supplemental),
application
rates
range
from
a
single
application
of
0.0623
lb
a.
i./
A
(
MRID
155772)
to
repeated
applications
of
0.126
lb
a.
i./
A,
(
6
applications
at
5­
day
intervals
to
cotton
fields)
(
Acc.
No.
250506,
Supplemental).
However,
results
of
several
other
field
studies
show
that
exposure
to
cypermethrin
at
application
rates
ranging
from
0.00025
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Mulla
et
al.
1978)
to
0.125
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Acc.
No.
250506;
Supplemental)
causes
significant
decreases
in
abundance
and
diversity
of
aquatic
invertebrate
populations
over
a
longer
time
period
(
several
weeks
to
several
months)
­
86­
(
MRID
155770),
and
catastrophic
drift
within
0­
90
minutes
after
application
of
cypermethrin
(
Crossland
et
al,
1982;
Farmer
et
al.
1995;
Moshen
and
Mulla
1982),
and
decreased
abundance
and
diversity
of
macroinvertebrates
over
2737,
Supplemental;
Farmer
et
al.
1995;
Kedwards
et
al.,
1999a,
b;
Mulla
et
al.,
1978;
Mulla
et
al.,
1982).
In
some
cases,
recovery
of
individual
species
was
rapid
(
MRID
155770,
Supplemental;
Kedwards
et
al.,
1999a,
b;
);
however,
for
other
species,
recovery
did
not
occur
for
several
months
(
Kedwards
et
al;.
1999b;
Davies
and
Cook
1993).

In
addition
to
potential
acute
and
chronic
risk
from
cypermethrin
exposure
in
sediments
to
sensitive
macroinvertebrates
and
fish,
from
agricultural
uses,
this
risk
concern
should
be
extended
to
include
non­
agricultural
uses.
Although
the
Agency
does
not
usually
model
urban
pesticide
uses
for
possible
risk
to
aquatic
and
terrestrial
organisms,
monitoring
information
is
used
when
it
is
available.
Recently
the
Agency
received
information
of
a
monitoring
project
in
California
that
was
used
to
evaluate
pyrethroid
residues
in
stream
sediments
adjacent
to
an
urban
subdivision.
The
findings
show
that
toxic
residue
levels
of
cypermethrin
and
other
pyrethroids
have
been
found
in
sediments
near
storm
drains
inputs
to
streams
that
possible
received
runoff
from
the
subdivisions
(
Weston,
et
al.,
2005).
Although
bifenthrin
was
the
major
pyrethroid
residue
found,
cypermethrin
levels
were
also
of
toxic
significance
to
aquatic
invertebrates.
Weston's
work
is
significant
because
it
documents
the
presence
of
pyrethroids
in
the
sediments
of
creeks
within
residential
areas
and
with
additional
research
it
is
possible
to
better
identify
their
likely
sources.
Since
a
large
amount
of
pyrethroids
are
being
used
in
non­
agricultural
urbane
settings
the
Agency
has
a
concern
for
the
possible
additional
risk
to
aquatic
systems
that
this
implies.
Currently
the
Agency
is
evaluating
appropriate
modeling
that
may
be
useful
in
assessing
this
potential
risk
to
the
environment.

d.
Aquatic
Plants
Toxicity
data
are
not
available
for
plants
inhabiting
aquatic
environments;
thus,
risks
associated
with
cypermethrin
exposure
to
plants
inhabiting
aquatic
environments
cannot
be
assessed.
However,
based
on
cypermethrin's
mode
of
action,
plant
toxicity
resulting
from
cypermethrin
exposure
does
not
appear
to
be
an
issue
of
concern
for
this
assessment.
In
addition
the
Agency
is
not
aware
of
any
cypermethrin
plant
incidents,
or
plant
incidents
from
exposure
to
other
pyrethroids.

e.
Other
Special
Considerations
for
Evaluating
Aquatic
Risk
(
Buffer
Zones)

EFED
performed
a
brief
buffer
zone/
spray
drift
analysis
with
various
buffer
zones
and
drift
scenarios,
to
evaluate
the
extent
to
which
the
buffer
zone
imposed
by
the
registrant
might
mitigate
the
level
of
spray
drift
reaching
bodies
of
water
close
to
treated
areas
for
the
NC
cotton
scenario.
For
aerial
applications,
the
labeled
buffer
zone
is
150
ft.
First,
EFED
ran
PRZM/
EXAMS
with
the
input
parameters
of
a
standard
run,
except
that
the
spray
drift
level
was
set
to
­
87­
0%.
When
the
standard
results
with
spray
drift
of
5%
were
compared
with
the
special
run
with
spray
drift
of
0%,
the
results
indicated
that
the
percent
of
the
peak
EEC
that
was
attributable
to
spray
drift
was
9.6%
for
NC
cotton
PRZM
scenario.
This
scenario
has
a
relatively
small
component
of
drift.
Then,
the
scenario
was
run
with
aerial
applications
and
various
buffer
zones
to
evaluate
the
possible
effects
of
buffer
zones
on
spray
drift,
in
reducing
potential
risk
from
exposure
to
aquatic
systems.
The
levels
of
spray
drift
simulated
a
high
end
drift
scenario
(
high
boom
height,
high
wind
speed,
small
droplet
size),
a
low
end
drift
scenario
(
low
boom
height,
low
wind
speed,
large
droplet
size),
and
typical
drift
scenario,
to
bracket
the
spectrum
of
possibilities.
Supplementary
Tables
H
and
I
show
the
calculated
acute
risk
quotient
(
RQ)
values
for
the
most
sensitive
species
(
Mysid
Shrimp,
estuarine/
marine
invertebrate),
for
buffer
zones
set
from
0
to
200
ft
and
spray
drift
set
at
1
and
5%
and
the
assigned
spray
drift
values
for
the
specific
drift
scenarios.
All
scenarios
showed
that
the
RQs
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
exceeded
all
the
LOCs.
However,
the
low
end
drift
scenario
yielded
lower
levels
of
drift
and
consequently
lower
EECs
and
RQs.
The
low
end
drift
scenario,
with
no
buffer
zone,
yielded
an
RQ
of
a
similar
order
of
magnitude
as
the
one
produced
by
ground
applications.

For
the
NC
cotton
scenario
a
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
reduced
the
peak
EECs
(
and
consequently
the
acute
RQs)
by
about
4.4%
for
the
low
end
drift
scenario,
14.1%
for
the
typical
drift
scenario
and
18.9%
for
the
high
end
drift
scenario,
compared
to
the
equivalent
conditions
with
no
buffer
zone.

For
the
NC
cotton
scenario,
the
acute
RQ
for
the
most
sensitive
species
(
Mysid
shrimp),
for
the
typical
drift
scenario,
with
a
buffer
zone
of
150
ft
the
RQ
is
approximately
990X
the
LOC
of
acute
high
risk
(
0.5).
If
the
application
is
made
under
more
stringent
measures,
and
the
low
end
drift
scenario
is
used,
the
RQ
decreases
slightly
to
about
918X
the
LOC
of
the
acute
high
risk.

The
identified
uncertainties
of
this
analysis
are
as
follows:
It
is
assumed
that
the
level
of
runoff
is
similar
in
all
PRZM/
EXAMS
runs.
The
current
version
of
PRZM/
EXAMS
cannot
take
into
consideration
the
fact
that
there
are
buffer
zones
ranging
from
0
to
200
ft,
that
might
mitigate
the
level
of
runoff
(
particularly
for
the
peak
values),
or
the
mandatory
vegetative
strip
included
in
the
label.
The
scope
of
this
analysis
is
limited.
It
constitutes
only
an
overview,
with
calculations
performed
with
NC
cotton
only,
it
was
considered
representative
for
all
the
areas
where
aerial
applications
of
cypermethrin
occur.
Furthermore,
it
was
found
that
this
scenario
has
a
relatively
small
component
of
spray
drift.
Ideally
various
scenarios
would
be
explored,
and
data
compared
among
each
other.

f.
Summary
of
Risk
to
Aquatic
Systems
The
complexities
of
natural
aquatic
systems
forgoes
the
use
of
a
single
factor
approach
in
evaluating
even
a
screening
level
assessment
of
risk
to
fish
and
aquatic
invertebrates
from
toxic
exposure
to
cypermethrin.
Thus,
EFED
approached
the
cypermethrin
evaluation
by
assessing
the
potential
toxic
impact
to
the
aquatic
system
from
exposure
in
the
water
column
and
in
sediment
and
pore
water.
As
noted
earlier,
EFED
modeled
the
possible
exposure
of
cypermethrin
use
from
agricultural
areas
for
application
to
cotton,
pecans
and
lettuce.
These
agricultural
uses
were
­
88­
chosen
because
these
crops
have
the
highest
cypermethrin
use.
One
of
the
crops
is
representative
of
ground
applications
(
pecans).

This
screening
level
assessment
of
cypermethrin
shows
that
the
agricultural
use
of
this
pyrethroid
on
crops
(
cotton,
pecans,
and
lettuce)
can
result
in
potential
toxic
exposure
to
aquatic
systems.
This
concern
includes
organisms
that
frequent
the
surface
and
water
column,
as
well
as
those
that
live
in/
on
the
benthos.
The
risk
to
water
column
organisms
and
to
sediment­
dwelling
organisms
has
the
potential
for
synergy
of
effects,
where
the
consequences
can
exceed
the
sum
of
the
effects
caused
by
each
factor
separately.
As
cypermethrin
is
introduced
to
surface
water
via
drift
or
runoff
from
a
crop
area,
it
can
disperse
down
through
the
water
column
causing
acute
toxicity
(
sublethal
and
lethal
effects)
to
sensitive
species.
In
addition
to
acute
risk,
chronic
effects
are
a
potential
concern
for
aquatic
organisms
that
are
exposed
to
cypermethrin
in
the
water
column
during
critical
life
stages.
Possible
chronic
effects
to
aquatic
life
may
also
be
a
concern
where
an
initial
cypermethrin
exposure
may
cause
embryological
effects
(
possible
neonate
mortality
and
growth
effects
may
reflect
toxin
exposure
at
an
early
embryological
stage)
or
possible
reproductive
effects
21
days
to
60
days
following
initial
exposure.
Because
cypermethrin
has
a
high
affinity
to
bind
to
particulate
and
organic
carbon,
sediment
can
act
as
a
sink
where
cypermethrin
can
accumulate
(
modeled
sediment
concentrations
of
cypermethrin
exceed
those
for
surface
water
by
approximately
85­
to
800­
fold
Tables
7­
9)..

Toxic
exposure
of
cypermethrin
in
the
sediment
can
present
a
more
far­
reaching
impact
on
a
multitude
of
organisms
than
exposure
in
the
water
column
(
e.
g.,
cypermethrin
residues
decline
in
the
water
column
by
about
98%
after
48
hours).
A
wide
variety
of
aquatic
organisms
depend
upon
the
benthos
for
food
(
e.
g.,
fish
feeding
on
invertebrates),
reproduction
(
e.
g.,
salmonid
and
other
species
using
the
benthic
substrate
for
breeding),
and
shelter
(
e.
g.,
bottom
dwelling
fish,
mollusks,
aquatic
invertebrates,
etc.);
the
benthos
is
a
dynamic
system
that
interacts
directly
or
indirectly
with
most,
if
not
all
aquatic
species
at
some
point
in
their
development
or
life
stages.
Because
of
their
influence
on
various
functional
parameters
in
streams,
such
as
primary
productivity,
detritus
processing,
and
energy
flow,
changes
in
abundances
and
distributions
of
benthic
macroinvertebrates
have
the
potential
to
reflect
changes
in
stream
ecosystems.
In
addition,
because
benthic
macroinvertebrates
are
the
major
prey
of
many
species
of
fish
(
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine),
they
also
have
societal
relevance
in
terms
of
recreation
and
ecological
biodiversity.
As
food
resources
decline
or
widely
fluctuate,
fish
communities
often
display
increased
disease,
parasitism,
and
deformities
as
a
result
of
less
than
adequate
diet.

EFED
has
a
concern
for
the
potential
chronic
risk
that
may
occur
to
aquatic
organisms
from
cypermethrin
load
in
sediments.
Chronic
toxicant
loads
in
sediments
may
drive
populations
toward
a
limited
set
of
tolerant
genotypes
over
time.
Such
reductions
in
genetic
diversity
reduce
a
population's
plasticity
to
adapt
to
the
new
stresses
that
can
arise
as
anthropogenic
stress
on
aquatic
ecosystems
increases
(
especially
in
agricultural
areas).
This
impact
cumulatively
results
in
structural
and
functional
responses
of
the
aquatic
ecosystems
and
biota.
The
time
required
for
invertebrate
assemblages
to
return
to
their
natural
state,
following
disturbances
such
as
those
of
pesticide
drift
and/
or
runoff,
can
be
on
the
order
of
many
years
for
streams,
and
decades
for
lakes.

In
addition
to
acute
and
chronic
risk
of
cypermethrin
exposure
to
sensitive
macroinvertebrates
and
fish,
from
agricultural
uses,
this
risk
concern
should
be
extended
to
­
89­
include
non­
agricultural
uses.
Toxic
residue
levels
of
cypermethrin
have
been
found
in
sediments
near
storm
drains
inputs
to
streams
that
are
located
adjacent
to
urban
subdivisions
in
Roseville,
California
(
Weston,
et
al.,
2005).
Although
difficult
to
model
and
quantify,
urban
uses
of
pyrethroids
have
the
potential
to
impact
aquatic
systems.
The
vast
majority
of
insecticides
sold
for
consumer
use
now
contain
pyrethroids,
and
are
widely
used
around
homes
by
consumers
and
professional
pest
control
applicators.
Cypermethrin
accounts
for
a
large
percentage
of
this
market
especially
for
structural
pest
control.
Since
this
area
is
hardly
unique
from
other
suburban
areas,
the
Agency
is
concerned
that
urban
use
of
cypermethrin
can
result
in
sediment
contamination
and
possible
toxic
impact
to
aquatic
life
in
some
areas
of
the
country.

2.
Risks
to
Terrestrial
Organisms
a.
Terrestrial
Animals
(
Mammals
and
Birds)

Pesticide
exposure
can
vary
substantially
in
space,
mostly
because
of
use
patterns.
However,
terrestrial
exposure
tends
to
localize
near
the
application
site,
extended
somewhat
by
spray
drift
down
wind.
In
some
cases,
long
range
aerial
transport
can
extend
this
range
for
a
volatile
compound.
However,
in
the
case
of
cypermethrin,
volatility
is
not
an
issue
of
concern.
Therefore,
to
assess
risks
to
terrestrial
organisms
(
e.
g.,
birds
and
mammals),
this
assessment
focuses
on
the
potential
for
toxic
exposure
cypermethrin
residues
on
food
items.
An
evaluation
of
potential
risks
was
conducted
using
the
T­
REX
model,
which
provides
estimates
of
concentrations
of
chemical
residues
on
different
types
of
food
items
that
may
be
sources
of
dietary
exposure
to
avian,
mammalian,
reptilian,
or
terrestrial­
phase
amphibian
receptors.
The
four
crop
uses
were
evaluated
for
the
terrestrial
assessment
(
cotton,
lettuce,
pecans,
and
canola)
were
chosen
since
they
represent
over
90%
of
cypermethrin's
agricultural
use.

Cypermethrin
does
not
appear
to
pose
an
acute
risk
concern
for
birds
(
Table
17)
or
mammals
(
Table
18),
except
for
acute
listed
risk
to
small
mammals
feeding
primarily
on
short
grass
(
cotton
use
only).
Given
the
low
order
of
toxicity
observed
in
acute
toxicity
studies
in
mammals
and
birds,
acute
risks
to
terrestrial
animals
resulting
in
decreased
survival
were
not
expected.
For
chronic
risk
for
birds,
the
LOC
is
exceeded
only
for
birds
feeding
primarily
on
short
grass
for
applications
of
cypermethrin
to
cotton
(
Table
19).
However,
since
the
chronic
toxicity
value
used
to
derive
chronic
avian
RQs
is
reported
as
"
greater
than"
the
highest
dietary
concentration
tested
(
i.
e.,
a
chronic
LOAEC
or
NOAEC
were
not
established),
chronic
RQs
may
be
lower
than
those
reported.
Thus,
this
assessment
may
overestimate
chronic
risks
to
birds.
For
mammals,
the
potential
for
chronic
risk
was
identified
for
mammals
feeding
on
short
grass,
tall
grass,
and
broadleaf
plants
and
insects
for
all
modeled
crop
uses
(
Table
20).
However,
since
an
expected
EEC
for
cotton
is
greater
than
50
ppm
(
NOAEC
presented
for
avian
reproduction
studies)
there
is
an
uncertainty
that
must
be
addressed
regarding
an
accurate
avian
chronic
NOAEC,
as
well
as
LOAEC.
This
assessment
also
suggests
that
cypermethrin
exposure
has
the
potential
for
chronic
effects
to
mammals
that
include
decreased
body
weight
and
decreased
body
weight
gain
in
adults
and
offspring.
­
90­
b.
Non­
Target
Terrestrial
Insects
Although
EFED
does
not
derive
RQ
values
for
non­
target
insects,
risks
can
be
assessed
qualitatively.
Cypermethrin
toxicity
data
show
that
the
compound
is
very
highly
toxic
to
honey
bees.
This
hazard
assessment
shows
that
cypermethrin
exposure
can
result
in
acute
toxicity
to
honey
bees
and
is
considered
to
be
highly
toxic
on
both
a
contact
and
an
oral
basis.
Cypermethrin
was
also
found
to
be
highly
toxic
to
honey
bees
exposed
to
foliage
that
had
been
sprayed
with
a
cypermethrin
formulation
(
Cymbush
3E).
In
addition,
cypermethrin
has
also
been
shown
to
be
highly
toxic
to
earthworms.
Based
on
these
results,
acute
risks
to
non­
target
insects
and
terrestrial
invertebrates
are
anticipated
for
the
uses
considered
in
this
assessment.

c.
Terrestrial
Plants
Toxicity
data
are
not
available
for
terrestrial
plants;
thus,
risks
associated
with
cypermethrin
exposure
to
terrestrial
plants
cannot
be
assessed.
However,
relative
to
cypermethrin
mode
of
action,
plant
toxicity
resulting
from
cypermethrin
exposure
does
not
appear
to
be
an
issue
of
concern
for
this
assessment.

3.
Review
of
Incident
Data
Incident
reports
submitted
to
EPA
since
approximately
1994
have
been
tracked
by
assignment
of
"
incident
numbers"
in
an
Incident
Data
System
(
IDS),
microfiched,
and
then
entered
to
a
second
database,
the
Ecological
Incident
Information
System
(
EIIS).
An
effort
has
also
been
made
to
enter
information
to
EIIS
on
incident
reports
received
prior
to
establishment
of
current
databases.
Incident
reports
are
not
received
in
a
consistent
format
(
e.
g.,
states
and
various
labs
usually
have
their
own
formats),
may
involve
multiple
incidents
involving
multiple
chemicals
in
one
report,
and
may
report
on
only
part
of
a
given
incident
investigation
(
e.
g.,
residues).
While
some
progress
has
been
made
in
recent
years
in
getting
incident
reports
submitted
and
entered,
there
has
never
been
the
level
of
resources
assigned
to
incidents
that
there
has
been
to
the
tracking
and
review
of
laboratory
toxicity
studies,
for
example.

Incidents
entered
into
EIIS
are
categorized
into
one
of
several
certainty
levels:
highly
probable,
probable,
possible,
unlikely,
or
unrelated.
In
brief,
"
highly
probable"
incidents
usually
require
carcass
residues,
substantial
ChE
inhibition
in
avian
and/
or
mammalian
species,
and/
or
clear
circumstances
regarding
the
exposure.
"
Probable"
incidents
include
those
where
residues
were
not
available
and/
or
circumstances
were
less
clear
than
for
"
highly
probable."
"
Possible"
incidents
include
those
where
multiple
chemicals
may
have
been
involved
and
it
is
not
clear
what
the
contribution
was
of
a
given
chemical.
The
"
unlikely"
category
is
used,
for
example,
where
a
given
chemical
is
practically
nontoxic
to
the
category
of
organism
killed
and/
or
the
chemical
was
tested
for
but
not
detected
in
samples.
"
Unrelated"
incidents
are
those
that
have
been
confirmed
­
91­
to
be
not
pesticide­
related.

Incidents
entered
into
the
EIIS
are
also
categorized
as
to
use/
misuse.
Unless
specifically
confirmed
by
a
state
or
federal
agency
to
be
misuse,
or
there
was
very
clear
misuse
such
as
intentional
baiting
to
kill
wildlife,
incidents
would
not
typically
be
considered
misuse.
Data
entry
personnel
often
do
not
have
a
copy
of
the
specific
label
used
in
a
given
application,
and
would
not
usually
be
able
to
detect
a
variety
of
label­
specific
violations,
for
example.

a.
Incidents
Involving
Aquatic
Organisms
A
total
of
10
incidents
involving
aquatic
cypermethrin
exposure
have
been
reported
to
EPA
and
tracked
by
EIIS
(
Appendix
J,
Table
J­
2).
Unfortunately,
these
reports
do
not
provide
any
specific
information
regarding
the
organisms
affected
or
the
types
of
effects
observed.
All
incidents
were
categorized
according
to
the
Certainty
Index
as
follows:
possible
(
3
reports);
probable
(
3
reports);
and
highly
probably
(
4
reports).
Due
to
the
lack
of
any
detailed
information
in
the
available
reports,
these
incidents
involving
exposure
of
aquatic
organisms
cannot
be
used
as
an
additional
line
of
evidence
for
this
assessment
b.
Incidents
Involving
Terrestrial
Organisms
A
total
of
5
incidents
involving
terrestrial
exposure
have
been
reported
to
EPA
and
tracked
by
EIIS
(
Appendix
J,
Table
J­
1).
Unfortunately,
these
reports
do
not
provide
any
specific
information
regarding
the
organisms
affected
or
the
types
of
effects
observed.
All
incidents
were
categorized
according
to
the
Certainty
Index
as
follows:
unlikely
(
2
reports);
possible
(
2
reports);
and
probable
(
1
report).
Due
to
the
lack
of
any
detailed
information
in
the
available
reports,
incidents
involving
exposure
of
terrestrial
organisms
cannot
be
used
as
an
additional
line
of
evidence
for
this
assessment
4.
Endocrine
Effects
Results
of
chronic
exposure
studies
show
that
cypermethrin
does
not
appear
to
have
adverse
reproductive
effects
in
birds
or
mammals
(
effects
on
rats
reflected
a
decrease
in
pup
weight).
However,
reproductive
effects
have
been
documented
in
aquatic
species
(
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates).
Therefore
EFED
considers
cypermethrin
to
have
detrimental
effects
on
the
endocrine
system.
Under
the
Federal
Food,
Drug
and
Cosmetic
Act
(
FFDCA),
as
amended
by
the
Food
Quality
Protection
Act
(
FQPA),
EPA
is
required
to
develop
a
screening
program
to
determine
whether
certain
substances
(
including
all
pesticide
active
and
other
­
92­
ingredients)
"
may
have
an
effect
in
humans
that
is
similar
to
an
effect
produced
by
a
naturallyoccurring
estrogen,
or
other
such
endocrine
effects
as
the
Administrator
may
designate".
Following
the
recommendations
of
its
Endocrine
Disruptor
Screening
and
Testing
Advisory
Committee
(
EDSTAC),
EPA
determined
that
there
was
scientific
basis
for
including,
as
part
of
the
program,
the
androgen­
and
thyroid
hormone
systems,
in
addition
to
the
estrogen
hormone
system.
EPA
also
adopted
EDSTAC's
recommendation
that
the
Program
include
evaluations
of
potential
effects
in
wildlife.
For
pesticide
chemicals,
EPA
will
use
FIFRA
and,
to
the
extent
that
effects
in
wildlife
may
help
determine
whether
a
substance
may
have
an
effect
in
humans,
FFDCA
authority
to
require
the
wildlife
evaluations.
As
the
science
develops
and
resources
allow,
screening
of
additional
hormone
systems
may
be
added
to
the
Endocrine
Disruptor
Screening
Program
(
EDSP).
When
the
appropriate
screening
and
or
testing
protocols
being
considered
under
the
Agency's
Endocrine
Disruptor
Screening
Program
have
been
developed,
cypermethrin
may
be
subjected
to
additional
screening
and
or
testing
to
better
characterize
effects
related
to
endocrine
disruption.

5.
Federally
Threatened
and
Listed
(
Listed)
Species
Concerns
a.
Action
Area
The
Listed
Species
Act
defines
the
action
area
for
a
Federal
action
as
being
the
footprint
of
possible
effects
stemming
from
the
action,
not
necessarily
limited
to
where
the
immediate
action
occurs.
For
screening­
level
purposes,
the
risk
assessment
conservatively
assumes
that
listed
species
are
co­
located
with
the
pesticide
treatment
area.
This
means
that
plants
inhabiting
terrestrial
environments
and
wildlife
are
assumed
to
be
located
on
or
adjacent
to
the
treated
field
and
aquatic
organisms
are
assumed
to
be
located
in
a
surface
water
body
adjacent
to
the
treated
field.
This
assumption
places
the
listed
species
within
an
assumed
area
of
high
potential
exposure
to
the
pesticide.
If
these
assumptions
result
in
RQs
that
are
below
the
listed
species
LOCs,
a
no
effect
conclusion
is
made.
However,
in
situations
where
the
screening
assumptions
lead
to
RQs
in
excess
of
the
listed
species
LOCs,
the
potential
for
a
"
may
affect"
conclusion
exists.
In
such
cases,
additional
information
on
the
biology
of
listed
species,
the
locations
of
these
species,
and
the
locations
of
use
sites
would
be
considered
to
determine
the
extent
to
which
screening
assumptions
apply
to
a
particular
listed
organism.
These
subsequent
refinement
steps
would
consider
how
this
information
would
impact
the
action
area
for
a
particular
listed
organism
and
may
include
exposures
that
are
downwind
and
downstream
of
the
pesticide
use
site.

b.
Taxonomic
Groups
Potentially
at
Risk
(
1).
Discussion
of
Risk
Quotients
­
93­
The
registrant
must
provide
information
on
the
proximity
of
Federally
listed
species
to
cypermethrin
use
sites.
This
requirement
may
be
satisfied
in
one
of
three
ways:
1)
having
membership
in
the
FIFRA
Listed
Species
Task
Force;
2)
citing
FIFRA
Listed
Species
Task
Force
data;
or
3)
independently
producing
these
data,
provided
the
information
is
of
sufficient
quality
to
meet
FIFRA
requirements.
The
information
will
be
used
by
the
OPP
Listed
Species
Protection
Program
to
develop
recommendations
to
avoid
adverse
effects
to
listed
species.

Should
estimated
exposure
levels
occur
in
proximity
to
listed
species,
the
available
screening
level
information
suggests
a
potential
concern
for
direct
effects
on
listed
fish,
amphibians,
and
aquatic
invertebrates
(
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine),
insects,
birds,
and
mammals.
Specifically,
results
of
this
level
I
screening
assessment
show
that
acute
RQs
exceed
the
acute
listed
species
LOC
for
several
taxa
(
Table
21).

Table
21.
Number
of
Listed
Species
by
Taxa
per
State
for
the
Following
Crops:
Cotton,
Pecans,
Lettuce,
Bulb
vegetables
(
onions,
garlic),
Brassica
(
Brussel
sprouts,
broccoli,
cauliflower,
cabbage),
Leafy
Brassica
(
collards,
kale,
mustard
greens,
spinach,
canola)

State
Amphibian
Arachnid
Bird
Clam
Crustacean
Fish
Insect
Mammal
Reptile
Snail
Grand
Total
Alabama
2
4
30
1
15
4
5
10
71
Arizona
2
8
17
8
2
1
38
Arkansas
3
6
2
3
1
3
1
19
California
6
16
8
28
22
22
8
1
111
Colorado
3
6
2
2
13
Connecticut
3
1
1
1
1
7
Delaware
2
1
1
4
Florida
1
9
7
1
4
1
10
10
43
Georgia
1
5
16
8
1
5
2
38
Hawaii
1
32
1
1
2
2
2
41
Idaho
2
7
4
6
19
Illinois
3
6
1
1
2
2
1
16
Indiana
2
9
2
2
1
16
State
Amphibian
Arachnid
Bird
Clam
Crustacean
Fish
Insect
Mammal
Reptile
Snail
Grand
Total
­
94­
Iowa
3
2
2
1
1
9
Kansas
4
4
1
2
11
Kentucky
3
20
1
4
3
31
Louisiana
6
2
2
2
3
15
Maine
3
2
1
6
Maryland
1
1
2
2
2
8
Massachusett
s
3
1
3
1
1
9
Michigan
3
2
3
2
1
11
Minnesota
2
2
1
1
6
Mississippi
1
6
3
3
1
5
19
Missouri
3
4
7
1
2
1
18
Montana
4
4
3
11
Nebraska
4
2
1
7
Nevada
2
21
2
1
26
New
Hampshire
1
1
1
1
4
New
Jersey
3
1
1
5
New
Mexico
1
6
1
12
5
1
2
28
New
York
3
1
1
1
1
1
8
North
Carolina
1
5
5
4
1
6
1
1
24
North
Dakota
4
1
5
Ohio
2
5
1
1
1
1
11
Oklahoma
7
2
4
1
3
17
State
Amphibian
Arachnid
Bird
Clam
Crustacean
Fish
Insect
Mammal
Reptile
Snail
Grand
Total
­
95­
Oregon
5
1
19
2
1
28
Pennsylvania
2
2
2
6
Rhode
Island
1
1
1
1
4
South
Carolina
1
4
1
1
3
2
12
South
Dakota
4
2
1
1
8
Tennessee
1
3
24
1
10
4
1
44
Texas
4
10
12
1
9
8
5
3
52
Utah
2
8
2
1
13
Vermont
1
1
1
3
Virginia
1
3
18
2
5
1
6
1
1
38
Washington
5
17
1
5
28
West
Virginia
1
1
5
4
1
12
Wisconsin
3
2
2
1
8
Wyoming
1
4
5
Unique
Species
Total
17
12
69
69
20
130
44
62
28
30
481
Probit
Slope
Analysis
The
probit
slope
response
relationship
is
evaluated
to
calculate
the
chance
of
an
individual
event
corresponding
to
the
listed
species
acute
LOCs.
If
information
is
unavailable
to
estimate
a
slope
for
a
particular
study,
a
default
slope
assumption
of
4.5
is
used
as
per
original
Agency
assumptions
of
typical
slope
cited
in
Urban
and
Cook
(
1986).

Freshwater
fish
After
an
analysis
of
raw
data
from
the
acute
toxicity
studies
(
MRID
419682­
08)
with
­
96­
rainbow
trout,
one
slope
estimate
was
determined
at
7.7
(
95%
C.
I.
4.1
­
11.2).
Based
on
the
slope
and
the
LC50
value
=
0.68
ug/
L,
the
chance
of
individual
mortality
for
freshwater
fish
following
cypermethrin
exposure
is
1
in
2.68
x
10
3
(
RQ
=
0.5
­
5.2).
The
lower
and
upper
bound
estimate
of
the
slope
from
this
study
are
4.13
and
11.2.
Based
on
the
slope
and
the
endangered
species
aquatic
LOC
=
0.05,
the
corresponding
estimated
chance
of
individual
mortality
of
freshwater
fish
species
following
cypermethrin
application
is
1
in
1.0
x
10
16
.
The
lower
and
upper
of
the
slope
estimate
(
4.1
­
11.2)
can
be
used
to
calculate
upper
and
lower
levels
of
effects
associated
with
listed
species
LOC.
These
values
are
1
in
2.0
x
10
7
and
1
in
1.0
x
10
16.
.

Estuarine/
marine
fish
After
an
analysis
of
raw
data
from
the
acute
toxicity
studies
with
sheepshead
minnow
(
MRID
445460­
34)
one
slope
estimate
was
determined
at
8.4
(
4.2
­
12.6)
and
the
LC50
=
2.5
ppb
the
estimate
of
chance
of
individual
mortality
following
cypermethrin
exposure
is
1
in
1
(
RQ
=
2.1).
The
lower
and
upper
bound
estimate
of
that
slope
are
4.25and
12.65.

Freshwater
invertebrates
After
an
analysis
of
raw
data
from
the
acute
toxicity
studies
with
daphnids
(
MRID
445460­
31)
slope
estimate
were
identified
at
7.3
with
the
corresponding
estimate
chance
of
individual
mortality
for
freshwater
invertebrates
following
cypermethrin
as
1in
1
RQ
=
0.4
­
2.3).
The
lower
and
upper
bound
estimate
of
the
slopes
are
3.99
to
10.69.

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

The
screening­
level
risk
assessment
has
identified
potential
concerns
for
indirect
effects
on
listed
species
for
those
organisms
dependant
upon
all
size
categories
of
small
mammals
evaluated
(
15
g,
35
g,
1000
g),
freshwater
and
estuarine
fish,
freshwater
invertebrates,
and
terrestrial
invertebrates.
In
light
of
the
potential
for
indirect
effects,
the
next
step
for
EPA
and
the
Service(
s)
is
to
identify
which
listed
species
and
critical
habitat
are
potentially
implicated.
Analytically,
the
identification
of
such
species
and
critical
habitat
can
occur
in
either
of
two
ways.
First,
the
agencies
could
determine
whether
the
action
area
overlaps
critical
habitat
or
the
occupied
range
of
any
listed
species.
If
so,
EPA
would
examine
whether
the
pesticide's
potential
­
97­
impacts
on
non­
listed
species
would
affect
the
listed
species
indirectly
or
directly
affect
a
constituent
element
of
the
critical
habitat.
Alternatively,
the
agencies
could
determine
which
listed
species
depend
on
biological
resources,
or
have
constituent
elements
that
fall
into,
the
taxa
that
may
be
directly
or
indirectly
impacted
by
the
pesticide.
Then
EPA
would
determine
whether
use
of
the
pesticide
overlaps
the
critical
habitat
or
the
occupied
range
of
those
listed
species.
At
present,
the
information
reviewed
by
EPA
does
not
permit
use
of
either
analytical
approach
to
make
a
definitive
identification
of
species
that
are
potentially
impacted
indirectly
or
critical
habitats
that
is
potentially
impacted
directly
by
the
use
of
the
pesticide.
EPA
and
the
Service(
s)
are
working
together
to
conduct
the
necessary
analysis.

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

C.
Description
of
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
1.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
Exposure
For
All
Taxa
There
are
a
number
of
areas
of
uncertainty
in
the
aquatic
and
terrestrial
risk
assessments.
The
toxicity
assessment
for
terrestrial
and
aquatic
animals
is
limited
by
the
number
of
species
tested
in
the
available
toxicity
studies.
Use
of
toxicity
data
on
representative
species
does
not
provide
information
on
the
potential
variability
in
susceptibility
acute
and
chronic
exposures.

This
screening­
level
risk
assessment
relies
on
labeled
statements
of
the
maximum
rate
of
cypermethrin
application,
the
maximum
number
of
applications,
and
the
shortest
interval
between
applications.
These
assumptions
constitute
a
maximum
use
scenario.
The
frequency
at
which
actual
uses
approach
these
maximums
is
dependant
on
resistance
to
the
pesticide,
timing
of
applications,
and
market
forces.

2.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
Exposure
For
Aquatic
Species
­
98­
For
an
acute
risk
assessment,
there
is
no
averaging
time
for
exposure.
An
instantaneous
peak
concentration,
with
a
1
in
10
year
return
frequency,
is
assumed.
The
use
of
the
instantaneous
peak
assumes
that
instantaneous
exposure
is
of
sufficient
duration
to
elicit
acute
effects
comparable
to
those
observed
over
more
protracted
exposure
periods
tested
in
the
laboratory,
typically
48
to
96
hours.
In
the
absence
of
data
regarding
time­
to­
toxic
event
analyses
and
latent
responses
to
instantaneous
exposure,
the
degree
to
which
risk
is
overestimated
cannot
be
quantified.

There
are
no
monitoring
studies
for
cypermethrin
in
freshwater
or
estuarine/
marine
environments;
therefore,
the
exposure
of
aquatic
species
to
cypermethrin
is
based
entirely
on
the
modeled
data.
It
is
noted
that
the
fate
characteristics
of
cypermethrin
indicate
that
it
will
partition
with
the
sediment.
Sediment
monitoring
data
are
not
available
neither.
The
output
of
models
such
as
PRZM/
EXAMS
is
dependent
upon
the
quality
of
the
environmental
fate
input
parameters.

For
cypermethrin,
the
environmental
fate
database
is
considered
to
be
complete.
Estimations
regarding
the
spray
drift
fraction
in
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
model
runs
were
based
upon
the
assumption
that
the
wind
speeds
at
each
site
are
generally
below
10
mph.
Meteorological
data
from
coastal
regions
in
California
where
lettuce
is
grown
suggest
that
this
assumption
may
not
be
accurate
for
this
particular
scenario.

3.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
Exposure
For
Terrestrial
Species
The
data
available
to
support
the
terrestrial
exposure
assessment
for
cypermethrin
is
considered
to
be
complete.
For
screening
terrestrial
risk
assessments,
a
generic
bird
or
mammal
is
assumed
to
occupy
either
the
treated
field
or
adjacent
areas
receiving
pesticide
at
a
rate
commensurate
with
the
treatment
rate
on
the
field.
The
actual
habitat
requirements
of
any
particular
terrestrial
species
are
not
considered,
and
it
is
assumed
that
species
occupy,
exclusively
and
permanently,
the
treated
area
being
modeled.
This
assumption
leads
to
a
maximum
level
of
exposure
in
the
risk
assessment.

Screening­
level
risk
assessments
for
spray
applications
of
pesticides
consider
dietary
exposure
alone.
Other
routes
of
exposure,
not
considered
in
this
assessment,
are
discussed
below:

Incidental
soil
ingestion
exposure
This
risk
assessment
does
not
consider
incidental
soil
ingestion.
Available
data
suggests
that
up
to
15%
of
the
diet
can
consist
of
incidentally
ingested
soil
depending
on
the
species
and
­
99­
feeding
strategy
(
Beyer
et
al.,
1994).
A
simple
first
approximation
of
soil
concentration
of
pesticide
from
spray
application
shows
that
ingestion
of
soil
at
an
incidental
rate
of
up
to
15%
of
the
diet
would
not
increase
dietary
exposure.

Inhalation
exposure
The
screening
risk
assessment
does
not
consider
inhalation
exposure.
Such
exposure
may
occur
through
three
potential
sources:
(
1)
spray
material
in
droplet
form
at
the
time
of
application
(
2)
vapor
phase
pesticide
volatilizing
from
treated
surfaces,
and
(
3)
airborne
particulate
(
soil,
vegetative
material,
and
pesticide
dusts).

Available
data
suggest
that
inhalation
exposure
at
the
time
of
application
is
not
an
appreciable
route
of
exposure
for
birds.
According
to
research
on
mallards
and
bobwhite
quail,
respirable
particle
size
in
birds
(
particles
reaching
the
lung)
is
limited
to
a
maximum
diameter
of
2
to
5
microns.
Theoretically,
inhalation
of
pesticide
active
ingredient
in
the
vapor
phase
may
be
another
source
of
exposure
for
some
pesticides
under
some
exposure
situations.
However,
considering
its
low
vapor
pressure
value,
it
is
very
unlikely
that
cypermethrin
will
exist
in
the
gaseous
phase
for
any
significant
duration
to
cause
adverse
effects
via
inhalation.

The
impact
from
exposure
to
dusts
contaminated
with
the
pesticide
cannot
be
assessed
generically
as
partitioning
issues
related
to
application
site
soils
and
chemical
properties
render
the
exposure
potential
from
this
route
highly
situation­
specific.

Dermal
Exposure
The
screening
assessment
does
not
consider
dermal
exposure,
except
as
it
is
indirectly
included
in
calculations
of
RQs
based
on
lethal
doses
per
unit
of
pesticide
treated
area.
Dermal
exposure
may
occur
through
three
potential
sources:
(
1)
direct
application
of
spray
to
terrestrial
wildlife
in
the
treated
area
or
within
the
drift
footprint,
(
2)
incidental
contact
with
contaminated
vegetation,
or
(
3)
contact
with
contaminated
water
or
soil.

The
available
measured
data
related
to
wildlife
dermal
contact
with
pesticides
are
extremely
limited.
The
Agency
is
actively
pursuing
modeling
techniques
to
account
for
dermal
exposure
via
direct
application
of
spray
and
by
incidental
contact
with
vegetation.

Drinking
Water
Exposure
Drinking
water
exposure
to
a
pesticide
active
ingredient
may
be
the
result
of
consumption
of
surface
water
or
consumption
of
the
pesticide
in
dew
or
other
water
on
the
surfaces
of
treated
vegetation.
For
pesticide
active
ingredients
with
a
potential
to
dissolve
in
runoff,
puddles
on
the
treated
field
may
contain
the
chemical.
Given
its
low
water
solubility
and
relatively
high
soil/
water
partitioning
coefficients,
cypermethrin
is
not
expected
to
dissolve
in
dew
and
other
­
100­
water
associated
with
plant
surfaces.
Furthermore,
the
dissipation
of
this
chemical
in
water
is
likely
to
be
rapid,
decreasing
the
likelihood
of
exposure
to
cypermethrin
via
drinking
water.

Dietary
Intake
­
The
Differences
Between
Laboratory
and
Field
Conditions
The
acute
and
chronic
characterizations
of
risk
rely
on
comparisons
of
wildlife
dietary
residues
with
LC
50
or
NOAEC
values
expressed
in
concentrations
of
pesticides
in
laboratory
feed.
These
comparisons
assume
that
ingestion
of
food
items
in
the
field
occurs
at
rates
commensurate
with
those
in
the
laboratory.
Although
the
screening
assessment
process
adjusts
dry­
weight
estimates
of
food
intake
to
reflect
the
increased
mass
in
fresh­
weight
wildlife
food
intake
estimates,
it
does
not
allow
for
gross
energy
and
assimilative
efficiency
differences
between
wildlife
food
items
and
laboratory
feed.

On
gross
energy
content
alone,
direct
comparison
of
a
laboratory
dietary
concentrationbased
effects
threshold
to
a
fresh­
weight
pesticide
residue
estimate
would
result
in
an
underestimation
of
field
exposure
by
food
consumption
by
a
factor
of
1.25
­
2.5
for
most
food
items.
Only
for
seeds
would
the
direct
comparison
of
dietary
threshold
to
residue
estimate
lead
to
an
overestimate
of
exposure.

Differences
in
assimilative
efficiency
between
laboratory
and
wild
diets
suggest
that
current
screening
assessment
methods
do
not
account
for
a
potentially
important
aspect
of
food
requirements.
Depending
upon
species
and
dietary
matrix,
bird
assimilation
of
wild
diet
energy
ranges
from
23
­
80%,
and
mammal
assimilation
ranges
from
41
­
85%
(
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1993).
If
it
is
assumed
that
laboratory
chow
is
formulated
to
maximize
assimilative
efficiency
(
e.
g.,
a
value
of
85%),
a
potential
for
underestimation
of
exposure
may
exist
by
assuming
that
consumption
of
food
in
the
wild
is
comparable
with
consumption
during
laboratory
testing.
In
the
screening
process,
exposure
may
be
underestimated
because
metabolic
rates
are
not
related
to
food
consumption.
­
101­
Finally,
the
screening
procedure
does
not
account
for
situations
where
the
feeding
rate
may
be
above
or
below
requirements
to
meet
free
living
metabolic
requirements.
Gorging
behavior
is
a
possibility
under
some
specific
wildlife
scenarios
(
e.
g.,
bird
migration)
where
the
food
intake
rate
may
be
greatly
increased.
Kirkwood
(
1983)
has
suggested
that
an
upper­
bound
limit
to
this
behavior
might
be
the
typical
intake
rate
multiplied
by
a
factor
of
5.

In
contrast
is
the
potential
for
avoidance,
operationally
defined
as
animals
responding
to
the
presence
of
noxious
chemicals
in
their
food
by
reducing
consumption
of
treated
dietary
elements.
This
response
is
seen
in
nature
where
herbivores
avoid
plant
secondary
compounds.

4.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
Effects
Assessment
The
database
available
to
support
the
terrestrial
assessment
is
partially
complete.
There
is
uncertainty
regarding
chronic
toxicity
to
birds
at
exposure
levels
above
50
ppm
(
EEC
for
cotton
66
ppm).
The
Agency
requires
avian
reproduction
studies
that
test
up
to1000
ppm.

Although
cypermethrin
has
been
extensively
studied
in
many
aquatic
species,
data
gaps,
uncertainties
and
limitations
for
the
aquatic
ecological
effects
assessment
are
summarized
as
follows:

°
Chronic
toxicity
data
are
not
available
for
freshwater
invertebrates,
estuarine/
marine
fish,
or
benthic
organisms.
To
assess
risk
in
these
species,
RQs
are
based
on
derived
chronic
NOAEC
values,
adding
uncertainty
to
the
aquatic
risk
assessment.

°
The
available
acute
toxicity
study
for
benthic
organisms
was
not
conducted
with
the
exposure
system
at
equilibrium,
adding
uncertainty
to
the
acute
RQs
derived
for
exposure
via
the
sediment.
Furthermore,
since
the
chronic
RQ
for
sediment
and
acute
and
chronic
RQs
for
pore
water
were
derived
from
the
sediment
toxicity
value,
this
uncertainty
is
introduced
to
all
categories
of
the
risk
assessment
for
benthic
organisms.
These
studies
are
currently
being
conducted
by
the
pyrethroid
working
group
(
PWG)
but
were
not
available
for
inclusion
in
this
assessment.

Age
class
and
sensitivity
of
effects
thresholds
It
is
generally
recognized
that
test
organism
age
may
have
a
significant
impact
on
the
observed
sensitivity
to
a
toxicant.
The
screening
risk
assessment
acute
toxicity
data
for
fish
are
collected
on
juvenile
fish
weighing
between
0.1
and
5
grams.
Aquatic
invertebrate
acute
testing
is
performed
on
recommended
immature
age
classes
(
e.
g.,
first
instar
for
daphnids,
second
instar
for
­
102­
amphipods,
stoneflies
and
mayflies,
and
third
instar
for
midges).
Similarly,
acute
dietary
testing
with
birds
is
also
performed
on
juveniles,
with
mallard
being
5­
10
days
old
and
quail
10­
14
days
old.

Testing
of
juveniles
may
overestimate
toxicity
at
older
age
classes
for
pesticidal
active
ingredients,
such
as
cypermethrin,
that
act
directly
(
without
metabolic
transformation)
because
younger
age
classes
may
not
have
the
enzymatic
systems
associated
with
detoxifying
xenobiotics.
The
screening
risk
assessment
has
no
current
provisions
for
a
generally
applied
method
that
accounts
for
this
uncertainty.
In
so
far
as
the
available
toxicity
data
may
provide
ranges
of
sensitivity
information
with
respect
to
age
class,
the
risk
assessment
uses
the
most
sensitive
life­
stage
information
as
the
conservative
screening
endpoint.

Use
of
the
Most
Sensitive
Species
Tested
Although
the
screening
risk
assessment
relies
on
a
selected
toxicity
endpoint
from
the
most
sensitive
species
tested,
it
does
not
necessarily
mean
that
the
selected
toxicity
endpoints
reflect
sensitivity
of
the
most
sensitive
species
existing
in
a
given
environment.
The
relative
position
of
the
most
sensitive
species
tested
in
the
distribution
of
all
possible
species
is
a
function
of
the
overall
variability
among
species
to
a
particular
chemical.
In
the
case
of
listed
species,
there
is
uncertainty
regarding
the
relationship
of
the
listed
species'
sensitivity
and
the
most
sensitive
species
tested.

The
Agency
is
not
limited
to
a
base
set
of
surrogate
toxicity
information
in
establishing
risk
assessment
conclusions.
The
Agency
also
considers
toxicity
data
on
non­
standard
test
species
when
available.

5.
Assumptions,
Limitations,
Uncertainties,
Strengths
and
Data
Gaps
Related
to
the
Acute
and
Chronic
LOCs
The
risk
characterization
section
of
the
assessment
includes
an
evaluation
of
the
potential
for
individual
effects
at
an
exposure
level
equivalent
to
the
LOC.
This
evaluation
is
based
on
the
median
lethal
dose
estimate
and
dose/
response
relationship
established
for
the
effects
study
corresponding
to
each
taxonomic
group
for
which
the
LOCs
are
exceeded.
­
103­
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division
would
like
to
thank
Syracuse
Environmental
Research
Associates
(
SERA),
and
Syracuse
Research
Corporation
for
their
assistance
in
developing
this
cypermethrin
risk
assessment.
Thanks
to
the
following
persons
for
their
collaboration
in
making
this
product:
Mario
Citra,
Julie
Klotzbach
and
Cynthia
King.
­
104­
V.
Literature
Cited
Environmental
Fate
MRID
Studies
Submitted
to
EPA
MRID
42129001
Estigoy,
L.;
Ruzo,
L.;
Shepler,
K.
(
1991)
Photodegradation
of
Carbon
14­
Acid
and
Carbon
14­
Alcohol
Cypermethrin
in
Soil
by
Natural
Sunlight:
Lab
Project
Number:
249/
250W:
191E1390El:
PC­
0159.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
PTRL
West.
115
p.

MRID
42129002
Curry,
S.
(
1991)
Leaching
of
Carbon
14­
Cypermethrin
in
Soil
Following
Aerobic
Aging:
Lab
Project
Number:
191E3
190E1.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
97
p.

MRID
42129003
Froelich,
L.
(
1991).
Soil
Mobility
Studies:
Adsorption/
Desorption
Studies
of
Cypermethrin:
Lab
Project
Number:
191E3290El.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
65
p.

MRID
42156601
Ramsey
A.
(
1991)
Environmental
Fate
Studies:
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
of
Cypermethrin
in
a
Sandy
Loam
Soil:
Lab
Project
Number:
19
lE2
190EI.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
99
p.

MRID
42156602
Ramsey
A.
(
1991)
Environmental
Fate
Studies:
Anaerobic
Soil
Metabolism
of
Cypermethrin
in
a
Sandy
Loam
Soil:
Lab
Project
Number:
19
lE2
190EI.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
93
p.

MRID
42395701
Estigoy,
L.;
Ruzo,
L.;
Shepler,
K.
(
1992)
Photodegradation
of
14C
Cypermethrin
in
Buffered
Aqueous
Solution
at
pH
7
by
Natural
Sunlight:
Revised:
Lab
Project
Number:
247/
248W:
247/
248W­
l;
191E1290El.
Unpub­
lished
study
prepared
by
Pharmacology
and
Toxicology
Research
Research
Lab
(
PTRL­
West)
and
FMC
Corp.
144
p.

MRID
42459601
Leppert,
B.
(
1992)
Ammo
2.5
EC
Insecticide­­
Terrestrial
Field
Dissipation:
Lab
Project
Number:
191E4191E1:
RAN­
0239.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corporation.
182
p.

MRID
42620501
Clifton
J.(
1992)
Environmental
Fate
Studies:
Hydrolysis
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
in
Aqueous
Buffered
Solutions:
Lab
Project
Number:
191E1192E1:
P­
2771.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
77
p.
­
105­
MRID
42868203
Giroir,
E.;
Stuerman,
L.
(
1993)
Cypermethrin
(
carbon
14)
Bioconcentration
by
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus):
Lab
Project
Number:
191
E5491E1:
400
18:
PC­
0189.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
ABC
Labs,
Inc.
3
11
p.

MRID
44876105
Ramsey,
A.
A.
1998.
Anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
of
14C­
zetacypermethrin
Unpublished
study
performed,
sponsored
and
submitted
by
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ.

MRID
44876107
Holihan,
J.
C.
1999.
Fury
®
1.5
EC
insecticide
aquatic
field
dissipation.
Study
No.:
194E4297E1.
Report
No.:
P­
3361.
Unpublished
study
performed
by
Agricultural
Advisors,
Inc.,
Live
Oak,
CA
(
in­
life
phase);
R&
D
Research
Farm,
Inc.,
Washington,
LA
(
in­
life
phase);
and
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ
and
Richmond,
CA
(
analytical
phase);
and
submitted
by
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ.

MRID
45920801
Curry,
S.
J.
2003.
Aerobic
aquatic
metabolism
of
14C­
zeta­
cypermethrin.
Unpublished
study
performed,
sponsored
and
submitted
by
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ.
FMC
Study
No.:
194E2202E1.
Experimental
initiation
September
17,
2002
(
p.
17),
and
completion
April
2,
2003
(
p.
12).
Final
report
issued
April
28,
2003.
­
106­
Ecological
Effects
MRID
Studies
Submitted
to
EPA
Acc.
No.
42444601
Edwards,
P.
J.,
Brown,
S.
M.,
Swaine,
H.
(
1980).
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
:
Toxicity
to
first
instar
Daphnia
magna.
Unpublished
report
by
the
Plant
Protection
Division,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
I
C
I
Americas
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Delaware.

Acc.
No.
42444601
Jaber,
M.
J.
(
1981).
The
acute
and
chronic
toxicity
of
cypemethrin
to
mysid
shrimp
(
Mysidopsis
bahia).
Unpublished
report
by
EG&
G
Bionomics,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
ICI
Americas
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Delaware.

Acc.
No.
42444601
Stephenson,
R.
R,
Kane,
D.
F.
(
1980).
The
acute
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
(
WL
43467)
to
the
freshwater
shrimp
(
Gammerus
pulex)
and
larvae
of
the
mayfly
(
Cleon
dipterum),
in
continuous­
£
low
tests.
Unpublished
report
from
Shell
Research
Ltd,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
ICI
Americas,
Wilmington,
Delaware.

Acc.
No.
42444601
Thompson,
R.
S.
(
1981)
Investigation
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
PP
383
to
Larvae
of
the
Pacific
Oyster
(
Crassostrea
gigas).
Unpublished
report
by
the
Brixham
Laboratory
of
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.;
Wilmington,
Delaware.

Acc.
No.
241598
Hill,
R.
W.,
Maddock,
B.
G.,
Hart,
B.
(
1976).
Determination
of
the
acute
toxicity
of
PP383
to
Rainbow
trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri).
ICI
Brixham
Laboratory
Report
No.
BL/
B/
1711,
March
1976.

Acc.
No.
241598
Hill,
R.
W,
Maddock,
B.
G.,
Hart,
B.,
Gilbert,
J.
L.
(
1977).
Determination
of
the
acute
toxicity
of
PP383
to
bluegill
sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus)
.
ICI
Brixham
Laboratory
Report
No.
BL/
B/
1775,
March
1977.

Acc.
No.
241598
Ross,
D.
B.,
D.
M.
Cameron,
N.
L.
Roberts
(
1977).
The
Acute
Oral
Toxicity
(
LDSO)
of
PP383
to
the
Mallard
Duck.
Huntington
Research
Centre
Report
No.
ICI
128WL/
7733,
August
1977.

Acc.
No.
250506
ICI
Americas
Inc.
(
1980).
Cypermthrin:
Aquatic
Ecological
Effects
Under
Field
Use
Conditions
in
Cotton
in
Selma,
Alabama.
Agricultural
Chemicals
Division
Research
and
Development
Department.
­
107­
Acc.
No.
260647
Bull,
J.
M.,
Wilkinson,
W.
(
1980).
Cypermethrin:
Laboratory
determination
of
the
acute
oral
and
contact
toxicity
to
honeybees
of
technical
material
and
an
emulsifiable
concentrate
(
GFU061)
.
Submitted
by
ICI
,
Plant
Protection
Division
.
Reg.
No.
10182­
65.

MRID
00056800
Henderson,
C.;
Oliver,
G.
A.;
Smith,
I.
K.;
et
al.
(
1980)
Cypermethrin
(
PP383):
Acute
Toxicity
and
Local
Irritation:
Report
No.
CTL/
P/
537.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
29,
1980
under
10182­
EX­
19;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
United
Kingdom,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
099855­
B)

MRID
62793
Cypermethrin
(
PP3838):
Toxicity
of
technical
and
formulated
material
to
first
instar
Daphnia
magna.
Submitted
by
ICI
Americas
for
Phase
4
List
B
review.
MRID
92027­
014
(
Summary
Report)
and
MRID
00062793
(
Study
Report)
.
No
date
given.

MRID
65813
Hill,
R.
W.;
Maddock,
B.
G.;
Harland,
B.
J.
(
1980).
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
GFU
061,
a
36%
w/
v
Formulation
of
Cypermethrin
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri):
BL/
B)
2016.
(
Unpublished
study).

MRID
88947
Hill,
R.
W.;
Maddock,
B.
G.;
Comber,
M.
H.
I.
(
1981)
Cypermethrin:
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
Formulation
GFU
070
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri):
BL/
B/
2093.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070558­
C).

MRID
89037
Hill,
R.
W.;
Young,
B.
E.;
Comber,
M.
H.
I.
(
1981)
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
3­
Phenoxy
Benzoic
Acid
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri):
Brixham
Report
No.
Bl/
B/
2038.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
B).

MRID
00089038
Hill,
R.
W.;
Young,
B.
E.;
Comber,
M.
H.
I.
(
1981)
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
3­
Phenoxy
Benzoic
Acid
to
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus):
Brixham
Report
No.
BL/
B/
2086.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
C).
­
108­
MRID
89039
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Fathead
Minnow
(
Pimephales
promelas)
Embryos
and
Larvae:
Report
Series
TMUE0007/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
D).

MRID
89040
Edwards,
P.
J.;
Brown,
S.
M.;
Swaine,
H.;
et
al.
(
1980)
Cypermethrin
(
PP383):
Toxicity
of
Formulation
GFU061
to
First
Instar
Daphnia
magna:
Report
Series
RJ
0149B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
E).

MRID
89045
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Fiddler
Crabs
(
Uca
pugilator):
Report
Series
TMUE0003/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
K).

MRID
89049
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Eastern
Oysters
(
Crassostrea
virginica):
Report
Series
TMUE0009/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
O).

MRID
00090040
Hend,
R.
W.;
Hendy,
R.;
Fleming,
D.
J.
(
1972?)
Toxicity
Studies
on
the
Insecticide
WL
43467:
A
Three
Generation
Reproduction
Study
in
Rats:
Group
Research
Report
TLGR.
0188.78.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Shell
Research,
Ltd.,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070564­
H).

MRID
90071
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.;
Woodhouse,
R.
N.
(
1980)
The
Subacute
Dietary
Toxicity
(
LC50)
of
Cypermethrin
to
the
Mallard
Duck:
ICI
330/
WL/
80812;
55
1(
a)/
3.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Research
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
C).

MRID
90072
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.;
Woodhouse,
R.
N.
(
1981)
The
Subacute
Dietary
Toxicity
(
LC50)
of
Cypermethrin
to
the
Bobwhite
Quail:
ICI
331
WL/
80811;
5E.
1(
a)/
4.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Research
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
D).
­
109­
MRID
90073
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.;
Chanter,
D.
O.;
et
al.
(
1981)
The
Effect
of
the
Dietary
Inclusion
of
Cypermentrin
on
Reproduction
in
the
Mallard
Duck:
ICI
341/
8164;
CTL/
C/
1091.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Re­
search
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
E).

MRID
90074
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.;
Chanter,
D.
O.;
et
al.
(
1981)
The
Effect
of
Dietary
Inclusion
of
Cypermethrin
on
Reproduction
in
the
Bobwhite
Quail:
ICI
342/
81341;
CTL/
C/
1105.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Research
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wil­
mington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
F).

MRID
90075
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Sheepshead
Minnows
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus):
Report
Series
TMUE0002/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
079561­
G).

MRID
00112912
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Sheepshead
Minnows
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus):
Report
Series
TMUE0002/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
079561­
G).

MRID
152737
Getty,
C.;
Wilkinson,
W.;
Swaine,
H.;
et
al.
(
1983)
Cypermethrin:
Effects
of
Multiple
Low
Rate
Applications
on
Experimental
Ponds:
Report
No.
RJ0182B.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries
PLC.
62
p.

MRID
152739
Everett,
C.
J.,
M.
J.
Hamer,
and
I.
R.
Hill.
(
1983).
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid:
Toxicity
to
first
instar
Daphnia
magna
(
II).
Report
Series
RJ
0318B.
Prepared
and
submitted
by
ICI
Plant
Protection
Division,
Bracknell,
Berkshire,
England.

MRID
155770
Crossland,
N.
(
1982)
Aquatic
toxicology
of
cypermethrin.
II.
Fate
and
biological
effects
in
pond
experiments.
Aquatic
Toxicology
2:
205­
222.

