PROGRESS in PESTICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT and PHASING-OUT of HIGHLY HAZARDOUS PESTICIDES in ASIA Viii RAP PUBLICATION 2015/01

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

PROGRESS in PESTICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT and PHASING-OUT of HIGHLY HAZARDOUS PESTICIDES in ASIA Viii RAP PUBLICATION 2015/01 RAP PUBLICATION 2015/01 PROGRESS IN PESTICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT AND PHASING-OUT OF HIGHLY HAZARDOUS PESTICIDES IN ASIA viii RAP PUBLICATION 2015/01 PROGRESS IN PESTICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT AND PHASING-OUT OF HIGHLY HAZARDOUS PESTICIDES IN ASIA FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS REGIONAL OFFICE FOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC Bangkok, 2015 i The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO. ISBN 978-92-5-108709-1 © FAO, 2015 FAO encourages the use, reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Except where otherwise indicated, material may be copied, downloaded and printed for private study, research and teaching purposes, or for use in non-commercial products or services, provided that appropriate acknowledgement of FAO as the source and copyright holder is given and that FAO’s endorsement of users’ views, products or services is not implied in any way. All requests for translation and adaptation rights, and for resale and other commercial use rights should be made via www.fao.org/contact-us/licence-request or addressed to [email protected]. FAO information products are available on the FAO website (www.fao.org/publications) and can be purchased through [email protected]. For a copy of this publication, please write to Piao Yongfan FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific Maliwan Mansion, 39 Phra Atit Road Bangkok 10200 THAILAND Tel: (+66) 2 697 4268 Fax: (+66) 2 697 4445 E-mail: [email protected] ii iii iv FOREWORD FAO considers reduced reliance on pesticides as a principle element of its focus on Sustainable Production Intensification and Pesticide Risk Reduction through judicious selection of pesticides and proper pesticide management. Pillars of FAO’s work in this area are its programme to promote the implementation of the new International Code of Conduct on Pesticide Management and providing the secretariat for the Rotterdam Convention for the part that concerns pesticides. Related work areas also include pesticide residues, pesticide specifications, and prevention and disposal of obsolete pesticides. Over the past 30 years, the FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific has assisted countries in the Asia and Pacific region in establishing pesticide legislation and regulations, and in managing these products in accordance with the Code of Conduct and other international conventions and treaties. Over the past years, the Office has organized a number of regional workshops aimed at enhancing harmonization among countries’ regulatory framework for the control of pesticides. In 2012, the Regional Workshop on Enhancement of regional collaboration in pesticides regulatory management was held in Chiang Mai, Thailand, and reviewed national pesticide regulatory management systems in view of recommendations in the revised International Code of Conduct on the distribution and use of pesticides and five harmonization guidelines that were developed for Southeast Asia under a TCP project titled “Assisting countries in Southeast Asia towards achieving pesticide regulatory harmonization”. Recent events included a workshop on Practical aspects of pesticide risk assessment and phasing out of highly hazardous pesticides, which was held in Nanjing, China from 19 to 22 May 2014. This workshop aimed specifically on a number of practical aspects of pesticide management that were identified in the earlier workshops as areas for further attention. It also introduced the latest revision of the Code of Conduct which was adopted in 2013 under the new name of Code of Conduct on pesticide management. This publication describes the updated status of pesticide risk reduction and progress in phasing out of highly hazardous pesticides in Asian countries. It further contains databases of registered and banned pesticides as well as important documents from the Nanjing workshop which could serve as a reference and encouragement to enhance closer collaboration among countries regarding the continuation of phasing out hazardous pesticides and other aspects of pesticide management. This will not only safeguard against adverse effects of pesticides to human health and the environment, but will also promote sustainable agricultural development for meeting the challenges of the future. Hiroyuki Konuma Assistant Director-General and FAO Regional Representative for Asia and the Pacific v vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Foreword...................................................................................................................................... v List of acronyms .......................................................................................................................... ix Executive summary ..................................................................................................................... xi 1. INTRODUCTION AND NEW DEVELOPMENTS ...................................................... 1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 New international developments ................................................................................. 