Pyrethroid Comments

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Pyrethroid Comments July 7, 2017 Office of Pesticide Programs Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW. Washington, DC 20460-0001 Re: Registration Review: Draft Human Health and/or Ecological Risk Assessments for pyrethrins and pyrethroids. (Docket # EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0384, EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0684, EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0167, EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0842, EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0539, EPA-HQ- OPP-2009-0637, EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0301, EPA-HQ-OPP-2007-0804, EPA-HQ-OPP-2010- 0422, EPA-HQ-OPP-2016-0031, EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0479, EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0692, EPA- HQ-OPP-2010-0480, EPA-HQ-OPP-2015-0752, EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0039, EPA-HQ-OPP- 2011-1009, EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0885, EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0915, EPA-HQ-OPP-2012-0501, EPA-HQ-OPP-2011-0907) Please accept the following comments on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Environmental Health, Friends of the Earth, Center for Food Safety, Beyond Pesticides, Boulder Innovative Technologies, Inc, Beyond Toxics and Doan Family Farms in response to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) receipt of an application for products containing a new active ingredient under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (“FIFRA”). Introduction Pyrethrins and their synthetic analogs pyrethroids are a class of pesticides that target insects’ peripheral and central nervous systems. 1 These chemicals are some of the most widely used pesticides in the United States, both in agricultural and residential settings.2 Dependency on pyrethroids has increased over the past twenty years, propelled by interest in replacing organophosphate insecticides.3 Today, pyrethroids and pyrethrins are so heavily used that their environmental concentrations exceed regulatory thresholds.4 1 T.G.E. Davies et al., DDT, Pyrethrins, Pyrethroids and Insect Sodium Channels, 59 LIFE 151, 155 (2007). 2 Muhammad M. Hossain, et al., Hippocampal ER Stress and Learning Deficits Following Repeated Pyrethroid Exposure, 143 TOXICOLOGICAL SCIENCES 220, 220 (2015). 3 Holly A Rogers, et al., Bifenthrin Causes Trophic Cascade and Altered Insect Emergence in Mesocosms: Implications for Small Streams, 50 ENVTL. SCI. & TECH. 11,974, 11,974 (2016). 4 Rogers, et al., supra note 3, at 11,974. Until recently, pyrethroids were believed to have limited toxicity in humans; this belief was based on the assumption that pyrethrins and pyrethroids are rapidly metabolized in the human body. But current studies and scientific investigations cast serious doubt on that assumption. For example, one recent pharmacokinetic study on the pyrethroid deltamethrin indicates that its peak concentration in the human brain is two times higher than that in rats.5 Additionally, mammalian studies showed that repeated exposure to low levels of a pyrethroid insecticide caused learning deficiencies and physiological effects associated with neurodegeneration and Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases, among others.6 Additionally, one study revealed higher incidences of autism spectrum disorders and developmental delay amongst children whose mothers were living within 1.5 kilometers of sites of pyrethroid applications during the third trimester of pregnancy.7 Not only do pyrethroids present serious risks to human health, but they also present risks to wildlife resources and ecosystems. A study by U.S. Geological Survey scientists found that commonly used pyrethroids have the potential to “alter aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem function at the regional scale.”8 More specifically, the study concluded that pyrethroid contamination in freshwater streams resulted in “less abundant and less diverse macroinvertebrate communities.”9 Additionally, the study revealed that pyrethroid contamination in aquatic ecosystems “propagate across life stages and generations of intervertebrates, trophic levels in aquatic food webs, and ecosystem boundaries to riparian food webs.”10 In the current preliminary risk assessment of eight pyrethroids and pyrethrins,11 the EPA states: “This assessment concludes that the down-the-drain, non-agricultural outdoor, agricultural, and adulticide use patterns of synthetic pyrethroids and pyrethrins may result in multiple exceedances of acute and chronic LOCs for freshwater and estuarine/marine fish, and for freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates, resulting in a potential reduction in survival, growth and reproduction to non-target aquatic animals.”12 Further, “As an additional line of evidence, a review of the OPP Incident Data System (IDS) which now incorporates the Ecological Incident Information System (EIIS) database was conducted. The IDS and EIIS databases contained numerous aquatic and pollinator incidents for the pyrethroids and pyrethrins. The number of reports listed in the EIIS database is believed to be only a small fraction of the total incidents involving non-target organism mortality and damage caused by pesticides. These incidents appear to support the findings of the PRA.”13 5 Stephen J. Godin, et al., Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Deltamethrin: Development of a Rat and Human Diffusion-Limited Model, 115 Toxicological Sciences 330, 338 (2010). 