U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Washington, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION

PC Code: 120603

DP Barcode: 380619

381445

October 12, 2010   

                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
                                                                        
                            

MEMORANDUM	

SUBJECT:	Tier II Drinking Water Exposure Assessment to Establish
Tolerances of Tetraconazole on Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup
13-07F, Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13-07G and Corn.  

TO:	Sidney Jackson, Risk Manager Reviewer

	Barbara Madden, Risk Manager	

	   	      Lisa Jones, Risk Manager Reviewer

	Mary Waller, Risk Manager	

	

FROM:	Christopher M. Koper, Chemist

	Stephen Wente, Secondary Reviewer

	Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

THROUGH:	Nancy Andrews, Branch Chief, Environmental Risk Branch I

	Sujatha Sankula, Risk Assessment Process Leader (RAPL), ERB I

	Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P)

Executive Summary

A Tier II screening-level drinking water assessment was conducted for a
petition submitted by Isagro SpA to establish tolerances of
tetraconazole for Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup 13-07F, Low Growing
Berry Subgroup 13-07G and Corn.  Two actions have been bundled in this
assessment: small fruit vine climbing subgroup 13-07F, low growing berry
subgroup 13-07G (D380619) and corn (D381445).  It is important to note
that cranberry is part of the 13-07G subgroup; however, the registrant
chose to withdraw cranberry from the label.  The letter of withdrawal
dated 06 October 2010 is located in Appendix C.

™ 125 ME Fungicide (EPA Reg. No. 80289-8) label.  In addition, the
fungicide can be applied to corn by aerial or ground application in
addition to chemigation according to Domark® 230 ME Fungicide (EPA Reg.
No. 80289-7) label.  The estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs)
are based on the maximum proposed application rates specified in the
product label.  The EDWCs for the human health risk assessment are
presented in Table 1.

For surface water, the EDWCs for the crops modeled in this assessment
did not exceed the previous EDWCs for use on grapes and pecans reported
(Table 3, page 5) in the previous drinking water assessment (D347085,
D350213) dated 01 July 2008. The previously reported acute concentration
of 10.69 µg/L (GA Pecan – aerial), annual mean (chronic)
concentration of 4.68 µg/L (MN Sugarbeet – aerial) and the highest 30
year annual average concentration of 3.88 µg/L (NC Peanuts – aerial)
are higher than the reported EDWCs for various uses in Table 1. 
Therefore, the current EDWCs for surface water do not supersede the
drinking water concentrations previously estimated for this chemical.

For groundwater, based on the proposed highest annual use rates for low
growing berry subgroup 13-07G (D380619) and corn (D381445), the SCI-GROW
model concentrations of tetraconazole were 0.127 µg/L and 0.0715 µg/L,
respectively (Table 1).  This value was compared to 0.397 µg/L reported
for pecans in the previous drinking water assessment (D347805, D350213)
dated 01 July 2008.  Since 0.127 µg/L and 0.0715 µg/L µg/L are less
than 0.397 µg/L, the current EDWCs do not supersede the previous
estimated drinking water concentrations.

In conclusion, the current EDWCs for surface and ground water do not
supersede the estimated drinking water concentrations previously
calculated for tetraconazole.

Table 1.  Tetraconazole Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations (EDWCs)1
for Surface Water and Ground Water based on selected Crop Scenarios

Proposed Label Use	PRZM/EXAMS

Scenario1

(first app date)	Method2	Application Rate

Mettle™ 125 ME Fungicide



Small Fruit Vine Climbing subgroup 13-07F 

(except fuzzy kiwifruit)	CA Grapes

(August 3 – foliar)	A	2 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	1.32	1.05	0.79

	CA Grapes

(August 3 – foliar)	G	2 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	0.83	0.64	0.48

	CA Grapes

(August 3 –airblast)	AB	2 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	0.83	0.64	0.48

	CA Grapes

(August 3 – chemigation)	C	2 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	0.56	0.37	0.27

	NY Grapes

(September 17 – foliar)	A	2 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	3.18	2.21	1.57

	NY Grapes

(September 17  – foliar)	G	2 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	3.06	2.08	1.45

	NY Grapes

(September 17  –airblast)	AB	2 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	3.06	2.08	1.45