3 1.2.1 Revised Code of Conduct on pesticide management....................................... 3 1.2.2 FAO Policy on HHP ......................................................................................... 4 1.3 Summary and conclusions ........................................................................................... 7 2. PESTICIDE REGISTRATION ........................................................................................ 8 2.1 Status of pesticide registration in Asia ........................................................................ 8 – Information exchange on pesticide registratio ................................................. 10 2.2 Presentations: .............................................................................................................. 12 2.2.1 Access to pesticide registration data from Japan ............................................. 12 2.2.2 Access to pesticide registration data from Malaysia........................................ 14 2.2.3 Access to pesticide registration data from Thailand ........................................ 18 2.3 Summary and conclusions ........................................................................................... 20 3. PESTICIDE RISK ASSESSMENT ................................................................................. 21 3.1 Status of risk assessment in Asia ................................................................................. 21 – International resources for pesticide risks........................................................ 22 3.2 Presentations: .............................................................................................................. 24 3.2.1 Introduction to risk health and environmental risk assessment – KemI .......... 24 3.2.2 Risk assessment in China – ICAMA................................................................ 30 3.2.3 Access to information from the pesticide registration process in the EU ........ 37 3.2.4 Pesticide registration information from US-EPA ............................................. 40 3.3 Summary and conclusions ........................................................................................... 43 4. PHASING OUT OF HHPs ............................................................................................... 44 4.1 Status of HHPs in Asia ................................................................................................ 44 4.2 Presentations................................................................................................................48 4.2.1 Progress of high hazardous pesticide management in China ........................... 48 4.2.2 Phasing out of HHPs: Chinese pesticide producers’ experiences and lessons. 53 4.2.3 Phasing out of HHPs in Malaysia .................................................................... 56 4.2.4 Phasing out of HHPs in Thailand..................................................................... 58 4.3 Summary and conclusions ........................................................................................... 60 5. FAKE AND SUBSTANDARD PESTICIDES................................................................. 62 5.1 Status of quality control in Asia .................................................................................. 62 5.2 Presentations: .............................................................................................................. 64 5.2.1 Chinese quality control/inspection scheme and implementation ..................... 64 5.2.2 Quality control and implementation in Japan .................................................. 68 vii TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
Recommended publications
  • Relative Tolerance of Peanuts to Alachlor and Metolachlor' Materials
    Relative Tolerance of Peanuts to Alachlor and Metolachlor' Glenn Wehtje*, John W. Wilcut, T. Vint Hicks2. and John McGuire3 ABSTRACT vealed that peas were most sensitive across all the sub- Field studies were conducted during 1984, 1985, and 1987 to evaluate weed control and the relative tolerance of peanuts stituted amide herbicides when the application was (Arachis hypogaea) to alachlor and metolachlor when applied at made 2 days after planting. This time of application cor- rates from 2.2 to 13.4 kg adha. Both single and split responded to shoot emergence, which is considered to preemergence, and postemergence applications were in- be the most sensitive portion of the seedling, through cluded. In 1984 and 1985, neither herbicide adversely affected the surface of the treated soil. Later applications re- yields compared to a hand-weeded control. In 1987, metolachlor at a rate of 9.0 kgha and alachlor at 13.4 k&a re- sulted in progressively less injury, indicating that the duced yields. Across all years, at least a two-fold safety factor foliar portion of the developing pea was relatively toler- existed between the maximum registered rate and the rate ant once emerged. Field studies indicated injury was necessary for peanut injury. Occurrence of injury appears to be markedly influenced by rainfall soon after planting. related to rainfall. Metolachlor was slightly more mobile than alachlor in soil chromatography trials, which may be a factor in Putnam and Rice (7) evaluated the factors associated its slightly greater propensity to be injurious under certain with alachlor injury on snap beans (Phaseolus vulgaris conditions of extensive leaching and/or slow peanut L.).