6 Hossain, et al., supra note 2, at 223. 7 Janie F. Shelton, et al. Neurodevelopmental Disorders and Prenatal Residential Proximity to Agricultural Pesticides: The CHARGE Study, 122 CHILDREN’S HEALTH 1103, 1107 (2014). 8 Rogers, et al., supra note 3, at 11,974. 9 Id. at 11,979. 10 Rogers, et al., supra note 3, at 11,980. 11 EPA. 2016. Preliminary Comparative Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment for the Registration Review of Eight Synthetic Pyrethroids and the Pyrethrins. Document ID EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0384-0045. 12 Id. at 2-3. 13 Id. at 3. 2 These findings are highly significant for multiple reasons. The first is that it demonstrates the power these chemicals have at altering and destroying ecosystems where they are used heaviest. The other is that, despite various mitigation measures that have been put in place over the last 20-30 years, the harm these chemicals are causing are still so abundant. This is a cautionary tale of what happens when an agency assumes that weak mitigation measures will somehow solve the problem of pesticide overuse. It is clear from this preliminary ecological risk assessment that that EPA will not be able to uphold its obligations under FIFRA with again requiring small tweaks to label language that are more or less meaningless. More appropriate changes will be significant buffers from water sources, lower maximum application rates and the cancelling of certain uses. For non-agricultural uses things such as cancelling some products that contain the most toxic, and persistent pyrethroids will likely be necessary. Below we have addressed concerns that we have with the current ERA and human health risk assessments. We address each section individually and then give general comments on how the analysis should be strengthened. Part I. Assessing Pyrethroid Releases to Publicly Owned Treatment Works In the current assessment of the down-the-drain uses of pyrethroids, the EPA has concluded that “…the use of bifenthrin, cypermethrin, cyfluthrins, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, cyhalothrins, and permethrin, plus the pyrethrins, in accordance with registered labels, results for acute and/or chronic risk Levels of Concern (LOCs) exceedances for freshwater and estuarine/marine invertebrates, from the indoor down-the-drain exposure to POTWs which in turn result in releases to bodies of water. Additionally, it results in acute risk LOC exceedances for freshwater fish for bifenthrin, lambda- cyhalothrin, cypermethrin and esfenvalerate, plus chronic risk LOC exceedances to freshwater fish for bifenthrin.”14 We agree with the EPA that, based on the best available science, the urban uses of most pyrethroids that result in down-the-drain disposal may be harming certain aquatic vertebrates and invertebrates in urban bodies of water. This is a significant finding and it adds to our knowledge of how persistent and toxic chemicals with this mode of action (MOA) can be to aquatic wildlife. On an acute basis, pyrethroids are characterized as very highly toxic to fish and invertebrates. The EPA has clearly identified the exposure pathway coming from publicly owned treatment works (POTWs) and has done a lot of analysis in trying to quantify that exposure pathway. There is obviously a lot of uncertainty involved in trying to estimate exposure from this exposure scenario. While there were certain measures that were taken to attempt to be conservative (i.e. 14 EPA. 2016. Preliminary Comparative Environmental Fate and Ecological Risk Assessment for the Registration Review of Eight Synthetic Pyrethroids and the Pyrethrins. Document ID EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0384- 0045. Pg 8. 3 assuming that the analyzed indoor uses would result in down-the-drain (DtD) exposure at every use, and assuming no degradation or sorption to organic matter), we ultimately believe that risk has been severely underestimated and that this should be clearly communicated to the risk manager who reviews this document for the following reasons: 1) It is troubling to us that the Office of Pesticide Programs has decided not to analyze certain uses and exposure sources by simply stating “that’s someone else’s job.” The most notable example being the use of permethrin as a pediculicide for the treatment of head lice and scabies. The EPA maintains that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for products containing permethrin used for pharmaceutical purposes. While it is the FDA’s job to ensure that those products are safe