	NY Grapes

(Sept. 17  – chemigation)	C	2 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	2.93	1.97	1.34



Low Growing Berry subgroup 13-07G 

	CA Strawberry 3

(May 20 - foliar)	A	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	5.21	3.06	2.43

	CA Strawberry

(May 20 - foliar)	G	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	5.20	2.91	2.27

	CA Strawberry

(May 20 - airblast)	AB	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	5.20	2.91	2.26

	CA Strawberry

(May 20 - chemigation)	C	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	5.11	2.76	2.12

	FL Strawberry

(January 04 - foliar)	A	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	4.22	1.78	1.48

	FL Strawberry

(January 04  - foliar)	G	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	4.28	1.74	1.43

	FL Strawberry

(January 04  - airblast)	AB	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	4.28	1.74	1.43

	FL Strawberry

(January 04  - chemigation)	C	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	4.24	1.69	1.38

	OR Berries  3

(June 18 - foliar)	A	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	3.34	2.48	2.02

	OR Berries

(June 18  - foliar)	G	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	3.13	2.21	1.78

	OR Berries

(June 18  - airblast)	AB	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	3.13	2.21	1.77

	OR Berries

(June 18  - chemigation)	C	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre

(14-day interval)	2.94	2.01	1.59

Groundwater

SCI-GROW	Low Growing Berry subgroup 13-07G 	--	4 app @ 0.04 lb a.i./acre
0.127	0.127	0.127

Surface Water

Domark® 230 ME Fungicide



Corn (field corn and popcorn including field corn grown for seed)	PA
Corn

(July 08 - foliar)	A	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	3.52	1.73	1.30

	PA Corn

(July 08 - foliar)	G	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	3.45	1.67	1.23

	PA Corn

(July 08 -chemigation)	C	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	3.35	1.61	1.16

	PA Corn

(July 01 - foliar)	A	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	3.54	1.74	1.31

	PA Corn

(July 01 - foliar)	G	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	3.49	1.68	1.24

	PA Corn

(July 01 -chemigation)	C	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	3.39	1.61	1.17

	MS Corn

(July 02 - foliar)	A	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	2.92	1.19	0.93

	MS Corn

(July 02 - foliar)	G	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	2.99	1.18	0.92

	MS Corn

(July 02 -chemigation)	C	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	2.98	1.16	0.90

	MS Corn

(June 25 - foliar)	A	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.89	1.19	0.93

	MS Corn

(June 25 - foliar)	G	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.93	1.19	0.92

	MS Corn

(June 25 -chemigation)	C	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.91	1.17	0.90

	IL Corn

(July 23 - foliar)	A	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	3.01	1.81	1.46

	IL Corn

(July 23 - foliar)	G	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	2.95	1.78	1.41

	IL Corn

(July 23 -chemigation)	C	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	2.83	1.73	1.35

	IL Corn

(July 16 - foliar)	A	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.99	1.82	1.47

	IL Corn

(July 16 - foliar)	G	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.87	1.78	1.42

	IL Corn

(July 16 -chemigation)	C	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.76	1.73	1.36

	KS Corn

(August 01 - foliar)	A	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	3.83	1.83	1.45

	KS Corn

(August 01 - foliar)	G	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	3.73	1.82	1.42

	KS Corn

(August 01-chemigation)	C	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	3.65	1.78	1.38

	KS Corn

(July 25 - foliar)	A	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	4.06	1.86	1.47

	KS Corn

(July 25 - foliar)	G	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	4.00	1.85	1.44

	KS Corn

(July 25 -chemigation)	C	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	3.90	1.80	1.40

	NC Corn

(July 07 - foliar)	A	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	2.44	1.35	1.16

	NC Corn

(July 07 - foliar)	G	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	2.29	1.29	1.10

	NC Corn

(July 07-chemigation)	C	1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	2.15	1.23	1.04

	NC Corn

(June 30 - foliar)	A	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.38	1.34	1.17

	NC Corn

(June 30 - foliar)	G	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.24	1.28	1.10

	NC Corn

(June 30 -chemigation)	C	2 app @ 0.045 lb a.i./acre

(7-day interval)	2.12	1.22	1.04

Groundwater

SCI-GROW	Corn	--	

1 app @ 0.090 lb a.i./acre

	0.0715	0.0715	0.0715

1  EDWC values adjusted with a Percent Cropped Area (PCA) factor of
0.87.  Bold numbers denote maximum EDWC values.

2  A = aerial application, G = ground application, AB = airblast
(orchard) application, C = chemigation.

3  It is important to note, two specialty scenarios were employed to
properly assess the low growing berry subgroup.  

   CA Strawberry is a Red-Legged Frog (RLF) scenario.  OR Berries is an
organophosphate (OP) scenario.



