PETITION PROPOSING A TOLERANCE FOR ACETAMIPRID USE IN PRODUCTION OF STRAWBERRY AND OTHER LOW-GROWING BERRIES VOLUME 1 OF 2 TITLE PAGE

Transcription

1 PETITION PROPOSING A TOLERANCE FOR ACETAMIPRID USE IN PRODUCTION OF STRAWBERRY AND OTHER LOW-GROWING BERRIES VOLUME 1 OF 2 TITLE PAGE KENNETH S. SAMOIL INTERREGIONAL RESEARCH PROJECT NO. 4 RUTGERS, THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW JERSEY 500 COLLEGE ROAD EAST, SUITE 201W PRINCETON, NJ New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station Publication No. A Supported by State, U.S. Hatch Act & other U.S. Department of Agriculture Funds. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 1 of 61

2 VOLUME 1 - TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. VOLUME 1 OF 2 TITLE PAGE...1 VOLUME 1 - TABLE OF CONTENTS...2 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION...3 SECTION A...4 SECTION B...5 SECTION C...42 SECTION D...43 SECTION E...57 SECTION F...58 SECTION G...60 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 2 of 61

3 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 3 of 61

4 SECTION A THE NAME, CHEMICAL IDENTITY, AND COMPOSITION OF ACETAMIPRID Please refer to letter of authorization, Page 3 Formulation used in testing: Assail 70 WP Insecticide EPA Reg. No IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 4 of 61

5 SECTION B THE AMOUNT, FREQUENCY AND TIME OF APPLICATION OF ACETAMIPRID IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 5 of 61

6 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 6 of 61

7 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 7 of 61

8 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 8 of 61

9 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 9 of 61

10 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 10 of 61

11 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 11 of 61

12 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 12 of 61

13 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 13 of 61

14 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 14 of 61

15 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 15 of 61

16 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 16 of 61

17 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 17 of 61

18 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 18 of 61

19 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 19 of 61

20 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 20 of 61

21 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 21 of 61

22 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 22 of 61

23 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 23 of 61

24 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 24 of 61

25 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 25 of 61

26 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 26 of 61

27 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 27 of 61

28 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 28 of 61

29 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 29 of 61

30 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 30 of 61

31 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 31 of 61

32 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 32 of 61

33 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 33 of 61

34 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 34 of 61

35 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 35 of 61

36 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 36 of 61

37 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 37 of 61

38 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 38 of 61

39 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 39 of 61

40 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 40 of 61

41 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 41 of 61

42 SECTION C FULL REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS MADE WITH RESPECT TO THE SAFETY OF THE PESTICIDE CHEMICAL ACETAMIPRID Please refer to letter of authorization, Page 3, to access the following data: a) Human safety data b) Domestic animal safety data c) Fish and wildlife safety data. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 42 of 61

43 SECTION D THE RESULTS OF TESTS ON THE AMOUNT OF ACETAMIPRID RESIDUES REMAINING IN OR ON THE RAW AGRICULTURAL COMMODITY STRAWBERRY IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 43 of 61

44 SECTION D ACETAMIPRID: MAGNITUDE OF THE RESIDUE ON STRAWBERRY The purpose of this study was to collect and analyze treated and untreated residue samples from appropriate field sites according to the application parameters requested to provide the sponsor with residue chemistry data to support an acetamiprid tolerance. Acetamiprid, the active ingredient in Assail 70 WP Insecticide, controls aphids, Japanese beetles, lygus bugs, plant bugs, thrips, and whiteflies in strawberry production. Executive Summary IR-4 has received requests from Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania for the use of acetamiprid on strawberry. To support this requested use, magnitude of residue data were collected from ten field trials located in NAFTA Regions described in Table B.1.3. Residue data that have been collected from strawberry trials will also support tolerances on bearberries, bilberries, lowbush blueberries, cloudberries, cranberries, lingonberries, muntries, and partridgeberries. Each field trial site consisted of one untreated control plot and one treated plot. Soil characteristics of each of the trial sites are summarized in Table B.1.1. Common cultural practices were followed to maintain the crop. Additional maintenance pesticides and fertilizers were used at most of the sites to produce a commercial quality strawberry. Application type, timing, rates and number of applications are summarized in Table B.1.2. At each trial, two foliar applications of the test substance 6-9 days apart were made to the treated plots. The application rates ranged from to lb ai/a per application for a total rate range of to lb ai/a per season (see Table B.1.2). All applications were made using appropriate spray equipment, and the spray volume was sufficient to provide adequate dispersal of the test substance. Sampling started in the untreated control plot and ended in the treated plot. At all the field trials, samples were harvested 1 day after the last application (see Table C.3). Additionally, at the CA*57 trial, duplicate samples were collected 3, 5, and 9 days after the last application. The samples were analyzed using a working method very similar to the reference method, KP-216R1: Preliminary LC/MS/MS Analytical Method for Determination of Assail 70 WP Insecticide (Acetamiprid) in Crop Matrices, written by Fenn Li and Paul Reibach, Cerexagri, 9/6/2003. Method suitability was evaluated both prior to sample analysis and concurrently with sample analysis. The method validation recoveries ranged from 82% to 101%. Concurrent recoveries obtained during sample analysis ranged from 88% to 103%. The LOD for the method was calculated to be ppm and the LOQ was calculated to be ppm. The lowest level of method validation (LLMV) for strawberry was ppm for acetamiprid. Additional information regarding method recoveries can be found in Table C.1. Analytical sets typically consisted of calibration standards, unfortified controls, fortified controls, and treated samples. A calibration standard was injected at the beginning and end of each analytical set. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 44 of 61