Recommended publications
  • Restricted Use Product Summary Report
    Page 1 of 17 Restricted Use Product Summary Report (January 19, 2016) Percent Active Registration # Name Company # Company Name Active Ingredient(s) Ingredient 4‐152 BONIDE ORCHARD MOUSE BAIT 4 BONIDE PRODUCTS, INC. 2 Zinc phosphide (Zn3P2) 70‐223 RIGO EXOTHERM TERMIL 70 VALUE GARDENS SUPPLY, LLC 20 Chlorothalonil 100‐497 AATREX 4L HERBICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 42.6 Atrazine 100‐585 AATREX NINE‐O HERBICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 88.2 Atrazine 100‐669 CURACRON 8E INSECTICIDE‐MITICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 73 Profenofos 100‐817 BICEP II MAGNUM HERBICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 33; 26.1 Atrazine; S‐Metolachlor 100‐827 BICEP LITE II MAGNUM HERBICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 28.1; 35.8 Atrazine; S‐Metolachlor 100‐886 BICEP MAGNUM 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 33.7; 26.1 Atrazine; S‐Metolachlor 100‐898 AGRI‐MEK 0.15 EC MITICIDE/INSECTICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 2 Abamectin 100‐903 DENIM INSECTICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 2.15 Emamectin benzoate 100‐904 PROCLAIM INSECTICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 5 Emamectin benzoate 100‐998 KARATE 1EC 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 13.1 lambda‐Cyhalothrin 100‐1075 FORCE 3G INSECTICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 3 Tefluthrin Acetochlor; Carbamothioic acid, dipropyl‐ 100‐1083 DOUBLEPLAY SELECTIVE HERBICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 16.9; 67.8 , S‐ethyl ester 100‐1086 KARATE EC‐W INSECTICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION, LLC 13.1 lambda‐Cyhalothrin 100‐1088 SCIMITAR GC INSECTICIDE 100 SYNGENTA CROP PROTECTION,
    [Show full text]
  • EMPENTHRIN Product-Type 18 (Insecticide)
    Regulation (EU) n°528/2012 concerning the making available on the market and use of biocidal products Evaluation of active substances Assessment Report EMPENTHRIN Product-Type 18 (Insecticide) March 2019 (revised version) RMS = Belgium Competent EMPENTHRIN Assessment Authority Report: Report Belgium March 2018 Table of Contents 1 STATEMENT OF SUBJECT MATTER AND PURPOSE ..................................................................... 3 1.1 PRINCIPLE OF EVALUATION ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 PROCEDURE FOLLOWED ............................................................................................................................ 3 2 OVERALL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................... 5 2.1 PRESENTATION OF THE ACTIVE SUBSTANCE ............................................................................................. 5 2.1.1 Identity, Physico-Chemical Properties & Methods of Analysis ...................................................... 5 2.1.2 Intended Uses and Efficacy ............................................................................................................. 7 2.1.3 Classification and Labelling ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Carpenter Ants and Control in Homes Page 1 of 6
    Carpenter Ants and Control in Homes Page 1 of 6 Carpenter Ants and Control in Homes Fact Sheet No. 31 Revised May 2000 Dr. Jay B Karren, Extension Entomologist Alan H. Roe, Insect Diagnostician Introduction Carpenter ants are members of the insect order Hymenoptera, which includes bees, wasps, sawflies, and other ants. Carpenter ants can be occasional pests in the home and are noted particularly for the damage they can cause when nesting in wood. In Utah they are more of a nuisance rather than a major structural pest. Carpenter ants, along with a number of other ant species, utilize cavities in wood, particularly stumps and logs in decayed condition, as nesting sites. They are most abundant in forests and can be easily found under loose bark of dead trees, stumps, or fallen logs. Homeowners may bring them into their homes when they transport infested logs from forests to use as firewood. Description Carpenter ants include species that are among the largest ants found in the United States. They are social insects with a complex and well-defined caste system. The worker ants are sterile females and may occur in different sizes (majors and minors). Members of the reproductive caste (fertile males and females) are usually winged prior to mating. All ants develop from eggs deposited by a fertilized female (queen). The eggs hatch into grub-like larvae (immatures) which are fed and cared for by the workers. When fully grown, the larvae spin a cocoon and enter the pupal stage. The pupal stage is a period of transformation from the larva to adult.