Introduction

Tetraconazole is a broad spectrum systemic fungicide with protective,
curative, and eradicate properties.  It is absorbed by the root, stem,
and leaves with subsequent translocation to all portions of the plant. 
Tetraconazole is persistent in the environment and does not have a
single predominant route of dissipation.  Based on the field and
laboratory studies, tetraconazole is expected to have low volatility
from soil and water surfaces and possesses slight mobility in soils. 
Successive applications are expected to result in year-to-year soil
accumulation.  Tetraconazole is likely to reach surface sources of
drinking water via spray drift and runoff but its tendency to reach
ground water is expected to be attenuated due to its lack of mobility in
soil.  The chemical has low potential to reach groundwater, except in
soils of high sand and low organic matter content. Detailed description
of fate and transport properties of tetraconazole can be obtained from
the comprehensive drinking water assessment (D321622, D321742 and
D331420) dated 27 November 2006.

Monitoring Data

A typical drinking water treatment operation begins with course
filtration of particulate matter from a lake or reservoir water intake
pipe.  Secondary filtration often involves the addition of alum or
ferric sulfate in order to cause suspended particulate matter to
coagulate for easier removal of smaller particles in the water column. 
In addition, lime is also added for pH adjustment, softening, and
corrosion control.  After the raw water has been treated with these
compounds, it is gently mixed by large mechanical paddles in
flocculation basins where the suspended particles gather into larger
particles and settle to the bottom of settling basins.  The settled
particles form a sludge layer on the bottom of each primary settling
basin and the sludge is pushed into sumps by traveling mechanical rakes,
and is eventually removed from the basins through a series of valves and
pumps.  The clarified water then exits the settling basins, and is
disinfected by the addition of free chlorine or some other process. 
Fluorosilicic acid is often used to add fluoride to the drinking water
to aid in the prevention of dental cavities.  The final step in the
purification process is filtration through a series of sand filters. 
These filters consist of graded gravel topped first with a layer of sand
and then with a layer of anthracite.  After filtration, the purification
process is complete, and drinking water is pumped out to customers.

No data were located regarding the fate of tetraconazole during the
drinking water process.  However, since tetraconazole is expected to
adsorb to suspended solids and sediment in the water column, it may be
subject to removal during the filtration process.  Furthermore, some
disinfection processes also employ UV irradiation of the finished water,
which may also result in the direct photolysis of tetraconazole. 

Tetraconazole is not included as one of the analytes monitored in U.S.
surface and groundwater under the USGS’s National Water Quality
Assessment (NAWQA) program.  However, the Minnesota Department of
Agriculture has conducted a surface water monitoring program in counties
where sugar beets are typically grown to monitor for the presence of
various pesticides (MRID 46614320).  Tetraconazole was not detected (n =
4) in the Buffalo, Chippewa, or Upper Minnesota River water sheds,
however, it was identified in three out of four samples in the Grand
Marais Creek watershed at levels below the quantification limit of 0.015
ppb during monitoring conducted in 2004.  Tetraconazole was not detected
in 17 samples obtained in 2003 or 21 samples obtained in 2004 from the
Lower Minnesota River basin.  Data from the 2005 monitoring program
indicated that tetraconazole was detected in 7 out of 10 monitored
watersheds, although only one sample from the Grand Marais Creek
watershed had a concentration (0.17 ppb) above quantifiable limits (MRID
46890601).

Monitoring data for tetraconazole is infrequent and only available from
the Minnesota area where it has been applied on sugar beets.  The
Minnesota Department of Agriculture monitoring was not designed to
target tetraconazole high use areas.  Hence, the data are not
representative of worst-case drinking water concentrations and the
monitoring data are not recommended to be used in the risk assessment.  