    [Show full text]
  • 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid
    2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid IUPAC (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid name 2,4-D Other hedonal names trinoxol Identifiers CAS [94-75-7] number SMILES OC(COC1=CC=C(Cl)C=C1Cl)=O ChemSpider 1441 ID Properties Molecular C H Cl O formula 8 6 2 3 Molar mass 221.04 g mol−1 Appearance white to yellow powder Melting point 140.5 °C (413.5 K) Boiling 160 °C (0.4 mm Hg) point Solubility in 900 mg/L (25 °C) water Related compounds Related 2,4,5-T, Dichlorprop compounds Except where noted otherwise, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C, 100 kPa) 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) is a common systemic herbicide used in the control of broadleaf weeds. It is the most widely used herbicide in the world, and the third most commonly used in North America.[1] 2,4-D is also an important synthetic auxin, often used in laboratories for plant research and as a supplement in plant cell culture media such as MS medium. History 2,4-D was developed during World War II by a British team at Rothamsted Experimental Station, under the leadership of Judah Hirsch Quastel, aiming to increase crop yields for a nation at war.[citation needed] When it was commercially released in 1946, it became the first successful selective herbicide and allowed for greatly enhanced weed control in wheat, maize (corn), rice, and similar cereal grass crop, because it only kills dicots, leaving behind monocots. Mechanism of herbicide action 2,4-D is a synthetic auxin, which is a class of plant growth regulators.
    [Show full text]
  • Common and Chemical Names of Herbicides Approved by the WSSA
    Weed Science 2010 58:511–518 Common and Chemical Names of Herbicides Approved by the Weed Science Society of America Below is the complete list of all common and chemical of herbicides as approved by the International Organization names of herbicides approved by the Weed Science Society of for Standardization (ISO). A sponsor may submit a proposal America (WSSA) and updated as of September 1, 2010. for a common name directly to the WSSA Terminology Beginning in 1996, it has been published yearly in the last Committee. issue of Weed Science with Directions for Contributors to A herbicide common name is not synonymous with Weed Science. This list is published in lieu of the selections a commercial formulation of the same herbicide, and in printed previously on the back cover of Weed Science. Only many instances, is not synonymous with the active ingredient common and chemical names included in this complete of a commercial formulation as identified on the product list should be used in WSSA publications. In the absence of label. If the herbicide is a salt or simple ester of a parent a WSSA-approved common name, the industry code number compound, the WSSA common name applies to the parent as compiled by the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) with compound only. CAS systematic chemical name or the systematic chemical The chemical name used in this list is that preferred by the name alone may be used. The current approved list is also Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) according to their system of available at our web site (www.wssa.net).
    [Show full text]
  • Corn and Soybean Mode of Action Herbicide Chart
    By Premix Corn and Soybean This chart lists premix herbicides alphabetically by their trade names so you can identify the premix’s component herbicides and their respective site of action groups. Refer Herbicide Chart to the Mode of Action chart for more information. Component Repeated use of herbicides with the same Site of Premix Trade Active Action site of action can result in the development of Trade Name ® Name ® Ingredient Group* herbicide-resistant weed populations. Authority First ............... Spartan sulfentrazone 14 FirstRate cloransulam 2 Axiom ........................... Define flufenacet 15 This publication was designed for commercial printing, color shifts may occur on other printers and on-screeen. Sencor metribuzin 5 Basis . ........................... Resolve rimsulfuron 2 Harmony GT thifensulfuron 2 By Mode of Action (effect on plant growth) Bicep II Magnum .......... Dual II Magnum s-metolachlor 15 AAtrex atrazine 5 This chart groups herbicides by their modes of action to assist Bicep Lite II Magnum .... Dual II Magnum s-metolachlor 15 AAtrex atrazine 5 you in selecting herbicides 1) to maintain greater diversity in Boundary ...................... Dual Magnum s-metolachlor 15 herbicide use and 2) to rotate among herbicides with different Sencor metribuzin 5 Breakfree ATZ ............... Breakfree acetochlor 15 sites of action to delay the development of herbicide resistance. atrazine atrazine 5 Breakfree ATZ Lite ........ Breakfree acetochlor 15 Number of atrazine atrazine 5 resistant weed Buctril + Atrazine ......... Buctril bromoxynil 6 atrazine atrazine 5 species in U.S. Bullet ............................ Micro-Tech alachlor 15 Site of Chemical Active atrazine atrazine 5 Action Product Examples Camix ........................... Callisto mesotrione 28 Group* Site of Action Family Ingredient (Trade Name ®) Dual II Magnum s-metolachlor 15 Lipid Canopy DF ..................