    [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]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, EVERCIDE ESFENVALERATE 6.4
    II UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION DEC 1 6 2011 Mr. Thomas A. Lennan McLaughlin Gormley King Company 8810 Tenth Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55427-4319 Subject: Notification per PRN 98-10 EPA Registration No.: 1021 -1815 Evercide® Esfenvalerate 6.4% CS Date of Submission: November 14, 2011 Dear Mr. Lennan: The Agency is in receipt of your Application for Pesticide Notification under Pesticide Registration Notice (PRN) 98-10 for the abovementioned product. The Registration Division (RD) has conducted a review of this request and finds that the action(s) requested fall within the scope of PRN 98-10. The label submitted with the application has been stamped "Notification" and will be placed in our records. If you have any questions regarding this action, please contact Olga Odiott at (703)308-9369. Sincerely, Mark Stfarez Product Manager 13 Insecticide Branch Registration Division (7505P) f Please read instructions before completing form Form /ed. OMB No. 2070-0060. Approval expires 05-31-98 United States Reregistration OPP Identifier Number Environmental Protection Agency Amendment Washington, DC 20460 Other Application for Pesticide Reregistration - Section I 1. Company/Product Number 2. EPA Product Manager 3. Proposed Classification 1021-1815 Richard Gebken 4. Company/Product (Name) PM# I None D Restricted EVERCIDE® Esfenvalerate 6.4% CS 10 5. Name and Address of Applicant (Include Zip Code) 6. Expedited Review. In accordance with FIFRA Section 3(c)(3)(b)(i), my MCLAUGHLIN GORMLEY KING COMPANY product is similar or identical in composition and labeling to: 8810 TENTH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55427 EPA Reg.
    [Show full text]
  • Manual for Certificate Course on Plant Protection & Pesticide Management
    Manual for Certificate Course on Plant Protection & Pesticide Management (for Pesticide Dealers) For Internal circulation only & has no legal validity Compiled by NIPHM Faculty Department of Agriculture , Cooperation& Farmers Welfare Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare Government of India National Institute of Plant Health Management Hyderabad-500030 TABLE OF CONTENTS Theory Practical CHAPTER Page No. class hours hours I. General Overview and Classification of Pesticides. 1. Introduction to classification based on use, 1 1 2 toxicity, chemistry 2. Insecticides 5 1 0 3. fungicides 9 1 0 4. Herbicides & Plant growth regulators 11 1 0 5. Other Pesticides (Acaricides, Nematicides & 16 1 0 rodenticides) II. Pesticide Act, Rules and Regulations 1. Introduction to Insecticide Act, 1968 and 19 1 0 Insecticide rules, 1971 2. Registration and Licensing of pesticides 23 1 0 3. Insecticide Inspector 26 2 0 4. Insecticide Analyst 30 1 4 5. Importance of packaging and labelling 35 1 0 6. Role and Responsibilities of Pesticide Dealer 37 1 0 under IA,1968 III. Pesticide Application A. Pesticide Formulation 1. Types of pesticide Formulations 39 3 8 2. Approved uses and Compatibility of pesticides 47 1 0 B. Usage Recommendation 1. Major pest and diseases of crops: identification 50 3 3 2. Principles and Strategies of Integrated Pest 80 2 1 Management & The Concept of Economic Threshold Level 3. Biological control and its Importance in Pest 93 1 2 Management C. Pesticide Application 1. Principles of Pesticide Application 117 1 0 2. Types of Sprayers and Dusters 121 1 4 3. Spray Nozzles and Their Classification 130 1 0 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide No. 1 – October 2020 2/12 the CONCEPT and IMPLEMENTATION of CPA GUIDANCE RESIDUE LEVELS