MRID
155772
Crossland,
N.;
Shires,
S.;
Bennett,
D.
(
1982)
Aquatic
toxicology
of
cypermethrin.
III.
Fate,
and
biological
effects
of
spray
drift
deposits
in
fresh
­
110­
water
adjacent
to
agricultural
land.
Aquatic
Toxicology
2:
253­
270.

MRID
9202704
Guttmann,
E.
(
1990)
ICI
Americas
Inc.
Phase
3
Summary
of
MRID
00112912.
Cypermethrin:
Three
Generation
Reproduction
Study
in
the
Rat:
CTL
Report
No.:
CTL/
P/
683;
CTL
Study
No.:
RR0143.:
9
p.

MRID
41068003
McLeese,
D.;
Metcalfe,
C.;
Zitko,
V.
(
1980)
Lethality
of
permethrin,
cypermethrin
and
fenvalerate
to
salmon,
lobster
and
shrimp.
Bulletin
of
Environmental
Contamination
and
Toxicology
25:
950­
955.

MRID
41968212
Chandler,
A.
(
1990)
FMC
45806:
Acute
Toxicity
to
Sheepshead
Minnow
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus)
Under
Flow­
through
Test
Conditions:
Lab
Project
Number:
3903026­
0350­
3140.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Environmental
Science
and
Engineering(
ESE),
Inc.
43
p.

MRID
42068504
Berry,
D.
(
1991)
Addendum
to
Phase
3
Summary
of
MRID
No.
112912,
Cypermethrin:
Three
Generation
Reproduction
Study
in
the
Rat:
Lab
Project
Number:
CTL/
P/
683.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
ICI
Central
Toxicology
Lab.
6
p.

MRID
42725301
Wheat,
J.
(
1993)
FMC­
30980(
carbon
14)­
Cypermethrin:
Chronic
Toxicity
to
the
Mysid,
Mysidopsis
bahia,
Under
Flow­
Through
Test
Conditions:
Lab
Project
Number:
J9205004A.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Toxikon
Environmental
Sciences.
63
p.

MRID
44074402
Gentle,
W.;
Goggin,
U.;
Rapley,
J.;
et
al.
(
1996)
Cypermethrin:
Toxicity
to
Chironomus
tentans
in
Sediment­
Water
Systems:
Lab
Project
Number:
RC0001:
96JH007.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Zeneca
Agrochemicals.
31
p.

MRID
44074406
Farrelly,
E.;
Gentle,
W.;
Goggin,
U.;
et
al.
(
1996)
Cypermethrin:
Toxicity
to
Hyalella
azteca
in
Sediment­
Water
Systems:
Lab
Project
Number:
RC0006:
95JH228.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Zeneca
Agrochemicals.
30
p.

MRID
44544208
Halsall,
N.
(
1998)
Betacypermethrin
10
EC:
Acute
Toxicity
to
Honey
Bees
(
Apis
mellifera):
Lab
Project
Number:
PWT
131/
963589:
PWT
131.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Life
Sciences
Ltd.
29
p.
­
111­
MRID
44546024
Johnson,
A.
(
1998)
Acute
Toxicity
(
LD50)
to
Bobwhite
Quail:
Betacypermethrin:
Lab
Project
Number:
PWT
129:
PWT
129/
962076.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Life
Sciences
Ltd.
38
p.

MRID
44546025
Johnson,
A.
(
1998)
Dietary
(
LC50)
to
the
Mallard
Duck:
Betacypermethrin:
Lab
Project
Number:
PWT
128:
PWT
128/
962075.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Life
Sciences
Ltd.
40
p.

MRID
44546026
Johnson,
A.
(
1998)
Dietary
LC50)
to
the
Bobwhite
Quail:
Betacypermethrin:
Lab
Project
Number:
PWT
127:
PWT
127/
962074.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Life
Sciences
Ltd.
40
p.

MRID
44546027
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)­
Cypermethrin­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Oncorhynchus
mykiss)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
11­
7166:
12442.1096.6223.108.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
91
p.

MRID
44546030
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
Cypermethrin
Technical­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
12­
7195:
12442.1096.6224.105.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
76
p.

MRID
44546031
Putt,
A.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)(
Beta)
Cypermethrin­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Daphnids
(
Daphnia
magna)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
9­
7079:
12442.1096.6227.115.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
95
p.

MRID
44546032
Putt,
A.
(
1998)
Cypermethrin
Technical­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Daphnids
(
Daphnia
magna)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
11­
7138:
12442.1096.6226.115.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
74
p.

MRID
44546034
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)(
Beta)­
Cypermethrin­­
Chronic
Toxicity
to
Sheepshead
Minnow
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
1­
7212:
12442.1096.6231.505.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
91
p.

MRID
44546035
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)(
Beta)­
Cypermethrin­­
Chronic
Toxicity
to
­
112­
Mysids
(
Mysidopsis
bahia)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
12­
7170:
12442.1096.6232.530.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
101
p.

MRID
44561209
Putt,
A.
(
1998)
(
Carbon­
14)
Beta­
Cypermethrin­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Mysids
(
Mysidopsis
bahia)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
11­
7153:
12442.1096.6229.515.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Laboratories,
Inc.
79
p.

MRID
44561210
Putt,
A.
(
1998)
Cypermethrin
Technical­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Mysids
(
Mysidopsis
bahia)
Under
Flow­
through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
98­
1­
7224:
12442.1096.6228.815.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
laboratories,
Inc.
76
p.
­
113­
Open
Literature
and
Government
Reports
Beyer,
W.
N.;
Connor,
E;
Gerould,
S.
1994.
Survey
of
soil
ingestion
by
wildlife.
Journal
of
Wildlife
Management
58:
375­
382.

Bott,
T.
L.,
Standley,
L.
J.
2000.
Transfer
of
benzo
[
a]
pyrene
and
2,2'
5,5'­
tetrachlorobiphenyl
from
bacteria
to
sediment­
associated
freshwater
invertebrates.
Environ.
Sci.
Technol.
34:
4936­
4942.

Crossland,
N.
O.,
S.
W.
Shires,
and
D.
Bennett.
1982.
Aquatic
Toxicology
of
Cypermethrin.
III.
Fate
and
Biological
Effects
of
Spray
Drift
Deposits
in
Fresh
Water
Adjacent
to
Agricultural
Land.
Aquat.
Toxicol.
2:
253­
270.

Davies,
P.
E.,
and
L.
S.
J.
Cook.
1993.
Catastrophic
Macroinvertebrate
Drift
and
Sublethal
Effects
on
Brown
Trout,
Salmo
trutta,
Caused
by
Cypermethrin
Spraying
on
a
Tasmanian
Stream.
Aquat.
Toxicol.
27(
3/
4):
201­
224.

Di
Toro,
D.
M.,
Zarba,
C.
S.,
Hansen,
D.
J.,
Berry,
W.
J.,
Swartz,
R.
C.,
Cowan,
C.
E.,
Pavlou,
S.
P.,
Allen,
H.
E.,
Thomas,
N.
A.,
Paquin,
P.
R.
1991.
Technical
basis
for
establishing
sediment
quality
criteria
for
nonionic
organic
chemicals
using
equilibrium
partitioning.
Environ
Toxicol.
Chem.
10:
1541­
1583.

EXAMS.
2002.
Surface
Water
Model,
Version
2.98.04.
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Washington,
D.
C.

Farmer,
D.,
I.
R.
Hill,
and
S.
J.
Maund.
1995.
A
Comparison
of
the
Fate
and
Effects
of
Two
Pyrethroid
Insecticides
(
lambda­
Cyhalothrin
and
Cypermethrin)
in
Pond
Mesocosms.
Ecotoxicology
4(
4):
219­
244.

Georgia
Pecan
Commission.
A
Commercial
Users
Guide
for
Georgia
Pecans.
Available
at
:
http://
www.
georgiapecans.
org/
commercial.
html
Gorsuch
CS.
2003.
Clemson
University
Pest
Management
Handbook.
Fruits
and
Nuts
(
last
updated
3­
11­
2003).

Hallam,
T.
G.,
Lassiter,
R.
R.,
Li,
J.,
McKinney,
W.
1990.
Toxicant­
induced
mortality
in
models
of
Daphnia
populations.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
9:
597­
621.
­
114­
Jackson
L.,
Mayberry
K.,
Laemmlen
F.,
Koike
S.,
Schulbach
K.,
Chaney
W.
1996.
Iceberg
lettuce
production
in
California.
Vegetable
Research
and
Information
Center
Univ
of
California
Div
of
Agriculture
and
Natural
Resources.
Publication
Number
7215.

Landrum,
P.
F.,
Dupuis,
W.
S.,
Kukkonen,
J.
1994.
Toxicokinetics
and
toxicity
of
sedimentassociated
pyrene
and
phenanthrene
in
Diporeia
spp.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
13:
1769­
1780.

Laskowski
D.
A..
2002.
Physical
and
Chemical
Properties
of
Pyrethroids.
Rev.
Environ.
Contam.
Toxicol.
174:
49­
170
Leppanen,
M.
T.
and
Kukkonen,
J.
V.
K.
1998.
Relationship
between
reproduction,
sediment
type,
and
feeding
activity
of
Lumbriculus
variegatus.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
17:
2196­
2202.

McGroddy,
S.
E.,
Farrington,
J.
W.,
Gschwend,
P.
M.
1996.
Comparison
of
the
in
situe
and
desorption
sediment­
water
partitioning
of
polycyclic
aromatic
hydrocarbons
and
polychlorinated
biphenyls.
Environ.
Sci.
Technol.
30:
172­
177.

Kedwards,
T.
J.,
S.
J.
Maund,
and
P.
F.
Chapman.
1999a.
Community
Level
Analysis
of
Ecotoxicological
Field
Studies:
I.
Biological
Monitoring.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
18(
2):
149­
157.

Kedwards,
T.
J.,
S.
J.
Maund,
and
P.
F.
Chapman.
1999b.
Community
Level
Analysis
of
Ecotoxicological
Field
Studies:
II.
Replicated­
Design
Studies.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
18(
2):
158­
166.

Kirkwood,
RC.
(
1983).
The
relationship
of
metabolism
studies
to
the
modes
of
action
of
herbicides.
Pestic.
Sci.
14:
453­
460.

Laskowski
D.
A..
2002.
Physical
and
Chemical
Properties
of
Pyrethroids.
Rev.
Environ.
Contam.
Toxicol.
174:
49­
170
Mohsen,
Z.
H.,
and
M.
S.
Mulla.
1982.
Field
Evaluation
of
Simulium
Larvicides:
Effects
on
Target
and
Nontarget
Insects.
Environ.
Entomol.
11(
2):
390­
398.

Mulla,
M.
S.,
H.
A.
Navvab­
Gojrati,
and
H.
A.
Darwazeh.
1978.
Biological
Activity
and
Longevity
of
New
Synthetic
Pyrethroids
Against
Mosquitoes
and
Some
Nontarget
Insects.
Mosq.
News
38(
1):
90­
96.
­
115­
Mulla,
M.
S.,
H.
A.
Darwazeh,
and
L.
Ede.
1982.
Evaluation
of
New
Pyrethroids
Against
Immature
Mosquitoes
and
Their
Effects
on
Nontarget
Organisms.
Mosq.
News
42(
4):
583­
590.

National
Agricultural
Statistical
Service
(
NASS).
U.
S.
Dept.
Of
Agriculture.
http://
www.
usda.
gov/
nass/

NCFAP.
2005.
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy,
National
Pesticide
Use
Database.
Information
taken
on
February
28,
2005
from
the
website:
http://
www.
ncfap.
org/
database/
default.
htm.

PRZM
3.12
beta.
1998.
Surface
Water
Model,
Version
3.12
Beta.
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Washington,
D.
C..
Information
downloaded
from
the
website
http//
www.
epa.
gov/
ceampubl/
gwater/
przm3/
index.
htm.

Roberts,
B.
L.,
and
H.
W.
Dorough.
1984.
Relative
Toxicities
of
Chemicals
to
the
Earthworm
Eisenia
foetida.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
3(
1):
67­
78.

Roof
ME.
2004.
Clemson
University
Pest
Management
Handbook.
Cotton
Insect
Control
(
last
updated
5­
26­
2004).
http://
cufan.
clemson.
edu/
pmguide/
main.
htm
Takahashi
N.,
Mikami
I.,
Matsuda
T.,
Miyamoto
J.
1985.
Photodegradation
of
the
pyrethroid
insecticide
cypermethrin
in
water
and
on
soil
surface.
Nippon
Noyaku
Gakkaishi
10:
629­
42.

Tomlin
C.
1994.
Pesticide
Manual
10th
edition.
British
Crop
Protection
Council.
The
Royal
Society
of
Chemistry,
Cambridge
U.
K.

T­
REX.
2004.
Terrestrial
Residue
Exposure
Model
(
T­
REX),
Version
1.1.
December
7,
2004.
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Washington,
D.
C.

USEPA.
1993.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Wildlife
Exposure
Factors
Handbook.
Volume
I
of
II.
EPA/
600/
R­
93/
187a.
Office
of
Research
and
Development,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460.

USEPA.
1998.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Guidelines
for
Ecological
Risk
assessment.
EPA/
630/
R­
95/
002f.
Office
of
Research
and
Development,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460.
­
116­
USEPA.
2001.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Ecological
Risk
Assessor
Orientation
Package.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Ecological
Fate
and
Effects
Division.
Draft
Version,
August
2001.

USEPA.
2002.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Guidance
for
Selecting
Input
Parameters
in
Modeling
the
Environmental
Fate
and
Transport
of
Pesticides,
Version
II.
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Washington,
D.
C.
21
pgs.

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

Weston,
D.
P.,
Holmes,
R.
W.,
You,
J.,
Lydy,
M.
J.
2005.
Aquatic
Toxicity
Due
to
Residential
Use
of
Pyrethroid
Insecticides.
Environ.
Sci.
Technol.
38:
2752­
2759.

Willis
and
McDowell.
1987.
As
cited
in
Carsel,
R.
F.,
et
al.,
"
PRZM­
3,
A
Model
for
Predicting
Pesticide
and
Nitrogen
Fate
in
the
Crop
Root
and
Unsaturated
Soil
Zones:
User's
Manual
for
Release
3.0."
National
Exposure
Research
Laboratory
USEPA,
Athens,
GA;
AQUA
TERRA
Consultants,
Mountain
View,
CA;
and
Waterborne
Environmental,
Inc.,
Leesburg,
VA.
p.
5­
12.
­
A­
1­
Appendix
A.
Environmental
Fate
and
Transport
Data
161­
1
Hydrolysis
(
MRID
42620501)

Cypermethrin
(
a
mixture
of
the
cis­
and
trans­
isomers),
at
a
starting
concentration
of
10
ppb,
was
reported
to
be
relatively
stable
to
abiotic
hydrolysis
at
25
"

C
in
pH
5
and
7
buffered
solutions
over
the
course
of
a
30
day
study
period.
However,
in
pH
9
solutions,
the
computed
half­
lives
were
1.8
days
and
2.5
days
for
14C­
cyclopropyl
labeled
and
14C­
benzyl
labeled
cypermethrin,
respectively.

The
major
cyclopropyl
labeled
degradate
at
pH
9
was
a
mixture
of
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA.
DCVA
steadily
increased
from
0%
of
the
applied
radioactivity
at
the
start
of
the
experiment
to
23.2%
(
hour
12),
35.3%
(
hour
24),
49.8%
(
hour
36),
55.5%
(
hour
48),
69.6%
(
hour
72),
and
78.7%
(
hour
120).

The
major
benzyl
labeled
degradate
at
pH
9
was
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde.
The
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzaldehyde
steadily
increased
from
0%
of
applied
radioactivity
at
the
start
of
the
experiment
to
13.8%
(
hour
12),
22.3%
(
hour
24),
31.0%
(
hour
36),
39.3%
(
hour
48),
54.6%
(
hour
72),
and
64.9%
(
hour
120).

161­
2
Aqueous
Photolysis
(
MRID
42395701)

The
photolysis
half­
life
of
14C­
cyclopropyl
labeled
cypermethrin
(
0.1
ppm
dissolved
in
20%
acetonitrile)
in
aqueous
pH
7
buffered
solution
was
36.2
days
when
exposed
to
sunlight
from
Richmond,
CA
in
the
months
of
March
and
April.
For
14C­
benzyl
labeled
cypermethrin
exposed
to
the
sunlight,
the
overall
half­
life
was
approximately
20
days,
but
the
buffer
may
not
have
been
properly
sterilized
since
this
solution
showed
growth
of
gram
negative
bacteria
at
the
end
of
the
study.
A
major
degradate
was
determined
to
be
present,
but
not
identified
in
the
experiment
performed
with
the
cyclopropyl
labeled
cypermethrin.
It
steadily
increased
to
21.2%
of
applied
radioactivity
on
day
30
in
the
sunlight
irradiated
solution,
compared
to
5.8%
of
applied
amount
on
day
30
in
the
dark
control.
The
degradate
trans­
DCVA
was
detected
at
a
maximum
of
4.5%
(
day
14)
in
the
sunlight
irradiated
solution
compared
to
a
maximum
of
0.8%
(
day
14)
in
the
dark
control.
The
major
benzyl
labeled
degradate
was
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
which
steadily
increased
from
below
its
detection
limit
at
day
0
to
34.6%
(
day
35)
in
the
sunlight
irradiated
solution,
compared
to
a
maximum
of
8.1%
(
day
28)
in
the
dark
control.

Cypermethrin
at
50
ppb
had
observed
half­
lives
in
river
water,
seawater
and
distilled
water
+
1%
humic
acid
in
the
range
of
0.7
to
3.4
days
when
exposed
to
sunlight
in
Takarazoka,
Japan
in
August
(
Takahashi
et
al.
1985).
These
authors
noted
that
the
cis
isomers
underwent
photodegradation
1.4­
1.7
times
faster
than
the
trans
isomers.
The
half­
lives
in
dark
control
samples
were
reported
to
be
>
10
days
for
each
sample
preparation.
No
metabolites
were
­
A­
2­
identified
and
dark
control
corrected
half­
lives
were
not
presented.

161­
3
Soil
Photolysis
(
MRID
42129001)

Cypermethrin
at
20
ppm
underwent
photodegradation
on
a
thin
film
of
Thurston
fine
sandy
loam
soil
(
76%
sand,
13%
silt,
11%
clay,
1.8%
OM,
pH
6.9)
exposed
to
sunlight
from
Richmond,
CA
for
35
days
in
February
and
March,
with
a
registrant
calculated
half­
life
of
about
55
days.
Cypermethrin
was
labeled
with
14C
at
both
the
phenyl
and
cyclopropyl
moieties
of
the
molecule.
In
both
the
irradiated
samples
and
dark
controls
cyperamide
was
observed
as
a
degradation
product
and
were
similar
throughout
the
course
of
the
study.
Cyperamide
levels
increased
from
1.7­
3.4%
of
the
applied
dose
at
day
7
to
9.2
to
13.3%
at
day
35.

The
half­
life
of
14C­
cypermethrin
labeled
at
the
cyclopropyl
moiety
was
55
(
r2
=
0.993)
days
while
the
half­
life
of
this
sample
in
the
dark
control
was
100.5
days
(
r2
=
0.861).
The
half­
life
of
phenyl
labeled
cypermethrin
was
determined
to
be
56.5
days
(
r2
=
0.950),
while
the
dark
control
half­
life
was
75.9
(
r2
=
0.750).
Dark
control
corrected
half­
lives
of
100
and
128
days
were
calculated
for
the
.
The
half­
life
in
a
dark
control
was
100
days.
Dark
control
corrected
photodegradation
halflives
of
128
and
219
days
were
calculated
for
cypermethrin
labeled
at
the
cyclopropyl
and
phenyl
moieties,
respectively,
by
subtracting
the
dark
control
rate
constant
from
the
rate
constant
of
the
irradiated
samples.

163­
3
Field
Volatility
Given
the
fact
that
cypermethrin
adsorbs
strongly
to
soils
and
partitions
to
sediment
in
the
water
column,
and
based
upon
a
vapor
pressure
of
2.5x10­
9
mm
Hg
and
Henry's
Law
constant
of
3.4x10­
7
atm­
m3/
mol,
cypermethrin
is
not
expected
to
have
any
significant
potential
for
volatilization
from
water
or
soil
surfaces.

162­
1
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
(
MRID
42156601)

Half­
lives
of
60.7
days
and
59.8
days
were
observed
for
14C­
cyclopropyl
labeled
and
14C­
phenyl
labeled
cypermethrin,
respectively,
in
a
Thurston
fine
sandy
loam
soil
(
76%
sand,
13%
silt,
11%
clay,
1.8%
OM,
pH
6.9)
incubated
in
the
dark
at
25
"

C
under
aerobic
conditions.

In
the
cyclopropyl
labeled
study,
the
major
degradates
were
14CO
2
and
a
mixture
of
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA.
The
14CO
2
steadily
increased
to
a
maximum
of
35.8%
of
applied
radioactivity
(
day
128).
­
A­
3­
The
DCVA
cis/
trans
mixture
increased
to
a
maximum
of
24.2%
of
applied
amount
on
day
62
and
then
decreased
to
18.1%
(
day
91),
7.9%
(
day
122),
and
4.4%
(
day
150).
In
the
phenyl
labeled
study,
the
major
degradate
was
4CO
2
which
steadily
increased
to
a
maximum
of
46.1%
of
applied
radioactivity
on
the
last
day
(
day
150)
of
the
study.
The
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
increased
to
a
maximum
of
8.4%
of
applied
amount
on
day
30
and
then
declined
to
5.8%
(
day
44),
6.6%
(
day
62),
4.4%
(
day
91),
3.5%
(
day
122),
and
1.7%
(
day
150).

162­
2
Anaerobic
Soil
Metabolism
(
MRID
42156602)

Using
a
Thurston
fine
sandy
loam
soil
(
76%
sand,
13%
silt,
11%
clay,
1.8%
OM,
pH
6.9),
14Ccyclopropyl
and
14C­
phenyl
labeled
cypermethrin
degraded
with
half­
lives
of
53.3
and
63
days,
respectively
under
anaerobic
(
flooded)
conditions
following
32
days
of
aerobic
incubation.
The
major
14C­
cyclopropyl
labeled
degradate
was
a
mixture
of
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA.
It
increased
from
14%
of
the
applied
radioactivity
on
the
first
day
that
anaerobic
conditions
to
33.3%
(
day
30),
then
decreased
slightly
to
26.3%
(
day
60).
14CO
2
steadily
increased
from
4.8%
of
applied
radioactivity
on
the
first
day
that
anaerobic
conditions
were
established
to
5.8%
(
day
14),
6.2%
(
day
30),
7.2%
(
day
45),
and
10.9%
(
day
60).

The
major
14C­
phenyl
labeled
degradate
was
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
which
steadily
increased
from
7.5%
of
applied
radioactivity
on
the
first
day
that
anaerobic
conditions
were
established,
to
25.9%
at
day
60
postflooding.
14CO
2
increased
from
13.2%
of
applied
radioactivity
on
day
0
of
the
flooded
period
to
20.9%
(
day
60).

162­
4
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
(
MRID
45920801)

The
biotransformation
of
[
14C]
zeta­
cypermethrin
dissolved
in
acetonitrile
and
applied
at
0.15
mg
a.
i./
L
(
approximately
0.2
lbs
a.
i./
A
applied
to
a
6
inch
deep
water
body)
was
studied
in
a
rice
field
water­
clay
loam
soil
system
(
water
pH
7.6,
organic
carbon
not
reported;
soil
pH
5.2­
6.5,
organic
matter
2.7%)
from
California
for
30
days
under
aerobic
conditions
in
darkness
at
25
±
1
°
C.
Cypermethrin
was
labeled
at
both
the
phenyl
and
cyclopropyl
moieties.
For
both
labels,
[
14C]
zetacypermethrin
in
the
total
system
(
water
and
soil)
decreased
from
87.1­
104.2%
of
the
applied
amount
at
day
0
post
treatment
to
47.3­
51.3%
at
1
week,
26.6­
34.7%
at
2
weeks,
14.4­
17.7%
at
3
weeks
and
was
8.8­
13.1%
at
study
termination.
In
the
water
layers,
phenyl
labeled
[
14C]
zetacypermethrin
decreased
from
68.7­
74.6%
at
day
0
to
12.6­
22.9%
at
1
day,
7.2­
8.5%
at
3
days,
1.9­
3.2%
at
1
week
and
was
#
0.7%
thereafter,
whereas
cyclopropyl
labeled
[
14C]
zetacypermethrin
decreased
from
80.2­
81.6%
on
day
0
to
19.0­
19.8%
at
1
day
and
was
#
0.5%
by
3
days.
In
the
soil,
[
14C]
zeta­
cypermethrin
(
both
labels)
increased
from
16.2­
29.7%
at
day
0
to
59.5­
73.4%
at
1­
3
days,
then
decreased
to
26.6­
34.6%
at
2
weeks
and
was
8.6­
12.9%
at
1
month.
Based
on
first­
order
linear
regression
analysis,
[
14C]
zeta­
cypermethrin
dissipated
(
both
labels
plotted
together)
in
the
water
layer,
soil
and
total
system
with
reviewer­
calculated
half­
lives
of
4,
10
and
9
days,
respectively.
14C­
Cyclopropyl
and
14C­
phenyl
labeled
zeta­
cypermethrin
­
A­
4­
degraded
with
half­
lives
of
9.8
and
8.9
days,
respectively
in
the
total
system.
It
is
noted
that
the
pH
of
the
water
increased
to
8.33­
8.35
at
day
10
of
the
study
before
declining
to
7.62­
7.77
by
day
30.
The
relatively
alkaline
nature
of
the
system
likely
contributed
to
the
quick
rate
of
degradation
and
relatively
short
half­
lives
observed.

Three
major
nonvolatile
transformation
products
were
identified
as
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
3­
PBA),
trans­
DCVA
and
cis­
DCVA.
One
minor
degradation
product
was
also
identified,
DCVAdicarboxylic
acid.
Mineralization
to
carbon
dioxide
was
significant
for
both
cyclopropyl­
and
phenyl­
labeled
zeta­
cypermethrin,
reaching
to
11.4
%
and
47.1%,
respectively,
at
day
30.

162­
3
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
(
MRID
44876105)

[
14C]­
zeta­
Cypermethrin,
dissolved
in
acetonitrile
and
applied
at
a
nominal
rate
of
0.15
ppm,
degraded
with
registrant­
calculated
half­
lives
of
13.8
days
and
16.5
days
(
benzyl
and
cyclopropyl
labels,
respectively),
in
flooded
clay
loam
sediment,
incubated
anaerobically
in
the
dark,
at
25
±
1
°
C
for
up
to
90
days
(
benzyl
label)
or
183
days
(
cyclopropyl
label).

In
the
benzyl
labeled
study,
the
parent
compound
was
initially
present
in
the
total
sediment/
water
system
at
91.5%
of
the
nominal
application;
it
decreased
to
51.4%
of
the
applied
by
3
days
and
38%
by
7
days
post
treatment.
In
the
cyclopropyl
labeled
study,
the
parent
compound
was
initially
present
in
the
total
sediment/
water
system
at
81.6
of
the
nominal
application,
and
decreased
to
44.1%
by
7
days
and
34.7%
by
14
days
post
treatment.
In
the
benzyl
labeled
study,
the
majority
of
the
radioactivity
of
the
parent
was
associated
with
the
sediment
(#
2.3%
present
in
the
water).
Similarly,
in
the
cyclopropyl
labeled
study,
the
majority
of
the
radioactivity
was
associated
with
the
sediment
(#
0.96%
present
in
the
water).
There
was
one
major
degradate
in
the
benzyl­
ring
labeled
study,
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid.
This
degradate
was
present
at
small
levels
in
the
aqueous
phase
(#
1.4%
of
the
applied
throughout
the
study).
This
degradate
reached
a
maximum
in
the
sediment
at
30
days
post
treatment,
with
42.5%
of
the
applied
amount.
It
decreased
thereafter
to
1.5%
at
90
days
post
application.

The
degradates
observed
in
the
cyclopropyl­
ring
labeled
study
included
trans­
DCVA,
which
increased
in
the
aqueous
phase
to
a
maximum
of
34.1%
of
the
applied
amount
by
30
days
and
decreased
to
#
0.8%
by
181­
183
days.
The
same
degradate,
trans­
DCVA,
was
present
in
the
sediment
at
a
maximum
of
31.3%
of
the
applied
amount
by
71
days
post
treatment;
by
183
days
it
was
only
21%
of
the
applied.
In
the
aqueous
phase,
one
minor
degradate,
DCVA­
diCOOH
(
more
than
three
isomers
present),
was
observed
at
a
maximum
of
6.7%
of
the
applied
radioactivity
at
118
days
and
1.3%
by
day
183
post­
application.
In
the
sediment
this
degradate
was
variable,
with
a
maximum
of
7.2%
of
the
applied
radioactivity
by
183
days.

Nonextractable
[
14C]
residues
were
a
maximum
of
14.0%
of
the
applied
amount
at
183
days
post
­
A­
5­
treatment.
Organic
volatiles
were
negligible.
Material
balances
were
85.3­
100.9%
of
the
applied
radioactivity.

163­
1
Mobility
­
Leaching
and
Adsorption/
Desorption
(
MRID
'
s
42129003
and
42129002)

Data
on
the
adsorption
and
desorption
of
cypermethrin
were
provided
for
the
four
soils
shown
in
table
A­
1:

Table
A­
1.
Properties
of
the
Soils
Soil
location
%
Sand
%
Silt
%
Clay
%
OM
pH
Tavares
(
FL)
94
2
4
0.4
6.0
Thurston
(
WI)
76
13
11
1.8
6.9
Georgetown
(
KY)
29
51
20
4.5
7.4
Troy
Grove
10
59
31
3.9
7.0
The
reported
Freundlich
adsorption
and
desorption
binding
constants
and
exponents
for
cypermethrin
binding
to
the
4
test
soils
are
provided
in
table
A­
2:

Table
A­
2.1.
Freundlich
Constants
for
Cypermethrin
in
the
Four
Soils
Parameter
Tavares
Sand
Thurston
Sandy
Loam
Gergetowm
Silty
Loam
Troy
Grove
Clay
Loam
Kd(
ads)
657
1160
1900
416
KOC,
ads
328,500
134,900
82,600
20,800
(
1/
n)
ads
1.25
1.33
1.47
1.16
r2
(
adsorp.
isotherms)
0.957
0.972
0.993
0.967
Kf(
des)
1260
191
602
262
(
1/
n)
des
1.29
1.01
1.22
1.10
Table
A­
2.1.
Freundlich
Constants
for
Cypermethrin
in
the
Four
Soils
Parameter
Tavares
Sand
Thurston
Sandy
Loam
Gergetowm
Silty
Loam
Troy
Grove
Clay
Loam
­
A­
6­
r2
(
desorp.
isotherms)
0.923
0.989
0.994
0.989
These
data
indicate
that
cypermethrin
is
immobile
in
soils
and
generally
does
not
leach
to
lower
soil
horizons
and
groundwater.

The
mobility
of
cypermethrin
and
its
primary
degradation
products
(
DCVA
and
3­
PBA)
were
studied
by
aged
soil
column
leaching
experiments
(
MRID
42129002).
Cypermethrin
was
shown
to
be
relatively
immobile
in
sandy
loam
soil
columns
aged
for
30
days
and
leached
with
20
inches
of
0.1
M
CaCl
2
.
Approximately
73­
93%
of
the
applied
radioactivity
remained
in
the
upper
6
inch
layer
of
the
soil
column;
however,
up
to
13.2%
of
the
applied
radioactivity
leached
out
of
the
soil
column
in
the
form
of
DCVA.

163­
1
Batch
Equilibrium
Adsorption/
Desorption
(
m­
PBA
and
trans­
DCVA,
MRID
43424901,
Partial)

It
can
be
concluded
that
the
cypermethrin
degradates
3­
PBA
and
trans­
DCVA
have
a
high
potential
for
mobility
in
the
soils
tested
as
they
were
weakly
sorbed
to
four
soils
tested.
3­
PBA
was
slightly
more
sorbed
(
K
oc
values
ranging
from
118
to
215)
to
the
tested
soils
than
was
trans­
DCVA
(
K
oc
values
ranging
from
18
to
48).
A
summary
of
the
results
appears
in
the
following
tables:
­
A­
7­
Table
A­
2.2.
Summary
table
batch
equilibrium
study
of
m­
PBA.

Freundlich
adsorption
coefficients
Freundlich
desorption
coefficients
Soil
K
Koc
Mobility
classification
K
Koc
Sand
ND
ND
very
mobile
ND
ND
Silty
clay
3.11
122
high
3.76
147
Sandy
loam
0.98
118
high
0.93
112
Sandy
loam
2.44
215
medium
2.13
187
Kd
 
Adsorption
and
desorption
coefficients;
K
 
Freundlich
adsorption
and
desorption
coefficients;
1/
N
 
Slope
of
adsorption/
desorption
isotherms;
Koc
 
Coefficient
adsorption
per
organic
carbon
(
Kd
or
K
x
100/%
organic
carbon)

Table
A­
2.3.
Summary
table
batch
equilibrium
study
of
trans­
DCVA.

Freundlich
adsorption
coefficients
Freundlich
desorption
coefficients
Soil
K
Koc
Mobility
classification
K
Koc
Sand
ND
ND
Very
mobile
ND
ND
Silty
clay
0.46
18
Very
mobile
0.91
36
Sandy
loam
0.16
19
Very
mobile
0.36
44
Sandy
loam
0.54
48
Very
mobile
0.72
64
ND
 
Not
determined
due
to
lack
of
adsorption;
Kd
 
Adsorption
and
desorption
coefficients;
K
 
Freundlich
adsorption
and
desorption
coefficients;
1/
N
 
Slope
of
adsorption/
desorption
isotherms;
Koc
 
Coefficient
adsorption
per
organic
carbon
(
Kd
or
K
x
100/%
organic
carbon)

164­
1
Terrestrial
Field
Dissipation
(
MRID
42459601)

Madera
CA:
Cypermethrin
in
the
form
of
Ammo
2.5
EC
was
applied
three
times
at
0.2
lb
ai/
acre/
application
to
a
bare
silt
loam
soil
(
78­
82%
sand,
14­
20%
silt,
2­
4%
clay,
0.2­
0.6%
OM,
pH
6.5­
7.2).
Total
rainfall
and
irrigation
combined
were
0.68
inches
0­
13
days
after
the
last
application,
and
0.77
inches
14­
26
days
after
the
last
application.
Total
rainfall
and
irrigation
combined
during
the
study
was
16.5
inches.
Soil
cores
were
collected
immediately
after
each
of
the
3
applications,
and
periodically
thereafter
until
day180
after
the
last
(
3rd)
application.
The
soil
cores
were
analyzed
for
cypermethrin
and
potential
degradates
cis­
DCVA,
trans­
DCVA,
and
3­
­
A­
8­
phenoxybenzoic
acid.
Based
upon
dissipation
in
the
upper
12
inches
of
the
field,
a
half­
life
of
13
days
was
estimated
for
cypermethrin.

Cypermethrin
was
detected
in
3­
6"
cores
collected
immediately
after
each
application
(
18,
8,
and
33
µ
g/
kg),
and
the
following
days
after
the
3rd
application:
day
2
(
20
µ
g/
kg)
and
day
4
(
29
µ
g/
kg).
Cypermethrin
was
detected
at
10
µ
g/
kg
in
one
6­
12"
core
collected
2
days
after
the
last
application,
but
it
was
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
soil
cores
collected
below
6
inches.
The
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
was
detected
in
0­
3"
cores
collected
immediately
after
the
2nd
application
(
8
µ
g/
kg),
immediately
after
the
third
application
(
17
µ
g/
kg),
and
the
following
days
after
the
3rd
application:
day
2
(
25
µ
g/
kg),
day
4
(
32
µ
g/
kg),
day
7
(
25
µ
g/
kg),
day
14
(
24
µ
g/
kg),
day
21
(
8
µ
g/
kg),
and
day
28
(
7
µ
g/
kg).
It
was
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
soil
cores
collected
below
3
inches.
Potential
degradates
cis­
and
trans­
DCVA
were
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
of
the
soil
cores.

Cheneyville
LA:
Cypermethrin
in
the
form
of
Ammo
2.5
EC
was
applied
three
times
at
0.2
lb
ai/
acre/
application
to
a
bare
loamy
sand
soil
(
30%
sand,
64%
silt,
6%
clay,
0.7%
OM,
pH
7.0).
Total
rainfall
and
irrigation
were
4.4
inches
0­
7
days
after
the
last
application,
and
1.45
inches
8­
14
days
after
the
last
application.
Total
rainfall
and
irrigation
during
the
study
was
53.7
inches.
Soil
cores
were
collected
immediately
after
each
of
the
3
applications,
and
periodically
thereafter
through
150
days
after
the
last
(
3rd)
application.
The
soil
cores
were
analyzed
for
cypermethrin
and
potential
degradates
cis­
DCVA,
trans­
DCVA,
and
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid.
Based
upon
dissipation
in
the
top
0­
3"
soil
cores,
the
dissipation
half­
life
for
cypermethrin
was
5
days.
Cypermethrin
was
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
cores
collected
below
3
inches.

The
degradate
trans­
DCVA
was
detected
in
0­
3"
cores
collected
on
the
following
days
after
the
3rd
application:
day
2
(
16
µ
g/
kg)
and
day
7
(
8
µ
g/
kg).
The
degradate
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
was
detected
in
0­
3"
cores
collected
immediately
after
the
2nd
application
(
10
µ
g/
kg),
immediately
after
the
3rd
application
(
20
µ
g/
L),
and
2
days
after
the
3rd
application
(
44
µ
g/
kg).
The
degradate
cis­
DCVA
was
not
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
of
the
soil
cores.
None
of
the
analytes
were
detected
above
a
detection
limit
of
7
µ
g/
kg
in
any
of
the
soil
cores
collected
below
3
inches.

164­
2
Aquatic
Field
Dissipation
(
MRID
44876107)

Two
aquatic
field
dissipation
studies
of
zeta­
cypermethrin
on
rice
plots
in
California
and
Louisiana
provide
limited
supplemental
information.
However,
the
results
(
in
particular,
the
halflives
are
considered
of
low
value.
The
half­
lives
were
determined
using
detections
below
the
LOQ;
the
parent
was
not
detected
above
the
LOQ
(
5
ppb)
following
14
days
(
other
than
in
single
replicates
at
30
and
90
days)
and
30
days
posttreatment
at
the
CA
and
LA
sites,
respectively.
In
addition:
­
A­
9­
*
the
analytical
methodology,
specifically
sample
storage,
may
have
been
inadequate
for
the
determination
of
the
parent
and
the
degradates
in
test
samples;

*
storage
stability
data
were
not
reported
for
soil
and
sediment
samples,
and
storage
stability
data
for
the
degradate
3­
PBA
in
water
were
inadequate;
and
*
the
soil
at
the
Louisiana
field
site
was
not
completely
characterized.

It
is
also
noted
that
the
reported
half­
lives
of
181
days
in
Sutter
County,
CA,
and
126
days
in
St.
Landry
Parish,
LA,
do
not
agree
with
the
values
of
the
supplemental
aerobic
aquatic
metabolism
study
(
t
½
=
9­
10
days)
or
the
anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
study
(
t
½
=
14­
17
days).
The
reported
half­
lives
included
the
sediments
only,
not
the
floodwater.

165­
4
Bioaccumulation
in
Fish
(
MRID
42868203)

Bluegill
sunfish
were
exposed
in
separate
tests
to
nominal
concentrations
of
0.20
µ
g/
L
14Ccyclopropyl
and
14C­
benzyl
labeled
cypermethrin
in
flow­
through
tanks
for
a
28
day
uptake
phase.
Mean
measured
exposure
concentrations
were
0.19
µ
g/
L
for
the
cyclopropyl
labeled
residues
and
0.18
µ
g/
L
for
the
benzyl
labeled
residues.
After
28
days
of
exposure
the
bluegill
sunfish
were
placed
in
cypermethrin
free
water
for
a
21
day
depuration
phase.

Maximum
total
14C­
cyclopropyl
residue
BCFs
were
161
(
for
edible
tissue
on
day
28),
833
(
for
viscera
on
day
28),
and
444
(
for
whole
fish
on
day
28).
BCFs
gradually
increased
with
increasing
exposure
time,
and
steady
state
may
not
have
been
obtained
by
the
last
day
of
exposure
(
day
28).
After
21
days
depuration,
total
14C­
cyclopropyl
residues
declined
from
29
µ
g/
kg
to
3.2
µ
g/
kg
in
edible
tissues,
from
150
µ
g/
kg
to
13
µ
g/
kg
in
viscera,
and
from
80
µ
g/
kg
to
11
µ
g/
kg
in
whole
fish.

Maximum
total
14C­
benzyl
residue
BCFs
were
111
(
for
edible
tissue
on
day
28),
579
(
for
viscera
on
day
21),
and
468
(
for
whole
fish
on
day
21).
BCFs
rapidly
increased
with
increasing
exposure
time
and
appeared
to
reach
approximate
steady
state
by
only
1
day
of
exposure
for
viscera
and
whole
fish.
For
edible
tissue,
BCFs
gradually
increased
with
increasing
exposure
time,
and
steady
state
may
not
have
been
obtained
by
the
last
day
of
exposure
(
day
28).
After
21
days
of
depuration,
total
14C­
benzyl
residues
declined
from
21
µ
g/
kg
to
2.9
µ
g/
kg
in
edible
tissues,
from
93
µ
g/
kg
to
12
µ
g/
kg
in
viscera,
and
from
57
µ
g/
kg
to
10
µ
g/
kg
in
whole
fish.
­
A­
10­
Table
A­
3
summarizes
major
degradation
products
of
cypermethrin,
organized
by
study
type.

Table
A­
3.
Major
Degradation
Products
of
Cypermethrin
by
Study
Type
a
Degradate
Name
Maximum
%
of
Applied
Study
Type
MRID
#

DCVA
79%
(
pH
=
9
only)
Hydrolysis
42620501
3­
Phenoxybenzaldehyde
65%
(
pH
=
9
only)
Hydrolysis
42620501
3­
Phenoxybenzoic
acid
35%
Aqueous
photolysis
42395701
Cyperamide
13.3%
Soil
photolysis
42129001
CO2
36­
41%
Aerobic
soil
metabolism
42156601
DCVA
24%
Aerobic
soil
metabolism
42156601
CO2
11­
21%
Anaerobic
soil
metabolism
42156602
DCVA
33%
Anaerobic
soil
metabolism
42156602
3­
Phenoxybenzoic
acid
26%
Anaerobic
soil
metabolism
42156602
DCVA
42%
Aerobic
aquatic
metabolism
45920801
3­
Phenoxybenzoic
acid
22%
Aerobic
aquatic
metabolism
45920801
CO2
11­
47%
Aerobic
aquatic
metabolism
45920801
3­
Phenoxybenzoic
acid
42%
Anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
44876105
DCVA
34%
Anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
44876105
a.
Major
(>
10%
of
the
initially
applied
amount)
transformation
products
only.
­
A­
11­
Cypermethrin
and
its
Degradation
Products
O
CN
O
O
Cl
Cl
COOH
Cl
Cl
DCVA
O
COOH
O
CHO
Cypermethrin
3­
Phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
3­
PBA
or
m­
PBA)

3­
Phenoxybenzaldehyde
O
C
O
O
Cl
Cl
O
NH2
Cyperamide
­
A­
12­
alpha­
Cypermethrin
­
A­
13­
­
A­
14­
beta­
Cypermethrin
­
A­
15­
theta­
Cypermethrin
­
A­
16­
­
B­
1­
zeta­
Cypermethrin
APPENDIX
B.
Aquatic
Exposure
Model
Output
(
PRZM/
EXAMS)

1.
1­
in­
10
year
Probability
For
ecological
risk
assessment,
it
is
important
to
match
the
averaging
time
to
the
duration
of
the
toxicity
study.
However,
of
the
multiple
years
of
data,
which
EEC
should
be
selected
in
the
calculation
of
the
RQ?
The
most
conservative
case
would
be
to
choose
the
maximum
EEC
for
each
averaging
time.
An
alternative
would
be
to
calculate
an
upper
end
value
that
is
less
than
the
maximum.
One
statistic
adopted
by
OPP
for
use
in
ecological
risk
assessment
is
the
1­
in­
10
year
return
value.
This
is
the
EEC
that,
on
average,
will
be
exceeded
only
once
every
10
years.
It
is
important
to
note
that
for
any
single
10­
year
period,
the
1­
in­
10
year
value
may
be
exceeded
more
than
once,
or
not
at
all.
The
key
concept
is
that
it
represents
the
average
probability
of
exceedance.

The
1­
in­
10
year
statistic
can
be
calculated
using
probability
plotting
methods.
There
are
a
number
of
different
techniques,
but
a
common
practice
in
hydrology
for
plotting
flow­
duration
and
flood­
frequency
curves
is
to
use
the
plotting
position
associated
with
the
Weibull
distribution
(
Helsel
and
Hirsch
1993).
The
general
formula
for
probability
plotting
is
given
by:

where
p
is
the
probability
level,
n
is
the
number
of
data
points,
and
a
is
a
coefficient
that
varies
between
0
and
0.5.
For
the
Weibull
distribution,
a
is
0
so
the
plotting
position
is
For
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
simulations
presented
above,
there
are
30
years
of
meteorological
data,
so
n
=
30.
To
generate
a
Weibull
probability
plot
to
estimate
the
exceedance
probabilities,
the
data
should
be
sorted
in
descending
order.
That
is,
there
is
a
lower
probability
of
exceeding
the
maximum
EEC
than
the
second
highest
EEC.
The
plotting
position
associated
with
the
maximum
value
is
then
calculated
as
follows:
­
B­
2­
The
minimum
and
maximum
probability
values
associated
with
the
entire
data
set
will
approach
[
0,
1]
as
the
sample
size
increases.
Sometimes
probability
plots
are
used
to
estimate
the
values
beyond
the
observed
range.
To
calculate
the
1­
in­
10
year
statistic,
we
need
the
EEC
associated
with
a
probability
value
of
0.100.
This
value
does
not
correspond
directly
with
any
of
the
modeled
values,
but
it
is
between
third
highest
value
(
p
=
0.097)
and
fourth
highest
value
(
0.129).
An
interpolation
procedure
is
needed
to
estimate
the
EEC
associated
with
p
=
0.100.
A
linear
interpolation
is
commonly
performed,
although
two
methods
are
available.
One
method
involves
fitting
a
line
to
the
entire
set
of
data
plotted
on
a
Weibull
probability
plot.
The
second
method
involves
a
linear
interpolation
only
between
the
two
values
that
encompass
the
desired
p­
value.
PRZM/
EXAMS
output
is
based
on
the
Weibull
plotting
positions
with
a
straight
line
interpolation
between
just
the
two
data
values
that
encompass
the
desired
p­
value
of
0.100.

Reference:

Helsel,
D.
R.
and
R.
M.
Hirsch.
1993.
Statistical
Methods
in
Water
Resources.
Elsevier.
Amsterdam.