Drinking Water Exposure Modeling

Estimated drinking water concentrations (EDWCs) were generated using
EFED’s standard suite of models.  Two specialty scenarios were
employed to properly assess the low growing berry subgroup.  CA
Strawberry is a Red-Legged Frog (RLF) scenario.  OR Berries is an
organophosphate (OP) scenario.  In addition, among the 10 possible
scenarios for corn, the Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Illinois, Kansas and
North Carolina corn scenarios were selected to be geographically
representative in this assessment.  The proposed uses from the provided
label were assessed. 

Models

Pesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM v3.12.2, May 12, 2005) and Exposure
Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS v2.98.04.06, April 25, 2005) are
simulation models coupled with the input PE5.pl shell (PE5, PE Version
5.0, November 15, 2006) to generate EDWCs of tetraconazole residues that
may occur in surface water used as drinking water.  The PRZM model
simulates pesticide movement and transformation on and across the
agricultural field resulting from crop applications.  The EXAMS model
simulates pesticide loading via runoff, erosion, and spray drift
assuming a standard watershed of 172.8 ha that drains into an adjacent
standard drinking water index reservoir of 5.26 ha, an average depth of
2.74 m.  A more detailed description of the index reservoir watershed
can be found in Jones et al., 1998.  The coupled PRZM/EXAMS model and
users manuals may be downloaded from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Water Models web-page (USEPA, 2010).  Percent Crop Areas
(PCA) that account for the maximum area within a watershed that may be
planted with the modeled crop are applied to concentrations predicted by
PRZM/EXAMS.

Screening Concentration in Ground Water (SCI-GROW v2.3, Jul. 29, 2003)
is a regression model used as a screening tool to estimate pesticide
concentrations found in ground water used as drinking water.  SCI-GROW
was developed by fitting a linear model to ground water concentrations
with the Relative Index of Leaching Potential (RILP) as the independent
variable.  Ground water concentrations were taken from 90-day average
high concentrations from Prospective Ground Water studies.  The RILP is
a function of aerobic soil metabolism and the soil-water partition
coefficient.  The output of SCI-GROW represents the concentrations of
residues that might be expected in shallow unconfined aquifers under
sandy soils, which is representative of the ground water most vulnerable
to pesticide contamination and likely to serve as a drinking water
source.  The SCI-GROW user’s manual is currently under development;
however, information concerning the model can be found on the EPA Water
Models web-page (USEPA, 2010).  

 

Input Parameters

Input parameters for the PRZM/EXAMS and SCI-GROW models are listed in
Table 2 and Table 3.  Explanations of various model input parameters are
discussed below.

Table 2.  PRZM/EXAMS Input Parameters for Tetraconazole  

Input Parameter:	Value:	Comment:	Source:

Scenario(s):	Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup 13-07 F: 

CA Grapes, NY Grapes

Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13-07G: 

CA Strawberry, FL Strawberry, OR Berry

Corn:

PA Corn, MS Corn, IL Corn, KS Corn, NC Corn	representative scenarios for
each use	N/A 

Maximum Single 

Application Rate

lbs a.i./acre (kg a.i./ha)	Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup 13-07 F: 

0.04  (0.045)

Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13-07G: 

0.04  (0.045)

Corn:

0.090  (0.101) 1 application

0.045  (0.051) 2 applications	proposed rates	proposed  label

Applications per Year	Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup 13-07 F:  2

Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13-07G:  4

Corn:  1, 2	label directions.  Label specifies rates per season.  If
crops are rotated with those on which tetraconazole is used, yearly
rates may be higher. 	proposed label

Application Interval (days)	Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup 13-07 F: 
14

Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13-07G:  14

Corn:  7  (2 applications)	proposed application intervals	proposed label

Date of Initial Application

(scenario/day/month)	Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup 13-07 F: 

CA Grapes:  03-08

NY Grapes:  17-09

Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13-07G: 

CA Strawberry:  20-05

FL Strawberry:   04-01

OR Berry:  18-06

Corn:

PA Corn:  08-07 (1 app.) and 01-07 (2 app.)

MS Corn:  02-07 (1 app.) and 25-06 (2 app.)

IL Corn:   23-07 (1 app.) and 16-07 (2 app.)

KS Corn:  01-08 (1 app.) and 25-07 (2 app.)