45 The total residues of acetamiprid ranged from 0.03 to 0.25 ppm in samples taken at 1 day after the last application. In the decline trial (CA*57), the residues declined from a mean of 0.23 ppm in samples taken at 1 day after the last application, to 0.19 ppm in samples taken at 3 days, to 0.15 ppm in samples taken at 5 days, to 0.09 ppm in samples taken at 9 days. See Table C.3 for additional information. The storage interval for field-treated samples in this study ranged from 6 to 109 days (see Table C.2). Storage stability samples were fortified with acetamiprid at ppm soon after the receipt of the samples by the analytical laboratory. The storage stability samples were held in frozen storage under similar conditions to the field generated samples. After 148 days of freezer storage, the storage stability samples were analyzed for acetamiprid. The recoveries for the storage stability samples were in the range 87% to 89%; see Table C.2. A concurrent recovery for a spike analyzed along with the storage stability samples was 92%. This data indicates that acetamiprid is stable under the conditions which the samples were held between harvest and analysis. The nature of the residues of acetamiprid is adequately understood, and an acceptable analytical method is available for enforcement purposes. The registration of this use would provide the growers with an effective insecticide. A. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The test substance used in the study was Assail 70 WP Insecticide. The active ingredient of the test substance used in this study is acetamiprid, of the class pyridylmethylamine. The nominal concentration of the active ingredient is 70%. The parent compound is the only compound mentioned in the tolerance expression (40CFR ). The samples were analyzed for acetamiprid only. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 45 of 61

46 Table A.1: Test Compound Nomenclature Compound: Acetamiprid Chemical Structure: C 10 H 11 ClN 4 Common Name: Acetamiprid Company Experimental Name: NI-25 IUPAC Name: (E)-N 1 -[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]-N 2 -cyano-n 1 -methylacetamidine CAS Name: (1E)-N-[(6-chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]-N -cyano-n-methylethanimidamide CAS #: End-Use product/ep: Assail 70 WP Insecticide IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 46 of 61

47 Table A.2. Physicochemical Properties Parameter Chemical: Melting point/range ph Density Water Solubility ( C) Solvent Solubility (mg/l at C) Vapour Pressure at C Dissociation Constant (pk a ): Octanol/Water Partition Coefficient Log (K ow ): UV/visible Absorption Spectrum: Table Intentionally Left Blank Value Reference IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 47 of 61

48 B. Experimental Design B.1. Study Site Information Table B.1.1 Soil Characterization and Summary of Meteorological Conditions Trial Trial Location Soil characteristics Meteorological Comments Trial Start (City, State or Province) CEC (meq/100 ID Year Type %OM ph Rainfall Temperatures g) CA*56 Salinas, CA 2004 Sandy loam Normal Normal CA*57 Salinas, CA 2004 Sandy loam Normal Normal CA58 Madera, CA 2004 Loam NA 1 Normal Normal FL26 Dover, FL 2004 Fine sand NA 1 Normal Normal NJ14 Bridgeton, NJ 2004 Sandy loam Above normal in April Above normal NS04 St. Edouard de Kent, NB 2004 Sandy loam NA 1 Normal Normal ON01 Thorndale, ON 2004 Fine sandy loam NA 1 Normal Normal OR08 Aurora, OR 2004 Loam NA 1 Normal Normal QC11 St. Paul d Abbotsford, QC 2004 Loamy fine sand Normal Normal WI07 Arlington, WI 2004 Silt loam NA 1 Normal Normal 1 NA = Not Available IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 48 of 61