    [Show full text]
  • CAUTION Or Streams with the Product Or Used Containers
    PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE, FISH, CRUSTACEANS AND THE ENVIRONMENT Abamectin is extremely toxic to aquatic species. DO NOT contaminate dams, rivers CAUTION or streams with the product or used containers. KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN FIRST AID READ SAFETY DIRECTIONS BEFORE OPENING OR USING If poisoning occurs contact a doctor or the Poisons Info Centre. Phone Australia FOR ANIMAL TREATMENT ONLY 13 11 26; New Zealand 0800 764 766. If skin contact occurs, remove contaminated clothing and wash skin thoroughly. ® SAFETY DIRECTIONS EQUITAK EXCEL ORAL PASTE HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED. May irritate the eyes and skin; avoid contact with eyes 3 in 1 Wormer for Horses and skin. Repeated exposure may cause allergic disorders. When opening the container and using the product, wear rubber gloves. Wash hands after use. DESCRIPTION EMERGENCY RESPONSE A pale cream to tan coloured, apple flavoured, palatable paste with a characteristic In case of spillage wear appropriate protective clothing and prevent material from odour and taste. Each gram contains Oxfendazole 200mg, Praziquantel 50mg and entering waterways. Absorb spills with inert material and place in waste containers. Abamectin 4mg. Wash the area with water and absorb with further inert material. Dispose of waste safely. MODE OF ACTION Abamectin stimulates the release of the neurotransmitter GABA in roundworms, MEAT WITHHOLDING PERIOD (HORSES): DO NOT USE less than 28 days which increases the membrane permeability of neurons to chloride ions. Normal before slaughter for human consumption. neural transmission is thus inhibited causing paralysis and death of the parasite. STORAGE Praziquantel affects the attachment of tapeworms to the host tissues by causing Store below 30°C (room temperature), tightly closed, in the original syringe and in spastic paralysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries
    Historical Perspectives on Apple Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Insecticidal Chemistries. Peter Jentsch Extension Associate Department of Entomology Cornell University's Hudson Valley Lab 3357 Rt. 9W; PO box 727 Highland, NY 12528 email: [email protected] Phone 845-691-7151 Mobile: 845-417-7465 http://www.nysaes.cornell.edu/ent/faculty/jentsch/ 2 Historical Perspectives on Fruit Production: Fruit Tree Pest Management, Regulation and New Chemistries. by Peter Jentsch I. Historical Use of Pesticides in Apple Production Overview of Apple Production and Pest Management Prior to 1940 Synthetic Pesticide Development and Use II. Influences Changing the Pest Management Profile in Apple Production Chemical Residues in Early Insect Management Historical Chemical Regulation Recent Regulation Developments Changing Pest Management Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 The Science Behind The Methodology Pesticide Revisions – Requirements For New Registrations III. Resistance of Insect Pests to Insecticides Resistance Pest Management Strategies IV. Reduced Risk Chemistries: New Modes of Action and the Insecticide Treadmill Fermentation Microbial Products Bt’s, Abamectins, Spinosads Juvenile Hormone Analogs Formamidines, Juvenile Hormone Analogs And Mimics Insect Growth Regulators Azadirachtin, Thiadiazine Neonicotinyls Major Reduced Risk Materials: Carboxamides, Carboxylic Acid Esters, Granulosis Viruses, Diphenyloxazolines, Insecticidal Soaps, Benzoyl Urea Growth Regulators, Tetronic Acids, Oxadiazenes , Particle Films, Phenoxypyrazoles, Pyridazinones, Spinosads, Tetrazines , Organotins, Quinolines. 3 I Historical Use of Pesticides in Apple Production Overview of Apple Production and Pest Management Prior to 1940 The apple has a rather ominous origin. Its inception is framed in the biblical text regarding the genesis of mankind. The backdrop appears to be the turbulent setting of what many scholars believe to be present day Iraq.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbicide Mode of Action Table High Resistance Risk