    Cooperation Centre for Scientific Research Relative to Tobacco CORESTA GUIDE N° 1 The Concept and Implementation of CPA Guidance Residue Levels October 2020 Agro-Chemical Advisory Committee CORESTA TECHNICAL GUIDE N° 1 Title: The Concept and Implementation of CPA Guidance Residue Levels Status: Valid Note: This document will be periodically reviewed by CORESTA Document history: Date of review Information July 2003 Version 1 GRL for Pyrethrins () and Terbufos corrected. December 2003 CPA terminology corrected. June 2008 Version 2 – GRLs revised and residue definitions added Provisional GRL of 2.00 ppm for Cyfluthrin to replace previous June 2010 GRL of 0.50 ppm July 2013 Version 3 – GRLs revised October 2013 Note for Maleic Hydrazide revised Version 4 – GRLs revised + clarification that scope of GRLs July 2016 applies predominantly to the production of traditional cigarette tobaccos and GAP associated with their cultivation. June 2018 Fluopyram GRL of 5 ppm added to GRL list Version 5 – Nine new CPAs with GRL added to list. November 2019 Revision of GRLs for Chlorantraniliprole and Indoxacarb. Updated web links. October 2020 Version 6 – Flupyradifurone GRL of 21 ppm added to GRL list. CORESTA Guide No. 1 – October 2020 2/12 THE CONCEPT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CPA GUIDANCE RESIDUE LEVELS Executive Summary • Guidance Residue Levels (GRLs) are in the remit of the Agro-Chemical Advisory Committee (ACAC) of CORESTA. Their development is a joint activity of all ACAC members, who represent the leaf production, processing and manufacturing sectors of the Tobacco Industry. The concept of GRLs and their implementation are described in this guide. • GRLs provide guidance to tobacco growers and assist with interpretation and evaluation of results from analyses of residues of Crop Protection Agents (CPAs*).
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Chemistry Method for Pyrethroids in Sediment 47053001
    • 1. Introduction and Summary 1.1 Scope The analytical procedure described is suitable for the detennination of residues of bifenthrin, cypennethrin, cyfluthrin, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, fenpropathrin, lambda-cyhalothrin and permethrin (Figures 1-8) in sediment using an external standardisation procedure. The Iimit ofquantitation of the method is 0.1 µg kg·• for bifenthrin, cypermethrin, cyfluthrin, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, fenpropathrin, lambda-cyhalothrin and 1.0 µg kg" 1 for pennethrin. Figura 1 Compound Bifenthrin IUPAC Name 2-methylbiphenyl-3-ylmethyl (Z)-( 1RS,3RS)-3-(2-chloro-3- 3-3-trifluoroprop-l -enyl)-2,2- dimethy lcyclopropanecarboxy late CAS Number 82657-04-3 CAS Name (2-methyl[ I,I '-biphenyl]-3-(2-chloro-3-3-3-trifluoroprop- l­ enyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate • Cl Figure 2 Compound Cypermethrin IUPACName (RS)-a-cyano-3-phenoxy benxy I ( 1RS,3RS; IRS,3SR)-3-(2,2- dichlorovinyl)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxy late CASNumber 52315-07-8 CAS Name Cyano(3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl 3-(2,2-dichloroethenyl)- 2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate N 11 Cl 0 Cl • Page 7 of185 • Figure 3 Compound Cyfluthrin IUPAC Name RS)-a-cyano-4-fluoro-3-phenoxybenzyl ( 1RS,3RS; 1RS,JSR}-3-(2,2-dichloroviny 1)-2,2- dimethy lcyclopropanecarboxylate CASNumber 68359-37-5 CASName Cyano(4-fluoro-3-phenoxyphenyl)methyl 3-(2,2- dichloroethenyl)-2,2-dimethy lcyclopropanecarboxylate N 11 Cl 0 o'() F ~' Figure 4 Compound Deltamethrin IUPAC Name (S)-a-cyano-3-phenoxybenzyl ( IR,JR)-3-(2,2- dibromoviny 1)-2,2-dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate CAS Number