2.
PRZM/
EXAMS
Model
Results
California
Lettuce
­
One
Crop
per
Year
Surface
Water
Levels
stored
as
CypermethrinCA_
lettuce.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
CAlettuceC1.
txt
modified
Thuday,
17
February
2005
at
15:
15:
33EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
11:
33:
30Metfile:
w23273.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
08:
04:
22
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.1706
0.05205
0.03281
0.02366
0.01733
0.005827
1962
0.1711
0.05274
0.03342
0.0243
0.01804
0.007884
1963
0.1708
0.0521
0.03304
0.02384
0.01794
0.006356
1964
0.1711
0.05265
0.03334
0.02414
0.01956
0.007149
1965
0.2204
0.06687
0.03327
0.02409
0.01772
0.007589
1966
0.1711
0.05261
0.03336
0.02415
0.01778
0.007637
1967
0.1712
0.05264
0.03344
0.02424
0.01782
0.007614
­
B­
3­
1968
0.1708
0.05226
0.03304
0.02385
0.0197
0.006153
1969
0.1713
0.0529
0.03361
0.02443
0.01804
0.008468
1970
0.1712
0.05277
0.03351
0.02427
0.01794
0.007467
1971
0.1711
0.05259
0.03333
0.02415
0.01784
0.006429
1972
0.1709
0.05701
0.03319
0.024
0.01802
0.006987
1973
0.1713
0.05518
0.03364
0.02443
0.01805
0.009469
1974
0.2932
0.08661
0.03357
0.02439
0.0187
0.01004
1975
0.1712
0.05284
0.03353
0.02435
0.01805
0.007151
1976
0.3089
0.09639
0.0437
0.03637
0.0296
0.009607
1977
0.1709
0.05236
0.03316
0.02399
0.01762
0.006878
1978
0.4649
0.1804
0.06062
0.03647
0.0279
0.01267
1979
0.171
0.05241
0.03331
0.02416
0.01782
0.007072
1980
0.1709
0.06127
0.03321
0.02405
0.01769
0.007857
1981
0.1709
0.05231
0.03311
0.02396
0.01788
0.007127
1982
0.1708
0.05211
0.03301
0.02382
0.01753
0.006774
1983
0.1701
0.0544
0.03232
0.02325
0.0179
0.009033
1984
0.17
0.05094
0.03217
0.02304
0.01661
0.005909
1985
0.1707
0.05206
0.0329
0.02374
0.01743
0.006591
1986
0.1709
0.0525
0.0332
0.02498
0.01863
0.006887
1987
0.1709
0.05238
0.03313
0.02397
0.01826
0.00709
1988
0.1707
0.05226
0.03296
0.02386
0.01754
0.006665
1989
0.1709
0.05242
0.03315
0.02405
0.0177
0.005741
1990
0.1705
0.05191
0.03272
0.02367
0.0173
0.005411
­
B­
4­
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
0.28592
0.084636
0.033637
0.024925
0.019686
0.0095932
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.00745106666666667
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
CypermethrinCA_
lettuce
Metfile:
w23273.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
CAlettuceC1.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.04
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
.039
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
1­
8
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
­
B­
5­
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
Record
18:
PLVKRT
PLDKRT
0.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
none
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Write
Benthic
Porewater
File?
benthic
1
Write
Benthic
Sediment
File?
benthicsed
1
­
B­
6­
Pore
Water
Values
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.00445
0.004399
0.003994
0.003267
0.00279
0.001097
1962
0.004733
0.004681
0.00428
0.003555
0.003078
0.002048
1963
0.00453
0.004473
0.004056
0.003302
0.002886
0.001382
1964
0.004694
0.004642
0.00424
0.003566
0.003542
0.001618
1965
0.004819
0.004765
0.004332
0.003465
0.002959
0.001728
1966
0.004694
0.004643
0.004236
0.003486
0.003005
0.001883
1967
0.004721
0.004669
0.00426
0.003504
0.002998
0.001919
1968
0.00455
0.004498
0.004091
0.003512
0.003297
0.001349
1969
0.004811
0.004759
0.004354
0.003653
0.003197
0.002094
1970
0.004762
0.00471
0.004303
0.003554
0.003064
0.001597
1971
0.004684
0.004633
0.004227
0.003495
0.003024
0.001637
1972
0.004777
0.004724
0.004281
0.003453
0.003247
0.001548
1973
0.005381
0.005337
0.0049
0.004199
0.003726
0.002403
1974
0.005131
0.005087
0.004747
0.003903
0.003461
0.002486
1975
0.004779
0.004727
0.004325
0.003591
0.003104
0.001932
1976
0.008853
0.008758
0.007761
0.00661
0.005893
0.002252
1977
0.004601
0.004549
0.004141
0.003398
0.002911
0.001508
1978
0.0103
0.01018
0.008919
0.006591
0.005566
0.003337
1979
0.00465
0.004596
0.004181
0.003432
0.002938
0.00168
1980
0.004624
0.004572
0.004164
0.003427
0.002944
0.0019
1981
0.004579
0.004527
0.004119
0.003384
0.002941
0.001664
1982
0.004522
0.004467
0.004052
0.003293
0.00288
0.001478
1983
0.005312
0.005259
0.004903
0.004049
0.003469
0.002156
1984
0.004134
0.004062
0.003646
0.002885
0.002436
0.0012
1985
0.00448
0.004428
0.004018
0.003277
0.002806
0.001533
1986
0.004636
0.004584
0.004182
0.003627
0.003168
0.001622
1987
0.004597
0.004545
0.004139
0.003394
0.003024
0.001608
1988
0.004536
0.004484
0.004082
0.003366
0.002889
0.001528
1989
0.00461
0.004558
0.004155
0.00343
0.002935
0.001363
1990
0.004408
0.004356
0.003948
0.003232
0.002756
0.001131
Sorted
results
0.1
0.0053741
0.0053292
0.0049027
0.004184
0.0037076
0.0023879
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.00175603333333333
­
B­
7­
­
B­
8­
Sediment
Levels
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day60
Day90
DayYearly
1961
25.23
24.94
22.64
18.52
15.82
6.22
1962
26.83
26.54
24.26
20.15
17.45
11.61
1963
25.68
25.36
22.99
18.72
16.36
7.833
1964
26.61
26.31
24.03
20.21
20.08
9.172
1965
27.32
27.01
24.56
19.64
16.77
9.796
1966
26.61
26.32
24.01
19.76
17.03
10.68
1967
26.76
26.47
24.15
19.86
17
10.88
1968
25.79
25.5
23.19
19.91
18.69
7.649
1969
27.27
26.98
24.68
20.71
18.12
11.87
1970
26.99
26.7
24.4
20.15
17.37
9.054
1971
26.56
26.26
23.97
19.82
17.14
9.277
1972
27.08
26.78
24.27
19.57
18.41
8.775
1973
30.5
30.25
27.78
23.8
21.13
13.62
1974
29.09
28.84
26.91
22.13
19.62
14.1
1975
27.09
26.8
24.52
20.36
17.6
10.95
1976
50.19
49.65
44
37.47
33.41
12.76
1977
26.08
25.79
23.47
19.26
16.5
8.549
1978
58.39
57.69
50.56
37.36
31.55
18.92
1979
26.36
26.06
23.7
19.45
16.66
9.525
1980
26.21
25.92
23.61
19.43
16.69
10.77
1981
25.96
25.66
23.35
19.18
16.67
9.432
1982
25.63
25.32
22.97
18.67
16.32
8.379
1983
30.11
29.81
27.8
22.95
19.67
12.22
1984
23.44
23.03
20.67
16.36
13.81
6.805
1985
25.4
25.1
22.78
18.58
15.9
8.692
1986
26.28
25.99
23.71
20.56
17.96
9.195
1987
26.06
25.77
23.46
19.24
17.15
9.118
1988
25.71
25.42
23.14
19.08
16.38
8.665
1989
26.14
25.84
23.55
19.44
16.64
7.728
1990
24.99
24.69
22.38
18.32
15.63
6.411
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
30.461
30.206
27.798
23.715
21.025
13.534
Average
of
yearly
averages:
9.95516666666667
­
B­
9­
CA
LETTUCE
­
TWO
CROPS
PER
YEAR
ON
05/
01
AND
08/
01
WATER
COLUMN
CONCENTRATIONS
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
CAlettuceC.
txt
modified
Monday,
11
October
2004
at
16:
23:
40
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w23273.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
04:
22
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.1722
0.0536
0.03454
0.02554
0.01885
0.01119
1962
0.1739
0.06319
0.03638
0.02721
0.0204
0.01415
1963
0.1725
0.05402
0.03486
0.02584
0.01981
0.01195
1964
0.2346
0.07057
0.0355
0.02645
0.02285
0.01315
1965
0.3095
0.09372
0.03538
0.02635
0.01954
0.01374
1966
0.1729
0.0557
0.03534
0.02628
0.0195
0.01371
1967
0.1993
0.06896
0.03558
0.02647
0.01977
0.01375
1968
0.1736
0.05923
0.03481
0.02577
0.0224
0.01157
1969
0.1737
0.07417
0.03617
0.02706
0.02022
0.01491
1970
0.2211
0.0656
0.0356
0.02651
0.01978
0.01349
1971
0.187
0.07536
0.04171
0.02863
0.02156
0.0128
1972
0.1727
0.07972
0.0351
0.02605
0.02058
0.01278
1973
0.2041
0.07737
0.03592
0.02679
0.01987
0.01619
1974
0.4115
0.1214
0.03606
0.02688
0.02107
0.01712
1975
0.1733
0.05482
0.03571
0.02668
0.01997
0.0131
1976
0.4329
0.1346
0.06024
0.04598
0.0367
0.01645
1977
0.2737
0.0791
0.0401
0.02906
0.02156
0.01327
1978
0.7507
0.2368
0.07958
0.04549
0.03495
0.02096
1979
0.1727
0.05404
0.03515
0.02632
0.01952
0.01291
1980
0.2288
0.08596
0.03557
0.02638
0.0196
0.01402
1981
0.1728
0.05404
0.03523
0.02598
0.01953
0.01283
1982
0.1724
0.05376
0.03478
0.02576
0.0199
0.0125
1983
0.1781
0.07627
0.03648
0.02682
0.02024
0.01558
1984
0.1713
0.05285
0.03363
0.02447
0.01793
0.01118
1985
0.172
0.0533
0.03429
0.02526
0.0187
0.01204
1986
0.1727
0.05419
0.03507
0.02748
0.02067
0.01262
1987
0.1726
0.05404
0.03499
0.02597
0.02096
0.0129
1988
0.1724
0.05387
0.03475
0.02577
0.01909
0.01231
­
B­
10­
1989
0.1726
0.05407
0.03498
0.02606
0.01932
0.01099
1990
0.172
0.05336
0.03435
0.02548
0.01876
0.01054
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
0.7507
0.2368
0.07958
0.04598
0.0367
0.02096
0.0645161290322581
0.4329
0.1346
0.06024
0.04549
0.03495
0.01712
0.0967741935483871
0.4115
0.1214
0.04171
0.02906
0.02285
0.01645
0.129032258064516
0.3095
0.09372
0.0401
0.02863
0.0224
0.01619
0.161290322580645
0.2737
0.08596
0.03648
0.02748
0.02156
0.01558
0.193548387096774
0.2346
0.07972
0.03638
0.02721
0.02156
0.01491
0.225806451612903
0.2288
0.0791
0.03617
0.02706
0.02107
0.01415
0.258064516129032
0.2211
0.07737
0.03606
0.02688
0.02096
0.01402
0.290322580645161
0.2041
0.07627
0.03592
0.02682
0.02067
0.01375
0.32258064516129
0.1993
0.07536
0.03571
0.02679
0.02058
0.01374
0.354838709677419
0.187
0.07417
0.0356
0.02668
0.0204
0.01371
0.387096774193548
0.1781
0.07057
0.03558
0.02651
0.02024
0.01349
0.419354838709677
0.1739
0.06896
0.03557
0.02647
0.02022
0.01327
0.451612903225806
0.1737
0.0656
0.0355
0.02645
0.01997
0.01315
0.483870967741936
0.1736
0.06319
0.03538
0.02638
0.0199
0.0131
0.516129032258065
0.1733
0.05923
0.03534
0.02635
0.01987
0.01291
0.548387096774194
0.1729
0.0557
0.03523
0.02632
0.01981
0.0129
0.580645161290323
0.1728
0.05482
0.03515
0.02628
0.01978
0.01283
0.612903225806452
0.1727
0.05419
0.0351
0.02606
0.01977
0.0128
0.645161290322581
0.1727
0.05407
0.03507
0.02605
0.0196
0.01278
0.67741935483871
0.1727
0.05404
0.03499
0.02598
0.01954
0.01262
­
B­
11­
0.709677419354839
0.1726
0.05404
0.03498
0.02597
0.01953
0.0125
0.741935483870968
0.1726
0.05404
0.03486
0.02584
0.01952
0.01231
0.774193548387097
0.1725
0.05402
0.03481
0.02577
0.0195
0.01204
0.806451612903226
0.1724
0.05387
0.03478
0.02577
0.01932
0.01195
0.838709677419355
0.1724
0.05376
0.03475
0.02576
0.01909
0.01157
0.870967741935484
0.1722
0.0536
0.03454
0.02554
0.01885
0.01119
0.903225806451613
0.172
0.05336
0.03435
0.02548
0.01876
0.01118
0.935483870967742
0.172
0.0533
0.03429
0.02526
0.0187
0.01099
0.967741935483871
0.1713
0.05285
0.03363
0.02447
0.01793
0.01054
0.1
0.4013
0.118632
0.041549
0.029017
0.022805
0.016424
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.01349
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w23273.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
CAlettuceC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
­
B­
12­
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.039
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
05
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
6
interval
62
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
7
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
8
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
9
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
10
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
11
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT
0
PLDKRT
0.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
total
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Write
Benthic
Porewater
File?
benthic
1
Write
Benthic
Sediment
File?
benthicsed
1
PORE
WATER
CONCENTRATIONS
stored
as
Cypermethrinben.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
CAlettuceC.
txt
modified
Monday,
11
October
2004
at
16:
23:
40
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w23273.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
04:
22
Benthic
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)
­
B­
13­
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.005197
0.005136
0.004719
0.003984
0.003464
0.002158
1962
0.006021
0.005962
0.005541
0.004745
0.004164
0.003524
1963
0.005342
0.00529
0.004875
0.004091
0.003651
0.002568
1964
0.006347
0.006293
0.005716
0.004882
0.004632
0.002936
1965
0.006656
0.006583
0.005983
0.004354
0.003893
0.003078
1966
0.005548
0.005486
0.005068
0.004312
0.003764
0.003253
1967
0.005778
0.005717
0.005242
0.004435
0.003874
0.003337
1968
0.005312
0.00525
0.004833
0.004381
0.004148
0.002477
1969
0.006313
0.006264
0.005807
0.005093
0.004458
0.003561
1970
0.005664
0.005602
0.005185
0.004426
0.003886
0.002863
1971
0.006516
0.006451
0.006024
0.004899
0.004301
0.003153
1972
0.006547
0.006475
0.005867
0.004649
0.004223
0.002777
1973
0.007491
0.00743
0.006822
0.005845
0.005184
0.00394
1974
0.007086
0.007026
0.006595
0.005422
0.004808
0.004113
1975
0.005831
0.005674
0.005246
0.004498
0.003961
0.003351
1976
0.0121
0.01196
0.0106
0.008873
0.00784
0.003752
1977
0.006111
0.006044
0.005623
0.004833
0.004137
0.002907
1978
0.01344
0.01324
0.01223
0.009116
0.007627
0.005338
1979
0.00544
0.00537
0.004952
0.004232
0.00369
0.002967
1980
0.00573
0.005687
0.005181
0.004411
0.003858
0.003274
1981
0.005473
0.005397
0.004973
0.004153
0.003585
0.002866
1982
0.005276
0.005206
0.004789
0.004055
0.003593
0.002681
1983
0.00741
0.007336
0.006841
0.005648
0.00484
0.003589
1984
0.004813
0.004761
0.004352
0.003581
0.003022
0.002245
1985
0.005078
0.005016
0.004599
0.003858
0.003354
0.002665
1986
0.005443
0.005386
0.005011
0.004478
0.003967
0.002864
1987
0.005397
0.005336
0.004919
0.004169
0.003778
0.002847
1988
0.005307
0.00525
0.004833
0.0041
0.003582
0.002735
1989
0.0054
0.005342
0.004925
0.004187
0.003647
0.002496
1990
0.005109
0.005045
0.004636
0.00392
0.003403
0.002171
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
0.01344
0.01324
0.01223
0.009116
0.00784
0.005338
0.0645161290322581
0.0121
0.01196
0.0106
0.008873
0.007627
0.004113
0.0967741935483871
0.007491
0.00743
0.006841
0.005845
0.005184
0.00394
0.129032258064516
0.00741
0.007336
0.006822
0.005648
0.00484
­
B­
14­
0.003752
0.161290322580645
0.007086
0.007026
0.006595
0.005422
0.004808
0.003589
0.193548387096774
0.006656
0.006583
0.006024
0.005093
0.004632
0.003561
0.225806451612903
0.006547
0.006475
0.005983
0.004899
0.004458
0.003524
0.258064516129032
0.006516
0.006451
0.005867
0.004882
0.004301
0.003351
0.290322580645161
0.006347
0.006293
0.005807
0.004833
0.004223
0.003337
0.32258064516129
0.006313
0.006264
0.005716
0.004745
0.004164
0.003274
0.354838709677419
0.006111
0.006044
0.005623
0.004649
0.004148
0.003253
0.387096774193548
0.006021
0.005962
0.005541
0.004498
0.004137
0.003153
0.419354838709677
0.005831
0.005717
0.005246
0.004478
0.003967
0.003078
0.451612903225806
0.005778
0.005687
0.005242
0.004435
0.003961
0.002967
0.483870967741936
0.00573
0.005674
0.005185
0.004426
0.003893
0.002936
0.516129032258065
0.005664
0.005602
0.005181
0.004411
0.003886
0.002907
0.548387096774194
0.005548
0.005486
0.005068
0.004381
0.003874
0.002866
0.580645161290323
0.005473
0.005397
0.005011
0.004354
0.003858
0.002864
0.612903225806452
0.005443
0.005386
0.004973
0.004312
0.003778
0.002863
0.645161290322581
0.00544
0.00537
0.004952
0.004232
0.003764
0.002847
0.67741935483871
0.0054
0.005342
0.004925
0.004187
0.00369
0.002777
0.709677419354839
0.005397
0.005336
0.004919
0.004169
0.003651
0.002735
0.741935483870968
0.005342
0.00529
0.004875
0.004153
0.003647
0.002681
0.774193548387097
0.005312
0.00525
0.004833
0.0041
0.003593
0.002665
0.806451612903226
0.005307
0.00525
0.004833
0.004091
0.003585
0.002568
0.838709677419355
0.005276
0.005206
0.004789
0.004055
0.003582
0.002496
0.870967741935484
0.005197
0.005136
0.004719
0.003984
0.003464
0.002477
0.903225806451613
0.005109
0.005045
0.004636
0.00392
0.003403
­
B­
15­
0.002245
0.935483870967742
0.005078
0.005016
0.004599
0.003858
0.003354
0.002171
0.967741935483871
0.004813
0.004761
0.004352
0.003581
0.003022
0.002158
0.1
0.0074829
0.0074206
0.0068391
0.0058253
0.0051496
0.0039212
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.00308286666666667
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w23273.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
CAlettuceC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.039
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
05
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
­
B­
16­
Interval
4
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
6
interval
62
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
7
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
8
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
9
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
10
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
11
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT
0
PLDKRT
0.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
total
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Write
Benthic
Porewater
File?
benthic
1
Write
Benthic
Sediment
File?
benthicsed
1
SEDIMENT
CONCENTRATIONS
stored
as
Cypermethrinbensed.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
CAlettuceC.
txt
modified
Monday,
11
October
2004
at
16:
23:
40
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w23273.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
04:
22
Sediment
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
29.46
29.12
26.75
22.58
19.64
12.23
1962
34.13
33.8
31.41
26.9
23.61
19.98
1963
30.28
29.99
27.64
23.19
20.7
14.56
1964
35.98
35.67
32.4
27.68
26.26
16.64
1965
37.73
37.32
33.92
24.68
22.07
17.45
1966
31.45
31.1
28.73
24.44
21.34
18.44
1967
32.75
32.41
29.72
25.14
21.96
18.92
1968
30.11
29.76
27.4
24.83
23.51
14.04
1969
35.79
35.51
32.92
28.87
25.27
20.19
­
B­
17­
1970
32.11
31.76
29.39
25.09
22.03
16.23
1971
36.94
36.57
34.15
27.77
24.38
17.87
1972
37.11
36.71
33.26
26.35
23.94
15.74
1973
42.47
42.12
38.67
33.14
29.39
22.34
1974
40.17
39.83
37.38
30.74
27.26
23.31
1975
33.05
32.16
29.74
25.5
22.46
19
1976
68.57
67.81
60.11
50.3
44.44
21.27
1977
34.64
34.26
31.87
27.4
23.45
16.48
1978
76.22
75.08
69.35
51.68
43.24
30.26
1979
30.84
30.44
28.07
23.99
20.92
16.82
1980
32.49
32.24
29.37
25.01
21.87
18.56
1981
31.03
30.6
28.19
23.54
20.33
16.25
1982
29.91
29.51
27.15
22.99
20.37
15.2
1983
42.01
41.59
38.78
32.02
27.43
20.35
1984
27.28
26.99
24.67
20.3
17.13
12.73
1985
28.79
28.43
26.07
21.87
19.02
15.11
1986
30.86
30.54
28.41
25.38
22.49
16.24
1987
30.59
30.25
27.88
23.63
21.42
16.14
1988
30.09
29.76
27.4
23.24
20.3
15.5
1989
30.61
30.28
27.92
23.73
20.68
14.15
1990
28.96
28.6
26.28
22.22
19.29
12.31
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
76.22
75.08
69.35
51.68
44.44
30.26
0.0645161290322581
68.57
67.81
60.11
50.3
43.24
23.31
0.0967741935483871
42.47
42.12
38.78
33.14
29.39
22.34
0.129032258064516
42.01
41.59
38.67
32.02
27.43
21.27
0.161290322580645
40.17
39.83
37.38
30.74
27.26
20.35
0.193548387096774
37.73
37.32
34.15
28.87
26.26
20.19
0.225806451612903
37.11
36.71
33.92
27.77
25.27
19.98
0.258064516129032
36.94
36.57
33.26
27.68
24.38
19
0.290322580645161
35.98
35.67
32.92
27.4
23.94
18.92
0.32258064516129
35.79
35.51
32.4
26.9
23.61
18.56
0.354838709677419
34.64
34.26
31.87
26.35
23.51
18.44
0.387096774193548
34.13
33.8
31.41
25.5
23.45
17.87
0.419354838709677
33.05
32.41
29.74
25.38
22.49
17.45
0.451612903225806
32.75
32.24
29.72
25.14
22.46
16.82
0.483870967741936
32.49
32.16
29.39
25.09
22.07
16.64
0.516129032258065
32.11
31.76
29.37
25.01
22.03
16.48
­
B­
18­
0.548387096774194
31.45
31.1
28.73
24.83
21.96
16.25
0.580645161290323
31.03
30.6
28.41
24.68
21.87
16.24
0.612903225806452
30.86
30.54
28.19
24.44
21.42
16.23
0.645161290322581
30.84
30.44
28.07
23.99
21.34
16.14
0.67741935483871
30.61
30.28
27.92
23.73
20.92
15.74
0.709677419354839
30.59
30.25
27.88
23.63
20.7
15.5
0.741935483870968
30.28
29.99
27.64
23.54
20.68
15.2
0.774193548387097
30.11
29.76
27.4
23.24
20.37
15.11
0.806451612903226
30.09
29.76
27.4
23.19
20.33
14.56
0.838709677419355
29.91
29.51
27.15
22.99
20.3
14.15
0.870967741935484
29.46
29.12
26.75
22.58
19.64
14.04
0.903225806451613
28.96
28.6
26.28
22.22
19.29
12.73
0.935483870967742
28.79
28.43
26.07
21.87
19.02
12.31
0.967741935483871
27.28
26.99
24.67
20.3
17.13
12.23
0.1
42.424
42.067
38.769
33.028
29.194
22.233
Average
of
yearly
averages:
17.477
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w23273.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
CAlettuceC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
­
B­
19­
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.039
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
05
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
6
interval
62
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
7
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
8
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
9
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
10
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
11
interval
7
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT
0
PLDKRT
0.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
total
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Write
Benthic
Porewater
File?
benthic
1
Write
Benthic
Sediment
File?
benthicsed
1
­
B­
20­
Georgia
Pecans
Airblast
Application
Surface
Water
Levels
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
GAPecansC.
txt
modified
Tueday,
22
April
2003
at
07:
57:
20
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w93805.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
04:
32
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.7749
0.3032
0.08103
0.04093
0.02999
0.008143
1962
0.274
0.09276
0.04188
0.02678
0.0197
0.006589
1963
0.552
0.1555
0.04167
0.02997
0.02414
0.008555
1964
0.4238
0.1732
0.0513
0.04027
0.03831
0.01488
1965
0.7789
0.2192
0.0626
0.03906
0.03172
0.01104
1966
0.4613
0.1555
0.04918
0.03755
0.02958
0.009845
1967
0.3494
0.1151
0.05416
0.02921
0.02358
0.0087
1968
1.398
0.3916
0.09919
0.05085
0.04074
0.01337
1969
1.283
0.4453
0.1144
0.05579
0.04394
0.01435
1970
0.2159
0.08129
0.04048
0.02719
0.02005
0.007454
1971
0.1896
0.07808
0.04514
0.02397
0.0185
0.006032
1972
0.2809
0.08769
0.03861
0.02069
0.01491
0.006806
1973
0.1706
0.07404
0.03883
0.02584
0.01851
0.007365
1974
0.972
0.3313
0.08665
0.04958
0.03701
0.01093
1975
0.2804
0.101
0.04016
0.02241
0.01904
0.007995
1976
0.4289
0.2071
0.05825
0.03485
0.02796
0.01189
1977
0.2538
0.1052
0.05845
0.0317
0.02288
0.008588
1978
0.223
0.08549
0.04184
0.01988
0.01394
0.00559
1979
0.3333
0.1107
0.03049
0.02434
0.01922
0.009104
1980
0.138
0.04157
0.02612
0.01439
0.01197
0.005449
1981
0.4209
0.1311
0.04041
0.02476
0.01823
0.006472
1982
0.3706
0.106
0.03167
0.02534
0.01875
0.006033
1983
0.1212
0.05195
0.02415
0.01724
0.01252
0.005604
1984
0.2111
0.06189
0.0304
0.01848
0.01315
0.004924
1985
0.4238
0.1476
0.04821
0.02783
0.02487
0.01003
1986
0.3519
0.1261
0.07394
0.03944
0.02828
0.01103
1987
0.3587
0.1599
0.06296
0.02948
0.02079
0.00827
1988
0.1516
0.04938
0.03176
0.02077
0.01702
0.006402
1989
0.1764
0.05037
0.02565
0.01896
0.01582
0.005611
­
B­
21­
1990
0.1373
0.05501
0.0298
0.02126
0.01554
0.00521
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
1.398
0.4453
0.1144
0.05579
0.04394
0.01488
0.0645161290322581
1.283
0.3916
0.09919
0.05085
0.04074
0.01435
0.0967741935483871
0.972
0.3313
0.08665
0.04958
0.03831
0.01337
0.129032258064516
0.7789
0.3032
0.08103
0.04093
0.03701
0.01189
0.161290322580645
0.7749
0.2192
0.07394
0.04027
0.03172
0.01104
0.193548387096774
0.552
0.2071
0.06296
0.03944
0.02999
0.01103
0.225806451612903
0.4613
0.1732
0.0626
0.03906
0.02958
0.01093
0.258064516129032
0.4289
0.1599
0.05845
0.03755
0.02828
0.01003
0.290322580645161
0.4238
0.1555
0.05825
0.03485
0.02796
0.009845
0.32258064516129
0.4238
0.1555
0.05416
0.0317
0.02487
0.009104
0.354838709677419
0.4209
0.1476
0.0513
0.02997
0.02414
0.0087
0.387096774193548
0.3706
0.1311
0.04918
0.02948
0.02358
0.008588
0.419354838709677
0.3587
0.1261
0.04821
0.02921
0.02288
0.008555
0.451612903225806
0.3519
0.1151
0.04514
0.02783
0.02079
0.00827
0.483870967741936
0.3494
0.1107
0.04188
0.02719
0.02005
0.008143
0.516129032258065
0.3333
0.106
0.04184
0.02678
0.0197
0.007995
0.548387096774194
0.2809
0.1052
0.04167
0.02584
0.01922
0.007454
0.580645161290323
0.2804
0.101
0.04048
0.02534
0.01904
0.007365
0.612903225806452
0.274
0.09276
0.04041
0.02476
0.01875
0.006806
0.645161290322581
0.2538
0.08769
0.04016
0.02434
0.01851
0.006589
0.67741935483871
0.223
0.08549
0.03883
0.02397
0.0185
0.006472
0.709677419354839
0.2159
0.08129
0.03861
0.02241
0.01823
­
B­
22­
0.006402
0.741935483870968
0.2111
0.07808
0.03176
0.02126
0.01702
0.006033
0.774193548387097
0.1896
0.07404
0.03167
0.02077
0.01582
0.006032
0.806451612903226
0.1764
0.06189
0.03049
0.02069
0.01554
0.005611
0.838709677419355
0.1706
0.05501
0.0304
0.01988
0.01491
0.005604
0.870967741935484
0.1516
0.05195
0.0298
0.01896
0.01394
0.00559
0.903225806451613
0.138
0.05037
0.02612
0.01848
0.01315
0.005449
0.935483870967742
0.1373
0.04938
0.02565
0.01724
0.01252
0.00521
0.967741935483871
0.1212
0.04157
0.02415
0.01439
0.01197
0.004924
0.1
0.95269
0.32849
0.086088
0.048715
0.03818
0.013222
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0084087
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w93805.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
GAPecansC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
­
B­
23­
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.99
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.022
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
08
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
Record
18:
PLVKRT
PLDKRT
0.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
total
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Pore
Water
Levels
stored
as
Cypermethrinben.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
GAPecansC.
txt
modified
Tueday,
22
April
2003
at
07:
57:
20
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w93805.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
04:
32
Benthic
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.01472
0.01434
0.0114
0.007052
0.005422
0.001575
1962
0.004452
0.004369
0.003982
0.003604
0.00315
0.001334
1963
0.007794
0.007667
0.006491
0.004471
0.004148
0.001887
1964
0.01113
0.01099
0.009494
0.008117
0.007407
0.003414
1965
0.0116
0.01132
0.008794
0.006729
0.005507
0.002623
1966
0.008806
0.008593
0.007427
0.005333
0.005041
0.002209
1967
0.008335
0.008093
0.006713
0.004784
0.004293
0.001894
1968
0.01868
0.01827
0.01452
0.009778
0.008171
0.003023
1969
0.02081
0.02038
0.01643
0.01065
0.008511
0.003365
1970
0.00572
0.00556
0.004757
0.003972
0.003268
0.001775
­
B­
24­
1971
0.005305
0.005198
0.004453
0.003423
0.002894
0.001212
1972
0.005701
0.005557
0.004346
0.002766
0.002231
0.001335
1973
0.005862
0.005717
0.004528
0.003538
0.002879
0.001605
1974
0.01672
0.01633
0.0129
0.008223
0.006677
0.002346
1975
0.005256
0.005109
0.004292
0.003178
0.003048
0.001737
1976
0.01073
0.0106
0.009244
0.007631
0.007057
0.002823
1977
0.008099
0.007903
0.006909
0.004695
0.003787
0.002201
1978
0.004666
0.004579
0.004223
0.002686
0.002052
0.001093
1979
0.006022
0.005872
0.004981
0.003867
0.003839
0.002105
1980
0.003403
0.003311
0.003017
0.002454
0.002178
0.001323
1981
0.007286
0.00714
0.005738
0.003702
0.00303
0.001401
1982
0.006282
0.006149
0.005095
0.003595
0.003076
0.00121
1983
0.003538
0.003451
0.002789
0.002143
0.001834
0.001124
1984
0.004381
0.004273
0.003369
0.00238
0.001904
0.001105
1985
0.008092
0.007905
0.006264
0.005938
0.004683
0.001992
1986
0.01093
0.01065
0.008839
0.006241
0.004851
0.002574
1987
0.008476
0.008207
0.006995
0.004467
0.003423
0.001872
1988
0.003914
0.003813
0.003324
0.002958
0.002683
0.001424
1989
0.004386
0.004311
0.003673
0.00285
0.002517
0.001184
1990
0.003902
0.003799
0.003224
0.002728
0.002303
0.001012
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
0.02081
0.02038
0.01643
0.01065
0.008511
0.003414
0.0645161290322581
0.01868
0.01827
0.01452
0.009778
0.008171
0.003365
0.0967741935483871
0.01672
0.01633
0.0129
0.008223
0.007407
0.003023
0.129032258064516
0.01472
0.01434
0.0114
0.008117
0.007057
0.002823
0.161290322580645
0.0116
0.01132
0.009494
0.007631
0.006677
0.002623
0.193548387096774
0.01113
0.01099
0.009244
0.007052
0.005507
0.002574
0.225806451612903
0.01093
0.01065
0.008839
0.006729
0.005422
0.002346
0.258064516129032
0.01073
0.0106
0.008794
0.006241
0.005041
0.002209
0.290322580645161
0.008806
0.008593
0.007427
0.005938
0.004851
0.002201
0.32258064516129
0.008476
0.008207
0.006995
0.005333
0.004683
0.002105
­
B­
25­
0.354838709677419
0.008335
0.008093
0.006909
0.004784
0.004293
0.001992
0.387096774193548
0.008099
0.007905
0.006713
0.004695
0.004148
0.001894
0.419354838709677
0.008092
0.007903
0.006491
0.004471
0.003839
0.001887
0.451612903225806
0.007794
0.007667
0.006264
0.004467
0.003787
0.001872
0.483870967741936
0.007286
0.00714
0.005738
0.003972
0.003423
0.001775
0.516129032258065
0.006282
0.006149
0.005095
0.003867
0.003268
0.001737
0.548387096774194
0.006022
0.005872
0.004981
0.003702
0.00315
0.001605
0.580645161290323
0.005862
0.005717
0.004757
0.003604
0.003076
0.001575
0.612903225806452
0.00572
0.00556
0.004528
0.003595
0.003048
0.001424
0.645161290322581
0.005701
0.005557
0.004453
0.003538
0.00303
0.001401
0.67741935483871
0.005305
0.005198
0.004346
0.003423
0.002894
0.001335
0.709677419354839
0.005256
0.005109
0.004292
0.003178
0.002879
0.001334
0.741935483870968
0.004666
0.004579
0.004223
0.002958
0.002683
0.001323
0.774193548387097
0.004452
0.004369
0.003982
0.00285
0.002517
0.001212
0.806451612903226
0.004386
0.004311
0.003673
0.002766
0.002303
0.00121
0.838709677419355
0.004381
0.004273
0.003369
0.002728
0.002231
0.001184
0.870967741935484
0.003914
0.003813
0.003324
0.002686
0.002178
0.001124
0.903225806451613
0.003902
0.003799
0.003224
0.002454
0.002052
0.001105
0.935483870967742
0.003538
0.003451
0.003017
0.00238
0.001904
0.001093
0.967741935483871
0.003403
0.003311
0.002789
0.002143
0.001834
0.001012
0.1
0.01652
0.016131
0.01275
0.0082124
0.007372
0.003003
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.00185923333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
­
B­
26­
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w93805.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
GAPecansC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.99
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.022
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
08
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
Record
18:
PLVKRT
PLDKRT
0.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
total
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)
­
B­
27­
Sediment
Levels
stored
as
Cypermethrinbensed.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
GAPecansC.
txt
modified
Tueday,
22
April
2003
at
07:
57:
20
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w93805.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
04:
32
Sediment
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
83.46
81.27
64.63
39.97
30.74
8.929
1962
25.24
24.76
22.57
20.43
17.86
7.564
1963
44.18
43.46
36.8
25.34
23.51
10.7
1964
63.09
62.28
53.82
46.01
41.99
19.35
1965
65.77
64.18
49.85
38.14
31.22
14.87
1966
49.92
48.71
42.11
30.23
28.58
12.52
1967
47.25
45.88
38.06
27.12
24.34
10.74
1968
106
104
82.34
55.43
46.32
17.14
1969
118
116
93.14
60.37
48.25
19.08
1970
32.42
31.52
26.97
22.52
18.53
10.06
1971
30.07
29.47
25.24
19.4
16.41
6.868
1972
32.32
31.5
24.63
15.68
12.65
7.567
1973
33.23
32.41
25.67
20.06
16.32
9.097
1974
94.8
92.57
73.12
46.61
37.85
13.3
1975
29.8
28.96
24.33
18.02
17.28
9.846
1976
60.84
60.09
52.41
43.26
40.01
16
1977
45.91
44.8
39.16
26.62
21.47
12.48
1978
26.45
25.96
23.94
15.23
11.63
6.196
1979
34.14
33.29
28.24
21.92
21.76
11.93
1980
19.29
18.77
17.1
13.91
12.34
7.497
1981
41.3
40.48
32.53
20.99
17.18
7.94
1982
35.61
34.86
28.88
20.38
17.44
6.857
1983
20.06
19.56
15.81
12.15
10.4
6.373
1984
24.83
24.22
19.1
13.49
10.8
6.263
1985
45.87
44.81
35.51
33.66
26.55
11.29
1986
61.96
60.37
50.11
35.38
27.5
14.59
1987
48.05
46.53
39.66
25.32
19.41
10.61
1988
22.19
21.61
18.84
16.77
15.21
8.072
1989
24.86
24.44
20.82
16.16
14.27
6.713
1990
22.12
21.53
18.28
15.46
13.05
5.738
­
B­
28­
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
118
116
93.14
60.37
48.25
19.35
0.0645161290322581
106
104
82.34
55.43
46.32
19.08
0.0967741935483871
94.8
92.57
73.12
46.61
41.99
17.14
0.129032258064516
83.46
81.27
64.63
46.01
40.01
16
0.161290322580645
65.77
64.18
53.82
43.26
37.85
14.87
0.193548387096774
63.09
62.28
52.41
39.97
31.22
14.59
0.225806451612903
61.96
60.37
50.11
38.14
30.74
13.3
0.258064516129032
60.84
60.09
49.85
35.38
28.58
12.52
0.290322580645161
49.92
48.71
42.11
33.66
27.5
12.48
0.32258064516129
48.05
46.53
39.66
30.23
26.55
11.93
0.354838709677419
47.25
45.88
39.16
27.12
24.34
11.29
0.387096774193548
45.91
44.81
38.06
26.62
23.51
10.74
0.419354838709677
45.87
44.8
36.8
25.34
21.76
10.7
0.451612903225806
44.18
43.46
35.51
25.32
21.47
10.61
0.483870967741936
41.3
40.48
32.53
22.52
19.41
10.06
0.516129032258065
35.61
34.86
28.88
21.92
18.53
9.846
0.548387096774194
34.14
33.29
28.24
20.99
17.86
9.097
0.580645161290323
33.23
32.41
26.97
20.43
17.44
8.929
0.612903225806452
32.42
31.52
25.67
20.38
17.28
8.072
0.645161290322581
32.32
31.5
25.24
20.06
17.18
7.94
0.67741935483871
30.07
29.47
24.63
19.4
16.41
7.567
0.709677419354839
29.8
28.96
24.33
18.02
16.32
7.564
0.741935483870968
26.45
25.96
23.94
16.77
15.21
7.497
0.774193548387097
25.24
24.76
22.57
16.16
14.27
6.868
0.806451612903226
24.86
24.44
20.82
15.68
13.05
6.857
0.838709677419355
24.83
24.22
19.1
15.46
12.65
6.713
0.870967741935484
22.19
21.61
18.84
15.23
12.34
6.373
0.903225806451613
22.12
21.53
18.28
13.91
11.63
6.263
0.935483870967742
20.06
19.56
17.1
13.49
10.8
6.196
0.967741935483871
19.29
18.77
15.81
12.15
10.4
5.738
0.1
93.666
91.44
72.271
46.55
41.792
17.026
Average
of
yearly
averages:
10.5393333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
Cypermethrin
­
B­
29­
Metfile:
w93805.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
GAPecansC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.99
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.022
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
08
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
5
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
Record
18:
PLVKRT
PLDKRT
0.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
total
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Write
Benthic
Porewater
File?
benthic
1
Write
Benthic
Sediment
File?
benthicsed
1
­
B­
30­
California
Cotton
Surface
Water
Levels
stored
as
CypermethrinCA_
new.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
CAcottonC.
txt
modified
Friday,
6
December
2002
at
06:
50:
06
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
11:
33:
30
Metfile:
w93193.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
04:
04:
24
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.1776
0.07855
0.05384
0.02117
0.01442
0.003632
1962
0.1779
0.07889
0.05421
0.02146
0.01465
0.00373
1963
0.1783
0.07947
0.05467
0.02187
0.01496
0.003812
1964
0.1778
0.07884
0.05417
0.02143
0.01464
0.003715
1965
0.1781
0.0792
0.05445
0.02166
0.01482
0.003779
1966
0.1782
0.07934
0.05456
0.02168
0.01478
0.003762
1967
0.1773
0.07818
0.05364
0.02091
0.01417
0.00358
1968
0.1776
0.07856
0.05395
0.02131
0.01457
0.0037
1969
0.1779
0.07887
0.05419
0.02144
0.01462
0.003778
1970
0.1774
0.0783
0.05374
0.02106
0.01434
0.00366
1971
0.1776
0.07858
0.05396
0.02122
0.01445
0.003667
1972
0.1778
0.07875
0.05409
0.02133
0.01455
0.003697
1973
0.1779
0.07894
0.05425
0.0215
0.01469
0.00375
1974
0.1778
0.0788
0.05414
0.02139
0.01457
0.003699
1975
0.1783
0.07941
0.05462
0.02187
0.01499
0.003815
1976
0.1781
0.07918
0.05444
0.02183
0.01504
0.003891
1977
0.1776
0.07855
0.05393
0.02119
0.01442
0.003664
1978
0.1775
0.07844
0.05385
0.02111
0.01441
0.003653
1979
0.1776
0.07858
0.05396
0.02123
0.01443
0.003632
1980
0.1773
0.07819
0.05365
0.02098
0.01426
0.003594
1981
0.1772
0.07797
0.05348
0.0208
0.0141
0.00355
1982
0.1779
0.07888
0.0542
0.02142
0.01463
0.003731
1983
0.1782
0.07929
0.05452
0.02162
0.0147
0.003748
1984
0.1767
0.07733
0.05297
0.02041
0.01379
0.003446
1985
0.1769
0.07763
0.05321
0.02064
0.01402
0.003539
1986
0.1776
0.07858
0.05396
0.02111
0.01432
0.003627
1987
0.1785
0.07973
0.05487
0.02197
0.01501
0.003794
1988
0.1769
0.07767
0.05324
0.02065
0.01401
0.003518
­
B­
31­
1989
0.1775
0.07838
0.0538
0.02112
0.01439
0.003634
1990
0.1772
0.07808
0.05357
0.02091
0.01421
0.003586
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
0.17829
0.079403
0.054614
0.021866
0.014987
0.0038102
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.00367943333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
CypermethrinCA_
new
Metfile:
w93193.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
CAcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.04
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
.039
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
1­
7
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
­
B­
32­
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
Record
18:
PLVKRT
PLDKRT
0.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
none
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Write
Benthic
Porewater
File?
benthic
1
Write
Benthic
Sediment
File?
benthicsed
1
­
B­
33­
Pore
Water
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.004225
0.00408
0.003361
0.002097
0.001544
0.0004151
1962
0.004319
0.004177
0.00346
0.002197
0.001626
0.000454
1963
0.004483
0.004352
0.003635
0.002351
0.001747
0.0004845
1964
0.004306
0.004164
0.003447
0.002185
0.001623
0.0004525
1965
0.004405
0.004269
0.003552
0.002268
0.001693
0.0004749
1966
0.004444
0.00431
0.003594
0.002267
0.001668
0.0004632
1967
0.004123
0.00398
0.003259
0.001985
0.001436
0.0003927
1968
0.004228
0.004084
0.003364
0.00215
0.001604
0.0004446
1969
0.004313
0.00417
0.003453
0.002187
0.001615
0.0004651
1970
0.004156
0.004012
0.003291
0.002051
0.001511
0.0004229
1971
0.004235
0.00409
0.003371
0.002104
0.001546
0.0004306
1972
0.00428
0.004135
0.003419
0.002147
0.001585
0.0004428
1973
0.004333
0.004192
0.003475
0.002211
0.001643
0.0004631
1974
0.004295
0.004151
0.003435
0.00217
0.001596
0.0004396
1975
0.004462
0.004329
0.003612
0.002357
0.001762
0.0004908
1976
0.004402
0.004266
0.003549
0.002357
0.001796
0.0005197
1977
0.004225
0.00408
0.003361
0.002095
0.001536
0.0004284
1978
0.004196
0.004052
0.003331
0.002064
0.001516
0.0004158
1979
0.004233
0.004088
0.003369
0.002109
0.00154
0.0004141
1980
0.004129
0.003985
0.003264
0.002021
0.001479
0.0004003
1981
0.004069
0.003926
0.003205
0.00195
0.001412
0.0003814
1982
0.004316
0.004174
0.003457
0.002179
0.001609
0.0004457
1983
0.004432
0.004297
0.00358
0.002244
0.001633
0.0004507
1984
0.003898
0.003756
0.003043
0.001812
0.001298
0.0003438
1985
0.003978
0.003835
0.003118
0.0019
0.001391
0.0003785
1986
0.00423
0.004085
0.003366
0.002051
0.001487
0.0004047
1987
0.004555
0.004429
0.003713
0.00238
0.001756
0.0004767
1988
0.003987
0.003845
0.003127
0.001903
0.001384
0.0003734
1989
0.004179
0.004035
0.003315
0.002074
0.001528
0.0004169
1990
0.004099
0.003956
0.003235
0.001995
0.001457
0.0003967
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
0.0044602
0.0043271
0.0036102
0.0023564
0.0017551
0.00048372
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.000432773333333333
­
B­
34­
­
B­
35­
Sediment
Levels
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
23.95
23.13
19.05
11.89
8.75
2.353
1962
24.48
23.68
19.61
12.45
9.218
2.574
1963
25.42
24.67
20.61
13.33
9.903
2.747
1964
24.41
23.6
19.54
12.39
9.2
2.565
1965
24.97
24.2
20.14
12.86
9.598
2.692
1966
25.19
24.44
20.37
12.85
9.454
2.626
1967
23.37
22.56
18.47
11.25
8.14
2.226
1968
23.97
23.15
19.07
12.19
9.094
2.521
1969
24.45
23.64
19.58
12.4
9.155
2.637
1970
23.56
22.74
18.66
11.63
8.565
2.398
1971
24.01
23.19
19.11
11.93
8.766
2.441
1972
24.26
23.44
19.38
12.17
8.986
2.51
1973
24.56
23.76
19.7
12.53
9.312
2.625
1974
24.35
23.53
19.47
12.3
9.045
2.492
1975
25.29
24.54
20.48
13.36
9.991
2.783
1976
24.96
24.18
20.12
13.36
10.18
2.946
1977
23.95
23.13
19.05
11.87
8.707
2.428
1978
23.79
22.97
18.88
11.7
8.592
2.357
1979
23.99
23.17
19.1
11.96
8.732
2.347
1980
23.41
22.59
18.51
11.46
8.383
2.269
1981
23.07
22.25
18.17
11.05
8.007
2.162
1982
24.47
23.66
19.6
12.35
9.12
2.527
1983
25.12
24.36
20.3
12.72
9.257
2.555
1984
22.09
21.29
17.25
10.27
7.36
1.949
1985
22.55
21.74
17.67
10.77
7.883
2.146
1986
23.98
23.16
19.08
11.63
8.43
2.294
1987
25.82
25.11
21.05
13.49
9.952
2.702
1988
22.6
21.8
17.73
10.79
7.848
2.117
1989
23.69
22.88
18.79
11.76
8.661
2.363
1990
23.24
22.42
18.34
11.31
8.259
2.249
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
25.28
24.53
20.469
13.357
9.9471
2.7425
Average
of
yearly
averages:
2.45336666666667
Mississippi
Cotton
stored
as
CypermethrinMS_
new.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
­
B­
36­
PRZM
environment:
MScottonC.
txt
modified
Wedday,
22
January
2003
at
07:
24:
26
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
11:
33:
30
Metfile:
w03940.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
04:
05:
46
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.226
0.5419
0.2224
0.1144
0.08266
0.02234
1962
0.2795
0.08307
0.05479
0.02814
0.02331
0.007364
1963
1.29
0.3988
0.1313
0.05476
0.03762
0.01108
1964
0.7698
0.2925
0.1295
0.08957
0.06589
0.02062
1965
0.8199
0.3542
0.09111
0.04263
0.0393
0.01316
1966
0.9534
0.2749
0.08134
0.0524
0.04011
0.01241
1967
0.5376
0.1777
0.1098
0.06812
0.05435
0.01709
1968
0.2626
0.08816
0.05465
0.02997
0.02208
0.007846
1969
0.793
0.2222
0.06204
0.04446
0.0331
0.01034
1970
0.5533
0.1895
0.07268
0.05353
0.04755
0.01566
1971
0.5631
0.2252
0.09425
0.05425
0.04655
0.01441
1972
0.1783
0.07947
0.05469
0.02486
0.01809
0.00693
1973
0.359
0.1188
0.05413
0.03113
0.03114
0.01187
1974
0.2453
0.09148
0.0546
0.03222
0.0285
0.01044
1975
1.963
0.5468
0.1709
0.08791
0.06441
0.01897
1976
0.6558
0.3085
0.1194
0.07679
0.06374
0.01891
1977
0.7099
0.2023
0.08756
0.0485
0.03896
0.0132
1978
0.3376
0.1514
0.07174
0.0301
0.02289
0.009309
1979
1.774
0.7277
0.2936
0.1442
0.1029
0.02968
1980
0.1773
0.07812
0.05483
0.02386
0.01644
0.005911
1981
0.7052
0.223
0.09086
0.03682
0.02992
0.01008
1982
1.041
0.3565
0.1905
0.1038
0.07313
0.02066
1983
0.6226
0.1741
0.0554
0.03716
0.02755
0.009677
1984
0.5998
0.1962
0.07937
0.05025
0.03676
0.01381
1985
1.079
0.3445
0.1131
0.08942
0.06773
0.01999
1986
0.841
0.2369
0.09571
0.04585
0.03531
0.01199
1987
0.178
0.07902
0.05456
0.02846
0.01996
0.007121
1988
0.7274
0.247
0.09384
0.05461
0.04235
0.01465
1989
0.363
0.1662
0.08456
0.0358
0.02902
0.01167
1990
0.2886
0.08093
0.05454
0.02163
0.02147
0.008993
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
­
B­
37­
0.1
1.2836
0.52759
0.18854
0.102377
0.07259
0.020656
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0135393666666667
­
B­
38­
Pore
Water
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.0291
0.02842
0.0259
0.01946
0.01498
0.004353
1962
0.00514
0.004974
0.00372
0.003105
0.002906
0.00139
1963
0.01752
0.01711
0.01437
0.008269
0.005987
0.002038
1964
0.01741
0.01693
0.01543
0.01338
0.01098
0.004183
1965
0.01714
0.01675
0.01341
0.009093
0.007224
0.002879
1966
0.01577
0.01542
0.01232
0.008067
0.006612
0.002652
1967
0.01459
0.01421
0.0119
0.01058
0.009627
0.003717
1968
0.005172
0.005026
0.004051
0.003375
0.003
0.00173
1969
0.01123
0.01097
0.008554
0.005789
0.005011
0.001945
1970
0.01309
0.01272
0.009928
0.008609
0.007604
0.003292
1971
0.01566
0.01521
0.01244
0.008331
0.007417
0.002894
1972
0.004488
0.004355
0.003724
0.002667
0.002169
0.001289
1973
0.00803
0.007828
0.006974
0.005038
0.004481
0.00249
1974
0.007007
0.006867
0.005942
0.004918
0.004232
0.002267
1975
0.02813
0.02738
0.02346
0.0148
0.01129
0.003956
1976
0.01466
0.01433
0.01291
0.01083
0.01064
0.003964
1977
0.01287
0.01249
0.009498
0.00681
0.005971
0.002708
1978
0.007882
0.007648
0.005939
0.00363
0.002886
0.001925
1979
0.04219
0.04129
0.0358
0.02438
0.01871
0.006341
1980
0.004598
0.004438
0.0038
0.002448
0.001799
0.001054
1981
0.007944
0.007816
0.007568
0.004819
0.004242
0.00194
1982
0.02652
0.02609
0.02386
0.01662
0.01257
0.00403
1983
0.009021
0.008775
0.006835
0.004589
0.003903
0.001814
1984
0.01167
0.01139
0.008983
0.007198
0.005865
0.003053
1985
0.02354
0.02286
0.01778
0.01384
0.0118
0.004164
1986
0.01375
0.01333
0.0101
0.006364
0.005269
0.002352
1987
0.004563
0.004438
0.003687
0.003218
0.002571
0.001444
1988
0.01253
0.01218
0.009413
0.007764
0.006885
0.002919
1989
0.008801
0.008617
0.007535
0.004806
0.004178
0.002539
1990
0.004951
0.004848
0.004095
0.003063
0.002628
0.001943
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
0.027969
0.027251
0.02382
0.016438
0.012493
0.0041811
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0027755
Sediment
Levels
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
­
B­
39­
1961
165
161
147
110
84.91
24.68
1962
29.14
28.2
21.09
17.6
16.48
7.882
1963
99.31
96.99
81.49
46.88
33.94
11.55
1964
98.68
95.99
87.49
75.86
62.25
23.71
1965
97.19
94.93
76.04
51.55
40.95
16.32
1966
89.37
87.43
69.86
45.73
37.49
15.04
1967
82.73
80.53
67.48
59.98
54.58
21.07
1968
29.32
28.49
22.96
19.13
17
9.81
1969
63.68
62.18
48.49
32.82
28.4
11.02
1970
74.22
72.1
56.28
48.8
43.11
18.66
1971
88.78
86.21
70.52
47.23
42.04
16.41
1972
25.44
24.69
21.11
15.12
12.3
7.31
1973
45.52
44.38
39.54
28.56
25.4
14.11
1974
39.72
38.93
33.68
27.88
23.99
12.85
1975
159
155
133
83.87
64
22.43
1976
83.11
81.23
73.19
61.42
60.3
22.47
1977
72.97
70.8
53.84
38.6
33.85
15.35
1978
44.68
43.35
33.67
20.58
16.36
10.91
1979
239
234
203
138
106
35.95
1980
26.07
25.16
21.54
13.88
10.2
5.975
1981
45.04
44.31
42.9
27.32
24.05
11
1982
150
148
135
94.2
71.28
22.84
1983
51.14
49.74
38.75
26.01
22.13
10.28
1984
66.15
64.56
50.92
40.8
33.25
17.3
1985
133
130
101
78.46
66.88
23.6
1986
77.94
75.55
57.24
36.08
29.87
13.34
1987
25.87
25.16
20.9
18.24
14.58
8.187
1988
71.02
69.04
53.36
44.01
39.03
16.55
1989
49.89
48.85
42.71
27.24
23.68
14.39
1990
28.07
27.48
23.21
17.37
14.9
11.01
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
158.1
154.3
134.8
93.167
70.84
23.699
Average
of
yearly
averages:
15.7334666666667
North
Carolina
Cotton
stored
as
CypermethrinNC_
new.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Friday,
6
December
2002
at
08:
14:
40
­
B­
40­
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
11:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
04:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.7829
0.2425
0.102
0.06825
0.05392
0.01556
1962
1.123
0.3416
0.193
0.093
0.0679
0.02133
1963
0.4646
0.1363
0.06221
0.03189
0.02309
0.01192
1964
0.8147
0.2578
0.1027
0.07208
0.06236
0.02159
1965
1.087
0.3661
0.1297
0.08817
0.06477
0.01962
1966
0.9823
0.2828
0.1184
0.06464
0.0495
0.01525
1967
0.8511
0.2427
0.1061
0.0698
0.05526
0.01702
1968
1.376
0.4384
0.1517
0.07802
0.06104
0.02002
1969
1.21
0.4544
0.1621
0.09553
0.07375
0.02257
1970
1.175
0.3574
0.1532
0.0905
0.06618
0.01962
1971
0.7139
0.2596
0.1107
0.08362
0.06585
0.02022
1972
1.216
0.3852
0.1841
0.1017
0.07569
0.0224
1973
0.893
0.3103
0.1305
0.08329
0.06214
0.01843
1974
0.7254
0.2767
0.1034
0.06187
0.04992
0.01549
1975
2.018
0.9594
0.2575
0.1178
0.08568
0.0243
1976
0.7583
0.2149
0.06548
0.03302
0.03049
0.01162
1977
0.5815
0.1882
0.07972
0.05069
0.04471
0.01528
1978
2.25
0.6295
0.1754
0.08368
0.05959
0.018
1979
1.405
0.3984
0.1668
0.08516
0.06783
0.02081
1980
0.5809
0.1628
0.0688
0.03844
0.03463
0.01207
1981
1.092
0.3141
0.1237
0.08648
0.06831
0.02104
1982
0.3715
0.1085
0.05525
0.03841
0.02845
0.01129
1983
0.2582
0.07973
0.05498
0.02415
0.01791
0.009862
1984
1.985
0.8272
0.2946
0.1373
0.09784
0.02821
1985
2.022
0.5825
0.1573
0.09978
0.07393
0.02175
1986
0.7714
0.2769
0.11
0.08862
0.06646
0.01934
1987
0.9977
0.2836
0.1015
0.05343
0.0462
0.01524
1988
0.5768
0.1771
0.08303
0.05078
0.04612
0.01572
1989
1.176
0.3721
0.1288
0.09119
0.06951
0.02164
1990
0.3421
0.1163
0.06489
0.03195
0.02269
0.01051
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
­
B­
41­
0.1
2.0147
0.6248
0.19211
0.101508
0.075514
0.022553
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0179240666666667
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
CypermethrinNC_
new
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.04
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
5
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
.039
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
1­
7
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
3
UPTKF
Record
18:
PLVKRT
­
B­
42­
PLDKRT
.13
FEXTRC
0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
none
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Write
Benthic
Porewater
File?
benthic
1
Write
Benthic
Sediment
File?
benthicsed
1
­
B­
43­
Pore
Water
Levels
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.01876
0.0183
0.01594
0.01209
0.009726
0.003203
1962
0.02464
0.02421
0.02246
0.01609
0.01268
0.004845
1963
0.007875
0.007813
0.007134
0.005915
0.004872
0.002889
1964
0.01569
0.01545
0.0141
0.01209
0.01178
0.005392
1965
0.02282
0.02226
0.01806
0.01457
0.01197
0.004524
1966
0.0197
0.0192
0.01624
0.01111
0.008782
0.003382
1967
0.01713
0.01669
0.01409
0.01146
0.009762
0.003876
1968
0.02208
0.02165
0.018
0.01285
0.01085
0.004547
1969
0.03042
0.02973
0.02557
0.01748
0.01447
0.005446
1970
0.02093
0.02039
0.01762
0.01543
0.01248
0.004455
1971
0.01815
0.01772
0.01586
0.01331
0.01223
0.004589
1972
0.02823
0.02764
0.02289
0.01795
0.0147
0.005083
1973
0.02154
0.02106
0.01826
0.01437
0.01156
0.004081
1974
0.01995
0.01946
0.01571
0.01125
0.009192
0.003591
1975
0.04467
0.04365
0.0355
0.02154
0.01638
0.005312
1976
0.01135
0.01115
0.009681
0.007534
0.00656
0.002763
1977
0.01342
0.01307
0.01035
0.00919
0.007934
0.003608
1978
0.02998
0.02931
0.02311
0.01409
0.01061
0.003832
1979
0.0274
0.02678
0.02262
0.01563
0.01284
0.004748
1980
0.01081
0.01058
0.008538
0.006821
0.005754
0.0027
1981
0.01967
0.01923
0.01723
0.01295
0.01215
0.0048
1982
0.008075
0.007864
0.007291
0.005305
0.004422
0.002586
1983
0.005045
0.005017
0.004849
0.004331
0.003709
0.002301
1984
0.04902
0.04781
0.04
0.02559
0.01938
0.006527
1985
0.02996
0.02923
0.02362
0.01758
0.01391
0.004809
1986
0.02077
0.02026
0.0182
0.01496
0.01209
0.004274
1987
0.0167
0.01631
0.01545
0.01125
0.009337
0.00349
1988
0.01442
0.01416
0.01255
0.009416
0.008187
0.003732
1989
0.02261
0.02212
0.01788
0.01519
0.01307
0.004926
1990
0.006863
0.006767
0.006015
0.004777
0.003923
0.002356
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
0.030376
0.029688
0.025375
0.017913
0.014677
0.005384
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0040889
Sediment
Levels
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
­
B­
44­
1961
106
104
90.33
68.56
55.14
18.16
1962
140
137
127
91.23
71.86
27.47
1963
44.64
44.29
40.44
33.53
27.62
16.38
1964
88.96
87.59
79.95
68.55
66.78
30.57
1965
129
126
102
82.58
67.84
25.64
1966
112
109
92.08
62.98
49.79
19.17
1967
97.1
94.62
79.85
64.95
55.34
21.97
1968
125
123
102
72.85
61.53
25.78
1969
172
169
145
99.12
82.04
30.87
1970
119
116
99.91
87.48
70.72
25.25
1971
103
100
89.91
75.46
69.34
26.01
1972
160
157
130
102
83.34
28.82
1973
122
119
104
81.46
65.54
23.13
1974
113
110
89.06
63.78
52.11
20.36
1975
253
247
201
122
92.85
30.11
1976
64.36
63.2
54.88
42.71
37.19
15.66
1977
76.06
74.09
58.69
52.1
44.98
20.45
1978
170
166
131
79.85
60.15
21.72
1979
155
152
128
88.62
72.78
26.92
1980
61.29
59.96
48.4
38.66
32.62
15.3
1981
112
109
97.66
73.42
68.9
27.21
1982
45.78
44.58
41.33
30.08
25.07
14.66
1983
28.6
28.44
27.49
24.55
21.02
13.04
1984
278
271
227
145
110
37
1985
170
166
134
99.68
78.88
27.26
1986
118
115
103
84.82
68.57
24.23
1987
94.65
92.47
87.58
63.8
52.93
19.78
1988
81.72
80.28
71.14
53.38
46.41
21.16
1989
128
125
101
86.12
74.1
27.93
1990
38.91
38.36
34.1
27.08
22.24
13.35
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
171.8
168.7
143.9
101.768
83.21
30.524
Average
of
yearly
averages:
23.1786666666667
Texas
Cotton
Surface
Water
Levels
stored
as
CypermethrinTX_
new.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
­
B­
45­
PRZM
environment:
TXcottonC.
txt
modified
Friday,
6
December
2002
at
08:
25:
18
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
11:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13958.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
04:
06:
24
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.6156
0.1983
0.08781
0.03552
0.02836
0.007487
1962
0.4891
0.1116
0.04363
0.02398
0.01833
0.005078
1963
0.1703
0.06588
0.0435
0.01636
0.01112
0.002922
1964
0.1706
0.06616
0.04377
0.01675
0.01358
0.004304
1965
0.2287
0.06618
0.04375
0.01705
0.014
0.004543
1966
0.2397
0.06609
0.04366
0.02512
0.0182
0.004839
1967
0.1705
0.06612
0.04386
0.01799
0.01512
0.004825
1968
0.3529
0.1348
0.06078
0.02374
0.01738
0.004999
1969
0.2323
0.06588
0.0435
0.02336
0.01658
0.004618
1970
0.1706
0.06628
0.04383
0.01662
0.0121
0.003507
1971
0.3063
0.104
0.04355
0.02596
0.01807
0.004815
1972
0.1708
0.06659
0.04579
0.01783
0.01218
0.00355
1973
0.3332
0.1285
0.05836
0.02268
0.01923
0.006616
1974
0.494
0.119
0.04376
0.02982
0.02185
0.006387
1975
0.1805
0.09172
0.04972
0.02065
0.01532
0.004637
1976
0.2577
0.09046
0.05447
0.0213
0.01772
0.005298
1977
0.1704
0.06604
0.04362
0.01646
0.01202
0.003359
1978
0.217
0.06585
0.04348
0.02048
0.01508
0.004343
1979
1.11
0.2589
0.1066
0.05246
0.0363
0.009494
1980
0.1701
0.06554
0.04323
0.01625
0.01193
0.003362
1981
0.2103
0.08754
0.04931
0.01875
0.01536
0.004892
1982
0.1703
0.06582
0.04346
0.01633
0.01103
0.00304
1983
0.3609
0.1082
0.05489
0.02249
0.01589
0.004327
1984
0.1704
0.06601
0.0436
0.01647
0.01118
0.003906
1985
0.1974
0.07084
0.04547
0.01726
0.01284
0.004376
1986
0.2175
0.06589
0.04351
0.01641
0.01392
0.00484
1987
0.3724
0.08637
0.04798
0.01919
0.01761
0.005054
1988
0.1706
0.06631
0.04392
0.01701
0.01147
0.00301
1989
0.1705
0.06606
0.04366
0.01809
0.01244
0.00336
1990
0.2164
0.0998
0.05133
0.01994
0.01356
0.004222
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
­
B­
46­
0.1
0.49351
0.13417
0.060538
0.029434
0.021588
0.0065931
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.004667
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:

Output
File:
CypermethrinTX_
new
Metfile:
w13958.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
TXcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubility
sol
0.04
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
9
1.9
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
.039
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
1­
7
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.

Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
Record
18:
PLVKRT
PLDKRT
.13
FEXTRC
0.5
­
B­
47­
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFF
none
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Write
Benthic
Porewater
File?
benthic
1
Write
Benthic
Sediment
File?
benthicsed
1
­
B­
48­
Pore
Water
Levels
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.01119
0.01078
0.008992
0.005252
0.004434
0.001335
1962
0.005421
0.005166
0.003975
0.002469
0.002288
0.0008119
1963
0.003179
0.003056
0.002475
0.001438
0.001027
0.000334
1964
0.003292
0.003169
0.002587
0.001558
0.001385
0.0006677
1965
0.003279
0.00316
0.002574
0.001612
0.001413
0.000783
1966
0.00515
0.004945
0.00386
0.002903
0.002437
0.0008033
1967
0.003262
0.003142
0.002558
0.001743
0.00176
0.0008056
1968
0.006208
0.006078
0.005233
0.002962
0.002342
0.0008904
1969
0.003776
0.003633
0.002949
0.002329
0.002035
0.0007132
1970
0.003314
0.003194
0.002607
0.001557
0.001253
0.0005053
1971
0.006321
0.006094
0.004598
0.003134
0.002462
0.0007371
1972
0.003581
0.003471
0.002917
0.001837
0.001341
0.0005213
1973
0.00564
0.00549
0.00481
0.003403
0.002702
0.001236
1974
0.007482
0.007202
0.005413
0.003813
0.003271
0.001213
1975
0.004475
0.004321
0.003569
0.002223
0.001882
0.0008138
1976
0.005325
0.005155
0.004156
0.002616
0.002404
0.0009618
1977
0.003228
0.003108
0.002525
0.001485
0.001162
0.0004752
1978
0.003639
0.003485
0.002635
0.002116
0.001745
0.000624
1979
0.01734
0.01672
0.01388
0.008231
0.006116
0.001774
1980
0.003074
0.002943
0.002369
0.00138
0.001083
0.0004292
1981
0.004017
0.003862
0.003315
0.001945
0.001824
0.000791
1982
0.003164
0.003038
0.002459
0.001429
0.001016
0.000359
1983
0.005875
0.005637
0.004192
0.002627
0.001987
0.0006448
1984
0.003217
0.003097
0.002516
0.001485
0.001158
0.00058
1985
0.003543
0.003421
0.002835
0.001685
0.001353
0.0007293
1986
0.003183
0.003059
0.002479
0.001778
0.001621
0.0008269
1987
0.004292
0.004149
0.003289
0.002033
0.002172
0.0008989
1988
0.003313
0.003193
0.002601
0.00159
0.00114
0.0003619
1989
0.003242
0.003121
0.002538
0.001638
0.001313
0.0004159
1990
0.005033
0.004855
0.003661
0.002167
0.00156
0.0006245
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.1
0.0073659
0.0070912
0.005395
0.003772
0.0032141
0.0012337
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.000755566666666667
Sediment
Levels
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
­
C­
1­
1961
63.41
61.11
50.97
29.77
25.13
7.568
1962
30.73
29.29
22.53
13.99
12.97
4.603
1963
18.02
17.32
14.03
8.152
5.823
1.893
1964
18.66
17.97
14.66
8.832
7.852
3.785
1965
18.59
17.91
14.59
9.138
8.012
4.439
1966
29.19
28.03
21.88
16.46
13.81
4.554
1967
18.49
17.81
14.5
9.882
9.978
4.567
1968
35.19
34.45
29.67
16.79
13.28
5.048
1969
21.41
20.59
16.72
13.2
11.54
4.043
1970
18.79
18.11
14.78
8.828
7.106
2.865
1971
35.83
34.55
26.07
17.76
13.96
4.179
1972
20.3
19.68
16.54
10.41
7.605
2.955
1973
31.97
31.12
27.27
19.29
15.32
7.007
1974
42.41
40.83
30.69
21.62
18.54
6.876
1975
25.37
24.49
20.23
12.6
10.67
4.613
1976
30.19
29.22
23.56
14.83
13.63
5.453
1977
18.3
17.62
14.31
8.416
6.589
2.694
1978
20.63
19.76
14.94
12
9.894
3.537
1979
98.29
94.78
78.71
46.66
34.67
10.06
1980
17.43
16.68
13.43
7.824
6.141
2.433
1981
22.77
21.9
18.79
11.03
10.34
4.484
1982
17.93
17.22
13.94
8.098
5.758
2.035
1983
33.31
31.96
23.76
14.89
11.26
3.655
1984
18.24
17.56
14.26
8.418
6.563
3.288
1985
20.08
19.39
16.07
9.55
7.671
4.134
1986
18.04
17.34
14.05
10.08
9.188
4.688
1987
24.33
23.52
18.64
11.52
12.32
5.096
1988
18.78
18.1
14.74
9.014
6.465
2.051
1989
18.38
17.69
14.39
9.283
7.444
2.358
1990
28.53
27.52
20.75
12.29
8.844
3.54
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
.1
41.752
40.202
30.588
21.387
18.218
6.9939
Average
of
yearly
averages:
4.28336666666667
APPENDIX
C.
TerrPlant
Model
 
Input,
Results,
Output
No
plant
toxicity
data
were
submitted,
therefore,
TerrPlant
was
not
run
for
this
assessment.
­
C­
2­
­
D­
1­
APPENDIX
D.
T­
REX
Model
(
T­
REX
Version
1.12,
December
7,
2004)
 
Input,
Results,
Output
The
model
output
from
T­
REX
for
cypermethrin
is
provided
in
the
attached
Microsoft
Excel
spreadsheets:

°
Cypermethrin_
T­
REX_
cotton_
v1.12.
xls
°
Cypermethrin_
T­
REX_
lettuce_
v1.12.
xls
°
Cypermethrin_
T­
REX_
pecans_
v1.12.
xls
°
Cypermethrin_
T­
REX_
rape_
v1.12.
xls
1.
Introduction
This
spreadsheet
based
model
calculates
the
decay
of
a
chemical
applied
to
foliar
surfaces
for
single
or
multiple
applications.
It
uses
the
same
principle
as
the
batch
code
models
FATE
and
TERREEC
for
calculating
terrestrial
estimates
exposure
(
TEEC)
concentrations
on
plant
surfaces
following
application.
A
first
order
decay
assumption
is
used
to
determine
the
concentration
at
each
day
after
initial
application
based
on
the
concentration
resulting
from
the
initial
and
additional
applications.
The
decay
is
calculated
by
from
the
first
order
rate
equation:

CT
=
Cie­
kT
or
in
log
form:

ln
(
CT/
Ci)
=
kT
Where:

CT
=
concentration
at
time
T
=
day
zero.

Ci
=
concentration,
in
parts
per
million
(
PPM)
present
initially
(
on
day
zero)
on
the
surfaces.
Ci
is
calculated
based
on
Kenaga
and
Fletcher
by
multiplying
the
Ci
based
on
the
Kenega
nomogram
(
Hoerger
and
Kenaga,
(
1972)
as
modified
Fletcher
(
1994).
For
maximum
concentration
the
application
rate,
in
pounds
active
ingredient
per
acre,
is
multiplied
by
240
for
Short
Grass,
110
for
Tall
Grass,
and
135
for
Broad
leafed
plants/
small
insects
and
15
for
fruits/
pods/
lg
insects.
Additional
applications
are
converted
from
pounds
active
ingredient
per
acre
to
PPM
on
the
plant
surface
and
the
additional
mass
added
to
the
mass
of
the
chemical
still
present
on
the
surfaces
on
the
day
of
application.

k
=
If
the
foliar
dissipation
data
submitted
to
EFED
are
found
scientifically
valid
and
statistically
robust
for
a
specific
pesticide,
the
90%
upper
confidence
limit
of
the
mean
half­
lives
should
be
used.
When
scientifically
valid,
statistically
robust
data
are
not
available
TETT
recommends
the
using
a
default
half­
life
value
of
35
days.
The
use
of
the
35
day
half­
life
is
based
on
the
highest
reported
value
(
36.9
days)
reported
by
Willis
and
McDowell
(
Pesticide
persistence
on
foliage,
Environ.
Contam.
Toxicol,
100:
23­
73,
1987).
­
D­
2­
T
=
time,
in
days,
since
the
start
of
the
simulation.
The
initial
application
is
on
day
0.
The
simulation
is
designed
to
run
for
365
days.