    Herbicide Mode of Action Table High resistance risk Chemical family Active constituent (first registered trade name) GROUP 1 Inhibition of acetyl co-enzyme A carboxylase (ACC’ase inhibitors) clodinafop (Topik®), cyhalofop (Agixa®*, Barnstorm®), diclofop (Cheetah® Gold* Decision®*, Hoegrass®), Aryloxyphenoxy- fenoxaprop (Cheetah®, Gold*, Wildcat®), fluazifop propionates (FOPs) (Fusilade®), haloxyfop (Verdict®), propaquizafop (Shogun®), quizalofop (Targa®) Cyclohexanediones (DIMs) butroxydim (Factor®*), clethodim (Select®), profoxydim (Aura®), sethoxydim (Cheetah® Gold*, Decision®*), tralkoxydim (Achieve®) Phenylpyrazoles (DENs) pinoxaden (Axial®) GROUP 2 Inhibition of acetolactate synthase (ALS inhibitors), acetohydroxyacid synthase (AHAS) Imidazolinones (IMIs) imazamox (Intervix®*, Raptor®), imazapic (Bobcat I-Maxx®*, Flame®, Midas®*, OnDuty®*), imazapyr (Arsenal Xpress®*, Intervix®*, Lightning®*, Midas®* OnDuty®*), imazethapyr (Lightning®*, Spinnaker®) Pyrimidinyl–thio- bispyribac (Nominee®), pyrithiobac (Staple®) benzoates Sulfonylureas (SUs) azimsulfuron (Gulliver®), bensulfuron (Londax®), chlorsulfuron (Glean®), ethoxysulfuron (Hero®), foramsulfuron (Tribute®), halosulfuron (Sempra®), iodosulfuron (Hussar®), mesosulfuron (Atlantis®), metsulfuron (Ally®, Harmony®* M, Stinger®*, Trounce®*, Ultimate Brushweed®* Herbicide), prosulfuron (Casper®*), rimsulfuron (Titus®), sulfometuron (Oust®, Eucmix Pre Plant®*, Trimac Plus®*), sulfosulfuron (Monza®), thifensulfuron (Harmony®* M), triasulfuron (Logran®, Logran® B-Power®*), tribenuron (Express®),
    [Show full text]
  • Greenhouse and Field Evaluation of Isoxaflutole for Weed Control In
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Greenhouse and field evaluation of isoxaflutole for weed control in maize in China Received: 27 June 2017 Ning Zhao, Lan Zuo, Wei Li, Wenlei Guo, Weitang Liu & Jinxin Wang Accepted: 18 September 2017 Greenhouse and field studies were conducted to provide a reference for pre-emergence (PRE) Published: xx xx xxxx application of isoxaflutole on maize in China. In greenhouse study, the isoxaflutole PRE application at 30 g active ingredient (a.i.) ha−1 could effectively control large numbers of weeds, especially some large-seeded broadleaves, tested in this study. The tolerance results indicated 21 maize hybrids showed different responses to isoxaflutole under greenhouse conditions. In 2015 and 2016, field experiments were conducted to determine and compare the weed control efficacy and safety to Zhengdan 958 maize with 6 herbicide treatments. In both years, isoxaflutole PRE at 100 to 250 g a.i. ha−1 was sufficient to provide satisfactory full-season control of the dominant common broadleaf and grass weeds in the field. Temporary injury to maize was observed with isoxaflutole treatments of 125, 150, and 250 g a.i. ha−1 in both years, but plants recovered within 4 to 6 wk. To maximize maize yield and provide satisfactory weed control, a range of 100 to 150 g a.i. ha−1 of isoxaflutole is recommended, depending on the soil characteristics, weather, and weed species present at the experimental site. Based on the results, isoxaflutole PRE has good potential for weed control in maize in China. Maize was planted on more hectares than any other crops in China from 2010 to 2014, with an average of 35 million ha planted per year and yield averaging 5,779 kg per ha per year1.