    [Show full text]
  • Compound Class Type Analysed in 3,4-Dichloroaniline Anilines
    U.S. Geological Survey ‐ California Water Science Center Pesticide Fate Research (Table of Analytes) Compound Class Type Analysed In 3,4‐Dichloroaniline Anilines degradate water & sediment AlAlac hlorChl Chloroacetani t ilidlides hbiidherbicide watert & sedidiment t Aldrin Organochlorines insecticide sediment Allethrin Pyrethroids insecticide water & sediment alpha‐Chlordane Organochlorines insecticide sediment alpha‐HCH Organochlorines insecticide sediment Atrazine Triazines/Triazones herbicide water & sediment AzoxystrobinAzoxystrobin Strobilurins funfungicidegicide water & sediment beta‐HCH Organochlorines insecticide sediment Bifenthrin Pyrethroids insecticide water & sediment Butylate Thiocarbamates herbicide water & sediment Carbaryl Carbamates insecticide water & sediment Carbofuran Carbamates insecticide water & sediment Chlorothalonil Miscellaneous fungicide water & sediment ChlChlorpyrifos if OrganophosphatesOhh insecticideiiid water & sedimentdi cis‐Nonachlor Organochlorines insecticide sediment Cycloate Thiocarbamates herbicide water & sediment Cyfluthrin Pyrethroids insecticide water & sediment Cyhalothrin Pyrethroids insecticide water & sediment Cypermethrin Pyrethroids insecticide water & sediment Cyproconazole Conazoles fungicide water & sediment Dacthal (DCPA) Miscellaneous herbicide water & sediment delta‐HCH Organochlorines insecticide sediment Deltamethrin Pyrethroids insecticide water & sediment Diazinon Organophosphates insecticide water & sediment Dieldrin Organochlorines insecticide sediment Disulfoton Organophosphates
    [Show full text]
  • General Pest Management: a Guide for Commercial Applicators, Category 7A, and Return It to the Pesticide Education Program Office, Michigan State University Extension
    General Pest Management A Guide for Commercial Applicators Extension Bulletin E -2048 • October 1998, Major revision-destroy old stock • Michigan State University Extension General Pest Management A Guide for Commercial Applicators Category 7A Editor: Carolyn Randall Extension Associate Pesticide Education Program Michigan State University Technical Consultants: Melvin Poplar, Program Manager John Haslem Insect and Rodent Management Pest Management Supervisor Michigan Department of Agriculture Michigan State University Adapted from Urban Integrated Pest Management, A Guide for Commercial Applicators, written by Dr. Eugene Wood, Dept. of Entomology, University of Maryland; and Lawrence Pinto, Pinto & Associates; edited by Jann Cox, DUAL & Associates, Inc. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Certification and Training Branch by DUAL & Associates, Arlington, Va., February 1991. General Pest Management i Preface Acknowledgements We acknowledge the main source of information for Natural History Survey for the picture of a mole (Figure this manual, the EPA manual Urban Integrated Pest 19.8). Management, from which most of the information on structure-infesting and invading pests, and vertebrates We acknowledge numerous reviewers of the manu- was taken. script including Mark Sheperdigian of Rose Exterminator Co., Bob England of Terminix, Jerry Hatch of Eradico We also acknowledge the technical assistance of Mel Services Inc., David Laughlin of Aardvark Pest Control, Poplar, Program Manager for the Michigan Department Ted Bruesch of LiphaTech, Val Smitter of Smitter Pest of Agriculture’s (MDA) Insect and Rodent Management Control, Dan Lyden of Eradico Services Inc., Tim Regal of and John Haslem, Pest Management Supervisor at Orkin Exterminators, Kevin Clark of Clarks Critter Michigan State University.
