State Surface Water Issues 2015 Kean S Goh Surface Water Protection Program Department of Pesticide Regulation CalEPA POINTS List Monitoring prioritization w atershed scale model Registration Evaluation Model ID: 1043155
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "SFIREG EQI APRIL 14, 2015" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
1. SFIREG EQI APRIL 14, 2015State Surface Water Issues 2015Kean S. GohSurface Water Protection Program Department of Pesticide RegulationCalEPA
2. POINTS ListMonitoring prioritization watershed scale modelRegistration Evaluation Model: Urban, Ag, Estuarine, Transformation Products Urban: Fipronil, POTW, Dog-wash study
3. POINTS 2014Pesticide of Interest: 156Pesticide of Concern: 73Under active management: 32Demonstrate Progress: 9 http://points.wsu.edu/reports/poi2.aspxMonitoring Prioritization ModelYuzhou Luo and Xin Deng. Methodology for Prioritizing Pesticides for Surface Water Monitoring in Agricultural and Urban Areas III: Watershed- Based Prioritization. March 19, 2015.http://cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/pubs/ehapreps/analysis_memos/luo_prioritization_3.pdfRegistration Evaluation Modelshttp://cdpr.ca.gov/docs/emon/surfwtr/review.htmMethodology for Evaluating Pesticides for Surface Water Protection.I: Initial Screening, PDF (342 kb). Yuzhou Luo and Xin Deng. January 26, 2012II: Refined Modeling, PDF (266 kb). Yuzhou Luo and Xin Deng. January 26, 2012III: Module for Urban Scenarios, PDF (593 kb). Yuzhou Luo. February 28, 2014.Methodology for Screening Pesticide Products with High Exposure Potentials to Marine/Estuarine Organisms, PDF (409 kb). Yina Xie and Yuzhou Luo. March 9, 2015.Urban Pesticide Issues: Fipronil, POTWStore surveysUniversal Chemical Scan Dog Wash Study Study 296, PDF (132 kb) Teerlink, J. 2014. The Washoff Potential of Fipronil from Dogs Treated with Fipronil Pet-Care Products.
4. Salinas River, Drainage Area = 11082 km2 Pesticide Use score Tox score Final score Monitoring inclusion Malathion 4 5 20 Yes Permethrin 3 6 18 Yes Chlorpyrifos 3 6 18 Yes Methomyl 4 4 16 Yes Diazinon 3 5 15 Yes Paraquat dichloride 3 5 15 Pending5 Mancozeb 5 3 15 No2 λ-cyhalothrin 2 7 14 Yes Naled 2 6 12 No3 Maneb 3 4 12 No2 Oxyfluorfen 2 5 10 Yes Bensulide 5 2 10 Yes Captan 3 3 9 No2 Cyprodinil 3 3 9 No4 Imidacloprid 3 3 9 Yes Oxydemeton-methyl 3 3 9 Pending5
5. Priority model pesticides based on urban usage in Los Angeles and Orange County, California (2009-2011). Active Ingredient Use (lbs) Use score OPP Benchmark Tox score Final score Permethrin 99474 5 0.01 7 35 Bifenthrin 19727 5 0.075 6 30 Fipronil 23677 5 0.11 5 25 Cyfluthrin 10694 4 0.0125 6 24 Beta-cyfluthrin 4212 4 0.034 6 24 Lambda-cyhalothrin 2926 3 0.0035 7 21 Chlorothalonil 32250 5 1.8 4 20 Cypermethrin 13216 4 0.195 5 20 Deltamethrin 1810 3 0.055 6 18 Diuron 17300 4 2.4 4 16 Copper 8986 4 2.05 4 16 Chlorfenapyr 5291 4 2.915 4 16 Pendimethalin 4768 4 5.2 4 16 Malathion 1696 3 0.3 5 15 Diquat dibromide 1544 3 0.75 5 15 Mancozeb 14067 4 47 3 12 Imidacloprid 13783 4 35 3 12 Triclopyr 6130 4 70 3 12 Iprodione 4234 4 50 3 12 Prodiamine 2951 3 3 4 12 Bromacil 2855 3 6.8 4 12