The
program
calculates
concentration
on
each
type
of
surface
on
a
daily
interval
for
one
year.
The
maximum
concentration
during
the
year
are
calculated
for
both
maximum
and
mean
residues.
The
inputs
used
to
calculate
the
amount
of
the
chemical
present
are
in
highlighted
in
light
blue
on
the
spread
sheet.
Outputs
are
in
yellow.
The
inputs
required
are:

Application
Rate:
The
maximum
label
application
rate
(
in
pounds
ai/
acre)

Half­
life:
The
degradation
half­
life
for
the
dominate
process(
in
days)

Frequency
of
Application:
The
interval
between
repeated
applications,
from
the
label
(
in
days)

Maximum
#
Application
per
year:
From
the
label
The
calculated
concentrations
are
used
to
calculate
Avian
and
Mammalian
RQ
values.
The
maximum
calculated
concentration
is
divided
by
user
input
values
for
acute
and
chronic
endpoints
to
give
RQs
for
each
type
of
plant
surface.

2.
Avian
Species
For
calculating
dose­
based
RQs
in
birds,
the
maximum
and
mean
Kenaga
residue
values
are
adjusted
for
avian
class
and
food
consumption
based
on
the
following
scaling
factor
(
USEPA,
1993):

FI
(
g/
d)
=
0.648
(
g
bw)^
0.651
For
the
3
avian
weight
classes
considered
(
20,
100
and
1000
g),
this
results
in
%
body
weight
consumption
of:

Weight(
g)
FI
wet
FI
%
bw
consumed
20
4.555599463
22.77799731
114
100
12.98897874
64.94489369
65
1000
58.15338588
290.7669294
29
­
D­
3­
A.
Dose­
Based
Acute
RQs
Dose­
based
acute
RQs
are
then
calculated
using
the
formula:

RQ
=
adjusted
EEC/
LD50
or
NOAEL
where
the
adjusted
EEC
is
considered
to
be
the
daily
dose
weighted
for
%
body
weight
consumed
of
a
given
food
source.

B.
Dietary­
Based
RQs
For
dietary­
based
RQs,
two
values
are
given
for
each
food
group.
First,
the
consumption­
weighted
RQ
for
each
weight
class
(
20,
100,
and
1000g
birds)
is
displayed
and
calculated
using
the
equation:

RQ
=
EEC/((
LC50
or
NOAEC)/(%
bw
consumed))

In
the
second
method,
no
adjustment
is
made
for
consumption
differences
among
the
weight
classes.
This
RQ
is
calculated:

RQ
=
EEC/
LC50
or
NOAEC
3.
Mammalian
Species
A.
Dose­
Based
RQs
For
calculating
dose­
based
RQs
in
mammals,
the
maximum
and
mean
Kenaga
values
are
adjusted
for
mammalian
class
and
food
consumption
(
0.95,
0.66
and
0.15
body
weight
for
herbivores
and
insectivores
and
0.21,
0.15,
and
0.03
body
wt.
for
granivores).
Dose­
based
acute
and
chronic
RQs
are
then
calculated
by
dividing
the
adjusted
EECs
(
daily
dose)
by
the
LD50
or
NOAEL.

B.
Dietary­
Based
RQs
Dietary­
based
RQs
are
calculated
using
the
equation:

RQ
=
EEC/((
LC50
or
NOAEC)/(%
bw
consumed))

4.
Graph
­
D­
4­
A
graph
of
concentration
on
each
plant
surface
vs
time
is
plotted
and
a
concentration
of
concern
line
can
be
added
at
a
user
specified
level.
The
concentration
of
concern
(
e.
g.,
avian
LC50,
mammalian
NOAEL)
label
should
be
entered
in
the
cell
underneath
the
value.
The
graph
automatically
plots
a
line
at
this
concentration
and
the
label
is
extracted
from
that
cell.
The
graph
is
plotted
for
the
first
100
days
post­
application.
Graphs
displaying
acute
and
chronic
LOCs
for
both
birds
and
mammals
are
displayed
in
the
"
Graph"
worksheet.
These
graphs
may
be
useful
as
a
visual
aid
to
communicate
risk
in
your
assessment
and
can
be
copy/
pasted
into
your
document.
To
help
with
scaling
issues
on
the
y
axis,
you
may
want
to
delete
one
of
the
endpoints.

5.
New
Version
Notes
A
new
look
is
used
in
this
update
in
an
effort
to
decrease
confusion
and
increase
transparency
in
the
risk
assessment
process.
This
version
of
T­
REX
(
v1.12)
incorporates
the
ability
to
calculate
EECs
and
RQs
for
maximum
and
mean
residues.
Mean
residues
are
calculated
exactly
as
the
maximum
residues
are,
except
the
corresponding
Kenaga
values
are:
85
for
Short
Grass,
36
for
Tall
Grass,
and
45
for
Broad
leafed
plants/
small
insects
and
7
for
fruits/
pods/
lg
insects.

6.
References
Fletcher,
J.
S.,
J.
E.
Nellesson
and
T.
G.
Pfleeger.
1994.
Literature
review
and
evaluation
of
the
EPA
food­
chain
(
Kenaga)
nomogram,
an
instrument
for
estimating
pesticide
residues
on
plants.
Environ.
Tox.
and
Chem.
13(
9):
1383­
1391.

Hoerger,
F.
and
E.
E.
Kenaga.
1972.
Pesticide
residues
on
plants:
correlation
of
representative
dada
as
a
basis
for
estimation
of
their
magnitude
in
the
environment.
IN:
F.
Coulston
and
F.
Corte,
eds.,
Environmental
Quality
and
Safety:
Chemistry,
Toxicology
and
Technology.
Vol
1.
Georg
Theime
Publishers,
Stuttgart,
Germany.
pp.
9­
28.

USEPA.
1993.
Wildlife
Exposure
Factors
Handbook.
Volume
I
of
II.
EPA/
600/
R­
93/
187a.
Office
of
Research
and
Development,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460.
Willis
and
McDowell.
1987.
Pesticide
persistence
on
foliage.
Environ.
Contam.
Toxicol.
100:
23­
73.
­
E­
1­
Acute
and
Chronic
RQs
are
based
on
the
Upper
Bound
Kenaga
Residues.

Chemical
Name:
The
maximum
single
day
residue
estimation
is
used
for
Use
both
the
acute
and
reproduction
RQs.
Formulation
Application
Rate
0.1
lbs
a.
i./
acre
Half­
life
60
days
Application
Interval
3
days
Maximum
#
Apps./
Year
6
Length
of
Simulation
1
year
Concentration
of
Concern
150.00
(
ppm)
Name
of
Concentration
of
Concern
2000
Note:
To
provide
risk
management
with
the
maximum
possible
information,

20000
it
is
recommended
that
both
the
dose­
based
and
concentration­
based
RQs
be
calculated
when
data
are
available
50
247
Note:
To
provide
risk
management
with
the
maximum
possible
information,

0
it
is
recommended
that
both
the
dose­
based
and
concentration­
based
7.5
RQs
be
calculated
when
data
are
available
150
Kenaga
Values
Short
Grass
132.28
Tall
Grass
60.63
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
74.41
Fruits/
pods/
seeds/
lg
insects
8.27
Avian
Results
Avian
Body
%
body
wgt
Adjusted
Class
Weight
consumed
LD50
Small
20
114
1416
Mid
100
65
1803
Large
1000
29
2546
small
mid
large
20
g
100
g
1000
g
Short
Grass
151
86
38
Tall
Grass
69
39
18
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
85
48
22
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
9
5
2
20
g
100
g
1000
g
Short
Grass
0.11
0.05
0.02
Tall
Grass
0.05
0.02
0.01
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
insects
0.06
0.03
0.01
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
0.01
0.00
0.00
Acute
Chronic
Short
Grass
0.01
2.65
Tall
Grass
0.00
1.21
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
0.00
1.49
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
0.00
0.17
Dose­
based
RQs
(
daily
dose/
LD50)
Avian
Acute
RQs
RQs
Upper
Bound
Kenaga
Residues
For
RQ
Calculation
Avian
Classes
and
Body
Weights
EEC
equivalent
dose
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
EECs
(
ppm)
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
NOAEC
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Mammals
LD50
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
Cypermethrin
Cotton
Bobwhite
quail
LC50
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Mammal
chronic
NOAEC
Bobwhite
quail
LD50
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
Endpoints
Bobwhite
quail
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg­
bw)

LC50
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Avian
Bobwhite
quail
NOAEC
(
mg/
kg­
diet)

Dietary­
based
RQs
(
EEC/
LC50
or
NOAEC)
T­
REX
Output
for
Cypermethrin
Application
to
Cotton
­
E­
2­
T­
REX
Output
for
Cypermethrin
Application
to
Lettuce
­
E­
3­
Acute
and
Chronic
RQs
are
based
on
the
Upper
Bound
Kenaga
Residues.

Chemical
Name:
The
maximum
single
day
residue
estimation
is
used
for
Use
both
the
acute
and
reproduction
RQs.
Formulation
Application
Rate
0.1
lbs
a.
i./
acre
Half­
life
60
days
Application
Interval
7
days
Maximum
#
Apps./
Year
0.6
Length
of
Simulation
1
year
Concentration
of
Concern
150.00
(
ppm)
Name
of
Concentration
of
Concern
2000
Note:
To
provide
risk
management
with
the
maximum
possible
information,

20000
it
is
recommended
that
both
the
dose­
based
and
concentration­
based
RQs
be
calculated
when
data
are
available
50
247
Note:
To
provide
risk
management
with
the
maximum
possible
information,

0
it
is
recommended
that
both
the
dose­
based
and
concentration­
based
7.5
RQs
be
calculated
when
data
are
available
150
Kenaga
Values
Short
Grass
24.00
Tall
Grass
11.00
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
13.50
Fruits/
pods/
seeds/
lg
insects
1.50
Avian
Results
Avian
Body
%
body
wgt
Adjusted
Class
Weight
consumed
LD50
Small
20
114
1416
Mid
100
65
1803
Large
1000
29
2546
small
mid
large
20
g
100
g
1000
g
Short
Grass
27
16
7
Tall
Grass
13
7
3
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
15
9
4
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
2
1
0
20
g
100
g
1000
g
Short
Grass
0.02
0.01
0.00
Tall
Grass
0.01
0.00
0.00
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
insects
0.01
0.00
0.00
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
0.00
0.00
0.00
Acute
Chronic
Short
Grass
0.00
0.48
Tall
Grass
0.00
0.22
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
0.00
0.27
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
0.00
0.03
Dose­
based
RQs
(
daily
dose/
LD50)
Avian
Acute
RQs
RQs
Upper
Bound
Kenaga
Residues
For
RQ
Calculation
Avian
Classes
and
Body
Weights
EEC
equivalent
dose
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
EECs
(
ppm)
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
NOAEC
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Mammals
LD50
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
Cypermethrin
Lettuce
Bobwhite
quail
LC50
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Mammal
chronic
NOAEC
Bobwhite
quail
LD50
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
Endpoints
Bobwhite
quail
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg­
bw)

LC50
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Avian
Bobwhite
quail
NOAEC
(
mg/
kg­
diet)

Dietary­
based
RQs
(
EEC/
LC50
or
NOAEC)

T­
REX
Output
for
Cypermethrin
Application
to
Canola
­
E­
4­
Acute
and
Chronic
RQs
are
based
on
the
Upper
Bound
Kenaga
Residues.

Chemical
Name:
The
maximum
single
day
residue
estimation
is
used
for
Use
both
the
acute
and
reproduction
RQs.
Formulation
Application
Rate
0.1
lbs
a.
i./
acre
Half­
life
60
days
Application
Interval
4
days
Maximum
#
Apps./
Year
0.4
Length
of
Simulation
1
year
Concentration
of
Concern
150.00
(
ppm)
Name
of
Concentration
of
Concern
2000
Note:
To
provide
risk
management
with
the
maximum
possible
information,

20000
it
is
recommended
that
both
the
dose­
based
and
concentration­
based
RQs
be
calculated
when
data
are
available
50
247
Note:
To
provide
risk
management
with
the
maximum
possible
information,

0
it
is
recommended
that
both
the
dose­
based
and
concentration­
based
7.5
RQs
be
calculated
when
data
are
available
150
Kenaga
Values
Short
Grass
24.00
Tall
Grass
11.00
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
13.50
Fruits/
pods/
seeds/
lg
insects
1.50
Avian
Results
Avian
Body
%
body
wgt
Adjusted
Class
Weight
consumed
LD50
Small
20
114
1416
Mid
100
65
1803
Large
1000
29
2546
small
mid
large
20
g
100
g
1000
g
Short
Grass
27
16
7
Tall
Grass
13
7
3
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
15
9
4
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
2
1
0
20
g
100
g
1000
g
Short
Grass
0.02
0.01
0.00
Tall
Grass
0.01
0.00
0.00
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
insects
0.01
0.00
0.00
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
0.00
0.00
0.00
Acute
Chronic
Short
Grass
0.00
0.48
Tall
Grass
0.00
0.22
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
0.00
0.27
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
0.00
0.03
Dose­
based
RQs
(
daily
dose/
LD50)
Avian
Acute
RQs
RQs
Upper
Bound
Kenaga
Residues
For
RQ
Calculation
Avian
Classes
and
Body
Weights
EEC
equivalent
dose
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
EECs
(
ppm)
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
NOAEC
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Mammals
LD50
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
Cypermethrin
Canola
Bobwhite
quail
LC50
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Mammal
chronic
NOAEC
Bobwhite
quail
LD50
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
Endpoints
Bobwhite
quail
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg­
bw)

LC50
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Avian
Bobwhite
quail
NOAEC
(
mg/
kg­
diet)

Dietary­
based
RQs
(
EEC/
LC50
or
NOAEC)
­
E­
5­
T­
REX
Output
for
Cypermethrin
Application
to
Pecans
­
E­
6­
Acute
and
Chronic
RQs
are
based
on
the
Upper
Bound
Kenaga
Residues.

Chemical
Name:
The
maximum
single
day
residue
estimation
is
used
for
Use
both
the
acute
and
reproduction
RQs.
Formulation
Application
Rate
0.1
lbs
a.
i./
acre
Half­
life
60
days
Application
Interval
5
days
Maximum
#
Apps./
Year
0.6
Length
of
Simulation
1
year
Concentration
of
Concern
150.00
(
ppm)
Name
of
Concentration
of
Concern
2000
Note:
To
provide
risk
management
with
the
maximum
possible
information,

20000
it
is
recommended
that
both
the
dose­
based
and
concentration­
based
RQs
be
calculated
when
data
are
available
50
247
Note:
To
provide
risk
management
with
the
maximum
possible
information,

0
it
is
recommended
that
both
the
dose­
based
and
concentration­
based
7.5
RQs
be
calculated
when
data
are
available
150
Kenaga
Values
Short
Grass
24.00
Tall
Grass
11.00
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
13.50
Fruits/
pods/
seeds/
lg
insects
1.50
Avian
Results
Avian
Body
%
body
wgt
Adjusted
Class
Weight
consumed
LD50
Small
20
114
1416
Mid
100
65
1803
Large
1000
29
2546
small
mid
large
20
g
100
g
1000
g
Short
Grass
27
16
7
Tall
Grass
13
7
3
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
15
9
4
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
2
1
0
20
g
100
g
1000
g
Short
Grass
0.02
0.01
0.00
Tall
Grass
0.01
0.00
0.00
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
insects
0.01
0.00
0.00
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
0.00
0.00
0.00
Acute
Chronic
Short
Grass
0.00
0.48
Tall
Grass
0.00
0.22
Broadleaf
plants/
sm
Insects
0.00
0.27
Fruits/
pods/
lg
insects
0.00
0.03
Dose­
based
RQs
(
daily
dose/
LD50)
Avian
Acute
RQs
RQs
Upper
Bound
Kenaga
Residues
For
RQ
Calculation
Avian
Classes
and
Body
Weights
EEC
equivalent
dose
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
EECs
(
ppm)
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
NOAEC
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Mammals
LD50
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
Cypermethrin
pecans
Bobwhite
quail
LC50
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Mammal
chronic
NOAEC
Bobwhite
quail
LD50
(
mg/
kg­
bw)
Endpoints
Bobwhite
quail
NOAEL
(
mg/
kg­
bw)

LC50
(
mg/
kg­
diet)
Avian
Bobwhite
quail
NOAEC
(
mg/
kg­
diet)

Dietary­
based
RQs
(
EEC/
LC50
or
NOAEC)
APPENDIX
E.
Ecological
Effects
Data
I.
Categories
of
Acute
Toxicity
­
E­
7­
In
general,
categories
of
acute
toxicity
ranging
from
"
practically
nontoxic"
to
"
very
highly
toxic"
have
been
established
for
aquatic
organisms
(
based
on
LC50
values),
terrestrial
organisms
(
based
on
LD50
values),
avian
species
(
based
on
LC50
values),
and
non­
target
insects
(
based
on
LD50
values
for
honey
bees)
(
EPA
2001).

Categories
of
acute
toxicity
for
aquatic
organisms
can
be
classified
according
to
the
toxicity
reference
value
(
LC50)
given
by
a
study:

LC50
(
ppm)
Toxicity
Category
<
0.1
Very
highly
toxic
0.1 
1
Highly
toxic
>
1 
10
Moderately
toxic
>
10 
100
Slightly
toxic
>
100
Practically
nontoxic
Categories
of
acute
toxicity
for
mammalian
species
can
be
classified
according
to
the
toxicity
reference
value
(
LD50)
given
by
a
study:

LD50
(
mg
a.
i./
kg)
Toxicity
Category
<
10
Very
highly
toxic
10 
50
Highly
toxic
51 
500
Moderately
toxic
501 
2000
Slightly
toxic
>
2000
Practically
nontoxic
­
E­
8­
For
avian
species,
categories
of
acute
toxicity
for
can
also
be
classified
according
to
the
toxicity
reference
value
(
LC50)
given
by
a
study:

LC50
(
ppm)
Toxicity
Category
<
50
Very
highly
toxic
50 
500
Highly
toxic
501 
1000
Moderately
toxic
1001 
5000
Slightly
toxic
>
5000
Practically
nontoxic
The
following
toxicity
category
descriptions
were
developed
by
Atkins
(
1981)
and
have
been
used
by
EFED
to
characterize
honey
bee
acute
contact
toxicity
values
(
EPA,
2001):

LD50
(:
g
a.
i./
bee)
Toxicity
Category
<
2
Highly
toxic
2 <
11
Moderately
toxic
>
11
Practically
nontoxic
II.
Toxicity
to
Freshwater
Aquatic
Animals
a.
Freshwater
Fish,
Acute
Two
freshwater
fish
toxicity
studies
using
the
TGAI
are
required
to
establish
the
acute
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
fish.
The
preferred
test
species
are
bluegill
sunfish
(
a
warmwater
fish)
and
rainbow
trout
(
a
coldwater
fish).
Acute
toxicity
studies
using
cypermethrin
TGAI
have
been
submitted
for
rainbow
trout
(
7
studies),
bluegill
sunfish
(
4
studies),
brown
trout
(
1
study),
carp
(
1
study),
and
rudd
(
1
study);
results
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
1a.
The
96­
hour
LC50
values
reported
in
these
studies
range
from
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
rainbow
trout
(
MRID
44546027;
Acceptable)
to
4.5
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
bluegill
sunfish
(
MRID
44546030;
Acceptable),
indicating
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
very
highly
toxic
to
freshwater
fish.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
EFED
will
use
the
lowest
96­
hour
LC50
of
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
rainbow
trout
to
evaluate
acute
toxic
exposure
to
freshwater
fish.
The
guideline
(
§
72­
1)
is
fulfilled.

In
addition
to
lethality
endpoints,
sublethal
effects
of
acute
cypermethrin
(
TGAI)
exposure
were
assessed
in
studies
in
rainbow
trout
(
3
studies)
and
bluegill
sunfish
(
3
studies).
The
sublethal
signs
of
toxicity
reported
were
rapid
and
erratic
swimming,
partial/
complete
loss
of
equilibrium,
jaw
spasms,
gulping
respiration,
lethargy,
and
darkened
pigmentation.
The
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
effects
ranged
from
<
0.00068
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
rainbow
trout
(
Acc.
No.
­
E­
9­
241598,
Acceptable)
to
2.1
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
bluegill
sunfish
(
MRID
44546030;
Acceptable).
For
two
studies,
the
NOAEC
value
for
sublethal
effects
was
several
orders
of
magnitude
lower
than
the
LC50
value;
in
rainbow
trout,
the
NOAEC
and
LC50
values
were
0.00068
:
g
a.
i./
L
and
0.8
:
g
a.
i./
L,
respectively
(
Acc
No.
241598;
Acceptable),
and
in
bluegill
sunfish,
the
NOAEC
and
LC50
values
were
<
0.0022
:
g
a.
i./
L
and
2.2
:
g
a.
i./
L,
respectively
(
MRID
241598;
Supplemental).
Thus,
sublethal
effects
can
occur
at
exposure
levels
far
below
the
concentrations
that
cause
lethality.

Studies
assessing
the
acute
toxicity
of
three
cypermethrin
formulations
in
rainbow
trout
were
submitted;
results
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
1b.
The
formulations
tested
were
WL
43467
40%
EC
(
40%
a.
i.),
GFU
061
(%
a.
i.
not
reported),
and
GFU
070
(
25.1%
a.
i.).
The
96­
hour
LC50
values
were
reported
for
GFU
061
and
GFU
070
are
4.7
:
g
formulation/
L
(
MRID
65813;
Supplemental)
and
13.0
:
g
formulation/
L
(
MRID
88947;
Acceptable),
respectively,
indicating
that
these
cypermethrin
formulations
are
very
highly
toxic
to
freshwater
fish.
Sublethal
effects
reported
include
loss
of
equilibrium,
quiescence,
darkening
pigmentation
and
coughing.
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
TGAI
and
the
cypermethrin
formations
tested
appear
to
have
a
degree
of
toxicity
to
freshwater
fish
on
an
acute
basis.
Results
of
the
study
using
WL
43467
40%
EC
show
that
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
is
decreased
in
unfiltered
pond
water
(
for
both
lethality
and
sublethal
effects),
compare
to
microfiltered
pond
water
from
which
suspended
solids
have
been
removed
(
MRID
89036;
Supplemental).
The
authors
suggest
that
the
reduced
toxicity
in
unfiltered
pond
water
is
due
to
adsorption
of
cypermethrin
to
suspended
solids,
resulting
in
decreased
concentrations
of
cypermethrin
in
water.

Acute
toxicity
studies
in
freshwater
fish
were
also
submitted
for
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
in
rainbow
trout
(
MRID
89037;
Acceptable)
and
bluegill
sunfish
(
MRID
89038;
Acceptable).
Results
yield
96­
hour
LC50
values
of
13.3
and
36.3
mg
degradate/
L
in
rainbow
trout
and
bluegill
sunfish,
respectively
(
Table
E­
1c).
Based
on
these
96­
hour
LC50
values,
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
is
categorized
as
slightly
toxic
to
freshwater
fish
on
an
acute
basis.
Thus,
the
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
degradate
is
much
less
toxic
than
cypermethrin
TGAI
to
freshwater
fish.
­
E­
10­
Table
E­
1a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Salmo
gairdneri
(
rainbow
trout)

.
92.9
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0.00068,
0.001,
0.0015,
0.0033,
0.0047,
0.01,
0.047,
0.10,
and
0.47
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
no
controls
indicated).

The
first
symptoms
noted
at
all
concentrations
were
rapid
swimming
with
frequent
thrashing
of
the
body.
In
all
cases
this
was
followed
by
exaggerated
and
involuntary
jaw
spasms.
After
death
all
fish
were
seen
to
have
pronounced
spinal
curvature
and
blackening
of
the
dorsal
area.

24­
hr
LC50
=
5.3
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)

48­
hr
LC50
=
2.0
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)

96­
hr
LC50
=
0.8
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.
241598
(
Hill
et
al.
1976)
Acceptable
Salmo
gairdneri
(
rainbow
trout)
91.5
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
DMSO
solvent),
0.32,
0.56,
0.75,
1.0
1.8,
2.4,
3.2
and
4.2
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.14,
0.25,
0.43,
0.55,
1.08,
1.49,
1.95,
and
3.35
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

24­
hr
LC50
=
1.73
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)

48­
hr
LC50
=
1.00
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)

96­
hr
LC50
=
0.92
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.81­
1.05)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
62792
(
ICI
1980);
same
study
reported
in
unclassified
MRID
92027011
(
Treacy
1990)
Acceptable
Table
E­
1a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
11­
Oncorhynchus
mykiss
(
rainbow
trout;
formerly
Salmo
gairdneri)
98.4
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.31,
0.52,
0.87,
1.5,
and
2.4
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.25,
0.42,
0.71,
1.1,
and
2.0
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

Sublethal
signs
of
test
material
toxicity
were
limited
to
partial/
complete
loss
of
equilibrium,
which
was
observed
in
the
four
highest
concentration
treatments.

96­
hr
LC50
=
1.1
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
1.0
­
1.3)

NOAEC
(
sublethal
effects)
=
0.25
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44546028
(
Sousa,
1998)
Acceptable
Lepomis
macrochirus
(
bluegill
sunfish)
98.4
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
1.4,
2.4,
4.0,
6.6,
and
11
µ
g
ai/
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
1.3,
2.1,
3.1,
4.7,
8.1
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

Fish
exposed
at
the
three
highest­
concentration
treatment
levels
demonstrated
signs
of
toxicity
which
included
partial/
complete
loss
of
equilibrium,
lethargy,
and
erratic
swimming
behavior.

96­
hr
LC50
=
4.5
ppb
ai
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.:
4.0
­
5.3
ppb
ai)

NOAEC
(
sublethal
effects)
=
2.1
ppb
ai
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44546030
(
Sousa,
1998)
Acceptable
Table
E­
1a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
12­
Lepomis
macrochirus
(
bluegill
sunfish)
91.5
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal
or
measured
unspecified)
tested:
0.35,
0.71,
1.44,
1.93,
2.38,
and
3.17
(
no
units;
ppb
a.
i.
are
assumed,
given
the
units
reported
for
NOAEC).

96­
hr
LC50
=
1.78
units
assumed
to
be
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
1.63­
1.95)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations).
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
65812
(
ICI
1980)
Acceptable
Lepomis
macrochirus
(
bluegill
sunfish)
92.9
Flow­
through
test
conditions.

Concentrations
tested
(
nominal
or
measured
unspecified):
0.0022,
0.0047,
0.01,
0.022,
0.047,
and
0.1
mg
a.
i./
L
At
all
concentrations,
fish
were
seen
to
swim
with
greater
rapidity
of
movement.
Other
toxic
symptoms
included
jaw
spasms
and
the
tendency
to
swim
with
the
head
up
and
the
tail
down.

24
hr
LC50
value
=
7.2
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)

48
hr
LC50
value
=
3.7
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)

96
hr.
LC50
=
2.2
ppb
a.
i.
(:
g
a.
i./
L)

Note:
LC50
values
given
in
this
study
were
not
determined
by
probit
analysis.
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.
241598
(
Hill
et
al.,
1973)
Supplemental
Technical
Cypermethrin
(
FMC
45806)
Table
E­
1a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
13­
Oncorhynchus
mykiss
(
Rainbow
trout
)
91.5
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
DMF
solvent
control),
0.39,
0.65,
1.08,
1.80,
and
3.00
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:

0.219,
0.366,
0.719,
1.35,
and
2.24
µ
g
a.
i./
L
96­
hour
LC50
=
0.90
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentration)
(
95%
C.
I.:
0.72­
1.35).
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
41968209
(
Vaishnav
and
Yurk,
1990)
Acceptable
Cypermethrin­
S
(
Fury
Technical)
(
FMC
56701)

Oncorhynchus
mykiss
(
rainbow
trout)
88.2
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
DMF
solvent
control),
0.70,
1.17,
1.94,
3.24,
and
5.40
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.47,
0.82,
1.65,
2.77,
and
5.27
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

96­
hour
LC50
=
0.69
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentration)(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.60­
0.82).

NOAEC
could
not
be
determined
due
to
mortality
at
all
concentrations.
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
41968208
(
Overman
et
al.,
1990)
Acceptable
Table
E­
1a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
14­
14C­
labeled
Beta­
cypermethrin
Oncorhynchus
mykiss
(
rainbow
trout)
tech
>
95%
Radio­
chemical
purity.
Flowthrough
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.13,
0.22,
0.36,
0.60,
and
1.0
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
17%
radiolabeled
material
and
83%
unlabeled
material).
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.11,
0.16,
0.27,
0.42,
and
0.8
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

Signs
of
test
material
toxicity
observed
at
all
but
the
lowestconcentration
included
partial/
complete
loss
of
equilibrium,
gulping
respiration,
erratic
swimming,
surfacing,
darkened
pigmentation,
and
lethargy.

96­
hour
LC50
=
0.39
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.:
0.27­
0.80)

NOAEC
(
sublethal
effects)
=
0.11
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
No.
44546027
(
Sousa,
1998)
Acceptable
Table
E­
1a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
15­
Lepomis
macrochirus
(
bluegill)
tech
>
95%
Radio­
chemical
Purity.
Flowthrough
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
1.3,
2.1,
3.5,
5.9,
and
9.8
µ
g
ai/
L
(
0.87%
radiolabeled
material
and
99.13%
unlabeled
material).
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.61,
1.0,
1.6,
2.4,
4.4
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

Signs
of
test
material
toxicity
observed
at
all
but
the
lowest
concentration
included
partial
or
complete
loss
of
equilibrium
and
lethargy.

96­
hour
LC50
=
1.2
ppb
ai
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.:
1.0­
1.3)

NOAEC
(
sublethal
effects)
=
0.61
ppb
ai.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
No.
44546029
(
Sousa,
1998)
Acceptable
Table
E­
1b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
WL
43467
(
40%
EC)
Table
E­
1b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
16­
Salmo
gairdneri
(
rainbow
trout)
40
96­
hr
exposure
period;
static
or
flow­
through
not
indicated.
Trout
were
exposed
to
2
and
5
µ
g/
L
nominal
concentrations
in
microfiltered
water
or
pond
water.
1.7
and
4.9
µ
g/
L
measured
in
microfiltered
water.
1.2
and
4.0
µ
g/
L
measured
in
pond
water.

After
3
hrs.
in
the
1.7
and
4.9
µ
g/
L
WL
43467
microfiltered
water,
fish
showed
signs
of
loss
of
balance,
tail
drop,
and
erratic
swimming;
fish
appeared
normal
after
24
hr.
At
1.7
µ
g/
L
WL
43467,
one
fish
was
found
dead
after
48
hr.
At
4.9
µ
g/
L
WL
43467,
all
fish
(
6)
were
dead
after
24
hr
exposure.

There
were
no
signs
of
toxicity
and
no
mortalities
in
fish
exposed
to
1.2
or
4.9
µ
g/
L
WL
43467
in
pond
water
during
the
96
hr.
exposure
period.

The
authors
conclude
that
the
observed
reductions
of
toxicity
and
lethal
effect
of
WL
43467
to
the
fish
in
pond
water
was
due
to
the
absorption
of
the
compound
onto
suspended
solids,
thereby
becoming
less
bio­
available
to
the
fish.
NA
MRID
89036
(
Reiff
et
al.,
1978)
Supplemental
Table
E­
1b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
17­
Formulation
GFU
061
Salmo
gairdneri
(
Rainbow
trout)
22.0
cis:
trans
ratio
=
54:
46.
Flowthrough
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
1.0,
2.4,
3.2
5.6,
7.5,
10.0,
15.5,
21.0,
24.0
µ
g
GFU/
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.60,
1.53,
1.90,
4.27,
6.02,
8.07,
13.1,
16.5,
and
16.6
µ
g
GFU/
L.

24­
hour
LC50
=
18.3
µ
g
GFU/
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
14.3­
23.4)

48­
hour
LC50
=
6.3
µ
g
GFU/
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
5.7­
6.9)

96­
hour
LC50
=
4.7
µ
g
GFU/
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
4.1­
5.4)

NOAEC
(
lethality)
=
1.53
µ
g
GFU/
L
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
65813
(
Hill
et
al.,
1980)
Supplemental
Formulation
GFU
070
Table
E­
1b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
18­
Salmo
gairdneri
(
Rainbow
trout)
25.1
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
1.8
3.2,
5.6,
10,
18,
32,
and
56
µ
g./
L
as
GFU
070.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
1.15,
2.24,
4.75,
7.69,
18.0,
34.9,
and
64.7
µ
g/
L
No
mortalities
observed
at
the
three
lowest
treatment
levels
(
1.15,
2.24,
and
4.75
µ
g/
L
mean
measured
concentrations).
General
toxic
symptoms
noted
were
loss
of
equilibrium,
quiescence,
surfacing,
darkening
in
color,
and
coughing.

96­
hour
LC50
=
13.0
µ
g
GFU
070/
L
(
based
upon
mean
measured
concentrations)
(
95%
C.
I.:
10.9­
15.3)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
88947
(
Hill,
1981)
Acceptable
Table
E­
1c:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Degradates
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Cypermethrin
Degradation
Product
3­
phenoxybenzoic
Acid
Table
E­
1c:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Degradates
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
19­
Salmo
gairdneri
(
Rainbow
trout)
99.0
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0
(
DMSO
solvent
control),
3.5,
5.5,
10.0,
17.7,
33.7,
and
56.7
ppm
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
(
mg/
L)

96­
hr
static
acute
LC50
=
13.3
ppm
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid/
L
(
mg/
L
)
(
95%
C.
L.
=
11.2
and
15.8)

96­
hr
NOAEL
=
5.5
ppm
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
/
L
(
mg/
L)
Slightly
toxic
MRID
89037
(
Hill
and
Young,
1981)
Acceptable
Lepomis
macrochirus
(
bluegill)
99.0
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0
(
DMSO
solvent
control),
5.7,
9.3,
16.8,
28.8,
44.6,
and
52.7
ppm
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
(
mg/
L)

96­
hr
static
acute
LC50
=
36.3
ppm
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
(
mg/
L)
(
95%
C.
L.
=
33.3
and
39.5)
Slightly
toxic
MRID
89038
(
Hill
et.
al,
1981)
Acceptable
b.
Freshwater
Fish,
Chronic
A
freshwater
fish
early
life­
stage
test
using
the
TGAI
is
required
for
cypermethrin
because
end­
use
products
could
contaminate
surface
water
through
drift
or
runoff
events
and,
may
be
transported
to
water
from
the
intended
use
site.
An
early
life­
stage
study
in
fathead
minnow
was
submitted
by
the
registrant
to
establish
the
chronic
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
freshwater
fish
(
MRID
89039;
Acceptable);
data
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
2.
Results
of
this
30­
day
exposure
study
show
that
survival
was
significantly
reduced
compare
to
controls
at
0.33
:
g
a.
i./
L,
yielding
a
30­
day
NOAEC
value
for
survival
of
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L.
No
treatment­
related
effects
were
observed
for
hatchability
or
growth.
The
NOAEC
value
for
survival
of
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L
will
be
used
to
assess
the
risk
of
chronic
exposure
of
freshwater
fish
to
cypermethrin
TGAI.
The
guideline
(
§
72­
4)
is
fulfilled.

No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
freshwater
fish
were
submitted.
­
E­
20­
Table
E­
2:
Chronic
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
Toxicity
Value
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Pimephales
promelas
(
fathead
minnow)
91.5
30­
day
chronic
toxicity
test
to
early
life
stage
fathead
minnows
under
flow­
through
conditions.

Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
unidentified
solvent
control),
0.031,
0.062,
0.12,
0.25,
and
0.50
:
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.048,
0.045,
0.063,
0.14,
and
0.33
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

Survival
significantly
different
from
controls
at
0.33
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

Survival
LOAEC
=
0.33
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Survival
NOAEC
=
0.14
µ
g
a.
i./
L
MRID
89039
(
Jaber
and
Hawk
1981)
Acceptable
c.
Freshwater
Invertebrates,
Acute
A
freshwater
aquatic
invertebrate
toxicity
study
using
the
TGAI
is
required
to
establish
the
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
freshwater
invertebrates.
The
preferred
test
species
is
the
water
flea
(
Daphnia
magna).
Four
acute
toxicity
studies
using
cypermethrin
TGAI
have
been
submitted
for
water
flea;
results
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
3a.
Acute
toxicity
values
range
from
the
48­
hour
LC50
value
of
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44546031;
Acceptable)
to
the
24­
hour
EC50
value
(
for
immobility)
of
2.0
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
Acc.
No.
42444601;
Supplemental).
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
categorized
as
very
highly
toxic
on
an
acute
basis.
EFED
will
take
the
most
conservative
approach
and
use
the
lowest
LC50
values
reported,
the
48­
hour
LC50
value
of
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L,,
to
assess
acute
risk
to
freshwater
invertebrates.
The
guideline
(
§
72­
2)
is
fulfilled.

In
addition
to
lethality
endpoints,
sublethal
effects
of
acute
cypermethrin
(
TGAI)
exposure
were
described
in
two
studies
in
the
waterflea.
Sublethal
signs
of
toxicity
reported
include
lethargy
and
lying
on
the
bottom
of
the
test
vessels;
NOAEC
values
for
sublethal
endpoints
range
from
0.085
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44546032;
Acceptable)
and
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
44546031).

Studies
assessing
the
acute
toxicity
of
three
cypermethrin
formulations
in
the
water
flea
were
submitted;
results
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
3b.
The
formulations
tested
were
GFU
034/
A
(
36%
a.
i.),
GFU
061
(
36%
a.
i.),
and
GFU
070
(
24%
a.
i.).
Results
of
these
studies
were
reported
as
EC50
values,
rather
than
LC50
values.
The
48­
hour
EC50
values
ranged
from
1.56
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
62793;
Supplemental)
to
21.6
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
89040;
Supplemental),
­
E­
21­
indicating
that
these
cypermethrin
formulations
are
very
highly
toxic
to
freshwater
invertebrates
on
an
acute
basis.
Sublethal
effects
reported
in
these
studies
include
immobilization
and
decreased
movement
response
to
stimulation.
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
TGAI
and
the
cypermethrin
formulations
tested
appear
to
have
a
degree
of
toxicity
to
freshwater
fish
on
an
acute
basis.

Acute
toxicity
tests
in
freshwater
invertebrates
were
also
submitted
for
the
cypermethrin
degradate
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
in
the
water
flea.
Results
yield
48­
hour
EC50
values
of
89.0
mg
degradate/
L
(
MRID
152739;
Acceptable)
and
111
mg
degredate/
L
(
Acc.
No.
42444601,
Acceptable).
Based
on
these
acute
toxicity
values,
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
is
categorized
as
practically
non­
toxic
to
slightly
toxic
to
freshwater
invertebrates
on
an
acute
basis.
Thus,
the
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid
degradate
is
much
less
toxic
than
cypermethrin
TGAI
to
freshwater
invertebrates.

Table
E­
3a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea,
first
instar)
91.5
Static
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0.05,
0.17,
0.38,
0.61,
1.6,
and
2.8
(
units
not
given,
no
control)
(
units
are
probably
µ
g
a.
i./
L
based
on
units
reported
for
toxicity
endpoints)

48­
hr
EC50
=
1.01
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.80­
1.31)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
62793
(
ICI
1980)
Acceptable
Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea)
95.7
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0
(
DMF
solvent
control),
84,
139,
232,
387,
645,
and
1075
ng
a.
i./
L
48­
hr
EC50
=
161.5
ug
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
134.4
­
191.7)
(
based
on
nominal
concentrations)

NOAEC
could
not
be
determined
due
to
mortality
in
the
lowest
test
concentration.
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
43293501
(
Wheat
and
Evans,
1994)
Acceptable
Table
E­
3a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
22­
Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea,
first
instar)
98.4
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0,
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.11,
0.23,
0.46,
0.92,
and
1.8
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.085,
0.14,
0.29,
0.55,
1.2
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Sublethal
signs
of
test
material
toxicity
were
limited
to
lethargy
and
lying
on
the
bottom
of
the
test
vessel;
effects
observed
in
the
0.14,
0.29,
and
0.55
µ
g
a.
i./
L
treatments.

48­
hour
EC50
=
0.48
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.39
­
0.60)

NOAEC
(
sublethal
effects)
=
0.085
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44546032
(
Putt,
1998)
Acceptable
Cypermethrin
Technical
(
WL
43467)

Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea)
84.6
24
hr
test
results
given;
no
other
study
details
given.

Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea;<
24­
hr
old)

24­
hr
EC50
=
2.0
µ
g
a.
i./
L
24­
hr
LC50
=
2
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.
42444601
(
Stephenson
1980)
Supplemental
Table
E­
3a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
23­
14C­
labeled
Betacypermethrin
Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea,
first
instar)
>
95
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.094,
0.19,
0.38,
0.75,
and
1.5
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.057,
0.14,
0.25,
0.50,
and
1.1
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Sublethal
signs
of
test
material
toxicity
were
limited
to
lethargy;
observed
at
the
three
highest
test
concentrations.

48­
hr
EC50
=
0.42
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations)
(
95%
C.
I
=
0.36
­
0.50
ppb
ai)

NOAEC
(
lethality/
immobilization)
=
0.14
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44546031
(
Putt,
1998)
Acceptable
Table
E3b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Cypermethrin
Formulation
GFU
034/
A
Table
E3b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
24­
Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea,
first
instar)
36%
Static
test
conditions.

Concentrations
tested:
0.05,
0.22,
0.79,
3.8
(
units
not
given,
no
control)
(
µ
g
formulated
product/
L
or
a.
i./
L)

Units
reported
as
follows
for
endpoints:

48­
hr
EC50
=
1.56
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
1.17­
2.10)
=

4.33
µ
g
formulated
product/
L
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
62793
(
ICI
1980)
Supplemental
Table
E3b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
25­
Cypermethrin
Formulation
GFU
061
Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea,
first
instar)
36%
cis:
trans
=
53.6:
46.4.

Nominal
concentrations
ranged
from
0.06
­
260
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
control
used).
Measured
concentrations
ranged
from
0.05
­
341
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

Daphnia
were
recorded
as
affected
if
they
were
immobilized
or
showed
only
minor
movements
after
stimulation.

Values
for
immobilization
 

24­
hr
EC50
=
>
341
µ
g
a.
i./
L
48­
hr
EC50
=
21.6
µ
g
a.
i./
L
72­
hr
EC50
=
0.83
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
89040
(
Edwards
et
al.,
1980)
Supplemental
Cypermethrin
Formulation
GFU
070
Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea,
first
instar)
24%
cis:
trans
=
55:
45.
Nominal
concentrations
ranged
from
0.03
­
240
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
control
used).
Measured
concentrations
ranged
from
0.05
­
230
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

Daphnia
were
recorded
as
affected
if
they
were
immobilized
or
showed
only
minor
movements
after
stimulation.

Values
for
immobilization
 

24­
hr
EC50
=
>
240
µ
g
a.
i./
L
48­
hr
EC50
=
3.00
µ
g
a.
i./
L
72­
hr
EC50
=
0.21
µ
g
a.
i./
L
MRID
88949
(
Edwards
et
al.,
1981)
Supplemental
­
E­
26­
Table
E­
3c:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Degradates
to
Freshwater
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
metabolite)

Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea,
first
instar)
99.0
Static
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
25,
50,
100,
200,
and
400
mg/
L
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
Test
I
=
24.0,
52.2,
104,
220,
and
425
mg/
L3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
Test
II
=
25.2,
50.7,
104,
216,
and
404
mg/
L
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid.

48­
hour
EC50
=
89.0
mg/
L
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
average
value
from
Test
I
and
Test
II)

(
95%
C.
I.
=
52­
104
for
Test
I
and
51­
104
for
Test
11).

NOAEC
=
52.2
mg/
L
(
value
estimated
by
EPA
reviewer,
not
reported
by
authors)

The
authors
suggested
that
the
break­
down
of
Cypermethrin
in
the
environment
to
3­
PBA
and
dihalovinyl
cyclopropane
acid
greatly
reduces
the
toxicity.
Slightly
toxic
MRID
152739
(
Everett
et
al.
1983)
Acceptable
Daphnia
magna
(
water
flea,
first
instar)
73.0
Static
test
conditions.
Mean
measured
concentrations
used,
because
of
precipitation
at
higher
concentrations:
0,
10.4,
20,
25,
41,
51,
82,
101,
157,
183,
245,
268
ppm
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
48­
hr
EC50
=
111
ppm
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
(
95%
C.
I.
=
82­
147)
Practically
non­
toxic
Accession
No.
42444601
(
Edwards
et
al.,
1980)

Same
data
reported
in
MRID
89046
(
Edwards
et
al.,
1980)
Acceptable
­
E­
27­
d.
Freshwater
Invertebrate,
Chronic
A
freshwater
aquatic
invertebrate
life­
cycle
test
using
the
TGAI
is
required
for
cypermethrin
because
the
end­
use
product
is
expected
to
be
transported
to
water
from
the
intended
use
site.
A
21­
day
life
cycle
on
Daphnia
magna
was
submitted
to
provide
data
on
the
chronic
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
TGAI
to
freshwater
invertebrates
(
MRID
428983­
01).
However,
due
to
several
deviations
from
guideline­
recommended
methodologies,
this
study
was
classified
as
invalid.
The
guideline
[
§
72­
4(
b)]
is
not
fulfilled.
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
freshwater
invertebrates
were
submitted.

e.
Freshwater
Benthic
Organisms
and
other
macroinvertebrates
Studies
in
benthic
organisms
are
not
guideline
requirements.
Results
of
submitted
studies
on
the
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
TGAI
on
benthic
organisms
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
4.
Studies
were
submitted
for
several
types
of
benthic
organisms,
including
midge,
amphipod,
mayfly,
isopod,
and
gastropod.
Two
types
of
protocols
were
used
in
these
studies,
a
water
system
and
a
water­
sediment
system.

In
the
water
system
studies,
organisms
were
exposed
only
to
cypermethrin
in
overlying
water;
there
was
no
sediment
in
the
test
chamber.
Thus,
while
data
from
these
studies
provide
information
regarding
the
sensitivity
of
benthic
organisms
to
cypermethrin
in
surface
water,
no
data
are
available
from
these
studies
regarding
exposure
to
cypermethrin
in
sediment.
Therefore,
data
are
insufficient
for
use
in
quantifying
risks
to
benthic
organisms.

For
studies
conducted
using
the
water­
sediment
system,
cypermethrin
was
applied
to
water­
sediment
systems
and
allowed
to
settle
for
2
days;
organisms
were
introduced
to
the
above
water­
sediment
systems,
and
toxicity
was
assessed
after
a
10­
day
exposure
duration.
Studies
using
the
water­
sediment
system
more
accurately
depict
the
environmental
exposure
of
benthic
organisms
than
the
water
system
studies.

Two
studies
on
cypermethrin
TGAI
were
conducted
using
a
water­
sediment
system,
one
study
on
midge
(
MRID
44074402;
Supplemental)
and
one
study
on
amphipod
(
MRID
44074406;
Supplemental);
both
studies
were
conducted
using
the
same
protocol.
Cypermethrin
was
added
to
three
different
water­
sediment
systems
using
sediments
from
three
sources
(
Florissant,
Mississippi,
and
Duluth).
Overlying
water
and
sediment
concentrations
of
cypermethrin
were
measured
on
Days
0
and
10
of
exposure.
Since
concentrations
in
overlying
water
decreased
over
the
10­
day
period,
it
appears
that
the
water­
sediment
system
was
not
at
equilibrium.
Thus,
all
toxicity
values
for
these
studies
are
expressed
in
terms
of
the
concentration
of
cypermethrin
in
sediment
(:
g
a.
i./
kg)
on
Day
0.
The
reported
toxicity
endpoints
varied
depending
upon
the
sediment
source.
In
general,
toxicity
decreased,
as
reflected
by
higher
LC50
values,
with
increasing
organic
carbon
content
of
the
sediment.
Results
of
these
studies
yield
10­
day
LC50
values
ranging
from
3.6
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
(
Florrisant)
in
amphipods
to
67
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
in
midge
(
Mississippi).
In
midge,
exposure
resulted
in
a
decrease
in
dry
weight,
with
10­
day
NOAEC
values
ranging
from
4.9
to
25
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment.
In
amphipod,
length
and
dry
weights
were
decreased,
with
10­
day
NOAEC
values
ranging
from
<
1.8
to
2.3
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
EFED
will
use
the
lowest
10­
day
LC50
value,
3.6
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
in
amphipods,
to
characterize
the
risk
of
acute
exposure
of
benthic
organisms
to
cypermethrin
TGAI.

Results
of
the
water
system
studies
yield
lethality
values
ranging
from
the
96­
hour
LC50
value
of
0.009
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
amphipods
(
Acc.
No.
42444601;
Acceptable)
to
the
24­
hour
LC50
value
of
>
5
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
midge
larvae
and
gastropod
(
Acc.
No.
42444601,
Supplemental).
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
categorized
as
very
highly
toxic
to
freshwater
benthic
organisms
on
an
acute
basis,
following
exposure
in
overlying
water.
No
toxicity
tests
on
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
freshwater
benthic
organisms
were
submitted.
­
E­
28­
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Oronectes
sp.
(
crayfish)
91.69
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0,
0
(
unidentified
solvent
control),
0.017,
0.023,
0.044,
0.11,
and
0.21
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

24­
hr
LC50
>
0.21
µ
g
a.
i./
L
48­
hr
LC50
=
0.070
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.044­
0.110)

96­
hr
LC50
=
0.068
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.053­
0.090)
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.

42444601
(
Jaber
1981)
Acceptable
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
29­
Baetis
rhodani
(
mayfly
larvae)
tech
14C­
labeled
cypermethrin
as
97.6%
of
applied
radioactivity.
Assumption
that
date
are
reported
in
terms
or
a.
i./
L
Flow­
through
test
conditions.

EC50
and
LC50
calculated
from
mean
measured
concentrations
of
two
tests:

Test
1
=
0,
1.7,
2.7,
6.2,
12.4,
and
25.2
pptr
(
ng
a.
i.
L)

Test
2
=
0,
2.1,
3.4,
6.0,
11.7,
and
22.0
pptr
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

24­
hr
EC50
=
9.5
pptr
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

48­
hr
EC50
=
9.2
pptr
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

96­
hr
EC50
=
5.7
pptr
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

48­
hr
LC50
>
25
pptr
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

72­
hr
LC50
=
22.4
pptr
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

96­
hr
LC50
=
12.3
pptr
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.
42444601
(
Edwards
et
al.
1980);

Supplemental
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
30­
Cypermethrin
Technical
(
WL
43467)

Cleon
dipterum
(
mayfly
larvae)
98.1
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0.7,
2,
7,
10,
24
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
no
solvent
control)

Ability
of
mayfly
larvae
to
recover
the
ability
to
make
escape
responses
when
returned
to
uncontaminated
water
wasn't
assessed
due
to
high
control
mortalities.

96­
hr
EC50
mayfly
larvae
=
4
pptr
(
ng
a.
i./
L)(
95%
C.
I.
=
2­
6)

96­
hr
LC50
mayfly
larvae
=
20
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

(
95%
C.
I.
=
10­
70)
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.

42444601
(
Stephenson
and
Kane
1980)
Acceptable
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
31­
Various
freshwater
species
84.6
24
hr
test
results
given;
no
other
study
details
given.

Gyrinus
natator
(
whirligig;
adult)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.07
µ
g
a.
i./
L
24­
hr
LC50
=
>
5
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Notonecta
spp.

(
backswimmer;
adult)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.30
µ
g
a.
i./
L
24­
hr
LC50
=
>
5
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Corixa
punctata
(
waterboatman;
adult)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.70
µ
g
a.
i./
L
24­
hr
LC50
=
>
5
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Piona
carnea
(
water
mite;
adult)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.02
µ
g
a.
i./
L
24­
hr
LC50
=
0.050
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Cloeon
dipterum
(
mayfly)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.070
µ
g
a.
i./
L
24­
hr
LC50
=
0.60
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.
42444601
(
Stephenson
1980)
Supplemental
.
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
32­
Gammerus
pulex
(
freshwater
amphipod)
98.1
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0.7,
2,
7,
10,
24
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
no
solvent
control)

Shrimp
were
shown
to
recover
the
ability
to
make
escape
responses
when
returned
to
uncontaminated
water.

96­
hr
EC50
=
4
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
2­
7)

96­
hr
LC50
=
9
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
7­
10)
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.

42444601
(
Stephenson
and
Kane
1980)
Acceptable
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
33­
Various
freshwater
species
84.6
24
hr
test
results
given;
no
other
study
details
given.

Gammarus
pulex
(
amphipod;
3­
8
mm)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.04
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.02­
0.06)

24­
hr
LC50
=
0.10
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.08­
0.20)

Chironomus
thummi
(
midge
larvae)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.20
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.10
­
0.30
)

24­
hr
LC50
=
>
5
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Asellus
spp.
(
isopod;
3­
8mm)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.02
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
­
)

24­
hr
LC50
=
0.20
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.10
­
0.40)

Lymnea
peregra
(
gastropod;
<
8mm)

24­
hr
EC50
=
>
5
µ
g
a.
i./
L
24­
hr
LC50
=
>
5
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Chaoborus
spp.
(
midge;
larvae)

24­
hr
EC50
=
0.03
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
­
)

24­
hr
LC50
=
0.2
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.03­
/(
sic)
4)
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.
42444601
(
Stephenson
1980)
Supplemental
.
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
34­
14C­
labeled
Cypermethrin
Chironomus
riparius
(
midge)
???
Radio­
chemical
purity
>
89%

Static
test
conditions.
First
instar
exposed
to
(
nominal)
:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.0016,
0.0031,
0.0062,
0.0125,
0.025,
0.05,
and
0.1
µ
g/
L.

First
instar
mean
measured:
0.0018,
0.0034,
0.0052,
0.010,
0.019,
0.037,
and
0.072
µ
g/
L
Fourth
instar
exposed
to
(
nominal):
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.250,
0.5,
1.0,
2.0,
and
4.0
µ
g/
L.

Fourth
instar
mean
measured:
0.20,
0.33,
0.74,
1.4,
and
2.9
µ
g/
L.

First
instar
48­
hr
LC50
=
0.0069
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.0056­
0.0085)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations)

Fourth
instar
48­
hr
LC50
=
4.6
µ
g/
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
2­
600)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations);
however,
the
authors
report
that
this
value
"
has
very
wide
confidence
limits
and
is
outside
the
range
of
concentrations
tested.
Thus
the
LC50
is
best
quoted
as
>
2.9
µ
g/
L,
the
highest
mean
measured
concentration
tested."
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44074401
(
Rapley
and
Hamer
1996)
Supplemental
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
35­
Chironomus
tentans
(
midge)
tech
Radio­
chemical
purity
>
96%

Cypermethrin
applied
to
three
water­
sediment
systems,
then
allowed
to
settle
for
2
days:

Florissant
sediment
(
0.99
%
Organic
Carbon
(
OC));
nominal
concentrations
=
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
2.2,
6.7,
20,
60,
and
180
µ
g
a.
i./
kg.

Mississippi
sediment
(
3.1
%
OC);
nominal
concentrations
=
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
3.4,
11,
33,
100,
and
300
µ
g
a.
i./
kg.
Duluth
sediment
(
13.3
%
OC);
nominal
concentrations
=
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
5.6,
17,
50,
150,
and
450
µ
g
a.
i./
kg.

Third
instar
Chironomus
were
introduced
to
the
above
watersediment
systems,
and
10
days
later,
survival
and
dry
weight
of
survivors
was
measured.

10­
day
LC50'
s
(
based
on
sediment
concentrations
measured
at
day
0):

Florrisant
=
14
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Mississippi
=
67
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Duluth
=
62
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
NOAEC's
(
based
on
dry
weight):

Florrisant
=
4.9
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Mississippi
=
25
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Duluth
=
14
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44074402
(
Gentle
et
al.
1996)
Supplemental
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
36­
Hyalella
azteca
(
amphipod)
tech
Radiochemical
purity
>
89%

Static
test
conditions.
7­
14
day
old
amphipods
exposed
to
(
nominal):
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.0016,
0.0031,
0.0062,
0.0125,
0.025,
0.05,
and
0.1
µ
g/
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.0016,
0.0033,
0.0054,
0.010,
0.019,
0.035,
0.071
µ
g/
L.

48­
hr
LC50
=
0.0053
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.0043
­
0.0065)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations).
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44074401
(
Rapley
and
Hamer
1996)
Supplemental
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
37­
Hyalella
azteca
(
amphipod)
tech
Radiochemical
purity
Cypermethrin
applied
to
three
water­
sediment
systems,
then
allowed
to
settle
for
2
days:

Florissant
sediment
(
0.99
%
OC);
nominal
concentrations
=
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
2.5,
5,
10,
20,
and
40
µ
g
a.
i./
kg.
Mississippi
sediment
(
3.1
%
OC);
nominal
concentrations
=
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.74,
2.2,
6.7,
20,
and
60
µ
g
a.
i./
kg.
Duluth
sediment
(
13.3
%
OC);
nominal
concentrations
=
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
1.9,
5.6,
17,
50,
and
150
µ
g
a.
i./
kg.

Amphipods
were
introduced
to
the
above
water­
sediment
systems,
and
10
days
later,
survival
and
length
and
dry
weight
of
survivors
was
measured.

10­
day
LC50'
s
(
based
on
sediment
concentrations
measured
at
day
0):

Florrisant
=
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Mississippi
=
19
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Duluth
=
23
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
NOAEC's
(
based
on
length
and
dry
weight):

Florrisant
=
<
1.8
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Mississippi
=
2.3
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Duluth
=
1.8
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44074406
(
Rapley
and
Hamer
1996
Supplemental
Table
E­
4:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Freshwater
Benthic
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
38­
Hyalella
azteca
(
amphipod)
tech
Radiochemical
purity
=
97%

Static
test
conditions.
Adult
amphiphods
exposed
to
(
nominal):
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.78,
1.56,
3.12,
6.25,
12.5,
25,
50,
100,
200,
and
400
ng
a.
i./
L.

In
addition
to
mortality,
amphipods
were
assessed
as
being
affected
if
they
failed
to
respond
to
a
stimulus
by
swimming.

96­
hr
EC50
=
3.6
ng
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
2.0­
4.9)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44423501
(
Hamer
1997)
Supplemental
III.
Toxicity
to
Estuarine
and
Marine
Animals
a.
Estuarine
and
Marine
Fish,
Acute
Acute
toxicity
testing
with
estuarine/
marine
fish
using
the
TGAI
is
required
for
cypermethrin
because
the
end­
use
product
is
expected
to
reach
this
environment
because
of
its
use
in
coastal
areas.
The
preferred
test
species
is
the
sheepshead
minnow.
Acute
toxicity
studies
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted
for
sheepshead
minnow
(
5
studies)
and
Atlantic
salmon
(
1
study).
Study
details
are
provided
in
Table
E­
5.
Results
of
these
studies
yield
96­
hour
LC
50
values
ranging
from
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
90075;
Supplemental)
to
4.3
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
41968212;
Acceptable),
indicating
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
very
highly
toxic
to
estuarine/
marine
fish
on
an
acute
basis.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
EFED
will
use
the
lowest
96­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
sheepshead
minnow
to
evaluate
acute
toxic
exposure
to
estuarine/
marine.
The
guideline
[
§
72­
3(
a)]
is
fulfilled.

No
acute
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted.
­
E­
39­
Table
E­
5:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Cyprinidon
variegatus
(
sheepshead
minnow)
91.5
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.32,
0.63,
1.25,
2.50,
and
5.00
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.11,
0.24,
0.48,
0.64,
and
1.90
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

After
96
hrs,
mortality
was
100%
at
1.9
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
There
was
no
mortality
in
the
controls
or
at
concentrations
#
0.48
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

24­
hr
LC50
=
1.1
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.64­
1.90)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations)

48­
hr
LC50
=
1.1
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.64­
1.90)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations).

96­
hr
LC50
=
0.95
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.48­
1.90)
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations).