    [Show full text]
  • Acifluorfen Sorption, Degradation, and Mobility in a Mississippi Delta Soil
    Acifluorfen Sorption, Degradation, and Mobility in a Mississippi Delta Soil L. A. Gaston* and M. A. Locke ABSTRACT repulsion effects, acifluorfen is sorbed by soil or soil Potential surface water and groundwater contaminants include her- constituents (Pusino et al., 1991; Ruggiero et al., 1992; bicides that are applied postemergence. Although applied to the plant Pusino et al., 1993; Gennari et al., 1994b; NeÁgre et al., canopy, a portion of any application reaches the soil either directly 1995; Locke et al., 1997). Although the extent of sorp- or via subsequent foliar washoff. This study examined sorption, degra- tion in soil is generally proportional to OC content dation, and mobility of the postemergence herbicide acifluorfen (5-[2- (Gennari et al., 1994b; NeÁgre et al., 1995; Locke et al., chloro-4-(trifluoromethyl)phenoxy]-2-nitrobenzoic acid) in Dundee 1997), sorption likely involves processes other than par- silty clay loam (fine-silty, mixed, thermic, Aeric Ochraqualf) taken titioning between aqueous and organic matter phases. from conventional till (CT) and no-till (NT) field plots. Homogeneous In particular, acifluorfen forms complexes with divalent surface and subsurface samples were used in the sorption and degrada- tion studies; intact soil columns (30 cm long and 10 cm diam.) were and trivalent cations (Pusino et al., 1991; Pusino et al., used in the mobility study. Batch sorption isotherms were nonlinear 1993) that may be sorbed or precipitated. Complex for- (Freundlich model) and sorption paralleled organic C (OC) content. mation and subsequent sorption may partially account All tillage by depth combinations of soil exhibited a time-dependent for increased acifluorfen sorption with decreasing soil approach to sorption equilibrium that was well described by a two- pH or increasing cation exchange capacity (Pusino et site equilibrium±kinetic model.
    [Show full text]
  • Restricted Use Chemicals by Product Name 09/14/2016
    Plant Health - Pesticide and Fertilizer Section 8995 E. Main St. , Reynoldsburg, Ohio 43068 Phone: Phone (614) 728-6396Fax: Fax (614) 728-4221 Governor: John R. Kasich Lt. Governor: Mary Taylor www.agri.ohio.gov [email protected] Director: David T. Daniels Page 1 of 33 Restricted Use Chemicals by Product Name 09/14/2016 Registered Thru: 6/30/2017 12:00:00 AM Product_name Active_Ingredients Company_Name EPA_Number Private Commercial AATREX 4L HERBICIDE INC Atrazine (ANSI) SYNGENTA CROP 100-497 1, 3, 4, 7 2C, 4A, 6A PROTECTION LLC AATREX NINE-O HERBICIDE INC Atrazine (ANSI) SYNGENTA CROP 100-585 1, 3, 4, 7 2C, 4A, 5, 6A, 8 PROTECTION LLC ABACUS AGRICULTURAL MITICIDE/ INSECTICIDE Abamectin ROTAM NORTH 83100-4-83979 3 1, 2A, 2B AMERICA INC ABACUS V Abamectin ROTAM NORTH 83100-32-83979 3 1, 2B, 2C AMERICA INC ABAMECTIN 0.15EC SELECT Abamectin PRIME SOURCE, LLC 89442-20 None None ABAMEX MITICIDE-INSECTICIDE Abamectin (ANSI) NUFARM AMERICAS 228-734 3 2A, 2B INC 228 ABBA 0.15 MAKHTESHIM-AGAN OF 66222-191 None None NORTH AMER INC ABBA 0.15 EC MITICIDE INSECTICIDE Abamectin MAKHTESHIM-AGAN OF 66222-139 3 1, 2A NORTH AMER INC ABBA ULTRA MITICIDE INSECTICIDE Abamectin (ANSI) MAKHTESHIM-AGAN OF 66222-226 3 2B NORTH AMER INC ACELLUS AZT Acetochlor; Atrazine GROWMARK INC 62719-671-534 1, 2 2C ACELLUS AZT LITE Acetochlor; Atrazine GROWMARK INC 62719-670-534 1, 2 2C ACETO BIFENTHRIN 2 EC Bifenthrin ACETO AGRICULTURAL 2749-556 1, 3 2A, 2B CHEMICALS CORP ACURON HERBICIDE Atrazine; S-metolachlor; Mesotrione; SYNGENTA CROP 100-1466 1, 2 2C Bicyclopyrone
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Risk Assessment for Saflufenacil