NC Corn:  07-07 (1 app.) and 30-06 (2 app.)	Date of initial application
was calculated from the Pre-Harvest Interval (PHI) and application
interval as written on the proposed labels. 1 For corn, 90 days after
emergence was selected to define corn growth stage R3 (brown silk/milk).
Crop Scenarios

Application Method	Small Fruit Vine Climbing Subgroup 13-07 F: 

Foliar:  aerial and ground

Airblast

Chemigation

Low Growing Berry Subgroup 13-07G: 

Foliar:  aerial and ground

Airblast

Chemigation

Corn:

Foliar:  aerial and ground

Chemigation	label directions	proposed label

CAM Input	2	linear foliar based on crop canopy	proposed label

Incorporation Depth (cm.)	N/A	--	proposed label

IPSCND Input	3  (berries)

1  (corn)	3 = remaining pesticide on foliage is retained as surface
residue and continues to undergo decay.  

1 = remaining pesticide on foliage is converted to surface application
to the top soil layer 	US EPA, 2005

Spray Drift Fraction	0.16  (aerial)

0.064  (ground)

0.063  (airblast)

0  (chemigation) 	See footnote 2 for chemigation reference	Input
parameter guidance (USEPA, 2009) 

Application Efficiency	0.95  (aerial)

0.99  (ground)

0.99  (airblast)

1.0  (chemigation)	--	Input parameter guidance 

(USEPA, 2009)

Molecular Mass (g/mol)	372.1	--	Tomlin, 2003

Vapor Pressure at 25°C (torr)	9.901 x 10-7	--	MRID 45851801

Henry’s Law Constant

(atm-m3/mol)	3.5 x 10-9	--	Tomlin, 2003

Solubility in Water (mg/L)	156	pH 7 at 20oC	Tomlin, 2003

Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KOC) (L/kgOC)	4424	3 represents
the average KOC from 5 values	MRID 47023201

Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half-life (days)	0 (stable)	--	MRID 44367005



Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half-life (days)	447	represents the 90th
%-ile confidence bound on the mean half-life using half-lives of 382 and
320 days.	MRID 44751319



Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half-life (days)	0  (stable)	--	MRID
45840001



Hydrolysis Half-lives (days)	0  (stable)	pH 7	MRID 44367002

Aqueous Photolysis

Half-life (days)	215	--	MRID 44367003

 N/A = Not Applicable

         1 =   HYPERLINK
"http://www.dekalb-asia.com/pdf/CG5_DifferentStages.pdf" 
http://www.dekalb-asia.com/pdf/CG5_DifferentStages.pdf 

 2 =  Chemigation (< 1% spray drift as described in   HYPERLINK
"http://www.agdrift.com/PDF_FILES/Chem.pdf" 
http://www.agdrift.com/PDF_FILES/Chem.pdf   - modeled as 0%)

3 =  The reviewer-calculated coefficients of determination (R2) for the
relationships Kads vs. organic matter = 0.94; therefore, the average Koc
 

       obtained from five values (11491, 2896, 5841, 670, and 1220) was
used for this parameter.



Table 3.  SCI-GROW Input Parameters for Tetraconazole.

Input Parameter	Value	Comment	Source

Maximum Application Rate per growing season (lbs a.i./A)	Low Growing
Berry Subgroup 13-07G:  0.04

Corn:  0.09	maximum rates from proposed labels	proposed label

Applications per Year	4  (berry)

1  (corn)	label directions	proposed label

Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient (KOC) (L/kgOC)	670	lowest KOC value
because there was greater than a three-fold variation among five values
MRID 47023201

Aerobic Soil Metabolism

Half-life (days)	1000	1000 days was used since tetraconazole was stable
over the course of 52 weeks in an aerobic soil metabolism study	MRID
44367005



™ 125 ME Fungicide (EPA Reg. No. 80289-8) and Domark® 230 ME
Fungicide (EPA Reg. No. 80289-7).  Considering corn, 90 days after
emergence was selected to define corn growth stage R3 (brown silk/milk)
as described in the following corn growth and development reference  
HYPERLINK "http://www.dekalb-asia.com/pdf/CG5_DifferentStages.pdf" 
http://www.dekalb-asia.com/pdf/CG5_DifferentStages.pdf .  