NOAEC
(
lethality)
=
0.48
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
90075
(
Jaber
and
Hawk
1981)
Acceptable
Table
E­
5:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
40­
Cyprinidon
variegatus
(
sheepshead
minnow)
98.4
Flow­
through
test
conditions.

Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.85,
1.4,
2.4,
3.9,
and
6.5
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.64,
1.1,
1.4,
2.1,
4.2
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Loss
of
equilibrium
noted
at
the
two
highest­
concentration
treatment
levels.

Mortalities
observed
at
96
hrs.
at
2.1
µ
g
a.
i./
L,
and
at
24,
48,
72,
and
96
hrs.
at
4.2
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

96­
hour
LC50
=
2.7
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.:
2.1­
4.2
ppb
a.
i.)

NOAEC
=
1.4
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44546033
(
Dionne
1998)
Acceptable
Salmo
salar
(
Atlantic
salmon)
98.5
Study
details
not
given.

96­
hr
LC50
=
2.0
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
41068003
(
McLeese
et
al.,
1980)
Supplemental
Technical
Cypermethrin
(
FMC
45806)

Cyprinidon
variegatus
(
sheepshead
minnow)
91.5
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0
(
DMF
solvent
control),
0.71,
1.19,
1.98,
3.29,
and
5.49
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

96­
hr
LC50
=
3.42
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
1.89­
4.07)

NOAEC
=
1.89
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
41968212
(
Chandler,
1990)
Acceptable
Table
E­
5:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
41­
Cypermethrin­
S
(
Fury
Technical)
(
FMC
56701)

Cyprinidon
variegatus
(
sheepshead
minnow)
88.2
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0
((
DMF
solvent
control),
0.7,
1.17,
1.94,
3.24,
and
5.4
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.28,
0.62,
0.91,
1.79,
and
3.0
µ
g
a.
i./
L.

No
mortality
was
observed
in
the
controls
or
the
three
lowest
test
concentrations.

96­
hr
LC50
=
2.37
µ
g
a.
i./
L
(
95%
C.
I.
=
1.79­
3.0)

NOAEC
(
mortality)
=
1.79
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
41968211
(
Overman
et
al.
,1990)
Acceptable
14C­
labeled
Betacypermethrin
Cyprinidon
variegatus
(
sheepshead
minnow)
98.6
>
95%
Radio­
chemical
Purity
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
1.3,
2.2,
3.6,
6.0,
and
10
µ
g
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.84,
1.7,
2.5,
5.0,
and
8.5
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L
)

Signs
of
test
material
toxicity
were
noted
at
all
but
the
lowestconcentration
treatment
level
and
included
lethargy
and
loss
of
equilibrium.

96­
hour
LC50
=
2.4
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)

NOAEC
(
sublethal
effects)
=
0.84
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L
)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44546034
(
Sousa
1998)
Acceptable
­
E­
42­
b.
Estuarine
and
Marine
Fish,
Chronic
No
chronic
toxicity
tests
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted
by
the
registrant.
The
guideline
[
§
72­
4(
a)]
is
not
fulfilled.
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
fish
were
submitted.

c.
Estuarine
and
Marine
Aquatic
Invertebrates,
Acute
Acute
toxicity
testing
with
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
using
the
TGAI
is
required
for
cypermethrin
because
the
active
ingredient
may
reach
this
environment
because
of
its
use
in
coastal
communities.
The
preferred
test
species
are
mysid
shrimp
and
eastern
oyster.
Acute
toxicity
studies
using
cypermethrin
TGAI
have
been
submitted
for
mysid
shrimp
(
4
studies),
other
shrimp
(
2
studies),
lobster
(
1
study),
fiddler
crab
(
1
study),
and
oyster
(
2
studies);
results
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
6.
The
toxicity
values
(
EC
50
and
LC
50
)
reported
for
shrimp
range
from
the
96­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
Acc.
No.
42444601;
Acceptable)
to
the
96­
hour
LC
50
value
0.01
:
g
a.
i./
L
(
MRID
41068003;
Supplemental).
Similar
results
were
observed
in
lobster
(
96­
hour
LC
50
=
0.04
:
g
a.
i./
L;
MRID
41068003;
Supplemental)
and
fiddler
crab
(
96­
hour
LC
50
=
0.197
:
g
a.
i./
L;
MRID
89045;
Supplemental).
Based
on
these
results,
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
categorized
as
very
highly
toxic
to
shrimp,
lobster
and
crab.
Results
of
acute
toxicity
tests
in
molluscs
show
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
moderately
to
highly
toxic
in
oysters,
with
a
96­
hour
EC
50
value
of
0.37
mg
a.
i./
L
in
Eastern
oyster
(
MRID
89049;
Acceptable)
and
a
48­
hour
LC
50
value
of
>
2.27
mg
a.
i./
L
in
Pacific
oyster
(
Acc.
No.
42444601;
Acceptable).
Comparison
of
the
shrimp
and
mollusc
toxicity
values
suggests
that
molluscs
are
less
susceptible
than
shrimp
to
cypermethrin
toxicity
on
an
acute
basis.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
EFED
will
use
the
lowest
acute
toxicity
value,
the
96­
hour
LC
50
value
of
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L
in
mysid
shrimp
(
Acc.
No.
42444601;
Acceptable),
to
categorize
acute
risk
to
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates.
The
guideline
[
§
72­
3]
is
fulfilled.
No
acute
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
were
submitted.

Table
E­
6:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Table
E­
6:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
43­
Penaeus
duorarum
(
pink
shrimp)
91.5
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
tested:
0,
0
(
unidentified
solvent
control),
8.6,
12,
25,
58,
and
94
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

24­
hr
LC50
=
74
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
58­
94)

48­
hr
LC50
=
43
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
36­
53)

72­
hr
LC50
=
38
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)(
95%
C.
I.
=
32­
46)

96­
hr
LC50
=
36
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
31­
43)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
89043
(
amendment
to
Accession
No.
42444601)

(
Jaber
1981)
Acceptable
C.
septemspinosa
(
shrimp),
and
Homarus
americanus
(
lobster)
98.5
96­
hr
LC50
shrimp
=
0.01
µ
g
a.
i./
L
96­
hr
LC50
lobster
=
0.04
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
41068003
(
McLeese
et
al.
,1980)
Supplemental
Crassostrea
virginia
(
eastern
oyster)
91.5
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0,
0
(
unidentified
solvent
control),
13.9,
92.0,
217,
351,
677
µ
g
a.
i./
L
Criterion
was
a
50%
reduction
in
shell
growth
compared
to
controls
96­
hr
shell
deposition
EC50
=
370
ppb
a.
i.
(
µ
g
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
245­
556)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
89049
(
Jaber
1981)
Acceptable
Table
E­
6:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
44­
Mvsidopsis
bahia
(
Mysid
shrimp)
95.9
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:

0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
3.75,
6.25,
10,
15,
and
25
ng
a.
i/
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
3.1,
3.9,
4.5,
6.0,
and
10.0
ng
a.
i/
L
Precipitate
observed
at
the
highest
concentration
(
appeared
slightly
golden
colored
at
48
hours).

There
was
slight
test
material
contamination,
which
had
no
apparent
biological
consequences;
survival
was
95%
or
greater
in
the
control
groups
and
the
first
two
treatment
levels.

96­
hr
LC50
=
5
ng
a.
i/
L
(
based
on
measured
concentrations)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
5­
6)

NOAEC
(
survival)
=
3.9
ng
a.
i/
L
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
42444601
(
Ward
et
al.
1992)
Acceptable
Table
E­
6:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
45­
Mvsidopsis
bahia
(
Mysid
shrimp
98.4
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
2.2,
3.7,
6.1,
10,
and
17
ng
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
1.0,
1.7,
2.8,
4.6,
7.7
ng
a.
i./
L/

Signs
of
test
material
toxicity
were
noted
at
the
three
highestconcentration
treatment
levels
and
included
lethargy,
erratic
swimming
behavior,
loss
of
equilibrium,
and
surfacing.

96­
hour
LC50
=
5.5
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.:
4.6­
6.9)

NOAEC
(
sublethal
effects)
=
1.7
pptr
a.
i.
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44561210
(
Putt
1998)
Acceptable
Crassostrea
gigas
(
Pacific
oyster)
91.5
cis:
trans
ratio
=
48.8:
42.7.

48­
hr
EC50
>
2.27
ppm
a.
i
48­
hr
LC50
>
2.27
ppm
a.
i
Due
to
limited
solubility
of
test
compound
in
seawater,
higher
concentrations
could
not
be
tested.
Moderately
toxic
Accession
No.
42444601
(
Thompson
1981)
Acceptable
Table
E­
6:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
46­
Uca
pugilator
(
fiddler
crab)
91.5
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0,
0
(
unspecified
solvent
control),
29,
44,
85,
161,
and
389
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

96­
hr
LC50
=
197
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
162­
243)
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
89045
(
Jaber
1981)
Supplemental
Table
E­
6:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
47­
14C­
labeled
Technical
Mvsidopsis
bahia
(
Mysid
shrimp
>
97
%
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Mean
measured
concentrations
tested:
0,
0
(
solvent
control,
solvent
unspecified),
1.7,
2.5,
6.7,
10,
and
24
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

24­
hr
LC50
=
>
24
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

48­
hr
LC50
=
16.5
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
C.
I.=
8.44­
42.5)

72­
hr
LC50
=
9.27
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
5.09­
18.1)

96­
hr
LC50
=
4.75
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.
=
4.01­
5.67)

48­
hour
LOAEL
(
lethality)
=
2.5
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

48­
hour
NOAEL
(
lethality)
=
1.7
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
Very
highly
toxic
Accession
No.
42444601
(
Jaber
1981)
Acceptable
14C­
labeled
Betacypermethrin
Table
E­
6:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
48­
Mvsidopsis
bahia
(
Mysid
shrimp)
tech
>
95%
Radio­
chemical
Purity
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
1.1,
2.1,
4.3,
8.5,
and
17
ng
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.62,
1.2,
2.3,
5.0,
8.6
ng
a.
i./
L
Signs
of
test
material
toxicity
were
noted
at
the
two
highestconcentration
treatment
levels
and
included
lethargy
and
erratic
swimming
behavior.

96­
hour
LC50
=
5.9
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
(
95%
C.
I.:
5.1­
6.7)

NOAEC
(
sublethal
effects)
=
2.3
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L
Very
highly
toxic
MRID
44561209
(
Putt
1998)
Acceptable
­
E­
49­
Table
E­
7:
Chronic
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
14C­
labeled
Technical
Mvsidopsis
bahia
(
Mysid
shrimp)
>
97
%
active
ingred
ient
28­
day
test.
Mean
measured
concentrations
used:
0,
0
(
unspecified
solvent
control),
0.44,
0.64,
1.5,
2.8,
and
5.6
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L).

Reproduction
endpoints
measured
by
number
of
offspring,
number
of
females
with
offspring,
and
brood
pouches
per
female.

Number
of
offspring
in
treatment
groups
significantly
different
from
controls
in
2.8
and
5.6
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
group.

28­
day
LOAEC
=
2.8
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)

28­
day
NOAEC
=
1.5
pptr
a.
i.
(
ng
a.
i./
L)
Accession
No.
42444601
(
Jaber
1981)
Acceptable
Table
E­
7:
Chronic
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
50­
14C­
labeled
Cypermethrin
(
FMC­
30980)
Table
E­
7:
Chronic
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
51­
Mysidopsis
bahia
(
mysid
shrimp)
98.1
Early
life
stage
toxicity
test
under
flow­
through
conditions;
duration
unknown.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
DMF
solvent
control),
2.0,
1.0,
0.5,
and
0.25
ng
ai/
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.125,
0.233,
0.411,
0.781
and1.976
ng
ai/
L
Mortality
of
first
generation
mysids
ranged
from
8%
percent
(
mean
measured
concentration
of
0­
0.411
ng
a.
i./
L)
to
35%
(
mean
measured
concentration
of
1.976
ng
a.
i./
L).
Mortality
was
statistically
reduced
only
at
1.976
ng
a.
i./
L
when
compared
to
controls.

LOAEC
(
first
generation
mortality)
=
1.976
ng
a.
i./
L
NOAEC
(
first
generation
mortality)
=
0.781
ng
a.
i./
L
Mean
number
of
young
per
female
reproductive
day.
No
statistical
difference
between
treatment
groups
and
controls
NOAEC
(#
young/&
reproductive
day)
>
1.976
ng
a.
i./
L
Length
and
dry
weight
of
male
mysids
in
the
1.976
ng/
L
group
were
statistically
reduced
from
controls,
while
only
female
dry
weight
in
the
1.976
ng
a.
i./
L
group
was
statistically
reduced.

LOAEC
(%
length
and
wt)=
1.976
ng
a.
i./
L
NOAEC
(%
length
and
wt)
=
0.781
ng
a.
i./
L
LOAEC
(&
weight)
=
1.976
ng
a.
i./
L
NOAEC
(&
weight)
=
0.781
ng
a.
i./
L
Second
generation
mysid
survival
was
not
adversely
affected.
Survival
was
not
less
than
95%
in
any
of
the
treatment
groups.

LOAEC
(
second
generation
survival)
>
1.976
ng
a.
i./
L
NOAEC
(
second
generation
survival)
=
1.976
MRID
42725301
(
Wheat
1992)
Acceptable
Table
E­
7:
Chronic
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrates
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
52­
14C­
labeled
Betacypermethrin
Mysidopsis
bahia
(
mysid
shrimp)
Radio
purity
>
95%
Flow­
through
test
conditions.
Test
was
conducted
for
28
days.
Time
to
sexual
maturation
of
surviving
mysids
was
reported
to
be
14
days.

Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.37,
0.75,
1.5,
3.0,
and
6.0
ng
a.
i./
L.
Mean
measured
concentrations:
0.21,
0.44,
0.79,
1.5,
and
3.3
ng
a.
i./
L
No
sublethal
signs
of
toxicity
reported.

For
survival
and
reproduction
28­
day
LOAEC
=
3.3
ng
a.
i./
L
28­
day
NOAEC
=
1.5
ng
a.
i./
L
(
based
on
mean
measured
concentrations).

Due
to
significant
reduction
in
survival,
growth
endpoints
(
length
and
wt)
could
not
be
assessed
at
the
highest
treatment
level
(
3.3
ng
a.
i./
L).
However,
no
significant
effects
on
growth
parameters
were
observed
at
concentration
up
to
1.5
ng
a.
i./
L.
MRID
44546035
(
Sousa
1998)
Acceptable
v.
Aquatic
Field
Studies
Several
aquatic
field
studies
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
formulations
have
been
reviewed
for
this
risk
assessment.
Results
are
summarized
in
Table
E­
8.
Data
from
field
studies
were
obtained
from
studies
submitted
by
the
registrant
and
from
open
literature
studies
identified
from
searches
of
the
ECOTOX
database.
Results
of
these
studies
provide
information
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
fish
and
invertebrates
(
including
benthic
organisms)
in
freshwater
aquatic
environments.
Due
to
the
variability
in
experimental
techniques
and
methodologies
employed
in
these
studies,
results
of
these
studies
are
not
sufficient
for
use
in
quantitative
assessments.
Thus,
results
will
be
used
qualitatively
in
this
assessment.

Data
from
field
studies
on
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
fish
were
obtained
from
three
registrantsubmitted
studies
(
MRID
155770,
Supplemental;
MRID
155772,
Supplemental;
MRID
152737,
Supplemental)
and
two
open­
literature
studies
(
Crossland
et
al.
1982;
Davies
and
Cook
1993).
­
E­
53­
Results
of
the
registrant­
submitted
studies
using
single
applications
of
cypermethrin
application
at
rates
ranging
from
0.0012
lb
a.
i/
A
(
MRID
152737)
to
0.089
lb
a.
i./
A
(
MRID
155770)
show
no
lethal
or
sublethal
effects
on
fish
populations.
In
the
open
literature
studies,
application
rates
ranged
from
0.011
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Davies
and
Cook
1993)
to
0.0623
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Crossland
et
al.,
1982).
Although
no
adverse
effects
were
observed
on
fish
populations
at
the
higher
application
rate
of
0.0623
lb
a.
i./
A,
sublethal
effects
(
including
loss
of
equilibrium,
lethargy,
muscle
tetany)
were
reported
following
single
application
of
0.011
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Davies
and
Cook
1993).
In
this
study,
sublethal
effects
were
observed
for
8
days
following
application
and
attributed,
in
part,
to
exposure
to
cypermethrin
from
ingestion
of
dead
and
dying
invertebrates.

For
field
studies
assessing
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
aquatic
invertebrate
populations,
results
range
from
no
observable
effects
on
aquatic
invertebrate
and
benthic
populations
to
catastrophic
drift
and
profound
decreases
in
population
diversity
and
abundance.
For
studies
reporting
no
adverse
effects
on
macroinvertebrate
populations
(
Acc
No
250506,
Supplemental;
MRID
155772,
Supplemental),
application
rates
range
from
a
single
application
of
0.0623
lb
a.
i./
A
(
MRID
155772)
to
repeated
applications
of
0.126
lb
a.
i./
A,
(
6
applications
at
5­
day
intervals
to
cotton
fields)
(
Acc.
No.
250506,
Supplemental).
However,
results
of
several
field
studies
show
that
exposure
to
cypermethrin
at
application
rates
ranging
from
0.00025
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Mulla
et
al.
1978)
to
0.125
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Acc.
No.
250506;
Supplemental)
causes
significant
decreases
in
abundance
and
diversity
of
aquatic
invertebrate
populations.
Effects
include
catastrophic
drift
within
0­
90
minutes
after
application
of
cypermethrin
(
Crossland
et
al.,
1982;
Farmer
et
al.
1995;
Moshen
and
Mulla
1982),
and
decreased
abundance
and
diversity
of
macroinvertebrates
over
a
longer
time
period
(
several
weeks
to
several
months)
(
MRID
155770,
Supplemental;
MRID
152737,
Supplemental;
Farmer
et
al.
1995;
Kedwards
et
al.
1999
a,
b;
Mulla
et
al.
1978;
Mulla
et
al.
1982).
In
some
cases,
recovery
of
individual
species
was
rapid
(
MRID
155770,
Supplemental;
Kedwards
et
al.
1999a,
b;
);
however,
for
other
species,
recovery
did
not
occur
for
several
months
(
Kedwards
et
al.;
1999b;
Davies
and
Cook
1993).
­
E­
54­
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Cypermethrin
Formulation
Not
Specified
Not
given
formulated
product
­
not
specified
Methods:
A
cotton
field
adjacent
to
a
pond
was
treated
with
a
total
of
16
aerial
applications
of
cypermethrin.
Treatments
were
made
at
5­
day
intervals
at
a
rate
of
0.125
lbs
a.
i./
acre.
The
test
pond
was
observed
for
drift
and
runoff
contamination,
water
quality
and
biological
impact
of
the
treatments.

Observations:
Authors
state
that
the
only
effects
due
to
cypermethrin
were
localized
to
an
area
of
shoreline
closest
to
the
test
cotton
field.
Macroinvertebrate
and
zooplankton
populations
varied
throughout
the
study,
but
authors
concluded
this
was
primarily
due
to
seasonal
population
fluctuations
and
organism
mobility.
Adverse
effects
to
aquatic
insects
localized
to
the
area
of
the
pond
adjacent
to
the
cotton
field;
hemipterans
appeared
to
be
particularly
sensitive.

One
year
treatments,
the
macroinvertebrates
had
reestablished
themselves
in
the
affected
area,
and
authors
concluded
there
were
no
permanent
population
effects
from
the
cypermethrin.

EPA
reviewer
concluded
the
detection
level
in
sediments
in
this
study
of
0.005
mg/
kg
and
of
20
pptr
were
not
sensitive
enough
for
the
analysis
results
to
be
of
value.

EPA
reviewer
concluded
that
the
lack
of
sufficient
number
of
organisms
and/
or
sufficient
number
of
species
defeated
any
meaningful
statistical
analysis
relevant
to
assessing
populations.
Accession
No.
250506
(
ICI,
date
not
given,
study
done
1980)
Supplemental
The
EPA
reviewer
rated
this
study
as
supplemental,
due
to
its
inadequacy
to
address
runoff
potential
(
test
field
was
too
small
relative
to
the
pond
size
to
provide
a
realistic
runoff
exposure).
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
55­
2
weeks
Formulation
not
identified
 
Emulsifiable
concentrate
containing
400
g/
L
cypermethrin
,
10%
emulsifiers,
50%
mixed
petroleum
xylenes
Mature
20
m
x
5m
x
0.8m
deep
pond
was
oversprayed
with
emulsifiable
concentrate
at
a
rate
of
100
g
cypermethrin/
ha.

Surface
and
subsurface
water,
and
sediment
analyzed
for
cypermethrin.

Macroinvertebrates
sampled
1
wk
before
treatment
and
1
and
2
wks
after
treatment.

2
wks
after
treatment,
pond
was
pumped
dry
and
fish
removed,
identified
and
counted.

No
effects
were
observed
on
wild
populations
of
fish
and
amphibians.

Authors
note
a
"
considerable"
effect
on
the
community
of
invertebrates
,
marked
by
a
reduction
in
species
richness,
arising
from
mortality
of
aquatic
insects
and
Crustacea.

Other
effects
noted:

1)
Later
instar
nymphs
of
waterboatment
(
Nonecta
sp.)
showed
signs
of
hyperactivity
and
disorientation.
2)
Water
beetles,
particularly
Dytiscus
marginalis
died
at
the
surface
of
the
pond
within
a
few
hours.
3)

Dipterous
larvae
such
as
chironomids,
were
not
noticeably
affected
until
24
hrs
after
treatment.
4)
Crustacea
in
the
zooplankton
were
not
killed
until
24­
48
hr
after
treatment.
MRID
155770
(
Crossland
1982)
Supplemental
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
56­
16
weeks
Emulsifiable
concentrate
containing
400
g/
L
cypermethrin
,
10%
emulsifiers,
50%
mixed
petroleum
xylenes
Methods:
Mature,
20m
pond
divided
into
two
9m
x
10m
x
0.7
m
ponds;
one
pond
was
oversprayed
with
emulsifiable
concentrate
at
a
rate
of
100
g
cypermethrin/
ha.
12
days
before
treatment
both
ponds
were
stocked
with
75
small
rudd
fish.
Behavioral
observations
of
fish
were
made
immediately
before
and
after
treatment.
Samples
of
surface
water,
subsurface
water,
sediment,
vegetation
and
fish
were
analyzed
for
cypermethrin
at
regular
time
intervals
after
treatment.
Macroinvertebrates
were
collected
and
counted
to
give
information
on
the
effect
of
cypermethrin
on
numbers
of
individuals
and
species,
as
well
as
effect
on
diversity
index.

Results:
No
mortality
of
any
fish
or
wild
populations
of
newts
was
observed.
For
macroinvertebrates.
(
based
on
graphic
representation
data),
there
appeared
to
be
a
sharp
reduction
in
numbers
of
individuals
and
species,
as
well
as
the
Shannon
diversity
index
at
approximately
2
wks
after
treatment
when
compared
to
the
control
pond;
however
this
reduction
is
not
substantiated
statistically.
The
number
of
species
and
diversity
index
appeared
to
recover
at
approximately
6­
8
wks
after
treatment
(
similar
population
numbers
in
treated
and
untreated
ponds).
The
number
of
individuals
per
species
appeared
to
be
lower
in
the
treated
pond
than
the
untreated
pond
for
the
entire
16
weeks;
however,
data
were
presented
only
graphically.
MRID
155770
(
Crossland
1982)
Supplemental
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
57­
Not
given
100
g/
L
emulsifiable
concentrate
formulation
of
cypermethrin
Effect
of
spray­
drift
was
investigated
in
ponds
adjacent
to
fields
of
sugar
beets
and
potatoes
treated
with
cypermethrin
at
70
g/
ha;
Cypermethrin
concentrations
were
assessed
in
water
and
fish
from
the
ponds.

There
were
no
detectable
residues
in
fish
and
no
apparent
effects
on
aquatic
fauna.
Detection
limit
in
fish
was
5
ug/
kg
No
reductions
in
numbers
macroinvertebrates
was
observed.
MRID
155772
(
Crossland
et
al.
,1982)
Supplemental
120
minutes
not
reported
Field
study:
Cypermethrin
added
to
manmade
creak
(
Thousdand
Palms
Canyon,
CA)
at
a
rate
of
0.01
ppm/
15
minutes
[
appears
that
cypermethrin
was
diluted
into
200
mL
of
stream
water,
then
added
to
the
stream
over
a
15
minute
period].
Organisms
were
sampled
50,
250,
750,
and
1,300
m
downstream
of
application
site.
Sampling
was
conducted
from
0­
120
minutes
after
application
of
cypermethrin.

Non­
Target
species
sampled:
Ephemoroptera
(
mayflies),
Trichoptera
(
caddisflies),
Odonata
(
dragonflies
and
damselflies),
and
Chironomidae
(
benthic
water
beetle).

Results:
"
Catastrophic
drift"
(
organisms
immobilized
or
dead)
was
observed
for
mayfly
nymphs,
benthic
water
beetle,
caddisfly
larvae,
dragonflies
and
damselflies.
Effect
was
most
pronounced
during
time
0­
90
minutes
after
"
application"
of
cypermethrin.
Mohsen
and
Mulla
1982
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
58­
10
week
multiple
application
period,
followed
by
~
14­
week
postapplication
period
not
reported
Methods:
3.4
acre
farm
pond
in
Alabama.
Cypermethrin
formulation
(
not
specified)
was
aerially
applied
10
times
to
a
cotton
crop
at
a
rate
of
112
g
a.
i./
ha
[
equivalent
to
0.11
lb
a.
i./
A
a],
with
an
application
interval
of
1
week.
Abundance
of
Chironomidae
larvae
(
freshwater
midge)
assessed
at
2­
week
intervals
pre­,
during,
and
postapplication
(
154
days
after
last
application).

Results:
Significant
decreases
in
midge
abundance
during
the
application
period,
starting
with
the
first
application.
However,
effects
were
transient,
with
rapid
recovery.
Decrease
in
emergence
and
abundance
of
Diptera
(
flies)
associated
with
increasing
sediment
concentrations
of
cypermethrin.
Kedwards
et
al.
1999a
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)

4­
applications
over
8
weeks,
followed
by
7­
week
observation
period
not
reported
Methods:
Concrete
experimental
ponds
stocked
with
hydrosoil.
Ponds
seeded
with
aquatic
organisms
(
no
fish).
Cypermethrin
(
0.7
g
a.
i./
ha)
[
0.0006
lb
a.
i./
A
]
sprayed
on
the
surface
of
the
ponds
four
times,
with
2­
week
application
interval.
Species
evaluated:
Grammaridae
(
amphipod),
Planorbidae
(
snail),
Chironomidae
(
midge),
and
Asellidae
(
isopod
crustaceans).

Results:
No
significant
effect
on
emergence
of
the
macroinvertebrate
community.
Significant
decreases
in
abundance
of
amphipod
and
isopod
from
start
of
treatment
period
throughout
the
postrecovery
observation
period.
At
the
end
of
te
observation
period,
abundance
of
isopod
was
returning
to
control
levels;
abundance
of
amphipod
remained
below
pre­
treatment
levels
and
did
not
show
signs
of
recovery.
Kedwards
et
al.
1999b
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
59­
4
applications
over
8
weeks
formulation
not
reported
Methods:
Cypermethrin
applied
at
rate
of
0.7
g
a.
i./
ha
[
0.0006
lb
a.
i./
A
],
under
conditions
simulating
spray
drift.
Cypermethrin
concentrations
measured
in
surface
water
and
sediment.

Concentration
of
cypermethrin
in
surface
water
and
sediment:
Concentration
in
surface
water
declined
rapidly,
with
a
halflife
of
~
1day.
1
hour
after
the
3rd
application,
surface
water
concentration
was
35
ng/
L
(
only
measurement
reported
for
cypermethrin).
Residues
in
sediment
increased
during
the
application
period
(
concentrations
for
cypermethrin
not
reported).
At
13
weeks
after
final
application,
residues
in
sediment
were
undetectable.

Ecological
effects:
For
algae,
No
adverse
effects
on
algal
chlorophyll
content,
productivity,
community
metabolism,
abundance
or
biomass.
No
statistically
significant
effects
on
zooplankton
populations.
For
macroinvertebrates,
1
hour
after
application,
erratic
movements
observed
in
Notonectidae
(
backswimmers)
and
Gyrrinidae
(
beetles).
Decreased
numbers
of
Asellidae
(
isopod)
and
Gammaridae
(
amphipod).
Isopod
showed
evidence
of
recovery
3
weeks
after
last
treatment;
amphipod
showed
no
signs
of
recovery.
No
decrease
in
number
of
mayfly
nymphs
or
emergence.
Decreases
in
Chironomidae
(
amphipod)
numbers,
but
not
emergence.
Farmer
et
al.
1995
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
60­
Cypermethrin
(
Ammo
Formulation)

Single
application
followed
by
14­
day
observation
period
30%
Methods:
Single
application
of
cypermethrin
applied
at
0.001
lb
a.
i./
A.
Abundance
of
the
following
non­
target
organisms
was
assessed
 
mayfly
naiads,
dragonfly
naiads,
adult
diving
beetles,
and
Ostracods
(
crustacean).

Results:
No
adverse
effects
were
observed
on
abundance
of
water
beetle
populations,
dragonfly
naiads,
and
Ostracods.
A
marked
decrease
in
mayfly
populations
was
oberved,
with
no
significant
recovery
at
the
end
of
the
2­
week
observation
period.
Mulla
et
al.
1982
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)

FMC­
33297
(
Pounce
Formulation)

Single
application
followed
by
a
3­
week
observation
period.
21%
Methods:
Single
application
of
cypermethrin
applied
at
0.00025.
0.0005,
and
0.001
lb
a.
i./
A.
Effects
on
abundance
of
mayfly,
dragonfly,
midge
and
beetle
larvae.

Results:
Mayfly
abundance
greatly
reduced
for
3
weeks
after
application.
No
affect
on
dragonfly,
beetle
and
midge
larvae.
Mulla
et
al.
1978
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
61­
Formulation
GFU
36%
w/
v
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
62­
11
months
Emulsifiable
concentrate
formulation
GFU
061,
36%
w/
v
cypermethrin
Methods:
Two
concrete
ponds
(
5mx5mx1m)
were
sprayed
with
a
handheld
boom
sprayer
8
times
at
5­
day
intervals
with
cypermethrin
formulation
GFU
061
at
a
rate
of
1.4
g
cypermethrin/
ha.
In
addition,
there
were
two
(
concrete)
untreated
control
ponds.
Two
cages
each
with
5
carp
were
placed
in
each
pond
after
the
2nd
application
until
17
days
after
the
last
application.
All
four
ponds
were
stocked
with
zooplankton
and
macroinvertebrates.
Invertebrates
were
sampled
9
times
during
the
exposure
period,
and
5
more
times
during
the
following
year.
Microbial
assessments
were
made
13
times
during
the
treatment
period.

Results:

For
fish
 
cypermethrin
had
no
effect
on
the
fish.
For
invertebrates
 
there
was
no
treatment
effect
on
Turbellaria,
Collembola,
or
Rotiform.
Numbers
of
Oligochaeta
and
Hirudinum
increased.
Asellidae
and
Gammaridae
were
eliminated
and
the
numbers
of
Hemiptera,
Colaoptera
and
possibly
Odonata
were
reduced.
Cladocera
initially
decreased
but
recovered
during
treatment
and
became
more
abundant
in
the
treated
ponds,
although
with
a
different
species
composition.
Other
groups
showing
a
decline
followed
by
an
increase
were
Copepoda,
Ephemeroptera
and
Chironomidae.
Major
reductions
of
sensitive
species
occurred
after
the
first
spray.
For
microbes
 
Changes
in
numbers
of
visible
bacteria
were
attributed
to
seasonal
variations
and
not
to
cypermethrin.

Authors
conclude
that
low
rates
of
cypermethrin
drift
are
unlikely
to
be
toxic
to
fish,
higher
plants,
and
microorganisms,
but
can
cause
changes
in
the
relative
abundance
of
arthropod
species.
MRID
152737
(
Getty
et
al.
1983)
Supplemental
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
63­
Ripcord
Formulation
Samples
collected
from
0­
48
hours
after
application.
not
reported
Methods:
Two
fields
tests:
Ripord
spayed
on
two
fields:
(
A)
2
applications
to
sugar
beet
and
potato
in
U.
K.
at
rate
of
70
g
formulation/
ha
[
equivalent
to
0.0623
lb
formulation/
ai];
and
(
B)
vineyards
in
France
at
rate
of
30
or
45
g
formulation/
ha
[
equivalent
to
0.027
or
0.04
lb
formulation/
ai].
For
test
site
A,
effects
on
evaluated
for
adjacent
ponds.
For
test
site
B,
effects
evaluated
for
adjacent
streams.

Results:

Test
site
A:
No
detectable
residues
in
fish
at
24
hr
after
application.
No
effects
observed
in
aquatic
organism,
except
for
some
knock­
down,
but
no
mortality
,
of
some
air
breathing
insects.

Test
site
B:
0.5
hours
after
application,
maximum
concentrations
in
surface
water
of
streams
ranged
from
0.4
to
1.7
:
g/
L.
Cypermethrin
levels
in
surface
water
rapidly
decreased
to
Within
2
hours
after
spraying,
increased
invertebrate
drift
was
observed
for
Gammaridae
(
amphipod),
Ephemeroptera
(
mayflies),
Coleoptera
(
beetles),
and
Hemiptera
(
true
bugs).
Sample
collected
at
24
and
8
hours
after
application
show
invertebrate
drift
had
returned
to
pretreatment
conditions.
Based
on
date
collected
48
after
cypermethrin
application,
for
benthic
invertebrates,
species
richness,
evenness
and
diversity
appeared
unaffected
by
application
of
cypermethrin.
Crossland
et
al.
1982
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)
Table
E­
8
Aquatic
Field
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
64­
single
application
of
cypermethrin
formulation,
sampling
from
0
days
to
16
months
after
application
not
reported
Methods:
Cypermethrin
(
Polytrin
formulation)
applied
by
aerial
spray
at
12.6
g
a.
i./
ha
[
equivalent
to
0.011lb
a.
i./
A]
to
eucalyptus.
Populations
in
adjacent
tributary
streams
sampled
from
time
0
days
to
16
months.

Results:
For
macroinvertebrates
 
Immediately
after
spraying,
significant
increase
in
invertebrate
drift,
with
increased
drift
of
Plecoptera
(
stone
fly)
and
ephemeroptera
(
mayfly).
Benthic
abundance
of
Plecoptera
(
stone
fly)
and
ephemeroptera
(
mayfly)
also
decreased.
Abundance
of
these
organisms
was
decreased
for
77
days
after
application.
Recovery
of
benthic
populations
was
observed
within
6
months.
For
Fish
 
no
reported
lethality.
Fish
showed
changes
in
color
pattern,
loss
of
seld­
righting
ability,
lethargy,
appearance
of
muscle
tetany,
and
anemic
appearance
of
blood
and
gills.
Transient
changes
in
muscle
RNA/
DNA
levels
and
brain
and
muscle
acetylcholinesterase
levels
were
related
to
the
application
event.
Authors
conclude
that
sublethal
effects
in
fish
due
to
dietary
intake
of
cypermethrin
from
dead
and
dying
invertebrate
drift.
Davies
and
Cook
1993
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)

a
Conversion
of
the
application
rate
expressed
in
terms
of
g
a.
i./
ha
to
lb
a.
i./
A
was
done
as
follows:

lb
a.
i./
A
=
(
g
a.
i./
ha)
×
(
1
ha/
2.471
A)
×
(
0.0022
lb/
1
g)

III.
Toxicity
to
Plants
Inhabiting
Aquatic
Environments
Studies
of
the
effects
of
cypermethrin
on
plants
inhabiting
aquatic
environments
were
not
submitted.
­
E­
65­
IV.
Toxicity
to
Terrestrial
Animals
a.
Birds,
Acute
and
Subacute
An
acute
oral
toxicity
study
using
the
technical
grade
of
the
active
ingredient
(
TGAI)
is
required
to
establish
the
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
birds.
The
preferred
test
species
is
either
mallard
duck
(
a
waterfowl)
or
bobwhite
quail
(
an
upland
gamebird).
Results
of
acute
oral
toxicity
studies
in
birds
yield
an
LD50
value
of
>
9,520
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
mallard
ducks
(
Acc.
No.
241598l
Acceptable)
and
an
LD50
value
of
>
2,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
bobwhite
quail
(
MRID
44546024;
Acceptable),
indicating
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
practically
non­
toxic
on
an
acute
oral
basis
in
bird.
Study
details
are
provided
in
Table
E­
9.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
EFED
will
use
the
lowest
LD50
value
of
>
2,000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
bobwhite
quail
to
assess
the
risk
of
acute
oral
exposure
of
birds
to
cypermethrin.
The
guideline
(
71­
1)
is
fulfilled.

No
acute
oral
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
avian
species
were
submitted.

Table
E­
9:
Acute
Oral
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Birds
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
grade
Cypermethrin
Anas
platyrhynchos
(
mallard
duck)
92.9
Single
doses
of
0
and
9,520
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
wt
to
males
and
single
doses
of
0
and
11,227
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
wt
to
females;
birds
observed
for
21
days.

No
mortalities
in
any
treatment
group.
No
gross
abnormalities
post­
mortem.
Several
birds
in
the
test
groups
attempted
to
vomit,

but
only
one
bird
was
seen
to
reject
any
of
the
dose
material,
and
this
appeared
to
be
only
a
very
small
proportion
of
the
dose.

No
other
abnormal
signs
were
observed,
and
the
birds
appeared
to
remain
in
good
health
throughout
the
study.

LD50
(
males):
>
9,520
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
wt
LD50
(
females):
>
11,227
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
wt
Practically
non­
toxic
Accession
No.
241598
(
Ross
et
al.
1977)
Acceptable
Table
E­
9:
Acute
Oral
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Birds
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
66­
Beta
Cypermethrin
Colinus
virginianus
(
bobwhite
quail)
97.1
Avian
single­
dose
LD50
test.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:

0
(
0.5%
methylcellulose
vehicle
control),
500,
1000,
and
2000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight.

No
treatment­
related
signs
of
toxicity
and
no
mortalities
were
observed
in
the
dosage
groups.

LD50:
>
2000
mg
a.
i./
kg
NOAEL
=
2000
mg
a.
i./
kg
Practically
non­
toxic
MRID
44546024
(
Johnson
1998)
Acceptable
Two
subacute
dietary
studies
using
the
TGAI
are
required
to
establish
the
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
birds.
The
preferred
test
species
are
mallard
duck
and
bobwhite
quail.
Results
of
subacute
dietary
studies
are
tabulated
below
in
Table
E­
10.
In
mallard
ducks,
acute
LC50
values
range
from
>
2,634
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
MRID
90071;
Acceptable)
to
>
5290
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
MRID
44546025;
Acceptable),
indicating
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
slightly
toxic
to
practically
non­
toxic
to
mallard
ducks
on
an
acute
dietary
basis.
Similar
results
were
reported
for
the
studies
in
bobwhite
quail;
acute
LC50
values
range
from
>
3,951
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
MRID
90072;
Acceptable)
to
>
5,290
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
MRID
44546026l
Acceptable),
indicating
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
slightly
toxic
to
practically
nontoxic
to
bobwhite
quail.
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
EFED
will
use
the
lowest
LC50
value
of
>
2,634
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
mallard
ducks
to
assess
the
risk
of
acute
dietary
exposure
of
birds
to
cypermethrin.
The
guideline
(
72­
1)
is
fulfilled.

No
acute
dietary
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
avian
species
were
submitted.
­
E­
67­
Table
E­
10:
Acute
Dietary
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Birds
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Anas
platyrhync
hos
(
mallard
duck)
87.8
cis:
trans
=
53:
47
Dietary
concentrations:
0,
1756,
2634,
3951,
5926,
8889,
13333,
and
20000
ppm
a.
i
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)

Ducks
had
an
aversion
to
dietary
concentrations
of
cypermethrin
>
2634
ppm;
thus,
it
is
unclear
whether
observed
reductions
in
body
weight
gain
and
food
consumption
were
related
to
toxic
effects
of
cypermethrin
or
this
aversion.
The
EPA
reviewer
corrected
the
LC50
value
for
this
aversion
effect.

Dietary
LC50:
>
2,634
ppm
a.
i.
Slightly
toxic
MRID
90071
(
Roberts
et
al.

1980)
Acceptable
Colinus
virginianus
(
bobwhite
quail)
87.8
cis:
trans
=
53:
47
Birds
fed
0,
1756,
2634,

3951,
5926,
8889,
13333,
and
20000
ppm
a.
i.
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
in
the
diet.

Quail
had
an
aversion
to
dietary
concentrations
of
cypermethrin
>
3951
ppm.
It
is
unclear
whether
observed
reductions
in
body
weight
gain
and
food
consumption
were
related
to
toxic
effects
of
cypermethrin
or
this
aversion.
The
EPA
reviewer
corrected
the
LC50
value
for
this
aversion
effect.

Dietary
LC50:
>
3,95l
ppm
a.
i.
Slightly
toxic
MRID
90072
(
Roberts
et
al.

1981)
Acceptable
Table
E­
10:
Acute
Dietary
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Birds
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
68­
Beta
Cypermethrin
Anas
platyrhync
hos
(
mallard
duck)
97.1
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
163,
325,
650,
1300,
2600,
and
5200
ppm
a.
i..
Measured
concentrations:
168,
315,
633,
1290,
2550,
and
5290
ppm
a.
i.
Five
day
exposure
period
followed
by
a
3­
day
observation
period.

A
reduction
in
body
weight
gain
was
observed
in
the
5200
ppm
group
during
the
exposure
period.
Feed
consumption
values
were
reduced
for
the
2600
and
5200
ppm
a.
i.
groups
during
both
the
exposure
and
observation
periods.
No
mortalities
observed.

LC50:
>
5290
ppm
a.
i.

NOAEC
=
1290
ppm
a.
i.
Practically
non­
toxic
MRID
44546025
(
Johnson
1998)
Acceptable
Colinus
virginianus
(
bobwhite
quail)
97.1
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
163,
325,
650,
1300,
2600,
and
5200
ppm
a.
i.
Measured
concentrations:
168,
315,
633,
1290,
2550,
and
5290
ppm
a.
i.
Five
day
exposure
period
followed
by
an
11­
day
observation
period.

There
was
a
reduction
in
body
weight
values
only
in
the
5200
ppm
group
during
the
exposure
and
observation
periods.
Food
consumption
was
not
affected
at
any
treatment
level.

LC50:
>
5290
ppm
a.
i.
(
based
on
measured
concentrations)

NOAEC:
2550
ppm
a.
i.
(
based
on
measured
concentrations)
Practically
non­
toxic
MRID
44546026
(
Johnson
1998)
Acceptable
­
E­
69­
b.
Birds,
Chronic
Avian
reproduction
studies
using
the
TGAI
are
required
for
cypermethrin
because
birds
may
be
subject
to
continuous
exposure
to
the
pesticide,
especially
preceding
or
during
the
breeding
season.
The
preferred
test
species
are
mallard
duck
and
bobwhite
quail.
Results
of
reproductive
studies
in
mallard
ducks
(
MRID
90073;
Acceptable)
and
bobwhite
quail
(
MRID
90074;
Acceptable)
show
no
treatment­
related
effects
on
adult
birds,
reproductive
parameters,
or
offspring
(
Table
E­
11)
at
the
highest
dietary
concentrations
tested
in
these
studies
(
50
mg
a.
i/
kg
diet).
EFED
will
use
the
NOAEC
value
of
>
50
mg
a.
i/
kg
diet
to
assess
chronic
risk
of
cypermethrin
in
avian
species.,
however,
the
avian
reproduction
study
must
be
repeated
and
a
LOAEC
determined.
The
guideline
(
71­
4)
is
not
fulfilled.
No
chronic
toxicity
studies
of
cypermethrin
formulations
or
cypermethrin
degradates
in
avian
species
were
submitted.

Table
E­
11:
Chronic
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Birds
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Anas
platyrhynchos
(
mallard
duck)
87.8
cis:
trans
=
53:
47
Adults
fed
0,
5,
or
50
ppm
a.
i.
in
the
diet
for
11
wks
before
the
start
of
the
egg­
laying
period,
which
lasted
12
weeks.

No
treatment­
related
effect
on
adults
(
adult
food
consumption
and
body
weight)
or
reproductive
parameters
(
number
of
eggs
laid
and
proportion
damaged,
egg
weight,
eggshell
thickness,
number
of
infertiles
,
embryonic
deaths,
hatchings,
14­
day­
old
surviving
ducklings,
and
duckling
body­
weights
at
hatching
and
14
days
later).

NOAEC:
>
50
ppm
a.
i.
MRID
90073
(
Roberts
et
al.
1981)
Supplemental
Table
E­
11:
Chronic
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Birds
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
70­
Colinus
virginianus
(
bobwhite
quail)
87.8
cis:
trans
=
53:
47
Adults
fed
0,
5,
or
50
ppm
a.
i.
in
the
diet
for
19
wks
before
the
start
of
the
egg­
laying
period,
which
lasted
12
weeks.

No
treatment­
related
effect
on
adults
(
adult
body
wt
and
food
consumption)
or
reproductive
parameters
(
number
eggs
laid
and
proportion
damaged,
egg
weight
and
shell
thickness,
number
of
infertiles,
embryonic
deaths,
hatchlings,
14­
day­
old
survivors,
and
chick
body
weights
at
hatching
and
14
days
later).

NOAEC:
>
50
ppm
a.
i.
MRID
90074
(
Roberts
et
al.
1981)
Supplemental
c.
Mammals,
Acute
and
Chronic
Wild
mammal
testing
is
required
on
a
case­
by­
case
basis,
depending
on
the
results
of
lower
tier
laboratory
mammalian
studies,
intended
use
pattern
and
pertinent
environmental
fate
characteristics.
In
most
cases,
rat
or
mouse
toxicity
values
obtained
from
the
Agency's
Health
Effects
Division
(
HED)
substitute
for
wild
mammal
testing.
Results
of
pertinent
toxicity
studies
in
laboratory
mammals
on
cypermethrin
are
reported
below
in
Table
E­
12.
Results
of
the
acute
oral
toxicity
study
yield
an
LD50
value
of
247
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
male
rats
(
MRID
00056800;
Acceptable);
this
value
will
be
used
to
assess
the
acute
risk
of
cypermethrin
to
terrestrial
mammals.
Results
of
3­
generation
reproductive
studies
in
rats
yield
NOAEL
values
for
toxicity
to
both
parents
(
decreased
body
weight
gain)
and
offspring
(
decreased
weight
gain
during
lacation
in
pups)
ranging
from
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
MRID
00090040;
Acceptable)
to
150
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
MRIDs
00112912,
42068504,
92027040l
Acceptable).
Taking
the
most
conservative
approach,
EFED
will
use
the
lowest
NOAEL
value
of
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
(
MRID
00090040)
for
toxicity
to
parents
and
offspring
to
assess
chronic
risk
to
terrestrial
mammals.
­
E­
71­
Table
E­
12:
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Mammals
Species
%
a.
i.
Toxicity
Value
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
rat
tech
Males:
LD50
=
247
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
Females:
LD50
=
309
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
Deaths:
$
150
mg/
kg,
usually
in
first
day.

Clinical
signs
of
neurotoxicity,
gait
abnormalities;
some
persisting
to
14
days.

Based
on
acute
LD50
values,
cypermethrin
is
categorized
as
moderately
toxic.
MRID
00056800
Acceptable
rat
90.6
to
93.1
3
generation
reproduction
study.
Dietary
concentrations
of
0,
50,
150
or
1000/
750
ppm
(
reduced
to
750
ppm
after
12
weeks
because
of
severe
neurological
symptoms).
These
dose
levels
correspond
to
2.5,
7.5
or
50/
37.5
mg/
kg/
day.

The
parental/
offspring
LOAEL
is
750
ppm
(
50/
37.5
mg/
kg/
day)
based
on
consistent
decreased
body
weight
gain
in
both
sexes
in
the
parents
and
decreased
mean
litter
weight
gain
during
lactation.

The
parental/
offspring
NOAEL
is
150
ppm
(
7.5
mg/
kg/
day;
the
decreases
in
mean
body
weight
and
body
weight
gain
at
150
ppm
are
not
considered
to
be
toxicologically
significant).
MRIDs
00112912,
42068504,
92027040
Acceptable
rat
98
3
generation
(
2
litters/
generation)
reproduction
study.
Dietary
concentrations
of
0,
10,
100
or
500
ppm.
These
dose
levels
correspond
to
0,
0.5,
5
or
25
mg/
kg/
day.

The
parental
LOAEL
is
50
­
37.5
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
decreased
body
weight
gain.
The
parental
NOAEL
is
7.5
mg/
kg/
day.

The
offspring
LOAEL
is
50
­
37.5
mg/
kg/
day
based
on
a
decrease
in
pup
body
weight
gain
on
lactation
day
21
for
one
or
both
sexes
of
one
or
both
litters
of
each
generation.
The
offspring
NOAEL
is
7.
5
mg/
kg/
day.
MRID
00090040
Supplementary
­
E­
72­
d.
Terrestrial
Insects,
Acute
Contact
A
honey
bee
acute
contact
study
using
the
TGAI
is
required
for
cypermethrin
because
its
outdoor
treatment
use
will
result
in
honey
bee
exposure.
The
acute
contact
LD50,
using
the
honey
bee,
Apis
mellifera,
is
an
acute
contact,
singledose
laboratory
study
designed
to
estimate
the
quantity
of
toxicant
required
to
cause
50%
mortality
in
a
test
population
of
bees.
The
TGAI
is
administered
by
one
of
two
methods:
whole
body
exposure
to
technical
pesticide
in
a
nontoxic
dust
diluent
or
topical
exposure
to
technical
pesticide
via
micro­
applicator.
The
median
lethal
dose
(
LD50)
is
expressed
in
micrograms
of
active
ingredient
per
bee
(:
g
a.
i./
bee).
One
acute
contact
study
on
the
cypermethrin
TGAI
in
honey
bees
was
submitted
(
Acc.
No.
260647;
Acceptable);
details
are
provided
in
Table
E­
13a.
Based
on
the
48­
hour
contact
LD50
value
of
0.023
:
g
a.
i./
bee,
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
classified
as
highly
toxic
to
honey
bees.

Acute
contact
tests
LD50
values
in
honey
bees
were
also
determined
for
cypermethrin
formulations,
as
summarized
in
Table
E­
13b.
Results
are
similar
to
those
reported
for
the
acute
contact
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
TGAI,
with
48­
hour
contact
LD50
values
ranging
from
0.088
:
g
a.
i./
bee
(
44544208;
Acceptable)
to
0.13
:
g/
bee
(
Acc.
No.
260647;
Acceptable),
indicating
that
the
cypermethrin
formulations
are
highly
toxic
to
honey
bees.
Results
of
a
test
investigating
the
effects
of
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
residues
on
foliage
was
conducted
with
the
cypermethrin
formulation
Cymbush
3E
(
35.6%
a.
i.)
(
Acc.
No.
40274001;
Acceptable).
When
applied
at
a
rates
equivalent
to
0.06
and
0.13
lb
a.
i./
A,
exposure
to
residues
on
foliage
resulted
in
approximately
75­
95%
mortality
after
a
24­
hour
exposure.
The
foliar
application
rates
used
in
this
study
are
similar
to
the
maximum
single
application
rate
of
0.
l
lb
a.
i./
A
considered
in
this
assessment.

Table
E­
13a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Honey
Bees
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identificatio
n
Number
Study
Classification
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Apis
mellifera
(
honey
bee)
91.5
Acute
contact
toxicity
test.
Bees
anesthetized
and
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.01,
0.02,
0.05,
0.1,
0.2
and
0.5
µ
g
a.
i./
bee,
applied
to
the
thorax
24­
hr
contact
LD50
=
0.037
:
g
a.
i./
bee[(
95%
C.
I.
(
from
unclassified
MRID)
=
0.022­
0.055]

48­
hr
contact
LD50
=
0.023
:
g
a.
i./
bee
[
95%
C.
I.
(
from
unclassified
MRID)
=
0.018­
0.029]
Highly
toxic
DER
for
Accession
No.
260647
(
Bull
and
Wilkinson
1980);
appears
to
be
the
same
unclassified
study
MRID
155740
(
Bull
and
Wilkinson
1980)
Acceptable
Table
E­
13a:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Honey
Bees
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identificatio
n
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
73­
Apis
mellifera
(
honey
bee)
91.5
Acute
oral
toxicity
test.
Each
group
of
bees
fed
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.05,
0.1,
0.2,
0.45,
0.87,
and
1.64
µ
g
a.
i./
bee
in
sucrose
solution.

24­
hr
oral
LD50
=
0.181
:
g
a.
i./
bee
(
95%
C.
I.
from
MRID
study
=
0.117­
0.263)

48­
hr
oral
LD50
=
0.172
:
g
a.
i./
bee
[
95%
C.
I.
(
from
unclassified
MRID
study)
=
0.115­
0.244]
Highly
toxic
DER
for
Accession
No.
260647
(
Bull
and
Wilkinson
1980);
appears
to
be
the
same
unclassified
study
MRID
155740
(
Bull
and
Wilkinson
1980)
Acceptable
­
E­
74­
Table
E­
13b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Honey
Bees
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Betacypermethrin
10
EC
Apis
mellifera
(
honey
bee)
97.4
Acute
contact
toxicity
test.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.0125,
0.025,
0.05,
0.1,
and
0.2
µ
g
/
bee
No
reactions
other
than
death
were
observed
in
the
test
groups.

48­
hr
contact
LD50
=
0.13
µ
g
/
bee
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.10­
0.17)

NOAEL
=
0.025
µ
g/
bee
Highly
toxic
MRID
44544208
(
Halsall
1998)
Acceptable
Apis
mellifera
(
honey
bee)
97.4
Acute
oral
toxicity
test.
Concentrations
(
nominal)
tested:
0
(
50%
sucrose
solution
vehicle
control),
0.25,
0.5,
1.0,
and
2.0
ug
/
bee.

No
reactions
other
than
death
were
observed
in
the
test
groups.

48­
hr
oral
LD50
=
0.56
µ
g/
bee
(
95%
C.
I.
=
0.45­
0.71)

NOAEL
=
0.125
µ
g/
bee
Highly
toxic
MRID
44544208
(
Halsall
1998)
Acceptable
Cypermethrin
Emulsifiable
Concentrate
Formulation
GFU
061
Table
E­
13b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Honey
Bees
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
75­
Apis
mellifera
(
honey
bee)
37.2
Acute
contact
toxicity
test.
Concentrations
(
nominal
or
measured
not
indicated)
tested:
0,
0
(
acetone
solvent
control),
0.01,
0.02,
0.05,
0.1,
0.2
and
0.5
µ
g
a.
i./
bee,
applied
to
the
thorax.

24­
hr
contact
LD50
=
0.180
µ
g
a.
i./
bee
(
95%
C.
I.
from
unclassified
MRID
study
=
0.137­
0.251)

48­
hr
contact
LD50
=
0.088
:
g
a.
i./
bee
[
95%
C.
I.
(
from
unclassified
MRID
study)
=
0.045­
0.175]
Highly
toxic
DER
for
Accession
No.
260647
(
Bull
and
Wilkinson
1980);
same
as
unclassified
study
MRID
155740
(
Bull
and
Wilkinson
1980)
Acceptable
Apis
mellifera
(
honey
bee)
37.2
Acute
oral
toxicity
test.
Concentrations
(
nominal
or
measured
not
indicated)
tested:
0
(
20%
sucrose
solution
vehicle
control),
0.02,
0.05,
0.1,
0.2,
0.46,
0.88,
and
1.69
µ
g
a.
i./
bee.

24­
hr
oral
LD50
=
0.130
:
g
a.
i./
bee
[
95%
C.
I.
(
from
unclassified
MRID
study)
=
0.079­
0.202]

48­
hr
oral
LD50
=
0.103
:
g
a.
i./
bee
[
95%
C.
I.
(
from
unclassified
MRID
study)
=
0.074­
0.139]
Highly
toxic
DER
for
Accession
No.
260647
(
Bull
and
Wilkinson
1980);

same
as
unclassified
study
MRID
155740
(
Bull
and
Wilkinson
1980)
Acceptable
Table
E­
13b:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
Formulations
to
Honey
Bees
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
­
E­
76­
Formulation
Cymbush
3E
Apis
mellifera
(
honey
bee)
35.6
Toxicity
of
residues
on
foliage.
Oilseed
rape
seed
plots
sprayed
with
0,
67
and
150
g
a.
i./
ha.
Treated
foliage
cut
at
specified
times
(
not
given)
after
treatment
and
placed
in
cages
of
bees;
cages
then
placed
in
growth
chamber
for
24
hrs.
Weathering
times
of
treated
foliage
as
3,
8,
24,
48
and
96
hrs.
Mortality
evaluated
after
24
hr
exposure.

At
67
g
a.
i./
ha,
73­
97%
mortality.
One
test
at
67
g
a.
i./
ha
resulted
in
a
reduction
in
toxicity
over
time,
due
to
a
significant
amount
of
rainfall
early
in
the
rapeseed
plot
weathering
period.

At
150
g
a.
i./
ha,
75­
95%
mortality.

Note:
67
g
a.
i./
ha
is
approximately
equivalent
to
0.06
lb
a.
i./
A
and
150
g
a.
i./
ha
is
approximately
equivalent
to
0.13
lb
a.
i./
A.
Conversion
of
the
application
rate
expressed
in
terms
of
g
a.
i./
ha
to
lb
a.
i./
A
was
done
as
follows:
application
rate
in
lb
a.
i./
A
=
(
application
rate
in
g
a.
i./
ha)
×
(
1
ha/
2.471
A)
×
(
0.0022
lb/
1
g)
Highly
toxic
(
as
categorized
in
DER)
DER
for
Accession
No.
40274001
(
Gough
et
al.
1987)

same
as
unclassified
study
MRID
41699401
(
Lewis
1990)
Acceptable
e.
Earthworms,
Acute
Toxicity
Studies
in
earthworms
are
not
guideline
requirements.
A
study
on
the
acute
contact
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
earthworms
was
identified
by
search
of
the
ECOTOX
database
(
Roberts
and
Dorough
1984);
details
are
provided
in
Table
E­
14.
Using
the
classification
scheme
as
detailed
in
this
publication,
the
acute
48­
hour
contact
LD50
of
26.09
:
g/
cm2
suggests
that
cypermethrin
TGAI
is
very
toxic
to
earthworms.
­
E­
77­
Table
E­
14:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Technical
Grade
Cypermethrin
Isomers
(
TGAI)
to
Earthworms
Species
%
a.
i.
LC50
Toxicity
Category
Identification
Number
Study
Classification
Eisenia
foetida
(
earthworm)
100
Earthworms
exposed
to
cypermethrin
TGAI
deposits
on
filter
paper
for
48
hours.
Toxicity
classified
according
to
the
following
scheme:
super­
toxic
(
LC50
<
1.0
:
g/
cm2);
extremely
toxic
(
LC50
1­
10
:
g/
cm2);
very
toxic
(
LC50
10­
100
:
g/
cm2);
moderately
toxic
(
LC50
100­
1000
:
g/
cm2);
or
relatively
non­
toxic
(
LC50
>
1000
:
g/
cm2).