    TEXT SEARCHABLE DCOUMENT 2011 UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF CEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION PC Code: 118203 DP Barcode: 380638 and 381293 Thursday, April 07, 2011 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Ecological Risk Assessment for Saflufenacil Section 3 New Chemical Uses as a harvest aid on dry edible beans, dry peas, soybean, oilseeds "sunflower subgroup 20B", oilseeds "cotton subgroup 20C", and oilseeds canola "subgroup 20A". TO: Kathryn Montague, M.S., Product Manager 23 Herbicide Branch Registration Division (RD) (7505P) FROM: ~ Mohammed Ruhman, Ph.D., Agronomist 2 :4- . ""=- ........ 04!tJt! (I neith Sappington, Senior Biologist/Science Adviso~.... Vd- Environmental Risk Branch V O'f/ .../ II Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) THROUGH: Mah Shamim, Ph.D., Branch Chief Environmental Risk Branch VI Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507P) This ecological risk assessment for saflufenacil new uses is relying on the attached previous assessment (Attachment 1). As shown in the usage summary (Table 1), the single and seasonal rate, for all the crops range from 0.045 to 0.089 lbs a.i/A are within the range application rates used in exposure modeling for the 2009 Section 3 New Chemical Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment (DP Barcode 349855). Therefore, risk findings determined for the 2009 assessment may be used in the assessment for this submittal. Specifically, the 2009 assessment found no chronic risks to avian and mammalian species at an agricultural use rate 0 0.134 lb a.i.lA. Acute risks were not determined for birds and mammals since saflufenacil was not acutely toxic at the highest doses tested.
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SAMPLING PLAN for Contaminants with a Vermont Health Advisory – May 2020
    PROPOSED PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SAMPLING PLAN For Contaminants with a Vermont Health Advisory – May 2020 Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation Drinking Water & Groundwater Protection Division A Plan to Sample for Chemicals with a Vermont Health Advisory As required by Act 21 (2019), Section 10(b), the Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources, on or before January 1, 2020, must publish for public review and comment a plan to collect data for contaminants in drinking water from public community water systems and all non-transient non-community water systems, for which a health advisory has been established, but no Maximum Contaminant Level has been adopted. These health advisories are referred to as Vermont Health Advisories (VHAs) in this document. 1 | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………………………..Page 3 II. Background ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… Page 4 III. Determining the VHA contaminants for sampling at public water systems ………..Page 6 IV. Sampling Considerations …..…………………………………………………………………………….. Page 10 V. Proposed Sampling Plan ………………………………………………………………………….………..Page 12 Attachments Table 1 Complete List of Vermont Health Advisories (VHAs) …………………………………………..Page 13 Table 2 Proposed List of VHAs with Potential Concern ……………………………………………………Page 18 2 | P a g e I. Executive Summary The Secretary of the Agency of Natural Resources was tasked with developing a sampling plan for public review, for certain drinking water contaminants that have an established health advisory, also known as the Vermont Health Advisory (VHA) but have no Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL). This Sampling Plan (Plan) is targeted to public community and public non- transient non-community water systems. To provide context for public water system regulation, and standards that apply, a discussion of how VHAs and MCLs are determined is given.
    [Show full text]