 

Standard percent cropped areas (PCA) were used for all uses as estimates
of the extent of watershed on which crops are grown (Effland et al.,
1999).  The default agricultural PCA of 0.87 was used for the proposed
uses because they are not confined to specific regions of the United
States.  Actual fractions of cropped areas could be less in some areas
of the country. A representative PRZM/EXAM model input and output data
for CA Strawberry (aerial application) is attached in Appendix A. 
Representative SCI-GROW model input and output data for berries and corn
are attached in Appendix B.

	

REFERENCES

Effland, W. R., N. C. Thurman, I. Kennedy.  1999.  Proposed Methods for
Determining Watershed-derived Percent Crop Areas and Considerations for
Applying Crop Area Adjustments to Surface Water Screening Models. 
Presentation to the FIFRA Science Advisory Panel, May 27, 1999.  Online
at:   HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/1999/index.htm" 
http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/1999/index.htm 

Jones, R. D., S. Abel, W. R. Effland, R. Matzner, R. Parker.  1998.  An
Index Reservoir for Use in Assessing Drinking Water Exposure.  Proposed
Methods for Basin-scale Estimation of Pesticide Concentrations in
Flowing Water and Reservoirs for Tolerance Reassessment.  Presentation
to FIFRA Science Advisory Panel, June 29-30, 1998.  Online at:  
HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/1998/index.htm" 
http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/sap/1998/index.htm 

Tomlin,   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 C.D.S.  2003.  Tetraconazole (CAS No.
112281-77-3).  In: The e-Pesticide Manual, 13th 

	Edition Version 3.0.  Surrey U.K., British Crop Protection Council.

USEPA.  2005.  PRZM-3, A Model for Predicting Pesticide and Nitrogen
Fate in the Crop Root and Unsaturated Soil Zones:  Users Manual for
Release 3.0.  May 2005.

USEPA.  2009.  Guidance for Selecting Input Parameters in Modeling the
Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides, Version 2.1.  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and
Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and
Effects Division, October 22, 2009. 

USEPA.  2010.  Water Models.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Pesticides: Science and Policy.  Online at:   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/" 
http://www.epa.gov/oppefed1/models/water/ 

Appendix A. Representative PRZM/EXAMS Output:  CA Strawberry – Aerial
Application

Appendix B. SCI-GROW Output Files:

SCIGROW

VERSION 2.3

ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECTS DIVISION

OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS

U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

SCREENING MODEL

FOR AQUATIC PESTICIDE EXPOSURE

Low Growing Berries:

 

  SciGrow version 2.3

 Chemical:Tetraconazole on Low Growing Berries

 time is  9/27/2010  17:25:37

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

  Application      Number of       Total Use    Koc      Soil Aerobic

¶

·

Á

Ä

Ì

÷

ø

û

·

Ã

Ä

û

ü

 

!

$

'

6

7

:

X

Y

‹

”

¡

¢

£

ª

Ì

Í

Î

Ý

6

Y

Š

‹

Í

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

  h³

h³

 h

 h

 h

	@

  h

 h

Ffá

  h

  h

  h

 h

  h

hä

摧ԷÌ

퀀ࠂ䀇

摧⽲î

퀀ࠂ䀇

摧扩Ü

摧㕋©

딃曼Ĵ瑹ס¨

将

将

将

将

h€

퀀ࠂ䀇

퀀ࠂ䀇

퀀ࠂ䀇

퀀ࠂ䀇

䀀&摧啫£ᰀ(lb/acre)  applications   (lb/acre/yr)  (ml/g)  
metabolism (days)

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

      0.040           4.0           0.160      6.70E+02     1000.0

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

 groundwater screening cond (ppb) =   1.27E-01 or 0.127

 ***********************************************************************
*

Corn:

 SciGrow version 2.3

 chemical:Tetraconazole

 time is  9/27/2010  17:29:17

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

  Application      Number of       Total Use    Koc      Soil Aerobic

  rate (lb/acre)  applications   (lb/acre/yr)  (ml/g)   metabolism
(days)

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

      0.090           1.0           0.090      6.70E+02     1000.0

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
-

 groundwater screening cond (ppb) =   7.15E-02 or 0.0715

 ***********************************************************************
*

Appendix C.  Letter of Withdrawal for Cranberry

 PAGE   

Page   PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  13 