48­
hour
contact
LC50
=
26.09:
g/
cm2
very
toxic
Roberts
and
Dorough
1984
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)

f.
Field
Studies
on
Non­
Target
Terrestrial
Invertebrates
Limited
information
is
available
from
field
studies
in
non­
target
insects.
Results
of
a
field
study
identified
in
the
open
literature
(
summarized
in
Table
E­
15)
show
adverse
effects
on
the
abundance
of
carabid
and
rove
beetles
following
a
single
application
of
cypermethrin
at
a
rate
of
0.089
lb
a.
i./
A,
a
rate
that
is
slightly
less
than
the
approved
maximum
application
rate
of
0.1
lb
a.
i./
A
(
Shires
1985).
Both
carabid
and
rove
beetle
numbers
returned
to
untreated
control
levels
within
6
to
8
weeks
after
cypermethrin
application.
In
this
same
study,
earthworm
abundance
was
not
adversely
affected
by
cypermethirn
application;
however,
worm
abundance
was
not
evaluated
until
17
weeks
after
treatment.
Thus,
it
is
not
clear
if
there
were
adverse
effects
at
time­
points
closer
to
the
time
of
application.
Since
cypermethrin
has
a
broad
spectrum
of
insecticidal
activity,
it
is
not
surprising
that
adverse
effects
are
observed
in
non­
target
insect
populations.
­
E­
78­
Table
E­
15.
Field
Studies
on
the
Effects
of
Cypermethrin
on
Non­
Target
Terrestrial
Insects
Study
Duration
%
a.
i.
Methodology
and
Results
Study
Identification
Study
Classification
Cypermethrin
(
Formulation
Ripcord)

Single
application
followed
by
observation
period
of
up
to
17
weeks
not
reported
Methods:
Single
application
of
cypermethrin
at
rate
of
100
g
a.
i./
ha
[
equivalent
to
0.089
lb
a.
i./
A
a]
to
plots
of
spring
wheat.
Species
assessed
­
earthworms,
carabid
beetles,

Results:
For
earthworms,
17
weeks
after
treatment,
abundance
was
increased
,
most
likely
due
to
normal
seasonal
variation.
No
cypermethrin
residues
detected
in
earthworms.
For
carabid
beetles,
significant
decrease
compared
to
untreated
control
plots
at
2
weeks
after
application;
by
8
weeks
after
application,
numbers
recovered
to
untreated
control
levels.
For
Rove
beetles,
decrease
in
abundance
up
to
4
weeks
after
application;
recovery
to
untreated
controls
at
6
weeks
after
treatment.
Shires
1985
Open
Literature
(
Not
Classified)

a
Conversion
of
the
application
rate
expressed
in
terms
of
g
a.
i./
ha
to
lb
a.
i./
A
was
done
as
follows:

lb
a.
i./
A
=
(
g
a.
i./
ha)
×
(
1
ha/
2.471
A)
×
(
0.0022
lb/
1
g)

V.
Plants
Inhabiting
Terrestrial
Environments
No
studies
on
the
effects
cypermethrin
on
plants
inhabiting
terrestrial
environments
were
submitted.

VI..
Literature
Cited
All
references
cited
in
this
Appendix
are
provided
in
the
Ecotoxicity
Bibliography,
Appendix
N.
­
F­
1­
APPENDIX
F.
The
Risk
Quotient
Method
and
Levels
of
Concern
The
risks
to
terrestrial
and
aquatic
organisms
are
determined
based
on
a
method
by
which
risk
quotients
(
RQs)
are
compared
with
levels
of
concern
(
LOCs).
This
method
provides
an
indication
of
a
chemical's
potential
to
cause
an
effect
in
the
field
from
effects
observed
in
laboratory
studies,
when
used
as
directed.
Risk
quotients
are
expressed
as
the
ratio
of
the
estimated
environmental
concentration
(
EEC)
to
the
species­
specific
toxicity
reference
value
(
TRV):

RQ
EEC
TRV
=

Units
for
EEC
and
TRV
should
be
the
same
(
e.
g.,
:
g/
L
or
ppb).
The
RQ
is
compared
to
the
LOC
as
part
of
a
risk
characterization.
Acute
and
chronic
LOCs
for
terrestrial
and
aquatic
organisms
are
given
in
recent
Agency
guidance
(
EPA,
2004)
and
summarized
in
Table
F­
1
below.

Table
F1.
Level
of
concern
(
LOC)
by
risk
presumption
category
(
EPA,
2004).

Risk
Presumption
RQ
LOC
Mammals
and
Birds
Acute
Riska
EECb/
LC
50
or
LD
50
/
sqftc
or
LD
50
/
dayd
0.5
Acute
Restricted
Usee
EEC/
LC
50
or
LD
50
/
sqft
or
LD
50
/
day
(
or
LD
50
<
50
mg/
kg)
0.2
Acute
Listed
Speciesf
EEC/
LC
50
or
LD
50
/
sqft
or
LD
50
/
day
0.1
Chronic
Risk
EEC/
NOEC
1
Aquatic
Animals
Acute
Risk
EECg/
LC
50
or
EC
50
0.5
Acute
Restricted
Use
EEC/
LC
50
or
EC
50
0.1
Acute
Listed
Species
EEC/
LC
50
or
EC
50
0.05
Chronic
Risk
EEC/
NOEC
1
Terrestrial
Plants
and
Terrestrial
Plants
in
Semi­
Aquatic
Areas
Plants
Acute
Risk
EEC/
EC
25
1
Acute
Listed
Species
EEC/
EC
05
or
NOEC
1
Table
F1.
Level
of
concern
(
LOC)
by
risk
presumption
category
(
EPA,
2004).

Risk
Presumption
RQ
LOC
­
F­
2­
Aquatic
Plants
Acute
Risk
EECh/
EC
50
1
Acute
Listed
Species
EECg/
EC
05
or
NOEC
1
aPotential
for
acute
toxicity
for
receptor
species
if
RQ
>
LOC
(
EPA,
2004).

bEstimated
environmental
concentration
(
ppm)
on
avian/
mammalian
food
items
cmg/
ft2
dmg
of
toxicant
consumed
per
day
ePotential
for
acute
toxicity
for
receptor
species,
even
considering
restricted
use
classification,
if
RQ
>
LOC
(
EPA,
2004).

fPotential
for
acute
toxicity
for
listed
species
of
receptor
species
if
RQ
>
LOC
(
EPA,
2004).

gEEC
=
ppb
or
ppm
in
water
hEEC
=
lbs
a.
i./
A
For
acute
exposure
to
terrestrial
and
aquatic
plants,
an
LOC
of
1
is
used.
Currently
the
Agency
does
not
perform
assessments
for
chronic
risk
to
plants
or
acute/
chronic
risks
to
non­
target
insects.

For
the
Tier
2
aquatic
assessment
of
cypermethrin
acute
exposure
is
represented
by
the
maximum
24­
hour
EEC
value
and
chronic
exposure
is
represented
by
the
21­
day
time
weighted
average
EEC
value
calculated
using
PRZM/
EXAMS,
respectively.
EECs
used
to
assess
acute
and
chronic
risk
to
avian
and
mammalian
species
to
cypermethrin
were
calculated
using
the
Tier
1
model
T­
REX.

The
Agency
has
developed
an
Listed
Species
Protection
Program
to
identify
pesticides
whose
use
may
cause
adverse
impacts
on
listed
and
threatened
species,
and
to
implement
mitigation
measures
that
will
eliminate
the
adverse
impacts.
At
present,
the
program
is
being
implemented
on
an
interim
basis
as
described
in
a
Federal
Register
notice
(
54
FR
27984­
28008,
July
3,
1989),
and
is
providing
information
to
pesticide
users
to
help
them
protect
these
species
on
a
voluntary
basis.
As
currently
planned,
the
final
program
will
call
for
label
modifications
referring
to
required
limitations
on
pesticide
uses,
typically
as
depicted
in
county­
specific
bulletins
or
by
other
site­
specific
mechanisms
as
specified
by
state
partners.
A
final
program,
which
may
be
altered
from
the
interim
program,
will
be
described
in
a
future
Federal
Register
notice.
The
Agency
is
not
imposing
label
modifications
at
this
time.
Rather,
any
requirements
for
product
use
modifications
will
occur
in
the
future
under
the
Listed
Species
Protection
Program.

Limitations
in
the
use
of
cypermethrin
may
be
required
to
protect
listed
and
threatened
species,
but
these
limitations
have
not
been
defined
and
may
be
formulation
specific.
The
Agency
will
notify
the
registrants
if
any
label
modifications
are
necessary.
Such
modifications
would
most
likely
consist
of
the
generic
label
statement
referring
pesticide
users
to
use
limitations
contained
in
county
Bulletins.
­
F­
3­
Literature
Cited
EPA
(
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency).
2004.
Overview
of
the
Ecological
Risk
Assessment
Process
in
the
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency:
Listed
and
Threatened
Species
Effects
Determinations.
Office
of
Prevention,
Pesticide,
and
Toxic
Substances.
January
23.
­
G­
1­
APPENDIX
G:
Detailed
Risk
Quotients
This
appendix
presents
detailed
risk
quotient
(
RQ)
calculations
for
fish,
invertebrates,
aquatic
plants,
birds,
mammals
and
terrestrial
plants.
Exposure
for
aquatic
animals
and
plants
was
estimated
by
Tier
II
model
PRZM/
EXAMS.
For
terrestrial
animals,
EECs
were
generating
using
the
Tier
I
models
T­
REX.
All
toxicity
values
used
to
derive
RQs
were
from
registrant­
submitted
studies.
Risk
quotient
values
that
exceed
LOCs
are
discussed
in
the
Risk
Characterization
section
of
the
main
report.

Table
G­
1:
Acute
RQs
for
freshwater
fish
exposed
to
cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
LC50
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
EEC
Peak
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Acute
RQ
(
EEC/
LC50)
c
Cotton
California
rainbow
trout
0.39
0.178
0.5
Mississippi
rainbow
trout
0.39
1.28
3.3
North
Carolina
rainbow
trout
0.39
2.01
5.2
Texas
rainbow
trout
0.39
0.493
1.3
Pecans
Georgia
rainbow
trout
0.39
0.953
2.4
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
rainbow
trout
0.39
0.29
0.7
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
peak
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
RQs
are
based
on
the
rainbow
trout
96­
hr
LC50
=
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L.

c
RQs
meet
or
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).
­
G­
2­
Table
G­
2:
Chronic
RQs
for
freshwater
fish
exposed
to
cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
NOAEC
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
21­
Day
EEC
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Chronic
RQ
(
EEC/
NOAEC)
c
Cotton
California
fathead
minnow
0.14
0.055
0.4
Mississippi
fathead
minnow
0.14
0.188
1.3
c
North
Carolina
fathead
minnow
0.14
0.192
1.4
c
Texas
fathead
minnow
0.14
0.06
0.4
Pecans
Georgia
fathead
minnow
0.14
0.086
0.6
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
fathead
minnow
0.14
0.033
0.2
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
21­
day
average
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
RQs
are
based
on
the
fathead
minnow
28­
day
NOAEC
=
0.14
:
g
a.
i./
L.

c
RQs
exceed
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).

Table
G­
3:
Acute
RQs
for
freshwater
invertebrates
exposed
to
cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
EC50
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
EEC
Peak
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Acute
RQ
(
EEC/
LC50)

Cotton
California
waterflea
0.42
0.178
0.4
d
Mississippi
waterflea
0.42
1.28
3.0
c,
d
North
Carolina
waterflea
0.42
2.01
4.8
c,
d
Texas
waterflea
0.42
0.493
1.2
c,
d
Pecans
Georgia
waterflea
0.42
0.953
2.3
c,
d
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
waterflea
0.42
0.29
0.69
c,
d
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
peak
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
RQs
are
based
on
the
waterflea
48­
hr
EC50
=
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L.

c
RQs
exceeds
the
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
0.5)

d
All
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).
­
G­
3­
Table
G­
4:
Chronic
RQs
for
freshwater
invertebrates
exposed
to
cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
NOAEC
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
21­
Day
EEC
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Chronic
RQ
(
EEC/
NOAEC)

Cotton
California
surrogate
data
0.069
0.055
0.8
Mississippi
surrogate
data
0.069
0.188
2.7
c
North
Carolina
surrogate
data
0.069
0.192
2.8
c
Texas
surrogate
data
0.069
0.060
0.9
c
Pecans
Georgia
surrogate
data
0.069
0.086
1.2
c
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
surrogate
data
0.069
0.033
0.5
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
21­
day
average
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
the
freshwater
invertebrates
is
based
on
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Freshwater
invertebrate
LC50
(
0.42
:
g
a.
i./
L)/
X
(
estimated
value
for
Freshwater
invertebrate
NOAEC),
where
X
=
0.069
:
g
a.
i./
L.

c
RQs
exceed
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).
­
G­
4­
Table
G­
5:
Acute
RQs
for
estuarine/
marine
fish
exposed
to
cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
LC50
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
EEC
Peak
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Acute
RQ
(
EEC/
LC50)

Cotton
California
sheepshead
minnow
0.95
0.178
0.2
d
Mississippi
sheepshead
minnow
0.95
1.28
1.3
c,
d
North
Carolina
sheepshead
minnow
0.95
2.01
2.1
c,
d
Texas
sheepshead
minnow
0.95
0.493
0.5
c,
d
Pecans
Georgia
sheepshead
minnow
0.95
0.953
1.0
c,
d
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
sheepshead
minnow
0.95
0.29
0.3
d
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
peak
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
RQs
are
based
on
the
sheepshead
minnow
96­
hour
LC50
=
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L.

c
RQs
meet
or
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
0.5).

d
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1)
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).
­
G­
5­
Table
G­
6:
Chronic
RQs
for
estuarine/
marine
fish
exposed
to
cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
NOAEC
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
21­
Day
EEC
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Chronic
RQ
(
EEC/
NOAEC)
c
Cotton
California
surrogate
data
0.34
0.055
0.16
Mississippi
surrogate
data
0.34
0.188
0.55
North
Carolina
surrogate
data
0.34
0.192
0.56
Texas
surrogate
data
0.34
0.060
0.18
Pecans
Georgia
surrogate
data
0.34
0.086
0.25
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
surrogate
data
0.34
0.033
0.10
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
21­
day
average
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
The
estimated
NOAEC
0.34
:
g
a.
i./
L
is
based
on
the
acute­
to­
chronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:
Freshwater
LC50
(
0.39
:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Freshwater
NOAEC
(
0.14:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Estuarine/
Marine
LC50
(
0.95
:
g
a.
i./
L)/
X
(
estimated
value
for
Estuarine/
Marine
NOAEC),
where
X
=
0.34
:
g
a.
i./
L
c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).
­
G­
6­
Table
G­
7:
Acute
RQs
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
exposed
to
cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
LC50
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
EEC
Peak
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Acute
RQ
(
EEC/
LC50)
c
Cotton
California
mysid
shrimp
0.00475
0.178
37
Mississippi
mysid
shrimp
0.00475
1.28
269
North
Carolina
mysid
shrimp
0.00475
2.01
423
Texas
mysid
shrimp
0.00475
0.493
104
Pecans
Georgia
mysid
shrimp
0.00475
0.953
201
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
mysid
shrimp
0.00475
0.29
61
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
peak
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
RQs
are
based
on
the
mysid
shrimp
96­
hour
LC50
=
0.00475
:
g
a.
i./
L.

c
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).

Table
G­
8:
Chronic
RQs
for
estuarine/
marine
invertebrates
exposed
to
cypermethrin.

Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
NOAEC
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
21­
Day
EEC
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L)
Chronic
RQ
(
EEC/
NOAEC)
c
Cotton
California
mysid
shrimp
0.000781
0.055
70
Mississippi
mysid
shrimp
0.000781
0.188
241
North
Carolina
mysid
shrimp
0.000781
0.192
246
Texas
mysid
shrimp
0.000781
0.060
77
Pecans
Georgia
mysid
shrimp
0.000781
0.086
110
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
mysid
shrimp
0.000781
0.034
44
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
21­
day
average
concentrations
in
surface
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
RQs
are
based
on
the
mysid
shrimp
28­
day
NOAEC
=
0.0.000781
:
g
a.
i./
L.

c
All
RQs
exceed
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).
­
G­
7­
Table
G­
9:
Acute
RQs
for
benthic
organisms
exposed
to
cypermethrin,
calculated
using
sediment
toxicity
values
and
sediment
EEC
values
Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
LC50
b
(:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment)
EEC
Peak
a
(:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment)
Acute
RQ
(
EEC/
LC50)
c
Cotton
California
amphipod
3.6
25.28
7
Mississippi
amphipod
3.6
158.1
44
North
Carolina
amphipod
3.6
171.8
48
Texas
amphipod
3.6
47.6
13
Pecans
Georgia
amphipod
3.6
93.7
26
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
amphipod
3.6
30.5
8
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
24­
hour
peak
concentrations
in
sediment
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
RQs
are
based
on
the
amphipod
10­
day
LC50
=
3.6
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment.

c
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).
­
G­
8­
Table
G­
10:
Acute
RQs
for
benthic
organisms
exposed
to
cypermethrin,
calculated
using
toxicity
values
derived
for
pore
water
and
pore
water
EEC
values
Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAM
S
Scenario
Organism
LC50
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water)
EEC
Peak
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water)
Acute
RQ
(
EEC/
LC50)
c
Cotton
California
amphipod
0.0026
0.0044
2
Mississippi
amphipod
0.0026
0.0280
11
North
Carolina
amphipod
0.0026
0.0303
12
Texas
amphipod
0.0026
0.0073
3
Pecans
Georgia
amphipod
0.0026
0.017
7
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
amphipod
0.0026
0.005
2
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
24­
hour
peak
concentrations
in
pore
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
For
benthic
organisms,
the
LC50
value
of
0.00257
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water
was
calculated
as
follows.
The
LC50
value
in
whole
sediment
[
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment]
is
divided
by
the
proportion
of
organic
carbon
in
the
sediment
[
0.0099
kg
OC/
kg
whole
sediment].
Thus,
the
LC50
value
in
units
of
OC
is
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
[
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
÷
0.0099
kg
OC/
kg
sediment].
The
equivalent
concentration
in
pore
water
is
based
on
the
definition
of
the
Koc,

Koc
(
L/
kg
OC)
=
Sediment
Conc
in
OC
(
mg/
kg
OC)
÷
Conc
in
pore
water
(
mg/
L).

By
rearrangement,

Conc
in
water
=
Sediment
Conc
in
units
of
OC
÷
Koc.

For
cypermethrin,
the
Koc
is
taken
as
141,700
[
L/
kg
OC].
Thus,
the
calculated
concentration
in
pore
water
corresponding
to
the
LC50
value
of
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
is
0.00257
µ
g
a.
i./
L
[
364
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
OC
÷
141,700
L/
kg
OC].

c
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).
­
G­
9­
Table
G­
11:
Chronic
RQs
for
benthic
organisms
exposed
to
cypermethrin,
calculated
using
sediment
toxicity
values
and
sediment
EEC
values
Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
NOAEC
b
(:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment)
21­
Day
EEC
a
(:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment)
Chronic
RQ
(
EEC/
NOAEC)
c
Cotton
California
surrogate
data
0.59
20.47
35
Mississippi
surrogate
data
0.59
134.8
228
North
Carolina
surrogate
data
0.59
143.9
244
Texas
surrogate
data
0.59
30.6
52
Pecans
Georgia
surrogate
data
0.59
72.3
123
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
surrogate
data
0.59
27.8
47
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
21­
day
average
concentrations
in
sediment
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
benthic
organisms
in
terms
of
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
is
based
on
the
acute­
tochronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Benthic
LC50
in
sediment
3.6
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment
/
X
(
estimated
benthic
NOAEC
value
in
sediment),
where
X
=
0.59
:
g
a.
i./
kg
sediment.

c
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).
­
G­
10­
Table
G­
12:
Chronic
RQs
for
benthic
organisms
exposed
to
cypermethrin,
calculated
using
toxicity
values
derived
for
pore
water
and
pore
water
EEC
values
Crop
Use
PRZM/
EXAMS
Scenario
Organism
NOAEC
b
(:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water)
21­
Day
EEC
a
(:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water)
Chronic
RQ
(
EEC/
NOAEC)
c
Cotton
California
surrogate
data
0.00042
0.0036
9
Mississippi
surrogate
data
0.00042
0.0238
57
North
Carolina
surrogate
data
0.00042
0.0253
60
Texas
surrogate
data
0.00042
0.0054
13
Pecans
Georgia
surrogate
data
0.00042
0.013
31
Lettuce
(
Head)
California
surrogate
data
0.00042
0.005
12
a
EEC
values
(:
g/
L)
are
21­
day
average
concentrations
in
pore
water
generated
from
PRZM/
EXAMS.

b
The
chronic
NOAEC
estimated
for
benthic
organisms
in
units
of
µ
g
a.
i./
kg
pore
water
is
based
on
the
acute­
tochronic
ratio
method,
determined
by
the
following
mathematical
relationship:
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
LC50
(
0.00475:
g
a.
i./
L)
/
Estuarine/
marine
invertebrate
NOAEC
(
0.000781:
g
a.
i./
L)
=
Benthic
LC50
in
pore
water
(
0.00257
µ
g
a.
i./
L
/
X
(
estimated
benthic
NOAEC
value
in
pore
water
),
where
X
=
0.00042
:
g
a.
i./
L
pore
water.

c
RQs
exceed
LOCs
for
acute
risk
(
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.1),
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.05).
­
G­
11­
Table
G­
13.
Dose­
based
acute
RQs
for
birds
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
upper
bound
residues
as
calculated
by
TREX
a
and
an
acute
oral
LD50
>
2000
mg/
kg
body
weight
in
bobwhite
quail.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Avian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
(
all
RQs
are
<
the
reported
value)
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Cotton
20
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.003
100
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.002
1000
0.01
0.004
0.01
0.001
Lettuce
20
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.002
100
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.001
1000
0.01
0.003
0.003
0.0004
Pecans
20
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.002
100
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.002
1000
0.01
0.003
0.004
0.0004
Canola
20
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.002
100
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.001
1000
0.01
0.003
0.003
0.0004
a
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
TREX
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
acute
dietary
LD50
value
of
>
2000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
bobwhite
quail.

c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.1).
­
G­
12­
Table
G­
14.
Dose­
based
acute
RQs
for
birds
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
mean
residues
as
calculated
by
TREX
a
and
an
acute
oral
LD50
>
2000
mg/
kg
body
weight
in
bobwhite
quail.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Avian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
(
all
RQs
are
<
the
reported
value)
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Cotton
20
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.002
100
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.001
1000
0.003
0.001
0.002
0.0003
Lettuce
20
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.001
100
0.01
0.003
0.004
0.001
1000
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.0002
Pecans
20
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.001
100
0.01
0.004
0.01
0.001
1000
0.003
0.001
0.001
0.0002
Canola
20
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.001
100
0.01
0.003
0.004
0.001
1000
0.002
0.001
0.001
0.0002
a
EECs
values
are
mean
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
acute
dietary
LD50
value
of
>
2000
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
bobwhite
quail.

c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.1).
­
G­
13­
Table
G­
15.
Dietary­
based
acute
RQs
for
birds
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
upper
bound
residues
as
calculated
by
TREX
a
and
an
acute
dietary
LC50
>
2634
mg/
kg
diet
in
mallard
duck.

Crop
Use
Avian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
(
all
RQs
are
<
the
reported
value)
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Cotton
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.002
Lettuce
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.001
Pecans
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.001
Canola
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.001
a
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
acute
dietary
LC50
value
of
>
2634
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
mallard
duck.

c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.1).

Table
G­
16.
Dietary­
based
acute
RQs
for
birds
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
mean
residues
as
calculated
by
TREX
a
and
an
acute
dietary
LC50
>
2634
mg/
kg
diet
in
mallard
duck.

Crop
Use
Avian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
(
all
RQs
are
<
the
reported
value)
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Cotton
0.01
0.004
0.005
0.001
Lettuce
0.01
0.002
0.003
0.0004
Pecans
0.01
0.003
0.003
0.001
Canola
0.01
0.002
0.003
0.0004
Table
G­
16.
Dietary­
based
acute
RQs
for
birds
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
mean
residues
as
calculated
by
TREX
a
and
an
acute
dietary
LC50
>
2634
mg/
kg
diet
in
mallard
duck.

Crop
Use
Avian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
(
all
RQs
are
<
the
reported
value)
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
­
G­
14­
a
EECs
values
are
mean
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
acute
dietary
LC50
value
of
>
2634
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
mallard
duck.

c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.1).

Table
G­
17.
Dietary­
based
chronic
RQs
for
birds
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
upper
bound
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
and
a
chronic
NOAEC
>
50
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
ducks.

Crop
Use
Avian
Chronic
Risk
Quotients
(
all
RQs
are
<
the
reported
value)
b
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Cotton
1.34
c
0.61
0.75
0.08
Lettuce
0.80
0.37
0.45
0.05
Pecans
0.98
0.45
0.55
0.06
Canola
0.78
0.36
0.44
0.05
a
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
chronic
dietary
NOAEC
value
of
>
50
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
ducks.

c
RQ
is
above
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).
­
G­
15­
Table
G­
18.
Dietary­
based
chronic
RQs
for
birds
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
mean
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
and
a
chronic
NOAEC
>
50
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
ducks.

Crop
Use
Avian
Chronic
Risk
Quotients
(
all
RQs
are
<
the
reported
value)
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Cotton
0.47
0.20
0.25
0.04
Lettuce
0.28
0.12
0.15
0.02
Pecans
0.35
0.15
0.18
0.03
Canola
0.028
0.12
0.15
0.02
a
EECs
values
are
mean
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
chronic
dietary
NOAEC
value
of
>
50
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
bobwhite
quail
and
mallard
ducks.

c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).

Table
G­
19:
Dose­
based
acute
RQs
for
mammals
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
upper
bound
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
a
and
an
acute
oral
LD50
=
247
mg/
kg
body
weight
in
rats.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Mammalian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Seeds
Cotton
15
0.12
d
0.05
0.07
0.01
0.002
35
0.10
d
0.05
0.06
0.01
0.001
1000
0.05
0.02
0.03
0.00
0.001
Lettuce
15
0.07
0.03
0.04
0.004
0.001
35
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.004
0.001
1000
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.002
0.0004
Pecans
15
0.09
0.04
0.05
0.01
0.001
35
0.07
0.03
0.04
0.005
0.001
1000
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.002
0.0005
Table
G­
19:
Dose­
based
acute
RQs
for
mammals
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
upper
bound
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
a
and
an
acute
oral
LD50
=
247
mg/
kg
body
weight
in
rats.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Mammalian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Seeds
­
G­
16­
Canola
15
0.07
0.03
0.04
0.004
0.001
35
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.004
0.001
1000
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.002
0.0004
a
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
TREX
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
acute
oral
LD50
value
=
247
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
rats.

c
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5)
and
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2)

d
RQs
meet
or
exceed
the
LOC
for
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.1).
­
G­
17­
Table
G­
20:
Dose­
based
acute
RQs
for
mammals
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
mean
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
a
and
an
acute
oral
LD50
=
247
mg/
kg
body
weight
in
rats.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Mammalian
Acute
Risk
Quotients
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Seeds
Cotton
15
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.003
0.001
35
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.030
0.001
1000
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.002
0.003
Lettuce
15
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.002
0.0004
35
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.002
0.0004
1000
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.001
0.0002
Pecans
15
0.03
0.01
0.02
0.003
0.001
35
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.002
0.0005
1000
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.001
0.0002
Canola
15
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.002
0.0004
35
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.002
0.0004
1000
0.01
0.005
0.01
0.001
0.0002
a
EECs
values
are
mean
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
acute
oral
LD50
value
=
247
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
rats.

c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
acute
risk
(
LOC
0.5),
acute
restricted
use
(
LOC
0.2),
and
acute
listed
species
(
LOC
0.1).
­
G­
18­
Table
G­
21:
Dose­
based
chronic
RQs
for
mammals
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
upper
bound
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
a
and
a
chronic
NOAEL
=
7.5
mg/
kg
body
weight/
day
weight
in
rats.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Mammalian
Chronic
Risk
Quotients
b
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Seeds
Cotton
15
5.8
c
2.7
c
3.3
c
0.36
0.08
35
5.0
c
2.3
c
2.8
c
0.31
0.07
1000
2.6
c
1.2
c
1.5
c
0.16
0.03
Lettuce
15
3.5
c
1.6
c
1.9
c
0.22
0.05
35
3.0
c
1.4
c
1.7
c
0.18
0.04
1000
1.6
c
0.71
0.87
0.10
0.03
Pecans
15
4.2
c
1.9
c
2.4
c
0.26
0.06
35
3.6
c
1.7
c
2.1
c
0.23
0.05
1000
1.9
c
0.88
1.1
c
0.12
0.02
Canola
15
3.4
c
1.6
c
1.9
c
0.21
0.05
35
2.9
c
1.3
c
1.6
c
0.18
0.04
1000
1.5
c
0.70
0.86
0.10
0.02
a
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
TREX
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
chronic
NOAEL
=
5
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
rats,
based
on
standard
FDA
lab
rat
conversion
by
T­
REX
using
the
NOAEC
of
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet.

c
RQs
exceed
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).
­
G­
19­
Table
G­
22:
Dose­
based
chronic
RQs
for
mammals
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
mean
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
a
and
a
chronic
NOAEL
=
7.5
mg/
kg
body
weight/
day
weight
in
rats.

Crop
Use
Body
Weight
(
g)
Mammalian
Chronic
Risk
Quotients
b
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Seeds
Cotton
15
2.1
c
0.87
1.1
c
0.17
0.04
35
1.8
c
0.75
0.93
0.14
0.03
1000
0.92
0.39
0.49
0.08
0.02
Lettuce
15
1.2
c
0.52
0.65
0.10
0.02
35
1.1
c
0.44
0.55
0.09
0.02
1000
0.55
0.23
0.29
0.05
0.01
Pecans
15
1.5
c
0.64
0.79
0.12
0.03
35
1.3
c
0.55
0.68
0.11
0.02
1000
0.68
0.29
0.36
0.06
0.01
Canola
15
1.2
0.51
0.63
0.10
0.02
35
1.0
0.43
0.54
0.08
0.02
1000
0.54
0.23
0.29
0.04
0.01
a
EECs
values
are
mean
residues
expressed
as
equivalent
dose
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
chronic
NOAEL
=
5
mg
a.
i./
kg
body
weight
in
rats,
based
on
standard
FDA
lab
rat
conversion
by
T­
REX
using
the
NOAEC
of
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet.

c
RQs
exceed
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).
­
G­
20­
Table
G­
23.
Dietary­
based
chronic
RQs
for
mammals
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
upper
bound
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
and
a
chronic
NOAEC
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
rats.

Crop
Use
Mammalian
Chronic
Risk
Quotients
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Cotton
0.67
0.31
0.38
0.04
Lettuce
0.40
0.18
0.22
0.02
Pecans
0.49
0.22
0.28
0.03
Canola
0.39
0.18
0.22
0.02
a
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
chronic
dietary
NOAEC
value
of
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
rats.

c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).

Table
G­
24.
Dietary­
based
chronic
RQs
for
mammals
exposed
to
cypermethrin
based
on
mean
residues
as
calculated
by
T­
REX
and
a
chronic
NOAEC
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
rats.

Crop
Use
Mammalian
Chronic
Risk
Quotients
b,
c
Short
Grass
Tall
Grass
Broadleaf
Plants/

Small
Insects
Fruits/
Pods/

Large
Insects
Cotton
0.24
0.10
0.13
0.02
Lettuce
0.14
0.06
0.07
0.01
Pecans
0.17
0.07
0.09
0.01
Canola]
0.14
0.06
0.07
0.01
a
EECs
values
are
upper
bound
residues
expressed
as
dietary
concentrations
(
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet)
generated
from
T­
REX.
See
Appendix
D.

b
RQs
were
calculated
using
the
chronic
dietary
NOAEC
value
of
100
mg
a.
i./
kg
diet
in
rats.

c
All
RQs
are
below
the
LOC
for
chronic
risk
(
LOC
1).
­
H­
1­
APPENDIX
H.
Summary
of
Listed/
Threatened
Species
Should
estimated
exposure
levels
occur
in
proximity
to
listed
species,
the
available
screening
level
information
suggests
a
potential
concern
for
direct
effects
on
listed
fish,
amphibians,
and
aquatic
invertebrates
(
freshwater
and
estuarine/
marine),
insects,
birds,
and
mammals.
Specifically,
results
of
this
level
I
screening
assessment
show
that
acute
RQs
exceed
the
acute
listed
species
LOC
for
several
taxa
(
Table
20).
However,
at
this
time,
the
Agency
will
not
identify
individual
species
relative
to
use
sites.
­
I­
1­
APPENDIX
I.
Data
Requirement
Tables
 
Environmental
Fate
and
Ecological
Effects
Table
I­
1.
Cypermethrin
Table
of
Environmental
Fate
Data
Requirements
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
MRID
#
Study
Classification
Are
Additional
Data
Required
for
Risk
Assessment?

161­
1
Hydrolysis
42620501
Acceptable
no
161­
2
Photodegradation
in
Water
42395701
Supplemental
no
161­
3
Photodegradation
on
Soil
42129001
Supplemental
no
161­
4
Photodegradation
in
Air
No
Data
Waived
no
162­
1
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
42156601
Acceptable
no
162­
2
Anaerobic
Soil
Metabolism
42156602
Acceptable
no
162­
3
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
44876105
Acceptable
no
162­
4
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
45920801
Acceptable
no
163­
1
Leaching­
Adsorption/
Desorption
42129002,
42129003
Acceptable
no
163­
2
Laboratory
Volatility
No
Data
Waived
no
163­
3
Field
Volatility
No
Data
Waived
no
164­
1
Terrestrial
Field
Dissipation
42459601
Acceptable
no
164­
2
Aquatic
Field
Dissipation
44876107
Supplemental
no
aquatic
uses
164­
3
Forestry
Dissipation
No
Data
N/
A
no
165­
4
Accumulation
in
Fish
42868203
Acceptable
no
­
I­
2­
Table
I­
2.
Ecological
Effects
Data
Requirements
for
Cypermethrin
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
Formulation
Are
data
adequate
for
ecological
risk
assessment?
MRID
or
Acc.

Number
Study
Classification
71­
1
Avian
Acute
Oral
Toxicity
Technical
Technical
Technical
Yes
241598
44546024
90070
Acceptable
Acceptable
Invalid
71­
2
Avian
Subacute
Dietary
Toxicity
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Yes
90071
90072
44546025
44546026
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
71­
4
Avian
Reproduction
Toxicity
Technical
Technical
Yes
90073
90074
Acceptable
Acceptable
Table
I­
2.
Ecological
Effects
Data
Requirements
for
Cypermethrin
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
Formulation
Are
data
adequate
for
ecological
risk
assessment?
MRID
or
Acc.

Number
Study
Classification
­
I­
3­
72­
1
Freshwater
Fish
LC50
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Formulation
Formulation
Formulation
Metabolite
(
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid)
Yes
62792
65812
44546028
44546030
41968209
41968208
44546027
44546029
241598
41068004
65813
88947
89036
89037
89038
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable/

Supplemental
Not
classified
Acceptable
Not
classified
Not
classified
Acceptable
Acceptable
Table
I­
2.
Ecological
Effects
Data
Requirements
for
Cypermethrin
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
Formulation
Are
data
adequate
for
ecological
risk
assessment?
MRID
or
Acc.

Number
Study
Classification
­
I­
4­
72­
2
Freshwater
Invertebrate
Acute
LC50
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Formulation
Formulation
Formulation
Metabolite
(
3­
phenoxy
benzoic
acid)
Yes
62793
44546032
44546031
42444601
44074401
44074402
44074406
41968210
43293501
44423501
62793
89040
88949
42444601
152739
89046
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable/

Supplemental
Supplemental
Supplemental
Supplemental
Invalid
Not
classified
Not
classified
Supplemental
Not
classified
Not
classified
Acceptable
Acceptable
Not
classified
72­
3(
a)
Estuarine/
Marine
Fish
LC50
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Yes
44546033
41968212
41968211
44546034
90075
41068003
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Not
classified
Not
classified
72­
3(
b)
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
(
Mollusk
)
Technical
Yes
42444601
89049
Acceptable
Acceptable
Table
I­
2.
Ecological
Effects
Data
Requirements
for
Cypermethrin
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
Formulation
Are
data
adequate
for
ecological
risk
assessment?
MRID
or
Acc.

Number
Study
Classification
­
I­
5­
72­
3(
c)
Estuarine/
Marine
Invertebrate
(
Mysid)
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Unknown
Yes
42444601
44561210
42444601
44561209
41968213
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Invalid
72­
3
(
d)
Estuarine/
Marine
Crustacean
Technical
Technical
No
89045
41068003
Invalid
Not
classified
72­
4
(
a)
Freshwater
Fish
Early
Life­
Stage
Technical
Yes
89039
Acceptable
72­
4
Aquatic
Invertebrate
Life­
Cycle
(
Freshwater)
Chronic
Toxicity
Technical
No
428983­
01
89047
Invalid
Invalid
72­
4
Aquatic
Invertebrate
Life­
Cycle
(
Marine)
Chronic
Toxicity
Technical
Technical
Technical
Technical
Yes
42444601
42725301
44546035
42898301
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
Invalid
72­
5
Freshwater
Fish
Full
Life­
Cycle
(
marine)
No
Data
Submitted
No
NA
NA
72­
7
Aquatic
Field
Study
Formulation
Formulation
Unknown
Unknown
Yes
155770
152737
250506
155772
Not
classified
Not
classified
Supplemental
Not
classified
Table
I­
2.
Ecological
Effects
Data
Requirements
for
Cypermethrin
Guideline
#
Data
Requirement
Formulation
Are
data
adequate
for
ecological
risk
assessment?
MRID
or
Acc.

Number
Study
Classification
­
I­
6­
141­
1
Acute
Honeybee
Contact
Toxicity
Test
Technical
Technical
Formulation
Yes
260647
44544208
260647
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
141­
2
Residues
on
Foliage
Honeybee
Toxicity
Test
Formulation
Yes
40274001
Acceptable
141­
4
Subacute
Honeybee
Feeding
Toxicity
Test
Technical
Technical
Formulation
Yes
260647
44544208
260647
Acceptable
Acceptable
Acceptable
­
J­
1­
APPENDIX
J.
Incident
Reports
Table
J­
1.
EIIS
Pesticide
Report:
Incidents
Involving
Terrestrial
Species..

Incident
Number
Treatment
Site
Date
State
Certainty
Index
a
Legality
b
Formulation
Appl.

Method
1011348­
001
agricultura
l
area
8/
31/
99
N/
R
1
UN
N/
R
N/
R
1000340­
009
cotton
10/
9/
92
NC
2
UN
Emulsifiable
Conc.
N/
R
1000103­
010
home
3/
7/
90
AL
1
UN
Spray
N/
R
1000340­
006
home
12/
3/
92
NY
2
UN
Emulsifiable
Conc.
N/
R
1000340­
002
N/
R
12/
18/
92
FL
3
RU
N/
R
N/
R
a
Certainty
Index:
0=
Unrelated,
1=
Unlikely,
2=
Possible,
3=
Probable,
4=
Highly
Probable
b
Legality:
RU=
Registered
Use,
MA=
Misuse
(
accidental),
MI=
Misuse
(
intentional),
UN=
Undetermined
N/
R:
not
reported
­
J­
2­
Table
J­
1.
EIIS
Pesticide
Report:
Incidents
Involving
Aquatic
Species
Incident
Number
Treatment
Site
Date
State
Certainty
Index
a
Legality
b
Formulation
Appl.

Method
1008737­
001
building
8/
8/
98
FL
3
RU
Ready­
to­
Use
fog
1001031­
001
home
exterior
4/
26/
94
KY
4
UN
 
soil
incorp.

1007107­
003
N/
R
2/
7/
97
CA
4
UN
N/
R
N/
R
1006971­
001
N/
R
2/
6/
98
TN
2
UN
 
not
certain
1009966­
002
N/
R
2/
9/
98
TN
4
MA
N/
R
N/
R
1010444­
004
N/
R
6/
23/
00
MD
3
MA
N/
R
spill
1013857­
011
none
2/
25/
03
 
3
MI
 
dump
1004876­
011
paper
company
8/
5/
91
NY
4
MA
 
N/
R
1000011­
001
pond
4/
3/
92
NJ
2
RU
N/
R
home
use
1015094­
001
soil
4/
24/
04
OH
2
RU
Emulsifiable
Conc.
sol
incorp
(
band)

a
Certainty
Index:
0=
Unrelated,
1=
Unlikely,
2=
Possible,
3=
Probable,
4=
Highly
Probable
b
Legality:
RU=
Registered
Use,
MA=
Misuse
(
accidental),
MI=
Misuse
(
intentional),
UN=
Undetermined
N/
R:
not
reported
­
K­
1­
APPENDIX
K.
Literature
Searches
A
search
of
the
open
literature
on
the
ecological
effects
of
cypermethrin
was
conducted
using
EPA's
Ecotoxicology
database
ECOTOX.
The
focus
of
this
search
was
to
identify
studies
to
fill
data
gaps
for
aquatic
ecological
effects
and
to
identify
field
studies
in
aquatic
populations.
Studies
that
provided
information
overlapping
with
data
from
MRID
studies
were
not
pursued.
Full
results
of
the
ECOTOX
literature
search
conducted
by
EFED
are
provided
in
the
attached
files:

°
AQUIRE_
cypermethrin.
xls
°
Terrestrial_
cypermethrin.
xls
Following
review
of
the
literature
searches,
10
publications
were
retrieved
and
included
in
the
ecological
effects
characterization.
­
L­
1­
APPENDIX
L.
Use
Characterization
Maps
Figure
L­
1:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
All
Crops
­
L­
2­
Figure
L­
2:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
All
Crops
Caution:
The
pesticide
use
maps
available
from
this
site
show
regional­
scale
patterns
of
use
intensity
within
the
United
States
and
are
not
intended
for
making
local­
scale
estimates
of
pesticide
use,
such
as
for
individual
counties.
The
maps
are
based
state­
level
estimates
of
pesticide
use
rates
for
individual
crops,
which
have
been
compiled
by
the
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy
(
NCFAP)
for
1995­
1998,
and
on
1997
Census
of
Agriculture
county
crop
acreage.
Key
limitations
include:
(
1)
state
use­
coefficients
represent
an
average
for
the
entire
state
and
consequently
do
not
reflect
the
local
variability
of
pesticide
management
practices
found
within
many
states
and
counties,
and
(
2)
the
county­
level
acreage
are
based
on
the
1997
Census
of
Agriculture
and
may
not
represent
all
crop
acreage
due
to
Census
non­
disclosure
rules.
Please
refer
to
Method
for
Estimating
Pesticide
Use
for
a
detailed
discussion
of
how
the
pesticide
use
data
were
developed.

http://
ca.
water.
usgs.
gov/
cgi­
bin/
pnsp/
pesticide_
use_
maps_
1997.
pl?
map=
W6011
­
L­
3­
Figure
L­
3:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Cotton
­
L­
4­
Figure
L­
4:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Lettuce
­
L­
5­
Figure
L­
5:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Pecan
­
L­
6­
Figure
L­
6:
1997
Cotton
Harvest
­
L­
7­
Figure
L­
7:
1997
Cypermethrin
Application
on
Cotton,
by
County
Sources:
USDA
National
Agricultural
Statistics
Service
(
NASS),
http://
www.
nass.
usda.
gov/
census/
and
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy
(
NCFAP),
http://
www.
ncfap.
org.

Note:
The
pesticide
use
maps
show
regional
scale
patterns
in
use
intensity
within
the
United
States
and
are
not
intended
for
making
local­
scale
estimates
of
use,
such
as
for
individual
counties.
The
maps
are
based
on
state­
level
estimates
of
pesticide
use
rates
for
individual
crops,
which
have
been
compiled
by
the
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy
(
NCFAP)
for
1997,
and
on
county­
based
crop
acreage
data
obtained
from
the
1997
Census
of
Agriculture.
Key
limitations
include:
(
1)
state
use
coefficients
represent
an
average
for
the
entire
state
and
consequently
do
not
reflect
the
local
variability
pesticide
management
practices
found
within
many
states
and
counties,
and
(
2)
the
county­
level
acreage
data
used
to
calculate
use
are
based
on
the
1997
Census
of
Agriculture
and
may
not
represent
all
crop
acreage
due
to
Census
non­
disclosure
rules.
­
M­
1­
APPENDIX
M.
Equilibrium
Partitioning
and
Concentration
in
the
Sediment
In
general,
pyrethroid
insecticides
are
lipophilic
compounds
that
can
adsorb
readily
to
particulate
and
sediment,
thus
possibly
limiting
its
exposure
to
aquatic
life
in
the
water
column
but
increasing
toxic
exposure
in
the
benthos.
Sediment
can
act
as
a
reservoir
for
lipophilic
persistent
compounds.
The
sediment
and
particulate
likely
adsorb
a
high
percentage
of
pyrethrin,
as
indicated
by
its
high
K
OC
.
Therefore,
coupled
with
cypermethrin's
expected
persistence
in
anaerobic
environments,
sediment
bound
cypermethrin
could
present
a
toxicity
risk
for
benthic
aquatic
life
and
aquatic
ecosystems
in
general.
Exposure
to
this
sediment
can
result
in
a
direct
impact
to
aquatic
life
through
respiration,
ingestion,
dermal
contact,
as
well
as
indirect
impact
through
alterations
of
the
food
chain.

Pesticide
compounds
that
bind
readily
to
particulate
and
organic
carbon
in
the
water
column
can
eventually
settle
onto
the
benthos
(
bottom
area
of
a
pond
or
estuarine/
marine
ecosystem).
This
increase
in
particulate­
bound
pesticides
can
result
in
an
accumulation
of
compounds
in
or
on
the
sediment
that
may
have
the
potential
for
toxic
impact
to
benthic
and
epibenthic
aquatic
organisms
(
e.
g.,
early
life
stage
of
many
invertebrates
and
fish,
as
well
as
crabs
and
shrimp).
However,
evaluating
the
risk
to
aquatic
life
from
this
exposure
becomes
problematic
given
the
lack
of
adequate
sediment
toxicity
and
exposure
data.
Therefore,
in
order
to
assess
this
potential
for
pesticide
risk
to
aquatic
benthic
systems,
EFED
has
adopted
the
method
used
by
the
USEPA
Office
of
Water
(
OW)
that
relies
on
equilibrium
partitioning
(
EqP)
of
chemicals.
Th
EqP
theory
is
based
on
the
hydrophobicity
and
concentrations
of
the
chemical
normalized
to
organic
carbon
(
OC)
in
sediment
(
De
Toro
et
al.,
1991)
and
holds
that
a
nonionic
chemical
in
sediment
partitions
between
sediment
organic
carbon,
interstitial
(
pore)
water
and
benthic
organisms.
At
equilibrium,
if
the
concentration
in
any
phase
is
known,
then
the
concentration
in
the
other
phases
can
be
predicted.
A
key
component
to
this
theory
is
the
chemicals
organic
carbon
coefficient
(
Koc),
which
is
constant
for
every
chemical
and
represents
the
ratio
of
the
chemical
concentration
in
water
to
the
concentration
in
organic
carbon.
The
document,
"
Technical
Basis
for
the
Derivation
of
Equilibrium
Partitioning
Sediment
Guidelines
(
ESG)
for
the
Protection
of
Benthic
Organisms:
Nonionic
Organics"
(
USEPA,
2000a),
demonstrates
that
biological
responses
of
benthic
organisms
to
nonionic
organic
chemicals
in
sediments
are
different
when
the
sediment
concentrations
are
expressed
on
a
dry
weight
basis,
but
similar
when
expressed
on
a
ug
chemical/
g
organic
carbon
basis
(
ug/
g
oc
).
Similar
responses
were
also
observed
across
sediments
when
interstitial
water
concentrations
were
used
to
normalize
biological
availability.
The
Technical
Basis
Document
further
demonstrates
that
if
the
toxic
effect
concentration
in
water
is
known
(
e.
g.,
LC
50
),
the
effect
concentration
in
sediment
on
a
ug/
g
oc
basis
can
be
predicted
by
multiplying
the
effect
concentration
in
water
by
the
chemical
K
oc
.

(
LC
50
ug/
L
x
Koc
L/
kg
oc
x
1
kg
oc
/
1000g
oc
=
LC
50
ug/
g
oc
)

Since
EFED
uses
a
deterministic
method
for
its
screening
level
risk
assessment,
the
calculation
of
risk
quotient
values
(
RQ)
is
important
for
assessing
possible
risk.
The
RQ
values
­
M­
2­
are
calculated
by
taking
the
ratio
of
the
estimated
exposure
concentrations
(
EEC)
to
the
toxicity
effect
value
(
e.
g.,
LC
50
,
NOAEC).
The
EEC
values
are
model
generated
(
e.
g.,
PRZM/
EXAMS)
and
reflect
peer
evaluated
and
approved
scenarios
for
assessing
pesticide
exposure
to
an
aquatic
environment.
However,
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
output
produces
water
column
EEC
values,
as
well
as
sediment
and
porewater
EEC
values.
Therefore,
in
order
to
assess
possible
toxic
pesticide
exposure
to
aquatic
organisms
from
sediments,
EFED
uses
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
model,
which
incorporates
the
principles
of
the
equilibrium
partitioning
theory,
in
order
to
generate
EECs
from
sediment
and
pore
water.
By
relying
on
sediment
and/
or
porewater
output
values,
EFED
uses
two
methods
to
calculate
RQ
values
for
sediments
by
using
porewater
exposure
values
and
bulk
sediment
values.

Risk
calculations
that
rely
on
pore
water
concentrations
can
be
calculated
by
dividing
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
output
value
for
pore
water
by
the
dissolved
concentrations
in
the
water
column
that
cause
toxicity
in
bioassays
(
e.
g.,
LC
50
).

EEC
pore
water
ug/
L
/
LC50
ugL
If
sediment
effects
data
are
available
(
LC50
ug/
kg
oc
),
RQs
can
be
produced
by
using
the
PRZM/
EXAMS
sediment
output
value
for
sediment.

EEC
sediment
ug/
ugoc
/
LC50
ug/
kg
oc
The
following
three
principle
observations
underlie
the
equilibrium
partitioning
(
EqP)
approach:

C
The
concentrations
of
nonionic
organic
chemicals
in
sediments
(
expressed
on
an
organic
carbon
basis)
and
in
interstitial
waters
correlate
with
observed
biological
effects
on
sediment­
dwelling
organisms
across
a
range
of
sediments.

C
Partitioning
models
can
relate
sediment
concentrations
for
nonionic
organic
chemicals
on
an
organic
carbon
basis
to
freely­
dissolved
concentrations
in
interstitial
water.

C
The
distribution
of
sensitivities
of
benthic
organisms
is
similar
to
that
of
water
column
species.

The
EqP
approach
assumes
that
the
partitioning
of
a
chemical
between
sediment
organic
carbon
and
interstitial
water
is
at
or
near
equilibrium.
Another
assumption
is
that
the
concentration
in
either
phase
can
be
predictive
using
appropriate
partition
coefficients
and
the
measured
concentration
in
the
other
phase.
Furthermore,
it
is
assumed
that
organisms
receive
equivalent
exposure
from
water­
only
exposures
and
any
equilibrated
phase
(
interstitial
water
via
respiration;
from
sediment
via
ingestion
or
other
sediment
integument
exchange).
The
final
­
M­
3­
assumption
is
that
for
nonionic
compounds,
effect
concentrations
in
sediments
on
an
organic
carbon
basis
can
be
predicted
using
the
organic
carbon
partition
coefficient
(
K
OC
)
and
effects
concentrations
in
the
water.

The
range
of
EECs
estimated
for
benthic
pore
water
by
PRZM/
EXAMS
is
0.0044 
0.0304
:
g/
L
for
the
peak
daily
concentrations
(
Table
7­
9).
The
range
of
EECs
follows
the
pattern
exhibited
by
the
surface
water
EECs
with
the
highest
EECs
estimated
for
the
Oregon
ornamentals
scenario.
­
N­
1­
APPENDIX
N.
Environmental
Fate
and
Monitoring
Bibliography
And
Ecotoxicology
Bibliography
Environmental
Fate
and
Monitoring
Bibliography
MRID
Studies
MRID
42620501
Clifton
J.(
1992)
Environmental
Fate
Studies:
Hydrolysis
Studies
of
Cypermethrin
in
Aqueous
Buffered
Solutions:
Lab
Project
Number:
191E1192E1:
P­
2771.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
77
p.

MRID
42395701
Estigoy,
L.;
Ruzo,
L.;
Shepler,
K.
(
1992)
Photodegradation
of
14C
Cypermethrin
in
Buffered
Aqueous
Solution
at
pH
7
by
Natural
Sunlight:
Revised:
Lab
Project
Number:
247/
248W:
247/
248W­
l;
191E1290El.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Pharmacology
and
Toxicology
Research
Research
Lab
(
PTRL­
West)
and
FMC
Corp.
144
p.

MRID
42129001
Estigoy,
L.;
Ruzo,
L.;
Shepler,
K.
(
1991)
Photodegradation
of
Carbon
14­
Acid
and
Carbon
14­
Alcohol
Cypermethrin
in
Soil
by
Natural
Sunlight:
Lab
Project
Number:
249/
250W:
191E1390El:
PC­
0159.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
PTRL
West.
115
p.
MRID
42129001
MRID
42156601
Ramsey
A.
(
1991)
Environmental
Fate
Studies:
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
of
Cypermethrin
in
a
Sandy
Loam
Soil:
Lab
Project
Number:
19
lE2
190EI
.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
99
p.

MRID
42156602
Ramsey
A.
(
1991)
Environmental
Fate
Studies:
Anaerobic
Soil
Metabolism
of
Cypermethrin
in
a
Sandy
Loam
Soil:
Lab
Project
Number:
19
lE2
190EI.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
93
p.

MRID
42129003
Curry,
S.
(
1991)
Leaching
of
Carbon
14­
Cypermethrin
in
Soil
Following
Aerobic
Aging:
Lab
Project
Number:
191E3
190E1.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
97
p.

MRID
42129002
Froelich,
L.
(
1991).
Soil
Mobility
Studies:
Adsorption/
Desorption
Studies
of
Cypermethrin:
Lab
Project
Number:
191E3290El.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corp.
65
p.

MRID
42459601
Leppert,
B.
(
1992)
Ammo
2.5
EC
Insecticide­­
Terrestrial
Field
Dissipation:
Lab
Project
Number:
191E4191E1:
RAN­
0239.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
FMC
Corporation.
182
p.

MRID
42868203
Giroir,
E.;
Stuerman,
L.
(
1993)
Cypermethrin
(
carbon
14)
Bioconcentration
by
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus):
Lab
Project
Number:
191
E5491E1:
400
18:
PC­
0189.
­
N­
2­
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
ABC
Labs,
Inc.
311
p.

MRID
43424901
Gravelle,
W.
D.
1994.
Adsorption/
Desorption
of
14C­
trans­
DCVA
on
Four
Soils.
Study
performed
and
submitted
by
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ.

MRID
45920801
Curry,
S.
J.
2003.
Aerobic
aquatic
metabolism
of
14C­
zeta­
cypermethrin.
Unpublished
study
performed,
sponsored
and
submitted
by
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ.
FMC
Study
No.:
194E2202E1.
Experimental
initiation
September
17,
2002
(
p.
17),
and
completion
April
2,
2003
(
p.
12).
Final
report
issued
April
28,
2003.

MRID
44876105
Ramsey,
A.
1998.
Anaerobic
aquatic
metabolism
of
14C­
zeta­
cypermethrin.
Unpublished
study
performed,
sponsored
and
submitted
by
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ.

MRID
44876107
Holihan,
J.
C.
1999.
Fury
®
1.5
EC
insecticide
aquatic
field
dissipation.
Study
No.:
194E4297E1.
Report
No.:
P­
3361.
Unpublished
study
performed
by
Agricultural
Advisors,
Inc.,
Live
Oak,
CA
(
in­
life
phase);
R&
D
Research
Farm,
Inc.,
Washington,
LA
(
in­
life
phase);
and
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ
and
Richmond,
CA
(
analytical
phase);
and
submitted
by
FMC
Corporation,
Princeton,
NJ.

Open
Literature
and
Government
Reports
EXAMS.
2002.
Surface
Water
Model,
Version
2.98.04.
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Washington,
D.
C.

Georgia
Pecan
Commission.
A
Commercial
Users
Guide
for
Georgia
Pecans.
Available
at
:
http://
www.
georgiapecans.
org/
commercial.
html
Gorsuch
CS.
Clemson
University
Pest
Management
Handbook.
Fruits
and
Nuts
(
last
updated
3­
11­
2003).
http://
cufan.
clemson.
edu/
pmguide/
main.
htm
Helsel,
D.
R.
and
R.
M.
Hirsch.
1993.
Statistical
Methods
in
Water
Resources.
Elsevier.
Amsterdam.

Jackson
L.,
Mayberry
K.,
Laemmlen
F.,
Koike
S.,
Schulbach
K.,
Chaney
W.
Iceberg
lettuce
production
in
California.
Vegetable
Research
and
Information
Center
Univ
of
California
Div
of
Agriculture
and
Natural
Resources.
Publication
Number
7215
(
1996).

Laskowski
D.
A..
2002.
Physical
and
Chemical
Properties
of
Pyrethroids.
Rev.
Environ.
Contam.
Toxicol.
174:
49­
170
National
Agricultural
Statistical
Service
(
NASS).
U.
S.
Dept.
Of
Agriculture.
http://
www.
usda.
gov/
nass/
­
N­
3­
NCFAP.
2003.
National
Center
for
Food
and
Agricultural
Policy,
National
Pesticide
Use
Database.
Information
taken
on
February
28,
2005
from
the
website:
http://
www.
ncfap.
org/
database/
default.
htm.

PRZM
3.12
beta.
1998.
Surface
Water
Model,
Version
3.12
Beta.
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Washington,
D.
C..
Information
downloaded
from
the
website
http//
www.
epa.
gov/
ceampubl/
gwater/
przm3/
index.
htm.

Roof
ME.
Clemson
University
Pest
Management
Handbook.
Cotton
Insect
Control
(
last
updated
5­
26­
2004).
http://
cufan.
clemson.
edu/
pmguide/
main.
htm
Takahashi
N.,
Mikami
I.,
Matsuda
T.,
Miyamoto
J.
1985.
Photodegradation
of
the
pyrethroid
insecticide
cypermethrin
in
water
and
on
soil
surface.
Nippon
Noyaku
Gakkaishi
10:
629­
42.

Tomlin
C.
1994.
Pesticide
Manual
10th
edition.
British
Crop
Protection
Council.
The
Royal
Society
of
Chemistry,
Cambridge
U.
K.

Willis
and
McDowell
1987,
as
cited
in
Carsel,
R.
F.,
et.
al.,
"
PRZM­
3,
A
Model
for
Predicting
Pesticide
and
Nitrogen
Fate
in
the
Crop
Root
and
Unsaturated
Soil
Zones:
User's
Manual
for
Release
3.0."
National
Exposure
Research
Laboratory
USEPA,
Athens,
GA;
AQUA
TERRA
Consultants,
Mountain
View,
CA;
and
Waterborne
Environmental,
Inc.,
Leesburg,
VA.
p.
5­
12.
­
N­
4­
Ecotoxicology
Bibliography
Ecological
Effects
MRID
Studies
Submitted
to
EPA
Acc.
No.
42444601
Edwards,
P.
J.,
Brown,
S.
M.,
Swaine,
H.
(
1980).
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid
:
Toxicity
to
first
instar
Daphnia
magna.
Unpublished
report
by
the
Plant
Protection
Division,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
I
C
I
Americas
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Delaware.

Acc.
No.
42444601
Jaber,
M.
J.
(
1981).
The
acute
and
chronic
toxicity
of
cypemethrin
to
mysid
shrimp
(
Mysidopsis
bahia).
Unpublished
report
by
EG&
G
Bionomics,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
ICI
Americas
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Delaware.

Acc.
No.
42444601
Jaber,
M.
J.
(
1981).
The
acute
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
to
crayfish,

(
Unpublished
report
from
Union
Carbide
Environmental
Services
Laboratory,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
I
C
I
Americas,
Wilmington,

Delaware.

Acc.
No.
42444601
Stephenson,
R.
(
1980)
The
acute
toxicity
of
WL
43467
to
some
freshwater
invertebrates
in
static
water
tests.
Unpublished
report
by
Shell
Toxicology
Laboratory,
Tunstall,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
ICI
Americas
Inc.

Acc.
No.
4070562­
F
Stephenson,
R.
R.;
Sherwood,
C.
M.;
Bennett,
D.;
et
al.
(
1980).
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
WL43467
to
Some
Freshwater
Invertebrates
in
Static
Water
Tests:
Group
Research
Report
TLGR.
80.040.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec.
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
ICI
America,
Inc.
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070562­
F).

Acc.
No.
42444601
Thompson,
R.
S.
(
1981)
Investigation
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
PP
383
to
Larvae
of
the
Pacific
Oyster
(
Crassostrea
gigas).
Unpublished
report
by
the
Brixham
Laboratory
of
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
12/
28/
81
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.;
Wilmington,
Delaware.

Acc.
No.
241598
Hill,
R.
W.,
Maddock,
B.
G.,
Hart,
B.
(
1976).
Determination
of
the
acute
toxicity
of
PP383
to
Rainbow
trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri).
ICI
Brixham
Laboratory
Report
No.
BL/
B/
1711,
March
1976.