    [Show full text]
  • Rep12/Pr Joint Fao/Who Food Standards Programme
    E REP12/PR JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION 35th Session Geneva, Switzerland, 2 – 7 July 2012 REPORT OF THE 44th SESSION OF THE CODEX COMMITTEE ON PESTICIDE RESIDUES Shanghai, China, 23 - 28 April 2012 Note: This report includes Codex Circular Letter CL 2012/10-PR. E CX 4/40.2 CL 2012/10-PR May 2012 To: - Codex Contact Points - Interested International Organizations From: Secretariat, Codex Alimentarius Commission, Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme, E-mail: [email protected], Fax: +39 06 57054593) Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy SUBJECT: DISTRIBUTION OF THE REPORT OF THE 44TH SESSION OF THE CODEX COMMITTEE ON PESTICIDE RESIDUES (REP11/PR) The report of the 44th Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues will be considered by the 35th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Rome, Italy, 2 – 7 July 2012). PART A: MATTERS FOR ADOPTION BY THE 35TH SESSION OF THE CODEX ALIMENTARIUS COMMISSION: 1. Draft Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides at Step 8 (paras. 28 - 85 and Appendix II); 2. Draft Revision to the Codex Classification of Food and Animal Feed (fruit commodity groups) at Step 8 (para. 107 and Appendix VIII); 3. Draft Principles and Guidance for the Selection of Representative Commodities for the Extrapolation of Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides to Commodity Groups (including Table 1: Examples of the selection of representative commodities - fruit commodity groups) at Step 8 (para. 127 and Appendix XI); and 4. Proposed Draft Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides at Step 5/8 (with omission of Steps 6/7) (paras.
    [Show full text]
  • (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 9,139,481 B2 Sanders (45) Date of Patent: Sep
    US009139481 B2 (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 9,139,481 B2 Sanders (45) Date of Patent: Sep. 22, 2015 (54) ANHYDROUS AMMONIA SUPPLEMENTED 3,796.559 A * 3/1974 Windgassen ........................ 71/1 WITH AGRICULTURAL ACTIVES 3,997,319 A 12/1976 Ott 4,007,029 A * 2/1977 Kenton ............................. T1/11 (71) Applicant: Specialty Fertilizer Products, LLC, 5,210,163 A 5, 1993 Grey Leawood, KS (US) 5,536.311 A 7/1996 Rodrigues s 6,228.806 B1* 5/2001 Mehta ........................... 504,117 6,515,090 B1 2/2003 Sanders et al. (72) Inventor: John Larry Sanders, Leawood, KS 6,632,262 B2 * 10/2003 Gabrielson ....................... T1/30 (US) 7,655,597 B1 2/2010 Sanders 8,043,995 B2 10/2011 Sanders et al. (73) Assignee: Verdesian Life Sciences, LLP, Cary, 8,491,693 B2 * 7/2013 Burnham .......................... T1/11 NC (US) 2004/0211234 A1* 10/2004 Volgas et al. .................. 71 (64.1 2009/0071213 A1 3/2009 Keenan et al. (*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this 2009/0163365 A1 6/2009 Bentlage et al. patent is extended or adjusted under 35 U.S.C. 154(b) by 0 days. FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS (21) Appl. No.: 14/285,272 RU 2051884 C1 1, 1996 (22) Filed: May 22, 2014 OTHER PUBLICATIONS (65) Prior Publication Data International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Oct. 16, 2014 in PCT/US 2014/039424, International Filing Date: May 23, 2014. US 2014/0345344 A1 Nov. 27, 2014 U.S. Appl. No. 62/001,110, filed May 21, 2014, entitled Polyanionic Related U.S.
    [Show full text]