Acc.
No.
241598
Hill,
R.
W,
Maddock,
B.
G.,
Hart,
B.,
Gilbert,
J.
L.
(
1977).
Determination
of
the
acute
toxicity
of
PP383
to
bluegill
sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus)
.
ICI
Brixham
Laboratory
Report
NO.
BL/
B/
1775,
March
1977.

Acc.
No.
241598
Ross,
D.
B.,
D.
M.
Cameron,
N.
L.
Roberts
(
1977).
The
Acute
Qral
Toxicity
(
LDSO)
of
PP383
to
the
Mallard
Duck.
Huntington
Research
Centre
Report
No.
ICI
128WL/
7733,
August
1977.
­
N­
5­
Acc.
No.
250506
ICI
Americas
Inc.
(
1980).
Cypermethrin:
Aquatic
Ecological
Effects
Under
Field
Use
Conditions
in
Cotton
in
Selma,
Alabama.
Agricultural
Chemicals
Division
Research
and
Development
Department.

Acc.
No.
260647
Bull,
J.
M.,
Wilkinson,
W.
(
1980).
Cypermethrin:
Laboratory
determination
of
the
acute
oral
and
contact
toxicity
to
honeybees
of
technical
material
and
an
emulsifiable
concentrate
(
GFU061)
.
Submitted
by
ICI
,
Plant
Protection
Division
.
Reg.
NO.
10182­
65.

MRID
00056800
Henderson,
C.;
Oliver,
G.
A.;
Smith,
I.
K.;
et
al.
(
1980)
Cypermethrin
(
PP383):
Acute
Toxicity
and
Local
Irritation:
Report
No.
CTL/
P/
537.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
29,
1980
under
10182­
EX­
19;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
United
Kingdom,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
099855­
B).

MRID
62792
ICI
(
1980)
Determination
of
the
acute
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
(
PP383)
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri).

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

MRID
65812
ICI
(
1980)
Determination
of
the
acute
toxicity
of
cypermethrin
(
PP383)
to
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus).
ICI
Brixham
BL/
B/
2011
MRID
65813
Hill,
R.
W.;
Maddock,
B.
G.;
Harland,
B.
J.
(
1980).
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
GFU
061,
a
36%
w/
v
Formulation
of
Cypermethrin
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri):
BL/
B)
2016.
(
Unpublished
study).

MRID
88947
Hill,
R.
W.;
Maddock,
B.
G.;
Comber,
M.
H.
I.
(
1981)
Cypermethrin:
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
Formulation
GFU
070
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri):
BL/
B/
2093.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070558­
C).

MRID
88948
Hill,
E.
W.;
Maddock,
B.
G.;
Comber,
M.
H.
I.
(
1981)
Cypermethrin.
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
Formulation
GFU
070
to
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus):
BL/
B/
2099.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070558­
D).

MRID
88949
Edwards,
P.
J.;
Brown,
S.
M.;
Swaine,
H.;
et
al.
(
1981)
Cypermethrin
(
PP383):
Toxicity
of
Formulation
GFU070
to
First
Instar
Daphnia
magna:
Report
Series
RJ
0199B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070558­
E).
­
N­
6­
MRID
89036
Reiff,
B.;
Pearson,
N.;
Rees,
H.
J.;
et
al.
(
1978)
The
Effect
of
Suspended
Solids
on
the
Toxicity
of
WL
43467
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri):
Group
Research
Report
TLGR.
0007.78.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Shell
Research,
Ltd.,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
A).

MRID
89037
Hill,
R.
W.;
Young,
B.
E.;
Comber,
M.
H.
I.
(
1981)
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
3­
Phenoxy
Benzoic
Acid
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdneri):
Brixham
Report
No.
Bl/
B/
2038.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
B).

MRID
89038
Hill,
R.
W.;
Young,
B.
E.;
Comber,
M.
H.
I.
(
1981)
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
3­
Phenoxy
Benzoic
Acid
to
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus):
Brixham
Report
No.
BL/
B/
2086.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
C).

MRID
89039
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Fathead
Minnow
(
Pimephales
promelas)
Embryos
and
Larvae:
Report
Series
TMUE0007/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
D).

MRID
89040
Edwards,
P.
J.;
Brown,
S.
M.;
Swaine,
H.;
et
al.
(
1980)
Cypermethrin
(
PP383):
Toxicity
of
Formulation
GFU061
to
First
Instar
Daphnia
magna:
Report
Series
RJ
0149B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
E).

MRID
89043
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Pink
Shrimp
(
Penaeus
duorarum):
Report
Series
TMUE004/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
I).

MRID
89045
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Fiddler
Crabs
(
Uca
pugilator):
Report
Series
TMUE0003/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
K).
­
N­
7­
MRID
89046
Edwards,
P.
J.;
Brown,
S.
M.;
Swaine,
H.;
et
al.
(
1980)
3­
Phenoxy­
benzoic
Acid:
Toxicity
to
First
Instar
Daphnia
magna:
Report
Series
RJ
0148B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
L).

MRID
89047
Cypermethrin:
21­
day
Daphnia
magna
life
cycle
study.
Submitted
by
ICI
Americas
for
Phase
4
List
B
review.
MRID
92027­
025
(
Summary
Report)
and
MRID
00089047
(
Study
Report).

MRID
89048
Edwards,
P.
J.;
Brown,
S.
M.;
Hamer,
M.
J.;
et
al.
(
1980)
Cypermethrin:
Acute
Toxicity
to
the
Mayfly,
Baetis
rhodani:
Report
Series
RJ
0173B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries,
Ltd.,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
42444601­
N).

MRID
89049
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Eastern
Oysters
(
Crassostrea
virginica):
Report
Series
TMUE0009/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
MRID
42444601).

MRID
00090040
Hend,
R.
W.;
Hendy,
R.;
Fleming,
D.
J.
(
February
1972)
Toxicity
Studies
on
the
Insecticide
WL
43467:
A
Three
Generation
Reproduction
Study
in
Rats:
Group
Research
Report
TLGR.
0188.78.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Shell
Research,
Ltd.,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070564­
H).

MRID
90070
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.
(
1980)
The
Acute
Oral
Toxicity
(
LD50)
of
Cypermethrin
to
the
Mallard
Duck:
ICI
302/
80305;
CTL/
8/
994.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntington
Research
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
B).

MRID
90071
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.;
Woodhouse,
R.
N.
(
1980)
The
Subacute
Dietary
Toxicity
(
LC50)
of
Cypermethrin
to
the
Mallard
Duck:
ICI
330/
WL/
80812;
55
1(
a)/
3.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Research
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
C).

MRID
90072
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.;
Woodhouse,
R.
N.
(
1981)
The
Subacute
Dietary
Toxicity
(
LC50)
of
Cypermethrin
to
the
Bobwhite
Quail:
ICI
331
WL/
80811;
5E.
1(
a)/
4.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Research
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
D).

MRID
90073
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.;
Chanter,
D.
O.;
et
al.
(
1981)
The
Effect
of
the
Dietary
Inclusion
of
Cypermentrin
on
Reproduction
in
the
Mallard
Duck:
ICI
341/
8164;
CTL/
C/
1091.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Re­
search
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
E).
­
N­
8­
MRID
90074
Roberts,
N.
L.;
Fairley,
C.;
Chanter,
D.
O.;
et
al.
(
1981)
The
Effect
of
Dietary
Inclusion
of
Cypermethrin
on
Reproduction
in
the
Bobwhite
Quail:
ICI
342/
81341;
CTL/
C/
1105.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Research
Centre,
England,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
070561­
F).

MRID
90075
Jaber,
M.
J.;
Hawk,
R.
E.
(
1981)
The
Acute
Toxicity
of
Cypermethrin
to
Sheepshead
Minnows
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus):
Report
Series
TMUE0002/
B.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Dec
30,
1981
under
10182­
64;
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
Del.;
CDL:
079561­
G).

MRID
00112912
Milburn,
G.;
Banham,
P.;
Birtley,
R.;
et
al.
(
1982)
Cypermethrin:
Three
Generation
Reproduction
Study
in
the
Rat:
Report
No.
CTL/
P/
683.
(
Unpublished
study
received
Sep
1,
1982
under
2F2623;
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries
PLC,
Eng.,
submitted
by
ICI
Americas,
Inc.,
Wilmington,
DE;
CDL:
071074­
A;
071075).

MRID
152737
Getty,
C.;
Wilkinson,
W.;
Swaine,
H.;
et
al.
(
1983)
Cypermethrin:
Effects
of
Multiple
Low
Rate
Applications
on
Experimental
Ponds:
Report
No.
RJ0182B.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Imperial
Chemical
Industries
PLC.
62
p.

MRID
152739
Everett,
C.
J.,
M.
J.
Hamer,
and
I.
R.
Hill.
(
1983).
3­
phenoxybenzoic
acid:
Toxicity
to
first
instar
Daphnia
magna
(
II).
Report
Series
RJ
0318B.
Prepared
and
submitted
by
ICI
Plant
Protection
Division,
Bracknell,
Berkshire,
England.

MRID
155740
Bull,
J.;
Wilkinson,
W.
(
1980)
Cypermethrin:
Laboratory
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
to
Honeybees
of
Technical
Material
and
an
Emulsifiable
Concentrate
(
GFU
061):
Report
Series:
RJ
0169B.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
ICI
Plant
Protection
Div.
35
p.

MRID
155770
Crossland,
N.
(
1982)
Aquatic
toxicology
of
cypermethrin.
II.
Fate
and
biological
effects
in
pond
experiments.
Aquatic
Toxicology
2:
205­
222.

MRID
155772
Crossland,
N.;
Shires,
S.;
Bennett,
D.
(
1982)
Aquatic
toxicology
of
cypermethrin.
III.
Fate,
and
biological
effects
of
spray
drift
deposits
in
fresh
water
adjacent
to
agricultural
land.
Aquatic
Toxicology
2:
253­
270.

MRID
40274001
Gough,
H.;
Jackson,
D.;
Wilkinson,
W.
(
1987)
Cypermethrin:
Toxicity
of
Residues
on
Foliage
to
Honey
Bees
(
Apis
mellifera):
Laboratory
Project
ID:
RJ0587B.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
ICI
Plant
Protection
Division.
27
p.

MRID
41068003
McLeese,
D.;
Metcalfe,
C.;
Zitko,
V.
(
1980)
Lethality
of
permethrin,
cypermethrin
and
fenvalerate
to
salmon,
lobster
and
shrimp.
Bulletin
of
Environmental
Contamination
and
Toxicology
25:
950­
955.

MRID
41068004
Stephenson,
R.
(
1981)
Aquatic
toxicology
of
cypermethrin:
acute
toxicology
to
some
­
N­
9­
freshwater
fish
and
invertebrates
in
laboratory
tests.
Aquatic
Toxicology
2:
175­
185.

MRID
41968208
Overman,
M.;
Barron,
M.;
Vaishnav,
D.
(
1990)
Cypermethrin­
S
(
FMC
56701):
Acute
Toxicity
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Oncorhynchus
mykiss)
Under
Flow­
through
Test
Conditions:
Lab
Project
Number:
3903026­
0700­
3140.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Environmental
Science
and
Engineering,
Inc.
48
p.

MRID
41968209
Vaishnav,
D.;
Yurk,
J.
(
1990)
Cypermethrin
(
FMC
45806):
Acute
Toxicity
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Oncorhynchus
mykiss)
Under
Flow­
through
Test
Conditions:
Lab
Project
Number:
3903026­
0750­
3140.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Environmental
Science
and
Engineering,
Inc.
46
p.

MRID
41968210
Ward,
T.;
Boeri,
R.
et
al.
(
1991)
Acute
Toxicity
of
FMC
56701
Technical
and
Cypermethrin
Technical
to
the
Daphnid,
Daphnia
magna:
Lab
Project
Number:
90186­
FMC:
A90­
3310.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Resource
Analysts,
Inc.
46
p.

MRID
41968211
Overman,
M.
A.,
M.
G.
Barron,
and
D.
D.
Vaishnav.
(
1990).
Cypermethrin­
S
(
FMC
56701):
Acute
Toxicity
to
Sheepshead
Minnow
(
Cyprinodon
varieqatus)
Under
Flow­
Through
Test
Conditions.
Laboratory
Project
No.
3903026­
0600­
3140.
Study
performed
by
Environmental
Science
and
Engineering,
Inc.,
Gainesville,
FL.
submitted
by
FMC
Corporation,
Philadelphia,
PA.

MRID
41968212
Chandler,
A.
(
1990)
FMC
45806:
Acute
Toxicity
to
Sheepshead
Minnow
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus)
Under
Flow­
through
Test
Conditions:
Lab
Project
Number:
3903026­
0350­
3140.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Environmental
Science
and
Engineering(
ESE),
Inc.
43
p.

MRID
41968213
Ward,
T.;
Boeri,
R.
(
1991)
Acute
Toxicity
of
FMC
56701
Technical
and
Cypermethrin
Technical
to
the
Mysid,
Mysidopsis
bahia:
Lab
Project
Number:
90187­
FMC:
A90­
3309.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Resource
Analysts,
Inc.
52
p.

MRID
42068504
Berry,
D.
(
1991)
Addendum
to
Phase
3
Summary
of
MRID
No.
112912,
Cypermethrin:
Three
Generation
Reproduction
Study
in
the
Rat:
Lab
Project
Number:
CTL/
P/
683.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
ICI
Central
Toxicology
Lab.
6
p.

MRID
42444601
Ward,
Timothy
J.,
Robert
L.
Boeri,
and
Mark
A
Palmieri.
(
1992).
Acute
toxicity
of
FMC
56701
Technical
and
Cypermethrin
Technical
to
the
Mysid,
Mvsidopsis
bahia.
FMC
study
number
A91­
3454.
Submitted
by
FMC
Corporation.
Performed
by
EnviroSystems
Division,
Resource
Analysts,
Inc.
Hampton,
New
Hampshire.

MRID
42725301
Wheat,
J.
(
1993)
FMC­
30980(
carbon
14)­
Cypermethrin:
Chronic
Toxicity
to
the
Mysid,
Mysidopsis
bahia,
Under
Flow­
Through
Test
Conditions:
Lab
Project
Number:
J9205004A.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Toxikon
Environmental
Sciences.
63
p.

MRID
42898301
Wheat,
J.
(
1993)
FMC­
30980
((
carbon
14)
labeled
Cypermethrin):
Chronic
Life­
Cycle
­
N­
10­
Toxicity
to
the
Water
Flea,
Daphnia
magna,
Under
Flow­
through
Test
Conditions:
Lab
Project
Number:
J9205004B:
A91­
3479.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Toxikon
Environmental
Sciences.
71
p.

MRID
43293501
Wheat,
J.;
Evans,
J.
(
1994)
Zetacypermethrin
Technical
and
Cypermethrin
Technical:
Comparative
Acute
Toxicity
to
the
Water
Flea
(
Daphnia
magna),
under
Flow­
Through
Test
Conditions:
Lab
Project
Number:
J9210001B:
A92/
3636.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Toxikon
Environmental
Sciences.
76
p.

MRID
44074401
Rapley,
J.;
Hamer,
M.
(
1996)
Cypermethrin:
Toxicity
to
Chironomus
riparius
and
Hyalella
azteca:
Lab
Project
Number:
RC0002:
95JH082.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Zeneca
Agrochemicals.
15
p.

MRID
44074402
Gentle,
W.;
Goggin,
U.;
Rapley,
J.;
et
al.
(
1996)
Cypermethrin:
Toxicity
to
Chironomus
tentans
in
Sediment­
Water
Systems:
Lab
Project
Number:
RC0001:
96JH007.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Zeneca
Agrochemicals.
31
p.

MRID
44074406
Farrelly,
E.;
Gentle,
W.;
Goggin,
U.;
et
al.
(
1996)
Cypermethrin:
Toxicity
to
Hyalella
azteca
in
Sediment­
Water
Systems:
Lab
Project
Number:
RC0006:
95JH228.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Zeneca
Agrochemicals.
30
p.

MRID
44423501
Hamer,
M.
(
1997)
Cypermethrin:
Acute
Toxicity
of
Short­
Term
Exposures
to
Hyalella
Azteca:
Lab
Project
Number:
TMJ3904B.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Zeneca
Agrochemicals.
10
p.

MRID
44544208
Halsall,
N.
(
1998)
Betacypermethrin
10
EC:
Acute
Toxicity
to
Honey
Bees
(
Apis
mellifera):
Lab
Project
Number:
PWT
131/
963589:
PWT
131.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Life
Sciences
Ltd.
29
p.

MRID
44546024
Johnson,
A.
(
1998)
Acute
Toxicity
(
LD50)
to
Bobwhite
Quail:
Betacypermethrin:
Lab
Project
Number:
PWT
129:
PWT
129/
962076.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Life
Sciences
Ltd.
38
p.

MRID
44546025
Johnson,
A.
(
1998)
Dietary
(
LC50)
to
the
Mallard
Duck:
Betacypermethrin:
Lab
Project
Number:
PWT
128:
PWT
128/
962075.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Life
Sciences
Ltd.
40
p.

MRID
44546026
Johnson,
A.
(
1998)
Dietary
LC50)
to
the
Bobwhite
Quail:
Betacypermethrin:
Lab
Project
Number:
PWT
127:
PWT
127/
962074.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Huntingdon
Life
Sciences
Ltd.
40
p.

MRID
44546027
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)­
Cypermethrin­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Oncorhynchus
mykiss)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
11­
7166:
12442.1096.6223.108.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
91
p.
­
N­
11­
MRID
44546028
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
Cypermethrin
Technical­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Oncorhynchus
mykiss)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
98­
1­
7213:
12442.1096.6222.108.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
78
p.

MRID
44546029
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)(
Beta)­
Cypermethrin­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
12­
7177:
12442.1096.6225.105.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
91
p.

MRID
44546030
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
Cypermethrin
Technical­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Bluegill
Sunfish
(
Lepomis
macrochirus)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
12­
7195:
12442.1096.6224.105.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
76
p.

MRID
44546031
Putt,
A.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)(
Beta)
Cypermethrin­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Daphnids
(
Daphnia
magna)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
9­
7079:
12442.1096.6227.115.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
95
p.

MRID
44546032
Putt,
A.
(
1998)
Cypermethrin
Technical­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Daphnids
(
Daphnia
magna)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
11­
7138:
12442.1096.6226.115.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
74
p.

MRID
44546033
Dionne,
E.
(
1998)
Cypermethrin
Technical­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Sheepshead
Minnow
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
12­
7197:
12442.1096.6230.505.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
75
p.

MRID
44546034
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)(
Beta)­
Cypermethrin­­
Chronic
Toxicity
to
Sheepshead
Minnow
(
Cyprinodon
variegatus)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
1­
7212:
12442.1096.6231.505.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
91
p.

MRID
44546035
Sousa,
J.
(
1998)
(
Carbon
14)(
Beta)­
Cypermethrin­­
Chronic
Toxicity
to
Mysids
(
Mysidopsis
bahia)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
12­
7170:
12442.1096.6232.530.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Labs.,
Inc.
101
p.

MRID
44561209
Putt,
A.
(
1998)
(
Carbon­
14)
Beta­
Cypermethrin­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Mysids
(
Mysidopsis
bahia)
Under
Flow­
Through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
97­
11­
7153:
12442.1096.6229.515.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
Laboratories,
Inc.
79
p.

MRID
44561210
Putt,
A.
(
1998)
Cypermethrin
Technical­­
Acute
Toxicity
to
Mysids
(
Mysidopsis
bahia)
Under
Flow­
through
Conditions:
Final
Report:
Lab
Project
Number:
98­
1­
7224:
­
N­
12­
12442.1096.6228.815.
Unpublished
study
prepared
by
Springborn
laboratories,
Inc.
76
p.

MRID
92027011
Treacy,
C.
(
1990)
ICI
Americas
Inc.
Phase
3
Summary
of
MRID
00062792.
Cypermethrin
(
PP383):
Determination
of
the
Acute
Toxicity
of
Active
Ingredient
(
91.
5%
purity)
to
Rainbow
Trout
(
Salmo
gairdnerii)
Report
No.
BL/
B/
2006;
Study
No.:
F342/
B.:
12
p.

MRID
92027025
Hamer,
M.
(
1990)
ICI
Americas
Inc.
Phase
3
Summary
of
MRID
00089047.
Cypermethrin:
21
Day
Daphnia
magna
Life­
cycle
Study:
Report
No.:
RJ0177B;
PP383/
CN/
04.
Prepared
by
ICI
Agrochemicals
Jealott's
Hill
Research
Station
17
p.

MRID
92027014
Hamer,
M.
(
1990).
ICI
Americas
Inc.
Phase
3
Summary
of
MRID
00062793.
Cypermethrin
(
PP383):
Toxicity
of
technical
and
formulated
material
to
first
instar
Daphnia
magna.
ICI
Agrochemucals,
Jealott's
Hill
research
Station
17
p.

MRID
92027040
Guttmann,
E.
(
1990)
ICI
Americas
Inc.
Phase
3
Summary
of
MRID
00112912.
Cypermethrin:
Three
Generation
Reproduction
Study
in
the
Rat:
CTL
Report
No.:
CTL/
P/
683;
CTL
Study
No.:
RR0143.:
9
p.
­
N­
13­
Open
Literature
and
Government
Reports
Atkins,
EL;
Kellum,
D;
and
Atkins,
KW.
1981.
Reducing
pesticide
hazards
to
honey
bees:
mortality
prediction
techniques
and
integrated
management
strategies.
University
of
California,
Division
of
Agricultural
Sciences,
Leaflet
2883,
23
pp
Beyer,
W.
N.;
Connor,
E;
Gerould,
S.
1994.
Survey
of
soil
ingestion
by
wildlife.
Journal
of
Wildlife
Management
58:
375­
382.

Crossland,
N.
O.,
S.
W.
Shires,
and
D.
Bennett.
1982.
Aquatic
Toxicology
of
Cypermethrin.
III.
Fate
and
Biological
Effects
of
Spray
Drift
Deposits
in
Fresh
Water
Adjacent
to
Agricultural
Land.
Aquat.
Toxicol.
2:
253­
270.

Davies,
P.
E.,
and
L.
S.
J.
Cook.
1993.
Catastrophic
Macroinvertebrate
Drift
and
Sublethal
Effects
on
Brown
Trout,
Salmo
trutta,
Caused
by
Cypermethrin
Spraying
on
a
Tasmanian
Stream.
Aquat.
Toxicol.
27(
3/
4):
201­
224.

Farmer,
D.,
I.
R.
Hill,
and
S.
J.
Maund.
1995.
A
Comparison
of
the
Fate
and
Effects
of
Two
Pyrethroid
Insecticides
(
lambda­
Cyhalothrin
and
Cypermethrin)
in
Pond
Mesocosms.
Ecotoxicology
4(
4):
219­
244.

Kedwards,
T.
J.,
S.
J.
Maund,
and
P.
F.
Chapman.
1999a.
Community
Level
Analysis
of
Ecotoxicological
Field
Studies:
I.
Biological
Monitoring.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
18(
2):
149­
157.

Kedwards,
T.
J.,
S.
J.
Maund,
and
P.
F.
Chapman.
1999b.
Community
Level
Analysis
of
Ecotoxicological
Field
Studies:
II.
Replicated­
Design
Studies.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
18(
2):
158­
166.

Mohsen,
Z.
H.,
and
M.
S.
Mulla.
1982.
Field
Evaluation
of
Simulium
Larvicides:
Effects
on
Target
and
Nontarget
Insects.
Environ.
Entomol.
11(
2):
390­
398.

Mulla,
M.
S.,
H.
A.
Navvab­
Gojrati,
and
H.
A.
Darwazeh.
1978.
Biological
Activity
and
Longevity
of
New
Synthetic
Pyrethroids
Against
Mosquitoes
and
Some
Nontarget
Insects.
Mosq.
News
38(
1):
90­
96.

Mulla,
M.
S.,
H.
A.
Darwazeh,
and
L.
Ede.
1982.
Evaluation
of
New
Pyrethroids
Against
Immature
Mosquitoes
and
Their
Effects
on
Nontarget
Organisms.
Mosq.
News
42(
4):
583­
590.

Roberts,
B.
L.,
and
H.
W.
Dorough.
1984.
Relative
Toxicities
of
Chemicals
to
the
Earthworm
Eisenia
foetida.
Environ.
Toxicol.
Chem.
3(
1):
67­
78.

Shires,
S.
W.
1985.
A
Comparison
of
the
Effects
of
Cypermethrin
Parathion­
Methyl
and
DDT
on
Cereal
Aphids
Predatory
Beetles
Earthworms
and
Litter
Decomposition
in
Spring
Wheat.
Crop
Prot.
4(
2):
177­
194.

T­
REX,
2004.
Terrestrial
Residue
Exposure
Model
(
T­
REX),
Version
1.1.
December
7,
2004.
Environmental
Fate
and
Effects
Division,
Office
of
Pesticide
Programs,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Washington,
D.
C.

USEPA.
2001.
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Ecological
Risk
Assessor
Orientation
Package.
U.
S.
­
N­
14­
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Ecological
Fate
and
Effects
Division.
Draft
Version,
August
2001.

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

Weston,
D.
P.,
Holmes,
R.
W.,
You,
J.,
Lydy,
M.
J.
2005.
Aquatic
Toxicity
Due
to
Residential
Use
of
Pyrethroid
Insecticides.
Environ.
Sci.
Technol.
38:
2752­
2759.
­
O­
1­
Appendix
O.
AgDRIFT
®
Output
Files
and
Aquatic
Exposure
Model
Output
Results
Low
End
Drift
Scenario
Input
Summary
Low
End
Drift
Scenario
AgDRIFT
«
Input
Data
Summary
­­
General­­
Tier:
II
Title:
Cypermethrin
Notes:

Calculations
Done:
Yes
Run
ID:
AgDRIFT
«
Cypermethrin
1
gallon
water
low
end.
agd
2.01
07­
13­
2005
14:
04:
19
Default
values
appear
when
they
differ
from
the
Current
values.

­­
Aircraft­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Name
Air
Tractor
AT­
401
Type
Slow
Fixed­
wing
Boom
Length
(%)
75
76.3
Boom
Height
(
ft)
8
10
Flight
Lines
20
­­
Drop
Size
Distribution­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Name
ASAE
Medium
to
Coarse
ASAE
Fine
to
Medium
Type
Basic
Drop
Categories
#
Diam
(
um)
Frac
Diam
(
um)
Frac
1
35.01
0.0003
10.77
0.0010
2
40.57
0.0003
16.73
0.0003
3
47.03
0.0010
19.39
0.0007
4
54.50
0.0027
22.49
0.0003
5
63.16
0.0050
26.05
0.0007
6
73.23
0.0063
30.21
0.0010
7
84.85
0.0057
35.01
0.0010
8
98.12
0.0070
40.57
0.0020
9
113.71
0.0123
47.03
0.0033
10
131.73
0.0217
54.50
0.0053
11
152.79
0.0327
63.16
0.0067
12
177.84
0.0380
73.23
0.0090
13
205.84
0.0430
84.85
0.0133
14
238.45
0.0633
98.12
0.0223
15
276.48
0.0870
113.71
0.0330
16
320.60
0.1237
131.73
0.0393
17
372.18
0.1397
152.79
0.0480
18
430.74
0.1347
177.84
0.0647
19
498.91
0.1150
205.84
0.0830
20
578.54
0.0817
238.45
0.1147
21
670.72
0.0353
276.48
0.1283
22
777.39
0.0127
320.60
0.1380
23
900.61
0.0100
372.18
0.1127
24
1044.42
0.0083
430.74
0.0640
25
1210.66
0.0067
498.91
0.0440
26
1403.04
0.0060
578.54
0.0317
­­
Swath­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Swath
Width
60
ft
­
O­
2­
Swath
Displacement
0.3702
x
Swath
Width
­­
Spray
Material­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Nonvolatile
Rate
(
lb/
ac)
0.501
0.501
Active
Rate
(
lb/
ac)
0.1
0.2505
Spray
Volume
Rate
(
gal/
ac)
1
2
Carrier
Type
Water
­­
Meteorology­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Wind
Speed
(
mph)
3
10
Temperature
(
deg
F)
86
Relative
Humidity
(%)
50
­­
Transport­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Flux
Plane
(
ft)
0
Numerical
Values
AgDRIFT
«
Numerical
Values
Drop
Size
Distribution:
Initial
DSD
Dv0.1
156.55
Im
Dv0.5
340.86
Im
Dv0.9
560.06
Im
Relative
Span:
1.18
<
141
Im:
7.55
%

Deposition:
Swath
Displacement:
22.21
ft
Accountancy
of
Active:
Application
Efficiency:
n/
a
%
Downwind
Deposition:
n/
a
%
Airborne
Drift:
n/
a
%
Carrier
Evaporated:
n/
a
%

Tier:
II
RunID:
AgDRIFT
«
Cypermethrin
1
gallon
water
low
end.
agd
2.01
07­
13­
2005
13:
47:
46
Typical
Drift
Scenario
Input
Summary
AgDRIFT
«
Input
Data
Summary
­­
General­­
Tier:
II
Title:
Cypermethrin
Notes:

Calculations
Done:
Yes
Run
ID:
AgDRIFT
«
Cypermethrin
1
gallon
water
typical.
agd
2.01
07­
13­
2005
14:
02:
02
­
O­
3­
Default
values
appear
when
they
differ
from
the
Current
values.

­­
Aircraft­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Name
Air
Tractor
AT­
401
Type
Slow
Fixed­
wing
Boom
Length
(%)
75
76.3
Boom
Height
(
ft)
10
10
Flight
Lines
20
­­
Drop
Size
Distribution­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Name
ASAE
Fine
to
Medium
Type
Basic
Drop
Categories
#
Diam
(
um)
Frac
Diam
(
um)
Frac
1
10.77
0.0010
2
16.73
0.0003
16.73
0.0003
3
19.39
0.0007
19.39
0.0007
4
22.49
0.0003
22.49
0.0003
5
26.05
0.0007
26.05
0.0007
6
30.21
0.0010
7
35.01
0.0010
8
40.57
0.0020
9
47.03
0.0033
47.03
0.0033
10
54.50
0.0053
54.50
0.0053
11
63.16
0.0067
63.16
0.0067
12
73.23
0.0090
13
84.85
0.0133
84.85
0.0133
14
98.12
0.0223
98.12
0.0223
15
113.71
0.0330
16
131.73
0.0393
131.73
0.0393
17
152.79
0.0480
18
177.84
0.0647
177.84
0.0647
19
205.84
0.0830
20
238.45
0.1147
238.45
0.1147
21
276.48
0.1283
276.48
0.1283
22
320.60
0.1380
23
372.18
0.1127
372.18
0.1127
24
430.74
0.0640
25
498.91
0.0440
26
578.54
0.0317
578.54
0.0317
27
670.72
0.0203
670.72
0.0203
28
777.39
0.0093
777.39
0.0093
29
900.61
0.0010
30
1044.42
0.0007
1044.42
0.0007
31
1210.66
0.0003
1210.66
0.0003
­­
Swath­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Swath
Width
60
ft
Swath
Displacement
0.3702
x
Swath
Width
­­
Spray
Material­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Nonvolatile
Rate
(
lb/
ac)
0.501
0.501
Active
Rate
(
lb/
ac)
0.1
0.2505
Spray
Volume
Rate
(
gal/
ac)
1
2
Carrier
Type
Water
­­
Meteorology­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Wind
Speed
(
mph)
10
Temperature
(
deg
F)
86
­
O­
4­
Relative
Humidity
(%)
50
­­
Transport­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Flux
Plane
(
ft)
0
Numerical
Values
AgDRIFT
«
Numerical
Values
Drop
Size
Distribution:
Initial
DSD
Dv0.1
113.71
Im
Dv0.5
254.72
Im
Dv0.9
443.58
Im
Relative
Span:
1.3
<
141
Im:
15.87
%

Deposition:
Swath
Displacement:
22.21
ft
Accountancy
of
Active:
Application
Efficiency:
n/
a
%
Downwind
Deposition:
n/
a
%
Airborne
Drift:
n/
a
%
Carrier
Evaporated:
n/
a
%

Tier:
II
RunID:
AgDRIFT
«
Cypermethrin
1
gallon
water
typical.
agd
2.01
07­
13­
2005
13:
40:
05
High
End
Drift
Scenario
Input
Summary
AgDRIFT
«
Input
Data
Summary
­­
General­­
Tier:
II
Title:
Cypermethrin
Notes:

Calculations
Done:
Yes
Run
ID:
AgDRIFT
«
Cypermethrin
1
gallon
water
high
end.
agd
2.01
07­
13­
2005
13:
59:
21
Default
values
appear
when
they
differ
from
the
Current
values.

­­
Aircraft­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Name
Air
Tractor
AT­
401
Type
Slow
Fixed­
wing
Boom
Length
(%)
75
76.3
Boom
Height
(
ft)
15
10
Flight
Lines
20
­­
Drop
Size
Distribution­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Name
ASAE
Very
Fine
ASAE
Fine
to
Medium
­
O­
5­
Type
Basic
Drop
Categories
#
Diam
(
um)
Frac
Diam
(
um)
Frac
1
10.77
0.0148
10.77
0.0010
2
16.73
0.0182
16.73
0.0003
3
19.39
0.0158
19.39
0.0007
4
22.49
0.0113
22.49
0.0003
5
26.05
0.0127
26.05
0.0007
6
30.21
0.0260
30.21
0.0010
7
35.01
0.0425
35.01
0.0010
8
40.57
0.0568
40.57
0.0020
9
47.03
0.0690
47.03
0.0033
10
54.50
0.0733
54.50
0.0053
11
63.16
0.0607
63.16
0.0067
12
73.23
0.0548
73.23
0.0090
13
84.85
0.0645
84.85
0.0133
14
98.12
0.0713
98.12
0.0223
15
113.71
0.0702
113.71
0.0330
16
131.73
0.0645
131.73
0.0393
17
152.79
0.0653
152.79
0.0480
18
177.84
0.0720
177.84
0.0647
19
205.84
0.0588
205.84
0.0830
20
238.45
0.0287
238.45
0.1147
21
276.48
0.0225
276.48
0.1283
22
320.60
0.0137
320.60
0.1380
23
372.18
0.0060
372.18
0.1127
24
430.74
0.0027
430.74
0.0640
25
498.91
0.0018
498.91
0.0440
26
578.54
0.0010
578.54
0.0317
27
670.72
0.0010
670.72
0.0203
­­
Swath­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Swath
Width
60
ft
Swath
Displacement
0.3702
x
Swath
Width
­­
Spray
Material­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Nonvolatile
Rate
(
lb/
ac)
0.501
0.501
Active
Rate
(
lb/
ac)
0.1
0.2505
Spray
Volume
Rate
(
gal/
ac)
1
2
Carrier
Type
Water
­­
Meteorology­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Wind
Speed
(
mph)
15
10
Temperature
(
deg
F)
86
Relative
Humidity
(%)
50
­­
Transport­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Current­­­­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­­­
Default­­­­­­­­­­­
Flux
Plane
(
ft)
0
Numerical
Values
AgDRIFT
«
Numerical
Values
Drop
Size
Distribution:
Initial
DSD
Dv0.1
30.37
Im
Dv0.5
81.52
Im
Dv0.9
196.05
Im
­
O­
6­
Relative
Span:
2.03
<
141
Im:
75.28
%

Deposition:
Swath
Displacement:
22.21
ft
Accountancy
of
Active:
Application
Efficiency:
n/
a
%
Downwind
Deposition:
n/
a
%
Airborne
Drift:
n/
a
%
Carrier
Evaporated:
n/
a
%

Tier:
II
RunID:
AgDRIFT
«
Cypermethrin
1
gallon
water
high
end.
agd
2.01
07­
13­
2005
13:
54:
44
NC
cotton,
0%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.145
0.3507
0.1461
0.08557
0.06191
0.01742
1962
1.156
0.3379
0.1716
0.08693
0.06545
0.02265
1963
0.8329
0.2441
0.06803
0.03724
0.03129
0.01326
1964
1.102
0.3199
0.1115
0.07771
0.06919
0.02501
1965
1.005
0.3939
0.1344
0.08437
0.06341
0.02044
1966
2.111
0.5982
0.2512
0.1142
0.08229
0.02399
1967
1.463
0.4118
0.1779
0.08604
0.06395
0.02161
1968
1.547
0.447
0.1165
0.07419
0.05766
0.02137
1969
1.96
0.727
0.2531
0.1229
0.09392
0.02885
1970
1.166
0.3258
0.1479
0.09362
0.06811
0.02111
1971
0.8702
0.3296
0.1422
0.09302
0.07803
0.02443
1972
1.737
0.5468
0.2228
0.1221
0.09133
0.02698
1973
1.243
0.4486
0.1652
0.09553
0.06941
0.02092
1974
1.631
0.6114
0.216
0.1122
0.08238
0.02458
1975
2.153
1.035
0.2686
0.1153
0.08657
0.02638
1976
1.982
0.5601
0.1688
0.08453
0.06501
0.0193
1977
1.239
0.3961
0.1572
0.09439
0.07233
0.02497
1978
2.692
0.7507
0.1858
0.08408
0.05983
0.01975
1979
2.115
0.5915
0.2303
0.1179
0.08746
0.02646
1980
0.8895
0.247
0.1045
0.05153
0.03844
0.01298
1981
1.846
0.524
0.1743
0.091
0.07732
0.0257
1982
0.5895
0.1663
0.06665
0.02987
0.02853
0.01219
1983
0.584
0.1707
0.0478
0.03838
0.03087
0.01246
1984
2.155
0.9164
0.3288
0.1428
0.1014
0.03191
1985
2.637
0.7539
0.1894
0.1036
0.07543
0.02293
1986
1.099
0.3918
0.1517
0.1059
0.07783
0.02279
1987
1.859
0.5274
0.1875
0.09736
0.07282
0.02104
1988
1.155
0.3523
0.1634
0.08537
0.06838
0.02329
1989
1.507
0.434
0.1207
0.09276
0.07244
0.02328
1990
0.5586
0.1897
0.05565
0.03011
0.0235
0.01015
­
O­
7­
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.692
1.035
0.3288
0.1428
0.1014
0.03191
0.0645161290322581
2.637
0.9164
0.2686
0.1229
0.09392
0.02885
0.0967741935483871
2.155
0.7539
0.2531
0.1221
0.09133
0.02698
0.129032258064516
2.153
0.7507
0.2512
0.1179
0.08746
0.02646
0.161290322580645
2.115
0.727
0.2303
0.1153
0.08657
0.02638
0.193548387096774
2.111
0.6114
0.2228
0.1142
0.08238
0.0257
0.225806451612903
1.982
0.5982
0.216
0.1122
0.08229
0.02501
0.258064516129032
1.96
0.5915
0.1894
0.1059
0.07803
0.02497
0.290322580645161
1.859
0.5601
0.1875
0.1036
0.07783
0.02458
0.32258064516129
1.846
0.5468
0.1858
0.09736
0.07732
0.02443
0.354838709677419
1.737
0.5274
0.1779
0.09553
0.07543
0.02399
0.387096774193548
1.631
0.524
0.1743
0.09439
0.07282
0.02329
0.419354838709677
1.547
0.4486
0.1716
0.09362
0.07244
0.02328
0.451612903225806
1.507
0.447
0.1688
0.09302
0.07233
0.02293
0.483870967741936
1.463
0.434
0.1652
0.09276
0.06941
0.02279
0.516129032258065
1.243
0.4118
0.1634
0.091
0.06919
0.02265
0.548387096774194
1.239
0.3961
0.1572
0.08693
0.06838
0.02161
0.580645161290323
1.166
0.3939
0.1517
0.08604
0.06811
0.02137
0.612903225806452
1.156
0.3918
0.1479
0.08557
0.06545
0.02111
0.645161290322581
1.155
0.3523
0.1461
0.08537
0.06501
0.02104
0.67741935483871
1.145
0.3507
0.1422
0.08453
0.06395
0.02092
0.709677419354839
1.102
0.3379
0.1344
0.08437
0.06341
0.02044
0.741935483870968
1.099
0.3296
0.1207
0.08408
0.06191
0.01975
0.774193548387097
1.005
0.3258
0.1165
0.07771
0.05983
0.0193
0.806451612903226
0.8895
0.3199
0.1115
0.07419
0.05766
0.01742
0.838709677419355
0.8702
0.247
0.1045
0.05153
0.03844
0.01326
0.870967741935484
0.8329
0.2441
0.06803
0.03838
0.03129
0.01298
0.903225806451613
0.5895
0.1897
0.06665
0.03724
0.03087
0.01246
0.935483870967742
0.584
0.1707
0.05565
0.03011
0.02853
0.01219
0.967741935483871
0.5586
0.1663
0.0478
0.02987
0.0235
0.01015
0.1
2.1548
0.75358
0.25291
0.12168
0.090943
0.026928
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0216066666666667
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
­
O­
8­
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
5%
drift,
standard
run
with
no
buffer
zone
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.152
0.3571
0.1509
0.0969
0.07712
0.02241
1962
1.24
0.408
0.2339
0.1153
0.08504
0.02782
1963
0.8335
0.2447
0.07839
0.04312
0.03228
0.01843
1964
1.105
0.3227
0.1302
0.09558
0.08329
0.03018
1965
1.207
0.4102
0.1513
0.1121
0.08301
0.02562
1966
2.117
0.6045
0.2559
0.1217
0.09487
0.029
1967
1.469
0.4172
0.182
0.1032
0.08354
0.02677
1968
1.633
0.5249
0.1843
0.09683
0.07703
0.02643
1969
1.967
0.7344
0.2595
0.1424
0.1109
0.03403
1970
1.392
0.4271
0.1937
0.1183
0.08686
0.0263
1971
0.875
0.3344
0.1474
0.1181
0.0949
0.02959
1972
1.746
0.5554
0.2553
0.1424
0.1068
0.03212
1973
1.251
0.456
0.1826
0.1161
0.08698
0.02606
1974
1.638
0.618
0.2227
0.1189
0.09609
0.02974
1975
2.381
1.138
0.3079
0.1416
0.105
0.03154
1976
1.984
0.562
0.1704
0.08565
0.06594
0.02435
1977
1.243
0.3996
0.1616
0.09704
0.08151
0.02991
1978
2.921
0.8191
0.2275
0.109
0.07771
0.02472
1979
2.155
0.6108
0.2507
0.1307
0.103
0.0316
1980
0.8931
0.2503
0.107
0.05517
0.04978
0.01791
1981
1.851
0.529
0.1784
0.1185
0.0966
0.03067
1982
0.5971
0.1734
0.07265
0.0548
0.04105
0.01723
1983
0.5846
0.1713
0.07081
0.0388
0.03135
0.01739
1984
2.385
1.02
0.3606
0.1688
0.1203
0.03706
1985
2.646
0.7631
0.2038
0.1284
0.0953
0.02805
1986
1.109
0.4006
0.1582
0.1262
0.09515
0.02768
1987
1.861
0.5294
0.189
0.09883
0.07727
0.02591
1988
1.158
0.3546
0.1655
0.09091
0.08017
0.02823
1989
1.511
0.458
0.1605
0.1149
0.08774
0.02834
1990
0.5592
0.1903
0.08342
0.04264
0.03047
0.01508
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
­
O­
9­
0.032258064516129
2.921
1.138
0.3606
0.1688
0.1203
0.03706
0.0645161290322581
2.646
1.02
0.3079
0.1424
0.1109
0.03403
0.0967741935483871
2.385
0.8191
0.2595
0.1424
0.1068
0.03212
0.129032258064516
2.381
0.7631
0.2559
0.1416
0.105
0.0316
0.161290322580645
2.155
0.7344
0.2553
0.1307
0.103
0.03154
0.193548387096774
2.117
0.618
0.2507
0.1284
0.0966
0.03067
0.225806451612903
1.984
0.6108
0.2339
0.1262
0.09609
0.03018
0.258064516129032
1.967
0.6045
0.2275
0.1217
0.0953
0.02991
0.290322580645161
1.861
0.562
0.2227
0.1189
0.09515
0.02974
0.32258064516129
1.851
0.5554
0.2038
0.1185
0.0949
0.02959
0.354838709677419
1.746
0.5294
0.1937
0.1183
0.09487
0.029
0.387096774193548
1.638
0.529
0.189
0.1181
0.08774
0.02834
0.419354838709677
1.633
0.5249
0.1843
0.1161
0.08698
0.02823
0.451612903225806
1.511
0.458
0.1826
0.1153
0.08686
0.02805
0.483870967741936
1.469
0.456
0.182
0.1149
0.08504
0.02782
0.516129032258065
1.392
0.4271
0.1784
0.1121
0.08354
0.02768
0.548387096774194
1.251
0.4172
0.1704
0.109
0.08329
0.02677
0.580645161290323
1.243
0.4102
0.1655
0.1032
0.08301
0.02643
0.612903225806452
1.24
0.408
0.1616
0.09883
0.08151
0.0263
0.645161290322581
1.207
0.4006
0.1605
0.09704
0.08017
0.02606
0.67741935483871
1.158
0.3996
0.1582
0.0969
0.07771
0.02591
0.709677419354839
1.152
0.3571
0.1513
0.09683
0.07727
0.02562
0.741935483870968
1.109
0.3546
0.1509
0.09558
0.07712
0.02472
0.774193548387097
1.105
0.3344
0.1474
0.09091
0.07703
0.02435
0.806451612903226
0.8931
0.3227
0.1302
0.08565
0.06594
0.02241
0.838709677419355
0.875
0.2503
0.107
0.05517
0.04978
0.01843
0.870967741935484
0.8335
0.2447
0.08342
0.0548
0.04105
0.01791
0.903225806451613
0.5971
0.1903
0.07839
0.04312
0.03228
0.01739
0.935483870967742
0.5846
0.1734
0.07265
0.04264
0.03135
0.01723
0.967741935483871
0.5592
0.1713
0.07081
0.0388
0.03047
0.01508
0.1
2.3846
0.8135
0.25914
0.14232
0.10662
0.032068
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0266723333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.05
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
­
O­
10­
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
1%
drift,
99%
application
efficiency,
ground
applic.
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.195
0.3668
0.1532
0.08977
0.06497
0.01915
1962
1.212
0.3662
0.1913
0.09578
0.07182
0.02464
1963
0.8681
0.2545
0.07102
0.03891
0.03275
0.01485
1964
1.149
0.3339
0.1167
0.08373
0.07403
0.0271
1965
1.071
0.412
0.1414
0.09303
0.06967
0.02234
1966
2.2
0.6243
0.2626
0.1196
0.08616
0.02599
1967
1.526
0.4302
0.1862
0.09019
0.07031
0.02355
1968
1.629
0.4814
0.1339
0.0803
0.0637
0.02328
1969
2.044
0.7592
0.2651
0.1317
0.1003
0.0311
1970
1.26
0.3598
0.1626
0.1011
0.0737
0.02304
1971
0.9079
0.3445
0.1493
0.1014
0.08438
0.02649
1972
1.812
0.5715
0.2386
0.13
0.09717
0.02914
1973
1.297
0.469
0.1749
0.101
0.07392
0.02283
1974
1.701
0.6385
0.2264
0.1177
0.08647
0.02665
1975
2.289
1.099
0.2865
0.1237
0.09275
0.02853
1976
2.065
0.5838
0.1762
0.08829
0.06791
0.02112
1977
1.292
0.4135
0.1647
0.0989
0.07578
0.02701
1978
2.852
0.7963
0.1978
0.09091
0.06492
0.02158
1979
2.213
0.6204
0.2422
0.1241
0.09214
0.02861
1980
0.9278
0.2581
0.1095
0.05401
0.04029
0.01452
1981
1.925
0.5471
0.1825
0.09995
0.08444
0.02778
1982
0.6157
0.1747
0.07065
0.03318
0.03028
0.01371
1983
0.6087
0.178
0.04992
0.04008
0.03227
0.01397
1984
2.292
0.9755
0.3489
0.1525
0.1088
0.03428
1985
2.749
0.7874
0.1988
0.1096
0.08258
0.02492
1986
1.148
0.41
0.1594
0.1124
0.08342
0.02473
1987
1.938
0.55
0.1957
0.1018
0.07612
0.0229
1988
1.204
0.3676
0.1707
0.0898
0.07188
0.02526
1989
1.571
0.4531
0.1306
0.09937
0.07738
0.02527
1990
0.5823
0.1978
0.05812
0.03147
0.02458
0.01157
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.852
1.099
0.3489
0.1525
0.1088
0.03428
0.0645161290322581
2.749
0.9755
0.2865
0.1317
0.1003
0.0311
­
O­
11­
0.0967741935483871
2.292
0.7963
0.2651
0.13
0.09717
0.02914
0.129032258064516
2.289
0.7874
0.2626
0.1241
0.09275
0.02861
0.161290322580645
2.213
0.7592
0.2422
0.1237
0.09214
0.02853
0.193548387096774
2.2
0.6385
0.2386
0.1196
0.08647
0.02778
0.225806451612903
2.065
0.6243
0.2264
0.1177
0.08616
0.0271
0.258064516129032
2.044
0.6204
0.1988
0.1124
0.08444
0.02701
0.290322580645161
1.938
0.5838
0.1978
0.1096
0.08438
0.02665
0.32258064516129
1.925
0.5715
0.1957
0.1018
0.08342
0.02649
0.354838709677419
1.812
0.55
0.1913
0.1014
0.08258
0.02599
0.387096774193548
1.701
0.5471
0.1862
0.1011
0.07738
0.02527
0.419354838709677
1.629
0.4814
0.1825
0.101
0.07612
0.02526
0.451612903225806
1.571
0.469
0.1762
0.09995
0.07578
0.02492
0.483870967741936
1.526
0.4531
0.1749
0.09937
0.07403
0.02473
0.516129032258065
1.297
0.4302
0.1707
0.0989
0.07392
0.02464
0.548387096774194
1.292
0.4135
0.1647
0.09578
0.0737
0.02355
0.580645161290323
1.26
0.412
0.1626
0.09303
0.07188
0.02328
0.612903225806452
1.212
0.41
0.1594
0.09091
0.07182
0.02304
0.645161290322581
1.204
0.3676
0.1532
0.09019
0.07031
0.0229
0.67741935483871
1.195
0.3668
0.1493
0.0898
0.06967
0.02283
0.709677419354839
1.149
0.3662
0.1414
0.08977
0.06791
0.02234
0.741935483870968
1.148
0.3598
0.1339
0.08829
0.06497
0.02158
0.774193548387097
1.071
0.3445
0.1306
0.08373
0.06492
0.02112
0.806451612903226
0.9278
0.3339
0.1167
0.0803
0.0637
0.01915
0.838709677419355
0.9079
0.2581
0.1095
0.05401
0.04029
0.01485
0.870967741935484
0.8681
0.2545
0.07102
0.04008
0.03275
0.01452
0.903225806451613
0.6157
0.1978
0.07065
0.03891
0.03227
0.01397
0.935483870967742
0.6087
0.178
0.05812
0.03318
0.03028
0.01371
0.967741935483871
0.5823
0.1747
0.04992
0.03147
0.02458
0.01157
0.1
2.2917
0.79541
0.26485
0.12941
0.096728
0.029087
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0235303333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.99
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.01
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
­
O­
12­
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
200
ft,
low
end
drift
scenario,
0.5%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.146
0.3514
0.1465
0.08586
0.06213
0.01792
1962
1.159
0.3449
0.1779
0.0895
0.06723
0.02317
1963
0.8329
0.2442
0.06809
0.03729
0.03136
0.01378
1964
1.103
0.3201
0.1118
0.07908
0.07016
0.02553
1965
1.008
0.3947
0.1351
0.08692
0.06517
0.02096
1966
2.112
0.5989
0.2516
0.1145
0.08251
0.02449
1967
1.464
0.4123
0.1783
0.0863
0.06578
0.02213
1968
1.555
0.4548
0.1228
0.07568
0.05941
0.02188
1969
1.96
0.7278
0.2538
0.1247
0.09515
0.02937
1970
1.188
0.336
0.1521
0.09541
0.06935
0.02163
1971
0.8707
0.3301
0.1427
0.09522
0.07956
0.02495
1972
1.738
0.5477
0.226
0.1235
0.09233
0.02749
1973
1.244
0.4493
0.1666
0.09623
0.06997
0.02143
1974
1.632
0.612
0.2167
0.1126
0.08269
0.0251
1975
2.175
1.045
0.2719
0.117
0.08781
0.0269
1976
1.983
0.5603
0.169
0.08465
0.0651
0.0198
1977
1.239
0.3964
0.1577
0.09466
0.07253
0.02546
1978
2.715
0.7576
0.1878
0.08559
0.06094
0.02024
1979
2.119
0.5934
0.2314
0.1185
0.0879
0.02698
1980
0.8899
0.2473
0.1048
0.05168
0.03855
0.01348
1981
1.846
0.5245
0.1747
0.09333
0.07925
0.0262
1982
0.5903
0.1671
0.06725
0.03023
0.02881
0.01269
1983
0.584
0.1708
0.04785
0.03842
0.03092
0.01295
1984
2.178
0.9268
0.3319
0.1443
0.1029
0.03242
1985
2.638
0.7548
0.1901
0.104
0.07742
0.02344
1986
1.1
0.3927
0.1524
0.1063
0.07899
0.02328
1987
1.86
0.5276
0.1876
0.09751
0.07294
0.02153
1988
1.155
0.3525
0.1636
0.08579
0.06869
0.02378
1989
1.507
0.4344
0.1224
0.09411
0.07338
0.02379
1990
0.5587
0.1898
0.05571
0.03015
0.02354
0.01065
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.715
1.045
0.3319
0.1443
0.1029
0.03242
0.0645161290322581
2.638
0.9268
0.2719
0.1247
0.09515
0.02937
0.0967741935483871
2.178
0.7576
0.2538
0.1235
0.09233
0.02749
0.129032258064516
2.175
0.7548
0.2516
0.1185
0.0879
0.02698
­
O­
13­
0.161290322580645
2.119
0.7278
0.2314
0.117
0.08781
0.0269
0.193548387096774
2.112
0.612
0.226
0.1145
0.08269
0.0262
0.225806451612903
1.983
0.5989
0.2167
0.1126
0.08251
0.02553
0.258064516129032
1.96
0.5934
0.1901
0.1063
0.07956
0.02546
0.290322580645161
1.86
0.5603
0.1878
0.104
0.07925
0.0251
0.32258064516129
1.846
0.5477
0.1876
0.09751
0.07899
0.02495
0.354838709677419
1.738
0.5276
0.1783
0.09623
0.07742
0.02449
0.387096774193548
1.632
0.5245
0.1779
0.09541
0.07338
0.02379
0.419354838709677
1.555
0.4548
0.1747
0.09522
0.07294
0.02378
0.451612903225806
1.507
0.4493
0.169
0.09466
0.07253
0.02344
0.483870967741936
1.464
0.4344
0.1666
0.09411
0.07016
0.02328
0.516129032258065
1.244
0.4123
0.1636
0.09333
0.06997
0.02317
0.548387096774194
1.239
0.3964
0.1577
0.0895
0.06935
0.02213
0.580645161290323
1.188
0.3947
0.1524
0.08692
0.06869
0.02188
0.612903225806452
1.159
0.3927
0.1521
0.0863
0.06723
0.02163
0.645161290322581
1.155
0.3525
0.1465
0.08586
0.06578
0.02153
0.67741935483871
1.146
0.3514
0.1427
0.08579
0.06517
0.02143
0.709677419354839
1.103
0.3449
0.1351
0.08559
0.0651
0.02096
0.741935483870968
1.1
0.336
0.1228
0.08465
0.06213
0.02024
0.774193548387097
1.008
0.3301
0.1224
0.07908
0.06094
0.0198
0.806451612903226
0.8899
0.3201
0.1118
0.07568
0.05941
0.01792
0.838709677419355
0.8707
0.2473
0.1048
0.05168
0.03855
0.01378
0.870967741935484
0.8329
0.2442
0.06809
0.03842
0.03136
0.01348
0.903225806451613
0.5903
0.1898
0.06725
0.03729
0.03092
0.01295
0.935483870967742
0.584
0.1708
0.05571
0.03023
0.02881
0.01269
0.967741935483871
0.5587
0.1671
0.04785
0.03015
0.02354
0.01065
0.1
2.1777
0.75732
0.25358
0.123
0.091887
0.027439
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.022114
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.005
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
­
O­
14­
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
150
ft,
low
end
drift
scenario,
0.6%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.146
0.3515
0.1466
0.08592
0.06218
0.01802
1962
1.16
0.3463
0.1791
0.09002
0.06758
0.02327
1963
0.833
0.2442
0.0681
0.0373
0.03137
0.01388
1964
1.103
0.3202
0.1118
0.07936
0.07035
0.02564
1965
1.012
0.3948
0.1352
0.08743
0.06553
0.02106
1966
2.112
0.599
0.2517
0.1146
0.08255
0.02459
1967
1.464
0.4124
0.1784
0.08635
0.06614
0.02223
1968
1.557
0.4564
0.124
0.07598
0.05976
0.02198
1969
1.961
0.7279
0.2539
0.1251
0.0954
0.02947
1970
1.193
0.338
0.153
0.09576
0.0696
0.02173
1971
0.8708
0.3302
0.1428
0.09567
0.07986
0.02505
1972
1.738
0.5478
0.2267
0.1238
0.09253
0.0276
1973
1.244
0.4495
0.1668
0.09637
0.07011
0.02153
1974
1.632
0.6122
0.2168
0.1127
0.08275
0.0252
1975
2.18
1.047
0.2726
0.1174
0.08806
0.027
1976
1.983
0.5603
0.169
0.08467
0.06512
0.01991
1977
1.239
0.3965
0.1578
0.09471
0.07257
0.02556
1978
2.72
0.7589
0.1882
0.08593
0.06123
0.02034
1979
2.12
0.5938
0.2316
0.1186
0.08799
0.02708
1980
0.8899
0.2474
0.1048
0.05171
0.03858
0.01358
1981
1.847
0.5246
0.1748
0.09389
0.07963
0.0263
1982
0.5904
0.1672
0.06737
0.03031
0.02886
0.01279
1983
0.5841
0.1708
0.04786
0.03843
0.03093
0.01305
1984
2.183
0.9288
0.3326
0.1447
0.1032
0.03253
1985
2.638
0.755
0.1903
0.1041
0.07781
0.02355
1986
1.101
0.3929
0.1525
0.1067
0.07922
0.02337
1987
1.86
0.5276
0.1876
0.09754
0.07296
0.02162
1988
1.155
0.3526
0.1637
0.08587
0.06875
0.02388
1989
1.507
0.4345
0.123
0.09438
0.07357
0.02389
1990
0.5587
0.1898
0.05573
0.03016
0.02355
0.01075
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.72
1.047
0.3326
0.1447
0.1032
0.03253
0.0645161290322581
2.638
0.9288
0.2726
0.1251
0.0954
0.02947
0.0967741935483871
2.183
0.7589
0.2539
0.1238
0.09253
0.0276
0.129032258064516
2.18
0.755
0.2517
0.1186
0.08806
0.02708
0.161290322580645
2.12
0.7279
0.2316
0.1174
0.08799
0.027
­
O­
15­
0.193548387096774
2.112
0.6122
0.2267
0.1146
0.08275
0.0263
0.225806451612903
1.983
0.599
0.2168
0.1127
0.08255
0.02564
0.258064516129032
1.961
0.5938
0.1903
0.1067
0.07986
0.02556
0.290322580645161
1.86
0.5603
0.1882
0.1041
0.07963
0.0252
0.32258064516129
1.847
0.5478
0.1876
0.09754
0.07922
0.02505
0.354838709677419
1.738
0.5276
0.1791
0.09637
0.07781
0.02459
0.387096774193548
1.632
0.5246
0.1784
0.09576
0.07357
0.02389
0.419354838709677
1.557
0.4564
0.1748
0.09567
0.07296
0.02388
0.451612903225806
1.507
0.4495
0.169
0.09471
0.07257
0.02355
0.483870967741936
1.464
0.4345
0.1668
0.09438
0.07035
0.02337
0.516129032258065
1.244
0.4124
0.1637
0.09389
0.07011
0.02327
0.548387096774194
1.239
0.3965
0.1578
0.09002
0.0696
0.02223
0.580645161290323
1.193
0.3948
0.153
0.08743
0.06875
0.02198
0.612903225806452
1.16
0.3929
0.1525
0.08635
0.06758
0.02173
0.645161290322581
1.155
0.3526
0.1466
0.08593
0.06614
0.02162
0.67741935483871
1.146
0.3515
0.1428
0.08592
0.06553
0.02153
0.709677419354839
1.103
0.3463
0.1352
0.08587
0.06512
0.02106
0.741935483870968
1.101
0.338
0.124
0.08467
0.06218
0.02034
0.774193548387097
1.012
0.3302
0.123
0.07936
0.06123
0.01991
0.806451612903226
0.8899
0.3202
0.1118
0.07598
0.05976
0.01802
0.838709677419355
0.8708
0.2474
0.1048
0.05171
0.03858
0.01388
0.870967741935484
0.833
0.2442
0.0681
0.03843
0.03137
0.01358
0.903225806451613
0.5904
0.1898
0.06737
0.0373
0.03093
0.01305
0.935483870967742
0.5841
0.1708
0.05573
0.03031
0.02886
0.01279
0.967741935483871
0.5587
0.1672
0.04786
0.03016
0.02355
0.01075
0.1
2.1827
0.75851
0.25368
0.12328
0.092083
0.027548
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.022215
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.006
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
­
O­
16­
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
100
ft,
low
end
drift
scenario,
0.9%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.146
0.3519
0.1469
0.0861
0.06232
0.01833
1962
1.162
0.3505
0.1828
0.09156
0.06868
0.02358
1963
0.833
0.2442
0.06814
0.03733
0.03142
0.01419
1964
1.103
0.3204
0.1119
0.08019
0.07093
0.02595
1965
1.025
0.3953
0.1356
0.08896
0.06662
0.02137
1966
2.112
0.5994
0.252
0.1147
0.08268
0.02489
1967
1.464
0.4127
0.1786
0.08651
0.06724
0.02254
1968
1.562
0.461
0.1278
0.07688
0.06089
0.02228
1969
1.961
0.7284
0.2543
0.1261
0.09615
0.02978
1970
1.206
0.3441
0.1555
0.09683
0.0705
0.02204
1971
0.8711
0.3305
0.1432
0.09699
0.08078
0.02536
1972
1.739
0.5483
0.2286
0.1246
0.09313
0.0279
1973
1.245
0.4499
0.1676
0.0968
0.07073
0.02184
1974
1.632
0.6126
0.2172
0.1129
0.08294
0.02551
1975
2.194
1.053
0.2745
0.1185
0.08881
0.02731
1976
1.983
0.5604
0.1691
0.08473
0.06518
0.02021
1977
1.24
0.3967
0.158
0.09487
0.07269
0.02586
1978
2.733
0.763
0.1895
0.08697
0.0621
0.02064
1979
2.122
0.595
0.2322
0.119
0.08832
0.02739
1980
0.8901
0.2476
0.105
0.0518
0.03864
0.01387
1981
1.847
0.5249
0.175
0.09557
0.08079
0.02659
1982
0.5909
0.1676
0.06773
0.0315
0.02902
0.01309
1983
0.5841
0.1708
0.04789
0.03846
0.03096
0.01335
1984
2.196
0.935
0.3345
0.1461
0.1042
0.03283
1985
2.638
0.7555
0.1907
0.1048
0.07901
0.02385
1986
1.101
0.3934
0.1529
0.1077
0.07991
0.02367
1987
1.86
0.5277
0.1877
0.09762
0.07303
0.02191
1988
1.156
0.3527
0.1638
0.08612
0.06894
0.02418
1989
1.507
0.4347
0.1249
0.09519
0.07414
0.02419
1990
0.5587
0.1898
0.05576
0.03019
0.02358
0.01104
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.733
1.053
0.3345
0.1461
0.1042
0.03283
0.0645161290322581
2.638
0.935
0.2745
0.1261
0.09615
0.02978
0.0967741935483871
2.196
0.763
0.2543
0.1246
0.09313
0.0279
0.129032258064516
2.194
0.7555
0.252
0.119
0.08881
0.02739
0.161290322580645
2.122
0.7284
0.2322
0.1185
0.08832
0.02731
0.193548387096774
2.112
0.6126
0.2286
0.1147
0.08294
0.02659
0.225806451612903
1.983
0.5994
0.2172
0.1129
0.08268
0.02595
­
O­
17­
0.258064516129032
1.961
0.595
0.1907
0.1077
0.08079
0.02586
0.290322580645161
1.86
0.5604
0.1895
0.1048
0.08078
0.02551
0.32258064516129
1.847
0.5483
0.1877
0.09762
0.07991
0.02536
0.354838709677419
1.739
0.5277
0.1828
0.09699
0.07901
0.02489
0.387096774193548
1.632
0.5249
0.1786
0.09683
0.07414
0.02419
0.419354838709677
1.562
0.461
0.175
0.0968
0.07303
0.02418
0.451612903225806
1.507
0.4499
0.1691
0.09557
0.07269
0.02385
0.483870967741936
1.464
0.4347
0.1676
0.09519
0.07093
0.02367
0.516129032258065
1.245
0.4127
0.1638
0.09487
0.07073
0.02358
0.548387096774194
1.24
0.3967
0.158
0.09156
0.0705
0.02254
0.580645161290323
1.206
0.3953
0.1555
0.08896
0.06894
0.02228
0.612903225806452
1.162
0.3934
0.1529
0.08697
0.06868
0.02204
0.645161290322581
1.156
0.3527
0.1469
0.08651
0.06724
0.02191
0.67741935483871
1.146
0.3519
0.1432
0.08612
0.06662
0.02184
0.709677419354839
1.103
0.3505
0.1356
0.0861
0.06518
0.02137
0.741935483870968
1.101
0.3441
0.1278
0.08473
0.06232
0.02064
0.774193548387097
1.025
0.3305
0.1249
0.08019
0.0621
0.02021
0.806451612903226
0.8901
0.3204
0.1119
0.07688
0.06089
0.01833
0.838709677419355
0.8711
0.2476
0.105
0.0518
0.03864
0.01419
0.870967741935484
0.833
0.2442
0.06814
0.03846
0.03142
0.01387
0.903225806451613
0.5909
0.1898
0.06773
0.03733
0.03096
0.01335
0.935483870967742
0.5841
0.1708
0.05576
0.0315
0.02902
0.01309
0.967741935483871
0.5587
0.1676
0.04789
0.03019
0.02358
0.01104
0.1
2.1958
0.76225
0.25407
0.12404
0.092698
0.027849
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.022518
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.009
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
­
O­
18­
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
0
ft,
low
end
drift
scenario
2.8%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.149
0.3543
0.1488
0.08721
0.06848
0.02022
1962
1.176
0.3771
0.2065
0.1025
0.07626
0.02555
1963
0.8333
0.2445
0.06836
0.03752
0.03168
0.01615
1964
1.104
0.3214
0.1128
0.08605
0.07518
0.02791
1965
1.109
0.3982
0.1381
0.0993
0.07422
0.02334
1966
2.115
0.6017
0.2538
0.1158
0.08633
0.02679
1967
1.467
0.4148
0.1802
0.09059
0.07479
0.0245
1968
1.595
0.4906
0.1531
0.08423
0.06837
0.0242
1969
1.964
0.7312
0.2567
0.1328
0.1022
0.03175
1970
1.292
0.3826
0.1716
0.1055
0.07808
0.02402
1971
0.8729
0.3323
0.1451
0.1059
0.08674
0.02732
1972
1.742
0.5516
0.241
0.1308
0.09879
0.02986
1973
1.248
0.4528
0.1735
0.1034
0.07822
0.0238
1974
1.635
0.6151
0.2197
0.1145
0.08733
0.02747
1975
2.28
1.093
0.2881
0.1288
0.09619
0.02927
1976
1.984
0.5612
0.1697
0.08516
0.06553
0.02213
1977
1.241
0.3981
0.1597
0.09588
0.07346
0.02773
1978
2.82
0.789
0.2035
0.09651
0.06917
0.02253
1979
2.138
0.6023
0.237
0.1229
0.0942
0.02934
1980
0.8915
0.2489
0.1059
0.05237
0.04174
0.01575
1981
1.849
0.5268
0.1766
0.1062
0.08812
0.02848
1982
0.5938
0.1703
0.07001
0.0423
0.03245
0.01501
1983
0.5843
0.171
0.04809
0.03862
0.03114
0.01522
1984
2.284
0.9743
0.3466
0.1561
0.1115
0.03479
1985
2.642
0.7591
0.1934
0.1157
0.08656
0.0258
1986
1.105
0.3967
0.1553
0.1143
0.08676
0.02553
1987
1.86
0.5285
0.1883
0.09819
0.07347
0.02377
1988
1.157
0.3536
0.1646
0.08769
0.07168
0.02605
1989
1.509
0.4363
0.1368
0.1023
0.07961
0.02611
1990
0.5589
0.19
0.056
0.03036
0.02375
0.01291
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.82
1.093
0.3466
0.1561
0.1115
0.03479
0.0645161290322581
2.642
0.9743
0.2881
0.1328
0.1022
0.03175
0.0967741935483871
2.284
0.789
0.2567
0.1308
0.09879
0.02986
0.129032258064516
2.28
0.7591
0.2538
0.1288
0.09619
0.02934
0.161290322580645
2.138
0.7312
0.241
0.1229
0.0942
0.02927
0.193548387096774
2.115
0.6151
0.237
0.1158
0.08812
0.02848
0.225806451612903
1.984
0.6023
0.2197
0.1157
0.08733
0.02791
0.258064516129032
1.964
0.6017
0.2065
0.1145
0.08676
0.02773
0.290322580645161
1.86
0.5612
0.2035
0.1143
0.08674
0.02747
­
O­
19­
0.32258064516129
1.849
0.5516
0.1934
0.1062
0.08656
0.02732
0.354838709677419
1.742
0.5285
0.1883
0.1059
0.08633
0.02679
0.387096774193548
1.635
0.5268
0.1802
0.1055
0.07961
0.02611
0.419354838709677
1.595
0.4906
0.1766
0.1034
0.07822
0.02605
0.451612903225806
1.509
0.4528
0.1735
0.1025
0.07808
0.0258
0.483870967741936
1.467
0.4363
0.1716
0.1023
0.07626
0.02555
0.516129032258065
1.292
0.4148
0.1697
0.0993
0.07518
0.02553
0.548387096774194
1.248
0.3982
0.1646
0.09819
0.07479
0.0245
0.580645161290323
1.241
0.3981
0.1597
0.09651
0.07422
0.0242
0.612903225806452
1.176
0.3967
0.1553
0.09588
0.07347
0.02402
0.645161290322581
1.157
0.3826
0.1531
0.09059
0.07346
0.0238
0.67741935483871
1.149
0.3771
0.1488
0.08769
0.07168
0.02377
0.709677419354839
1.109
0.3543
0.1451
0.08721
0.06917
0.02334
0.741935483870968
1.105
0.3536
0.1381
0.08605
0.06848
0.02253
0.774193548387097
1.104
0.3323
0.1368
0.08516
0.06837
0.02213
0.806451612903226
0.8915
0.3214
0.1128
0.08423
0.06553
0.02022
0.838709677419355
0.8729
0.2489
0.1059
0.05237
0.04174
0.01615
0.870967741935484
0.8333
0.2445
0.07001
0.0423
0.03245
0.01575
0.903225806451613
0.5938
0.19
0.06836
0.03862
0.03168
0.01522
0.935483870967742
0.5843
0.171
0.056
0.03752
0.03114
0.01501
0.967741935483871
0.5589
0.1703
0.04809
0.03036
0.02375
0.01291
0.1
2.2836
0.78601
0.25641
0.1306
0.09853
0.029808
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0244433333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.028
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
­
O­
20­
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
200
ft,
typical
drift
scenario,
3.6%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.15
0.3553
0.1495
0.08917
0.07162
0.02101
1962
1.182
0.3883
0.2164
0.1072
0.07945
0.02637
1963
0.8334
0.2446
0.06845
0.0376
0.03179
0.01698
1964
1.104
0.3219
0.1132
0.08951
0.07783
0.02874
1965
1.145
0.3994
0.1392
0.1039
0.07741
0.02417
1966
2.116
0.6027
0.2546
0.1163
0.08944
0.02759
1967
1.468
0.4156
0.1809
0.09509
0.07797
0.02532
1968
1.609
0.5031
0.1644
0.08881
0.07152
0.02502
1969
1.965
0.7324
0.2577
0.1362
0.1054
0.03258
1970
1.328
0.3988
0.179
0.1101
0.08127
0.02485
1971
0.8737
0.333
0.146
0.11
0.08956
0.02815
1972
1.743
0.553
0.2462
0.1343
0.1016
0.03068
1973
1.249
0.454
0.1768
0.108
0.0814
0.02462
1974
1.636
0.6161
0.2208
0.1151
0.09052
0.0283
1975
2.317
1.109
0.2949
0.1335
0.09939
0.0301
1976
1.984
0.5615
0.17
0.08534
0.06568
0.02293
1977
1.242
0.3986
0.1604
0.0963
0.07615
0.02852
1978
2.857
0.8
0.2108
0.101
0.07227
0.02333
1979
2.144
0.6054
0.2403
0.1257
0.09739
0.03016
1980
0.8921
0.2494
0.1063
0.05261
0.04444
0.01653
1981
1.85
0.5276
0.1773
0.1107
0.0912
0.02928
1982
0.595
0.1715
0.07097
0.04684
0.03557
0.01582
1983
0.5844
0.1711
0.05114
0.03869
0.03122
0.01601
1984
2.32
0.9908
0.3517
0.1607
0.1147
0.03562
1985
2.644
0.7605
0.1945
0.1203
0.08974
0.02662
1986
1.106
0.3981
0.1564
0.1184
0.08981
0.02631
1987
1.861
0.5288
0.1886
0.09842
0.07366
0.02454
1988
1.157
0.3539
0.1649
0.08835
0.07477
0.02684
1989
1.51
0.4369
0.1418
0.1069
0.08238
0.02692
1990
0.559
0.1901
0.06377
0.03478
0.02508
0.0137
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.857
1.109
0.3517
0.1607
0.1147
0.03562
0.0645161290322581
2.644
0.9908
0.2949
0.1362
0.1054
0.03258
0.0967741935483871
2.32
0.8
0.2577
0.1343
0.1016
0.03068
0.129032258064516
2.317
0.7605
0.2546
0.1335
0.09939
0.03016
0.161290322580645
2.144
0.7324
0.2462
0.1257
0.09739
0.0301
0.193548387096774
2.116
0.6161
0.2403
0.1203
0.0912
0.02928
0.225806451612903
1.984
0.6054
0.2208
0.1184
0.09052
0.02874
0.258064516129032
1.965
0.6027
0.2164
0.1163
0.08981
0.02852
0.290322580645161
1.861
0.5615
0.2108
0.1151
0.08974
0.0283
0.32258064516129
1.85
0.553
0.1945
0.1107
0.08956
0.02815
0.354838709677419
1.743
0.5288
0.1886
0.1101
0.08944
0.02759
­
O­
21­
0.387096774193548
1.636
0.5276
0.1809
0.11
0.08238
0.02692
0.419354838709677
1.609
0.5031
0.179
0.108
0.0814
0.02684
0.451612903225806
1.51
0.454
0.1773
0.1072
0.08127
0.02662
0.483870967741936
1.468
0.4369
0.1768
0.1069
0.07945
0.02637
0.516129032258065
1.328
0.4156
0.17
0.1039
0.07797
0.02631
0.548387096774194
1.249
0.3994
0.1649
0.101
0.07783
0.02532
0.580645161290323
1.242
0.3988
0.1644
0.09842
0.07741
0.02502
0.612903225806452
1.182
0.3986
0.1604
0.0963
0.07615
0.02485
0.645161290322581
1.157
0.3981
0.1564
0.09509
0.07477
0.02462
0.67741935483871
1.15
0.3883
0.1495
0.08951
0.07366
0.02454
0.709677419354839
1.145
0.3553
0.146
0.08917
0.07227
0.02417
0.741935483870968
1.106
0.3539
0.1418
0.08881
0.07162
0.02333
0.774193548387097
1.104
0.333
0.1392
0.08835
0.07152
0.02293
0.806451612903226
0.8921
0.3219
0.1132
0.08534
0.06568
0.02101
0.838709677419355
0.8737
0.2494
0.1063
0.05261
0.04444
0.01698
0.870967741935484
0.8334
0.2446
0.07097
0.04684
0.03557
0.01653
0.903225806451613
0.595
0.1901
0.06845
0.03869
0.03179
0.01601
0.935483870967742
0.5844
0.1715
0.06377
0.0376
0.03122
0.01582
0.967741935483871
0.559
0.1711
0.05114
0.03478
0.02508
0.0137
0.1
2.3197
0.79605
0.25739
0.13422
0.101379
0.030628
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0252536666666667
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.036
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
­
O­
22­
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
150
ft,
typical
drift
scenario,
4.3
%
drift
Surface
Water
(
Water
Column)
Concentrations
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.151
0.3562
0.1502
0.09294
0.0744
0.02171
1962
1.21
0.3981
0.2252
0.1112
0.08225
0.02709
1963
0.8335
0.2447
0.06854
0.03908
0.03189
0.0177
1964
1.105
0.3223
0.1203
0.09255
0.08049
0.02946
1965
1.176
0.4005
0.1413
0.108
0.08021
0.02489
1966
2.117
0.6036
0.2552
0.1177
0.09215
0.0283
1967
1.468
0.4164
0.1814
0.09912
0.08075
0.02604
1968
1.621
0.514
0.1743
0.09282
0.07427
0.02572
1969
1.966
0.7334
0.2586
0.1392
0.1081
0.03331
1970
1.36
0.4129
0.1864
0.1142
0.08407
0.02558
1971
0.8743
0.3337
0.1467
0.1141
0.0921
0.02887
1972
1.745
0.5542
0.2507
0.1384
0.104
0.0314
1973
1.25
0.455
0.1797
0.112
0.08419
0.02534
1974
1.637
0.6171
0.2217
0.1164
0.0933
0.02902
1975
2.349
1.124
0.3009
0.1375
0.1022
0.03082
1976
1.984
0.5618
0.1702
0.08549
0.06581
0.02364
1977
1.242
0.3991
0.161
0.09667
0.07883
0.02921
1978
2.889
0.8095
0.2189
0.105
0.07499
0.02402
1979
2.15
0.6081
0.2448
0.1282
0.1002
0.03088
1980
0.8926
0.2498
0.1067
0.05282
0.04708
0.01722
1981
1.851
0.5283
0.1779
0.1146
0.0939
0.02998
1982
0.596
0.1724
0.07181
0.05082
0.03831
0.01652
1983
0.5845
0.1712
0.06098
0.03874
0.03129
0.0167
1984
2.352
1.005
0.3562
0.1648
0.1175
0.03634
1985
2.645
0.7618
0.1979
0.1244
0.09252
0.02734
1986
1.108
0.3993
0.1573
0.1223
0.09248
0.02699
1987
1.861
0.5291
0.1888
0.09863
0.0746
0.02523
1988
1.157
0.3543
0.1652
0.08908
0.07747
0.02753
1989
1.51
0.4436
0.1506
0.1109
0.08498
0.02763
1990
0.5591
0.1902
0.07359
0.03871
0.02777
0.01439
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.889
1.124
0.3562
0.1648
0.1175
0.03634
0.0645161290322581
2.645
1.005
0.3009
0.1392
0.1081
0.03331
0.0967741935483871
2.352
0.8095
0.2586
0.1384
0.104
0.0314
0.129032258064516
2.349
0.7618
0.2552
0.1375
0.1022
0.03088
0.161290322580645
2.15
0.7334
0.2507
0.1282
0.1002
0.03082
0.193548387096774
2.117
0.6171
0.2448
0.1244
0.0939
0.02998
0.225806451612903
1.984
0.6081
0.2252
0.1223
0.0933
0.02946
0.258064516129032
1.966
0.6036
0.2217
0.1177
0.09252
0.02921
0.290322580645161
1.861
0.5618
0.2189
0.1164
0.09248
0.02902
0.32258064516129
1.851
0.5542
0.1979
0.1146
0.09215
0.02887
0.354838709677419
1.745
0.5291
0.1888
0.1142
0.0921
0.0283
0.387096774193548
1.637
0.5283
0.1864
0.1141
0.08498
0.02763
­
O­
23­
0.419354838709677
1.621
0.514
0.1814
0.112
0.08419
0.02753
0.451612903225806
1.51
0.455
0.1797
0.1112
0.08407
0.02734
0.483870967741936
1.468
0.4436
0.1779
0.1109
0.08225
0.02709
0.516129032258065
1.36
0.4164
0.1743
0.108
0.08075
0.02699
0.548387096774194
1.25
0.4129
0.1702
0.105
0.08049
0.02604
0.580645161290323
1.242
0.4005
0.1652
0.09912
0.08021
0.02572
0.612903225806452
1.21
0.3993
0.161
0.09863
0.07883
0.02558
0.645161290322581
1.176
0.3991
0.1573
0.09667
0.07747
0.02534
0.67741935483871
1.157
0.3981
0.1506
0.09294
0.07499
0.02523
0.709677419354839
1.151
0.3562
0.1502
0.09282
0.0746
0.02489
0.741935483870968
1.108
0.3543
0.1467
0.09255
0.0744
0.02402
0.774193548387097
1.105
0.3337
0.1413
0.08908
0.07427
0.02364
0.806451612903226
0.8926
0.3223
0.1203
0.08549
0.06581
0.02171
0.838709677419355
0.8743
0.2498
0.1067
0.05282
0.04708
0.0177
0.870967741935484
0.8335
0.2447
0.07359
0.05082
0.03831
0.01722
0.903225806451613
0.596
0.1902
0.07181
0.03908
0.03189
0.0167
0.935483870967742
0.5845
0.1724
0.06854
0.03874
0.03129
0.01652
0.967741935483871
0.5591
0.1712
0.06098
0.03871
0.02777
0.01439
0.1
2.3517
0.80473
0.25826
0.13831
0.10382
0.031348
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0259623333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.043
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
­
O­
24­
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

Pore
Water
Concentrations
stored
as
Cypermethrinben.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Benthic
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
0.02755
0.02689
0.02337
0.01758
0.01417
0.004576
1962
0.02934
0.02878
0.02657
0.0193
0.01539
0.006309
1963
0.01393
0.01382
0.01263
0.01047
0.008539
0.004458
1964
0.02145
0.02112
0.01935
0.0162
0.0155
0.007692
1965
0.03022
0.02942
0.02375
0.01783
0.0149
0.00586
1966
0.04131
0.0403
0.03365
0.0232
0.01839
0.006458
1967
0.02858
0.02786
0.02346
0.01885
0.01553
0.006241
1968
0.02572
0.0252
0.02092
0.01544
0.01334
0.006076
1969
0.04706
0.04595
0.03952
0.02711
0.02181
0.008164
1970
0.02625
0.0256
0.02224
0.01963
0.01605
0.005974
1971
0.02763
0.02695
0.02438
0.0195
0.01745
0.006684
1972
0.03998
0.03919
0.03261
0.02486
0.02061
0.007294
1973
0.03003
0.02937
0.02562
0.01986
0.01608
0.00574
1974
0.04144
0.04047
0.03258
0.02348
0.01905
0.006922
1975
0.05228
0.05108
0.04155
0.02527
0.01955
0.007048
1976
0.02875
0.02824
0.02449
0.01912
0.01668
0.005992
1977
0.0267
0.02603
0.02064
0.01816
0.01586
0.007497
1978
0.03816
0.03729
0.02942
0.01802
0.01356
0.005448
1979
0.04131
0.04029
0.03388
0.02367
0.01961
0.00715
1980
0.01662
0.01627
0.01314
0.0104
0.008815
0.004032
1981
0.03037
0.02961
0.02669
0.02021
0.01707
0.00709
1982
0.01212
0.01181
0.01072
0.007449
0.006365
0.003987
1983
0.01128
0.01122
0.01085
0.00964
0.008166
0.004135
1984
0.05915
0.05768
0.04829
0.03092
0.02341
0.008986
1985
0.03813
0.03717
0.03006
0.02256
0.01769
0.006088
1986
0.03068
0.02994
0.02678
0.0216
0.01731
0.006054
1987
0.03068
0.02998
0.02831
0.02066
0.01707
0.006002
1988
0.02812
0.02763
0.02444
0.01839
0.01562
0.006867
1989
0.02845
0.02784
0.02253
0.01866
0.01615
0.006575
1990
0.01108
0.01092
0.009713
0.00772
0.0063
0.003317
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
0.05915
0.05768
0.04829
0.03092
0.02341
0.008986
0.0645161290322581
0.05228
0.05108
0.04155
0.02711
0.02181
0.008164
0.0967741935483871
0.04706
0.04595
0.03952
0.02527
0.02061
0.007692
0.129032258064516
0.04144
0.04047
0.03388
0.02486
0.01961
0.007497
0.161290322580645
0.04131
0.0403
0.03365
0.02367
0.01955
0.007294
0.193548387096774
0.04131
0.04029
0.03261
0.02348
0.01905
0.00715
0.225806451612903
0.03998
0.03919
0.03258
0.0232
0.01839
0.00709
0.258064516129032
0.03816
0.03729
0.03006
0.02256
0.01769
0.007048
0.290322580645161
0.03813
0.03717
0.02942
0.0216
0.01745
0.006922
0.32258064516129
0.03068
0.02998
0.02831
0.02066
0.01731
0.006867
0.354838709677419
0.03068
0.02994
0.02678
0.02021
0.01707
0.006684
0.387096774193548
0.03037
0.02961
0.02669
0.01986
0.01707
0.006575
0.419354838709677
0.03022
0.02942
0.02657
0.01963
0.01668
0.006458
0.451612903225806
0.03003
0.02937
0.02562
0.0195
0.01615
0.006309
­
O­
25­
0.483870967741936
0.02934
0.02878
0.02449
0.0193
0.01608
0.006241
0.516129032258065
0.02875
0.02824
0.02444
0.01912
0.01605
0.006088
0.548387096774194
0.02858
0.02786
0.02438
0.01885
0.01586
0.006076
0.580645161290323
0.02845
0.02784
0.02375
0.01866
0.01562
0.006054
0.612903225806452
0.02812
0.02763
0.02346
0.01839
0.01553
0.006002
0.645161290322581
0.02763
0.02695
0.02337
0.01816
0.0155
0.005992
0.67741935483871
0.02755
0.02689
0.02253
0.01802
0.01539
0.005974
0.709677419354839
0.0267
0.02603
0.02224
0.01783
0.0149
0.00586
0.741935483870968
0.02625
0.0256
0.02092
0.01758
0.01417
0.00574
0.774193548387097
0.02572
0.0252
0.02064
0.0162
0.01356
0.005448
0.806451612903226
0.02145
0.02112
0.01935
0.01544
0.01334
0.004576
0.838709677419355
0.01662
0.01627
0.01314
0.01047
0.008815
0.004458
0.870967741935484
0.01393
0.01382
0.01263
0.0104
0.008539
0.004135
0.903225806451613
0.01212
0.01181
0.01085
0.00964
0.008166
0.004032
0.935483870967742
0.01128
0.01122
0.01072
0.00772
0.006365
0.003987
0.967741935483871
0.01108
0.01092
0.009713
0.007449
0.0063
0.003317
0.1
0.046498
0.045402
0.038956
0.025229
0.02051
0.0076725
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0061572
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.043
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)
­
O­
26­
NC
cotton,
100
ft,
typical
drift
scenario,
5.5
%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.153
0.3577
0.1514
0.09975
0.07908
0.02291
1962
1.263
0.415
0.2401
0.1181
0.08703
0.02834
1963
0.8336
0.2448
0.08549
0.046
0.03411
0.01894
1964
1.106
0.3315
0.1373
0.09774
0.08528
0.0307
1965
1.229
0.42
0.1584
0.115
0.08501
0.02614
1966
2.118
0.6051
0.2564
0.1245
0.09681
0.0295
1967
1.47
0.4177
0.1824
0.106
0.08553
0.02728
1968
1.642
0.5339
0.1914
0.0997
0.07899
0.02694
1969
1.968
0.7352
0.2601
0.1452
0.1129
0.03455
1970
1.414
0.4372
0.199
0.1211
0.08886
0.02682
1971
0.8755
0.3348
0.148
0.121
0.09689
0.03011
1972
1.747
0.5563
0.2585
0.1453
0.1088
0.03263
1973
1.252
0.4568
0.1846
0.119
0.08898
0.02658
1974
1.638
0.6187
0.2233
0.1207
0.09808
0.03026
1975
2.403
1.148
0.3139
0.1445
0.107
0.03206
1976
1.985
0.5622
0.1706
0.08576
0.06603
0.02485
1977
1.243
0.4
0.1621
0.09731
0.08342
0.0304
1978
2.944
0.8259
0.2346
0.1118
0.07966
0.02522
1979
2.159
0.6127
0.2555
0.1325
0.105
0.03211
1980
0.8934
0.2506
0.1072
0.05727
0.05171
0.01841
1981
1.852
0.5295
0.1789
0.1213
0.09853
0.03117
1982
0.5979
0.1742
0.07811
0.05764
0.043
0.01773
1983
0.5847
0.1714
0.07783
0.03885
0.0314
0.01789
1984
2.408
1.03
0.3638
0.1718
0.1223
0.03758
1985
2.647
0.764
0.208
0.1313
0.09729
0.02857
1986
1.11
0.4014
0.1588
0.1289
0.09706
0.02816
1987
1.862
0.5296
0.1892
0.09898
0.07917
0.02639
1988
1.158
0.3548
0.1657
0.09221
0.0821
0.02872
1989
1.511
0.4683
0.1676
0.1177
0.0897
0.02885
1990
0.5593
0.1903
0.09043
0.04545
0.0324
0.01557
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
2.944
1.148
0.3638
0.1718
0.1223
0.03758
0.0645161290322581
2.647
1.03
0.3139
0.1453
0.1129
0.03455
0.0967741935483871
2.408
0.8259
0.2601
0.1452
0.1088
0.03263
0.129032258064516
2.403
0.764
0.2585
0.1445
0.107
0.03211
0.161290322580645
2.159
0.7352
0.2564
0.1325
0.105
0.03206
0.193548387096774
2.118
0.6187
0.2555
0.1313
0.09853
0.03117
0.225806451612903
1.985
0.6127
0.2401
0.1289
0.09808
0.0307
0.258064516129032
1.968
0.6051
0.2346
0.1245
0.09729
0.0304
0.290322580645161
1.862
0.5622
0.2233
0.1213
0.09706
0.03026
0.32258064516129
1.852
0.5563
0.208
0.1211
0.09689
0.03011
0.354838709677419
1.747
0.5339
0.199
0.121
0.09681
0.0295
0.387096774193548
1.642
0.5296
0.1914
0.1207
0.0897
0.02885
0.419354838709677
1.638
0.5295
0.1892
0.119
0.08898
0.02872
0.451612903225806
1.511
0.4683
0.1846
0.1181
0.08886
0.02857
0.483870967741936
1.47
0.4568
0.1824
0.1177
0.08703
0.02834
0.516129032258065
1.414
0.4372
0.1789
0.115
0.08553
0.02816
0.548387096774194
1.263
0.42
0.1706
0.1118
0.08528
0.02728
­
O­
27­
0.580645161290323
1.252
0.4177
0.1676
0.106
0.08501
0.02694
0.612903225806452
1.243
0.415
0.1657
0.09975
0.08342
0.02682
0.645161290322581
1.229
0.4014
0.1621
0.0997
0.0821
0.02658
0.67741935483871
1.158
0.4
0.1588
0.09898
0.07966
0.02639
0.709677419354839
1.153
0.3577
0.1584
0.09774
0.07917
0.02614
0.741935483870968
1.11
0.3548
0.1514
0.09731
0.07908
0.02522
0.774193548387097
1.106
0.3348
0.148
0.09221
0.07899
0.02485
0.806451612903226
0.8934
0.3315
0.1373
0.08576
0.06603
0.02291
0.838709677419355
0.8755
0.2506
0.1072
0.05764
0.05171
0.01894
0.870967741935484
0.8336
0.2448
0.09043
0.05727
0.043
0.01841
0.903225806451613
0.5979
0.1903
0.08549
0.046
0.03411
0.01789
0.935483870967742
0.5847
0.1742
0.07811
0.04545
0.0324
0.01773
0.967741935483871
0.5593
0.1714
0.07783
0.03885
0.0314
0.01557
0.1
2.4075
0.81971
0.25994
0.14513
0.10862
0.032578
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0271793333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.055
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
0
ft,
typical
drift
scenario,
13.0%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
­
O­
28­
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.163
0.3673
0.1843
0.1425
0.1085
0.03038
1962
1.594
0.5562
0.3422
0.1615
0.117
0.03608
1963
0.8346
0.27
0.192
0.08926
0.06322
0.02669
1964
1.373
0.4859
0.2437
0.1356
0.1152
0.03846
1965
1.56
0.5655
0.2652
0.1585
0.115
0.0339
1966
2.128
0.6144
0.2635
0.1669
0.1259
0.03701
1967
1.478
0.4258
0.2171
0.1492
0.1153
0.03501
1968
1.772
0.6855
0.2976
0.1427
0.1085
0.03453
1969
1.979
0.7462
0.2697
0.1883
0.1427
0.04232
1970
1.753
0.5892
0.2814
0.1646
0.1188
0.03461
1971
0.9077
0.4745
0.2503
0.1644
0.1269
0.03785
1972
1.76
0.6183
0.3107
0.1885
0.1386
0.04034
1973
1.342
0.4733
0.2456
0.1623
0.1189
0.03429
1974
1.648
0.6286
0.2333
0.1617
0.1279
0.038
1975
2.745
1.303
0.4189
0.1879
0.1369
0.03979
1976
1.988
0.5651
0.1834
0.08743
0.09087
0.03243
1977
1.249
0.4053
0.1825
0.1324
0.1121
0.03781
1978
3.288
0.9285
0.3404
0.1543
0.1088
0.03268
1979
2.221
0.6832
0.3344
0.1731
0.1349
0.03981
1980
0.8988
0.266
0.1861
0.09368
0.08063
0.0258
1981
1.86
0.5371
0.2526
0.1633
0.1274
0.03863
1982
0.6093
0.2667
0.1839
0.1002
0.07232
0.0253
1983
0.5952
0.2659
0.1832
0.07771
0.05623
0.02529
1984
2.752
1.185
0.4541
0.2153
0.1524
0.04531
1985
2.662
0.7779
0.2819
0.1745
0.1271
0.03625
1986
1.124
0.4146
0.2306
0.1706
0.1256
0.03549
1987
1.865
0.5326
0.1916
0.1087
0.1077
0.0337
1988
1.161
0.3582
0.1877
0.1195
0.111
0.03613
1989
1.518
0.6221
0.2736
0.1606
0.1192
0.03644
1990
0.6755
0.3056
0.1957
0.08756
0.06128
0.02296
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
3.288
1.303
0.4541
0.2153
0.1524
0.04531
0.0645161290322581
2.752
1.185
0.4189
0.1885
0.1427
0.04232
0.0967741935483871
2.745
0.9285
0.3422
0.1883
0.1386
0.04034
0.129032258064516
2.662
0.7779
0.3404
0.1879
0.1369
0.03981
0.161290322580645
2.221
0.7462
0.3344
0.1745
0.1349
0.03979
0.193548387096774
2.128
0.6855
0.3107
0.1731
0.1279
0.03863
0.225806451612903
1.988
0.6832
0.2976
0.1706
0.1274
0.03846
0.258064516129032
1.979
0.6286
0.2819
0.1669
0.1271
0.038
0.290322580645161
1.865
0.6221
0.2814
0.1646
0.1269
0.03785
0.32258064516129
1.86
0.6183
0.2736
0.1644
0.1259
0.03781
0.354838709677419
1.772
0.6144
0.2697
0.1633
0.1256
0.03701
0.387096774193548
1.76
0.5892
0.2652
0.1623
0.1192
0.03644
0.419354838709677
1.753
0.5655
0.2635
0.1617
0.1189
0.03625
0.451612903225806
1.648
0.5651
0.2526
0.1615
0.1188
0.03613
0.483870967741936
1.594
0.5562
0.2503
0.1606
0.117
0.03608
0.516129032258065
1.56
0.5371
0.2456
0.1585
0.1153
0.03549
0.548387096774194
1.518
0.5326
0.2437
0.1543
0.1152
0.03501
0.580645161290323
1.478
0.4859
0.2333
0.1492
0.115
0.03461
0.612903225806452
1.373
0.4745
0.2306
0.1427
0.1121
0.03453
­
O­
29­
0.645161290322581
1.342
0.4733
0.2171
0.1425
0.111
0.03429
0.67741935483871
1.249
0.4258
0.1957
0.1356
0.1088
0.0339
0.709677419354839
1.163
0.4146
0.192
0.1324
0.1085
0.0337
0.741935483870968
1.161
0.4053
0.1916
0.1195
0.1085
0.03268
0.774193548387097
1.124
0.3673
0.1877
0.1087
0.1077
0.03243
0.806451612903226
0.9077
0.3582
0.1861
0.1002
0.09087
0.03038
0.838709677419355
0.8988
0.3056
0.1843
0.09368
0.08063
0.02669
0.870967741935484
0.8346
0.27
0.1839
0.08926
0.07232
0.0258
0.903225806451613
0.6755
0.2667
0.1834
0.08756
0.06322
0.0253
0.935483870967742
0.6093
0.266
0.1832
0.08743
0.06128
0.02529
0.967741935483871
0.5952
0.2659
0.1825
0.07771
0.05623
0.02296
0.1
2.7367
0.91344
0.34202
0.18826
0.13843
0.040287
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0347763333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.13
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
200
ft,
high
end
drift
scenario,
16.1%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
­
O­
30­
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.167
0.3712
0.2284
0.1603
0.1208
0.03348
1962
1.731
0.6189
0.3862
0.1794
0.1293
0.03927
1963
0.835
0.3339
0.236
0.1071
0.07555
0.02989
1964
1.514
0.5497
0.2877
0.1513
0.1275
0.04166
1965
1.697
0.6257
0.3093
0.1764
0.1274
0.03711
1966
2.132
0.6183
0.2664
0.1844
0.138
0.04011
1967
1.482
0.4292
0.261
0.1671
0.1277
0.0382
1968
1.826
0.7482
0.3416
0.1604
0.1207
0.03767
1969
1.984
0.7508
0.2736
0.2061
0.1551
0.04553
1970
1.893
0.6519
0.3254
0.1825
0.1312
0.03783
1971
1.044
0.536
0.2943
0.1823
0.1392
0.04105
1972
1.765
0.6809
0.3369
0.2064
0.1509
0.04352
1973
1.398
0.516
0.2896
0.1802
0.1312
0.03748
1974
1.652
0.6328
0.2375
0.1796
0.1403
0.0412
1975
2.887
1.367
0.4631
0.2059
0.1493
0.04299
1976
1.989
0.5663
0.2271
0.0927
0.103
0.03556
1977
1.251
0.4075
0.2259
0.1497
0.124
0.04087
1978
3.43
0.9709
0.3842
0.1719
0.1208
0.03576
1979
2.246
0.7261
0.3686
0.1911
0.1473
0.043
1980
0.901
0.3294
0.2298
0.1112
0.09258
0.02886
1981
1.863
0.5403
0.2959
0.1807
0.1394
0.04171
1982
0.7377
0.3302
0.2276
0.1179
0.08444
0.02842
1983
0.737
0.3292
0.2268
0.09512
0.06816
0.02835
1984
2.895
1.249
0.4983
0.2333
0.1648
0.04851
1985
2.668
0.7836
0.3143
0.1923
0.1394
0.03943
1986
1.13
0.42
0.2622
0.1878
0.1375
0.03852
1987
1.866
0.5339
0.2265
0.1238
0.1195
0.03672
1988
1.163
0.3596
0.2273
0.137
0.123
0.03919
1989
1.557
0.6857
0.3174
0.1783
0.1314
0.03957
1990
0.8163
0.3678
0.2392
0.105
0.07322
0.02601
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
3.43
1.367
0.4983
0.2333
0.1648
0.04851
0.0645161290322581
2.895
1.249
0.4631
0.2064
0.1551
0.04553
0.0967741935483871
2.887
0.9709
0.3862
0.2061
0.1509
0.04352
0.129032258064516
2.668
0.7836
0.3842
0.2059
0.1493
0.043
0.161290322580645
2.246
0.7508
0.3686
0.1923
0.1473
0.04299
0.193548387096774
2.132
0.7482
0.3416
0.1911
0.1403
0.04171
0.225806451612903
1.989
0.7261
0.3369
0.1878
0.1394
0.04166
0.258064516129032
1.984
0.6857
0.3254
0.1844
0.1394
0.0412
0.290322580645161
1.893
0.6809
0.3174
0.1825
0.1392
0.04105
0.32258064516129
1.866
0.6519
0.3143
0.1823
0.138
0.04087
0.354838709677419
1.863
0.6328
0.3093
0.1807
0.1375
0.04011
0.387096774193548
1.826
0.6257
0.2959
0.1802
0.1314
0.03957
0.419354838709677
1.765
0.6189
0.2943
0.1796
0.1312
0.03943
0.451612903225806
1.731
0.6183
0.2896
0.1794
0.1312
0.03927
0.483870967741936
1.697
0.5663
0.2877
0.1783
0.1293
0.03919
0.516129032258065
1.652
0.5497
0.2736
0.1764
0.1277
0.03852
0.548387096774194
1.557
0.5403
0.2664
0.1719
0.1275
0.0382
0.580645161290323
1.514
0.536
0.2622
0.1671
0.1274
0.03783
0.612903225806452
1.482
0.5339
0.261
0.1604
0.124
0.03767
0.645161290322581
1.398
0.516
0.2392
0.1603
0.123
0.03748
0.67741935483871
1.251
0.4292
0.2375
0.1513
0.1208
0.03711
­
O­
31­
0.709677419354839
1.167
0.42
0.236
0.1497
0.1208
0.03672
0.741935483870968
1.163
0.4075
0.2298
0.137
0.1207
0.03576
0.774193548387097
1.13
0.3712
0.2284
0.1238
0.1195
0.03556
0.806451612903226
1.044
0.3678
0.2276
0.1179
0.103
0.03348
0.838709677419355
0.901
0.3596
0.2273
0.1112
0.09258
0.02989
0.870967741935484
0.835
0.3339
0.2271
0.1071
0.08444
0.02886
0.903225806451613
0.8163
0.3302
0.2268
0.105
0.07555
0.02842
0.935483870967742
0.7377
0.3294
0.2265
0.09512
0.07322
0.02835
0.967741935483871
0.737
0.3292
0.2259
0.0927
0.06816
0.02601
0.1
2.8651
0.95217
0.386
0.20608
0.15074
0.043468
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0379156666666667
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.161
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
150
ft,
high
end
drift
scenario,
18.9%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
­
O­
32­
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.171
0.3881
0.2676
0.1762
0.1317
0.03626
1962
1.855
0.6756
0.426
0.1956
0.1405
0.04217
1963
0.8696
0.3916
0.2758
0.1233
0.0867
0.03278
1964
1.641
0.6074
0.3274
0.1655
0.1387
0.04456
1965
1.821
0.6801
0.3491
0.1927
0.1386
0.04001
1966
2.135
0.6218
0.269
0.2002
0.1488
0.04292
1967
1.485
0.4571
0.3007
0.1832
0.1388
0.04109
1968
1.875
0.8048
0.3813
0.1764
0.1317
0.04051
1969
1.988
0.7549
0.3025
0.2222
0.1662
0.04843
1970
2.019
0.7087
0.3652
0.1987
0.1424
0.04074
1971
1.171
0.5916
0.3341
0.1985
0.1504
0.04394
1972
1.77
0.7376
0.3605
0.2225
0.1621
0.0464
1973
1.449
0.5547
0.3294
0.1964
0.1424
0.04037
1974
1.656
0.6365
0.2683
0.1958
0.1514
0.04408
1975
3.014
1.425
0.5029
0.2221
0.1604
0.04588
1976
1.99
0.5674
0.2666
0.1086
0.114
0.03838
1977
1.253
0.4095
0.2651
0.1654
0.1347
0.04364
1978
3.558
1.009
0.4237
0.1878
0.1317
0.03855
1979
2.269
0.7648
0.4036
0.2073
0.1584
0.04587
1980
0.903
0.3867
0.2692
0.1269
0.1034
0.03162
1981
1.866
0.5584
0.3351
0.1964
0.1502
0.0445
1982
0.866
0.3875
0.267
0.1338
0.09538
0.03125
1983
0.8651
0.3863
0.2661
0.1108
0.07893
0.03111
1984
3.023
1.307
0.5381
0.2495
0.176
0.0514
1985
2.674
0.7888
0.3436
0.2084
0.1506
0.0423
1986
1.136
0.4402
0.2948
0.2033
0.1481
0.04126
1987
1.867
0.535
0.2656
0.1374
0.1301
0.03944
1988
1.164
0.3869
0.2667
0.1527
0.1338
0.04195
1989
1.685
0.7432
0.3569
0.1943
0.1424
0.04241
1990
0.9435
0.424
0.2784
0.1207
0.08401
0.02877
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
3.558
1.425
0.5381
0.2495
0.176
0.0514
0.0645161290322581
3.023
1.307
0.5029
0.2225
0.1662
0.04843
0.0967741935483871
3.014
1.009
0.426
0.2222
0.1621
0.0464
0.129032258064516
2.674
0.8048
0.4237
0.2221
0.1604
0.04588
0.161290322580645
2.269
0.7888
0.4036
0.2084
0.1584
0.04587
0.193548387096774
2.135
0.7648
0.3813
0.2073
0.1514
0.04456
0.225806451612903
2.019
0.7549
0.3652
0.2033
0.1506
0.0445
0.258064516129032
1.99
0.7432
0.3605
0.2002
0.1504
0.04408
0.290322580645161
1.988
0.7376
0.3569
0.1987
0.1502
0.04394
0.32258064516129
1.875
0.7087
0.3491
0.1985
0.1488
0.04364
0.354838709677419
1.867
0.6801
0.3436
0.1964
0.1481
0.04292
0.387096774193548
1.866
0.6756
0.3351
0.1964
0.1424
0.04241
0.419354838709677
1.855
0.6365
0.3341
0.1958
0.1424
0.0423
0.451612903225806
1.821
0.6218
0.3294
0.1956
0.1424
0.04217
0.483870967741936
1.77
0.6074
0.3274
0.1943
0.1405
0.04195
0.516129032258065
1.685
0.5916
0.3025
0.1927
0.1388
0.04126
0.548387096774194
1.656
0.5674
0.3007
0.1878
0.1387
0.04109
0.580645161290323
1.641
0.5584
0.2948
0.1832
0.1386
0.04074
0.612903225806452
1.485
0.5547
0.2784
0.1764
0.1347
0.04051
0.645161290322581
1.449
0.535
0.2758
0.1762
0.1338
0.04037
0.67741935483871
1.253
0.4571
0.2692
0.1655
0.1317
0.04001
0.709677419354839
1.171
0.4402
0.269
0.1654
0.1317
0.03944
0.741935483870968
1.171
0.424
0.2683
0.1527
0.1317
0.03855
­
O­
33­
0.774193548387097
1.164
0.4095
0.2676
0.1374
0.1301
0.03838
0.806451612903226
1.136
0.3916
0.267
0.1338
0.114
0.03626
0.838709677419355
0.9435
0.3881
0.2667
0.1269
0.1034
0.03278
0.870967741935484
0.903
0.3875
0.2666
0.1233
0.09538
0.03162
0.903225806451613
0.8696
0.3869
0.2661
0.1207
0.0867
0.03125
0.935483870967742
0.866
0.3867
0.2656
0.1108
0.08401
0.03111
0.967741935483871
0.8651
0.3863
0.2651
0.1086
0.07893
0.02877
0.1
2.98
0.98858
0.42577
0.22219
0.16193
0.046348
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.040753
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.189
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
100
ft,
high
end
drift
scenario,
21.9%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)
­
O­
34­
Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.175
0.4497
0.31
0.1934
0.1435
0.03925
1962
1.987
0.7364
0.4686
0.2129
0.1525
0.04526
1963
1.007
0.4534
0.3184
0.1406
0.09863
0.03588
1964
1.778
0.6691
0.37
0.1808
0.1507
0.04766
1965
1.953
0.7383
0.3918
0.2101
0.1506
0.04312
1966
2.139
0.6255
0.3084
0.2171
0.1605
0.04592
1967
1.489
0.5123
0.3433
0.2005
0.1507
0.04418
1968
1.927
0.8654
0.4238
0.1936
0.1435
0.04355
1969
1.993
0.7594
0.3449
0.2394
0.1781
0.05154
1970
2.155
0.7694
0.4078
0.2161
0.1544
0.04386
1971
1.306
0.6512
0.3767
0.2159
0.1624
0.04703
1972
1.775
0.7982
0.401
0.2398
0.174
0.04948
1973
1.503
0.5961
0.372
0.2137
0.1543
0.04345
1974
1.66
0.6405
0.3109
0.2131
0.1634
0.04718
1975
3.151
1.487
0.5457
0.2395
0.1724
0.04897
1976
1.991
0.5686
0.3089
0.1257
0.1257
0.04141
1977
1.255
0.4461
0.3071
0.1821
0.1462
0.0466
1978
3.695
1.05
0.466
0.2048
0.1434
0.04153
1979
2.293
0.8063
0.441
0.2246
0.1704
0.04895
1980
1.003
0.448
0.3114
0.1438
0.1149
0.03458
1981
1.87
0.616
0.3771
0.2132
0.1618
0.04748
1982
1.003
0.449
0.3093
0.1508
0.1071
0.03428
1983
1.002
0.4476
0.3082
0.1277
0.09048
0.03407
1984
3.161
1.369
0.5808
0.267
0.1881
0.05449
1985
2.68
0.7944
0.375
0.2257
0.1625
0.04537
1986
1.213
0.5001
0.3313
0.22
0.1596
0.04419
1987
1.869
0.5362
0.3075
0.152
0.1416
0.04237
1988
1.166
0.4482
0.3089
0.1697
0.1454
0.04492
1989
1.821
0.8047
0.3993
0.2114
0.1542
0.04544
1990
1.08
0.4842
0.3205
0.1375
0.09556
0.03173
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
3.695
1.487
0.5808
0.267
0.1881
0.05449
0.0645161290322581
3.161
1.369
0.5457
0.2398
0.1781
0.05154
0.0967741935483871
3.151
1.05
0.4686
0.2395
0.174
0.04948
0.129032258064516
2.68
0.8654
0.466
0.2394
0.1724
0.04897
0.161290322580645
2.293
0.8063
0.441
0.2257
0.1704
0.04895
0.193548387096774
2.155
0.8047
0.4238
0.2246
0.1634
0.04766
0.225806451612903
2.139
0.7982
0.4078
0.22
0.1625
0.04748
0.258064516129032
1.993
0.7944
0.401
0.2171
0.1624
0.04718
0.290322580645161
1.991
0.7694
0.3993
0.2161
0.1618
0.04703
0.32258064516129
1.987
0.7594
0.3918
0.2159
0.1605
0.0466
0.354838709677419
1.953
0.7383
0.3771
0.2137
0.1596
0.04592
0.387096774193548
1.927
0.7364
0.3767
0.2132
0.1544
0.04544
0.419354838709677
1.87
0.6691
0.375
0.2131
0.1543
0.04537
0.451612903225806
1.869
0.6512
0.372
0.2129
0.1542
0.04526
0.483870967741936
1.821
0.6405
0.37
0.2114
0.1525
0.04492
0.516129032258065
1.778
0.6255
0.3449
0.2101
0.1507
0.04419
0.548387096774194
1.775
0.616
0.3433
0.2048
0.1507
0.04418
0.580645161290323
1.66
0.5961
0.3313
0.2005
0.1506
0.04386
0.612903225806452
1.503
0.5686
0.3205
0.1936
0.1462
0.04355
0.645161290322581
1.489
0.5362
0.3184
0.1934
0.1454
0.04345
0.67741935483871
1.306
0.5123
0.3114
0.1821
0.1435
0.04312
0.709677419354839
1.255
0.5001
0.3109
0.1808
0.1435
0.04237
0.741935483870968
1.213
0.4842
0.31
0.1697
0.1434
0.04153
0.774193548387097
1.175
0.4534
0.3093
0.152
0.1416
0.04141
0.806451612903226
1.166
0.4497
0.3089
0.1508
0.1257
0.03925
­
O­
35­
0.838709677419355
1.08
0.449
0.3089
0.1438
0.1149
0.03588
0.870967741935484
1.007
0.4482
0.3084
0.1406
0.1071
0.03458
0.903225806451613
1.003
0.448
0.3082
0.1375
0.09863
0.03428
0.935483870967742
1.003
0.4476
0.3075
0.1277
0.09556
0.03407
0.967741935483871
1.002
0.4461
0.3071
0.1257
0.09048
0.03173
0.1
3.1039
1.03154
0.46834
0.23949
0.17384
0.049429
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0437913333333333
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.219
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)

NC
cotton,
0
ft,
high
end
drift
scenario,
35.6%
drift
stored
as
Cypermethrin.
out
Chemical:
Cypermethrin
PRZM
environment:
NCcottonC.
txt
modified
Satday,
12
October
2002
at
17:
12:
02
EXAMS
environment:
pond298.
exv
modified
Thuday,
29
August
2002
at
16:
33:
30
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
modified
Wedday,
3
July
2002
at
09:
05:
50
Water
segment
concentrations
(
ppb)

Year
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
1961
1.632
0.7309
0.5035
0.2716
0.1973
0.05291
­
O­
36­
1962
2.592
1.014
0.6632
0.2921
0.2071
0.0594
1963
1.636
0.7357
0.5129
0.2196
0.1532
0.05002
1964
2.402
0.9512
0.5643
0.257
0.2053
0.06182
1965
2.559
1.004
0.5868
0.2895
0.2053
0.0573
1966
2.157
0.7278
0.5011
0.2945
0.2137
0.05964
1967
1.652
0.7642
0.5376
0.2794
0.2052
0.05829
1968
2.165
1.142
0.6179
0.2721
0.1974
0.05742
1969
2.051
0.8745
0.5387
0.3181
0.2326
0.06574
1970
2.774
1.047
0.6024
0.2954
0.2091
0.05809
1971
1.925
0.9231
0.5713
0.2952
0.2172
0.06117
1972
2.182
1.075
0.5953
0.3187
0.2285
0.06356
1973
1.752
0.7851
0.5666
0.2929
0.2089
0.05755
1974
1.678
0.733
0.5052
0.292
0.2179
0.06131
1975
3.776
1.77
0.7408
0.3189
0.2271
0.06311
1976
1.997
0.729
0.502
0.2035
0.1794
0.05525
1977
1.627
0.7249
0.4988
0.2586
0.1987
0.06014
1978
4.323
1.238
0.6593
0.2825
0.1966
0.05517
1979
2.404
0.9957
0.6194
0.3039
0.2251
0.06302
1980
1.63
0.7281
0.5042
0.2211
0.1678
0.04808
1981
1.963
0.8793
0.5688
0.2899
0.2146
0.06111
1982
1.631
0.7295
0.5025
0.2286
0.1607
0.04809
1983
1.629
0.7273
0.5007
0.2047
0.1432
0.0476
1984
3.79
1.652
0.7759
0.3465
0.243
0.06862
1985
2.707
0.8197
0.5247
0.3046
0.2169
0.05941
1986
1.829
0.7736
0.511
0.2961
0.2118
0.05758
1987
1.875
0.7297
0.499
0.2187
0.1937
0.05571
1988
1.63
0.7285
0.5018
0.2469
0.1983
0.05845
1989
2.444
1.086
0.5929
0.2897
0.2081
0.05931
1990
1.702
0.759
0.5128
0.2145
0.1483
0.04522
Sorted
results
Prob.
Peak
96
hr
21
Day
60
Day
90
Day
Yearly
0.032258064516129
4.323
1.77
0.7759
0.3465
0.243
0.06862
0.0645161290322581
3.79
1.652
0.7408
0.3189
0.2326
0.06574
0.0967741935483871
3.776
1.238
0.6632
0.3187
0.2285
0.06356
0.129032258064516
2.774
1.142
0.6593
0.3181
0.2271
0.06311
0.161290322580645
2.707
1.086
0.6194
0.3046
0.2251
0.06302
0.193548387096774
2.592
1.075
0.6179
0.3039
0.2179
0.06182
0.225806451612903
2.559
1.047
0.6024
0.2961
0.2172
0.06131
0.258064516129032
2.444
1.014
0.5953
0.2954
0.2169
0.06117
0.290322580645161
2.404
1.004
0.5929
0.2952
0.2146
0.06111
0.32258064516129
2.402
0.9957
0.5868
0.2945
0.2137
0.06014
0.354838709677419
2.182
0.9512
0.5713
0.2929
0.2118
0.05964
0.387096774193548
2.165
0.9231
0.5688
0.2921
0.2091
0.05941
0.419354838709677
2.157
0.8793
0.5666
0.292
0.2089
0.0594
0.451612903225806
2.051
0.8745
0.5643
0.2899
0.2081
0.05931
0.483870967741936
1.997
0.8197
0.5387
0.2897
0.2071
0.05845
0.516129032258065
1.963
0.7851
0.5376
0.2895
0.2053
0.05829
0.548387096774194
1.925
0.7736
0.5247
0.2825
0.2053
0.05809
0.580645161290323
1.875
0.7642
0.5129
0.2794
0.2052
0.05758
0.612903225806452
1.829
0.759
0.5128
0.2721
0.1987
0.05755
0.645161290322581
1.752
0.7357
0.511
0.2716
0.1983
0.05742
0.67741935483871
1.702
0.733
0.5052
0.2586
0.1974
0.0573
0.709677419354839
1.678
0.7309
0.5042
0.257
0.1973
0.05571
0.741935483870968
1.652
0.7297
0.5035
0.2469
0.1966
0.05525
0.774193548387097
1.636
0.7295
0.5025
0.2286
0.1937
0.05517
0.806451612903226
1.632
0.729
0.502
0.2211
0.1794
0.05291
0.838709677419355
1.631
0.7285
0.5018
0.2196
0.1678
0.05002
0.870967741935484
1.63
0.7281
0.5011
0.2187
0.1607
0.04809
­
O­
37­
0.903225806451613
1.63
0.7278
0.5007
0.2145
0.1532
0.04808
0.935483870967742
1.629
0.7273
0.499
0.2047
0.1483
0.0476
0.967741935483871
1.627
0.7249
0.4988
0.2035
0.1432
0.04522
0.1
3.6758
1.2284
0.66281
0.31864
0.22836
0.063515
Average
of
yearly
averages:
0.0576696666666667
Inputs
generated
by
pe4.
pl
­
8­
August­
2003
Data
used
for
this
run:
Output
File:
Cypermethrin
Metfile:
w13722.
dvf
PRZM
scenario:
NCcottonC.
txt
EXAMS
environment
file:
pond298.
exv
Chemical
Name:
Cypermethrin
Description
Variable
Name
Value
Units
Comments
Molecular
weight
mwt
416.3
g/
mol
Henry's
Law
Const.
henry
3.4e­
7
atm­
m^
3/
mol
Vapor
Pressure
vapr
2.5e­
9
torr
Solubilitysol
0.040
mg/
L
Kd
Kd
mg/
L
Koc
Koc
141700
mg/
L
Photolysis
half­
life
kdp
36.2
days
Half­
life
Aerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacw
11.3
days
Halfife
Anaerobic
Aquatic
Metabolism
kbacs
19.3
days
Halfife
Aerobic
Soil
Metabolism
asm
62
days
Halfife
Hydrolysis:
pH
7
0
days
Half­
life
Method:
CAM
2
integer
See
PRZM
manual
Incorporation
Depth:
DEPI
0.0
cm
Application
Rate:
TAPP
0.112
kg/
ha
Application
Efficiency:
APPEFF
0.95
fraction
Spray
Drift
DRFT
0.356
fraction
of
application
rate
applied
to
pond
Application
Date
Date
01­
07
dd/
mm
or
dd/
mmm
or
dd­
mm
or
dd­
mmm
Interval
1
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
2
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
3
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
4
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Interval
5
interval
3
days
Set
to
0
or
delete
line
for
single
app.
Record
17:
FILTRA
IPSCND
1
UPTKF
0
Record
18:
PLVKRT0
PLDKRT0
FEXTRC0.5
Flag
for
Index
Res.
Run
IR
Pond
Flag
for
runoff
calc.
RUNOFFtotal
none,
monthly
or
total(
average
of
entire
run)