49 Table B.1.2.1: Study Use Pattern Trial ID Trial Location (City, State or Province) CA*56 Salinas, CA 2004 CA*57 Salinas, CA 2004 CA58 Madera, CA 2004 FL26 Dover, FL 2004 NJ14 Bridgeton, NJ EP = End-use Product Application Trial Start Year EP 1 Timing Rate lb ai/a RTI 2 (days) Application Number Method Total Rate lb ai/a Tank Mix Adjuvants Assail 70 Mature fruit Foliar Broadcast Spray WP Mature fruit Foliar Broadcast Spray None NA Assail 70 Mature fruit Foliar Broadcast Spray WP Mature fruit Foliar Broadcast Spray None NA Assail 70 Mature and immature fruit Foliar Broadcast Spray WP Mature and immature fruit Foliar Broadcast Spray None NA Assail 70 Fruiting Foliar Directed Spray WP Fruiting Foliar Directed Spray None NA Assail 70 Fruiting Foliar Broadcast Spray WP Fruiting Foliar Broadcast Spray None NA 2 Retreatment Interval 3 Only applicable for cotton commodities. Harvest Procedures 3 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 49 of 61

50 Table B.1.2.2: Study Use Pattern Trial ID NS04 Trial Location (City, State or Province) St. Edouard de Kent, NB ON01 Thorndale, ON 2004 OR08 Aurora, OR 2004 Application Trial Start Year EP 1 Timing Rate lb ai/a RTI 3 (days) Application Number Method 2004 Assail 70 75% fruiting Foliar Broadcast Spray WP 90% fruiting Foliar Broadcast Spray Assail 70 Vegetative Foliar Broadcast Spray WP Fruiting Foliar Broadcast Spray Assail 70 Green and red fruit Foliar Directed Spray WP Ripe fruit Foliar Directed Spray Total Rate lb ai/a Tank Mix Adjuvants None Harvest Procedures 4 NA None NA St. Paul Flowering to ripe fruit Foliar Broadcast Spray QC11 d Abbotsford, QC 2004 Assail 70 WP Fruiting None NA 7 2 Foliar Broadcast Spray Assail 70 Fruiting Foliar Broadcast Spray WI07 Arlington, WI None NA WP Fruiting Foliar Broadcast Spray 1 EP = End-use Product 2 For metric equivalents, see Field Data Summaries 3 Retreatment Interval 4 Only applicable for cotton commodities None NA IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 50 of 61

51 Table B.1.3: Trial numbers and geographical locations Crop: Strawberry NAFTA Canada US Growing Region Submitted Required Submitted Required A A B A Total 3 2, The USEPA requirement for a Region 1 trial was met by the data collected from the Canadian trial in New Brunswick. 2 The Canadian requirement for a Region 5A trial was met by the data collected from the US trial in Wisconsin. Wisconsin is in US Region 5, but is considered to be in Canadian Region 5A. 3 The Canadian requirement for a Region 12 trial was met by the data collected from the US trial in Oregon. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 51 of 61

52 B.2. Sample Handling and Preparation The samples were shipped to the analytical laboratory frozen either by ACDS freezer truck or by overnight air express packed in dry ice. All samples arrived frozen and intact at the analytical laboratory. The samples were checked in and stored frozen. The samples were ground with dry ice and then stored frozen till extraction and analysis. B.3. Analytical Methodology The samples were analyzed using a working method very similar to the reference method, KP-216R1: Preliminary LC/MS/MS Analytical Method for Determination of Assail 70 WP Insecticide (Acetamiprid) in Crop Matrices, written by Fenn Li and Paul Reibach, Cerexagri, 9/6/2003. Residues of acetamiprid are extracted from the ground strawberry samples using a solution of methanol:water (1:1, v/v). The extract is cleaned by solid phase extraction using Waters Oasis HLB, 6cc/200mg cartridges. The eluate is transferred to a volumetric flask and brought to the appropriate volume with water. The extract volume is adjusted to be within the calibrated volume range for instrumental analysis. The sample is then analyzed for acetamiprid by LC/MS/MS. Method suitability was evaluated both prior to sample analysis and concurrently with sample analysis. The method validation recoveries ranged from 82% to 101%. Concurrent recoveries obtained during sample analysis ranged from 88% to 103%. The LOD for the method was calculated to be ppm and the LOQ was calculated to be ppm. The lowest level of method validation (LLMV) for strawberry was ppm for acetamiprid. Additional information regarding method recoveries can be found in Table C.1. Analytical sets typically consisted of calibration standards, unfortified controls, fortified controls, and treated samples. A calibration standard was injected at the beginning and end of each analytical set. C. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Application type, timing, rates and number of applications are summarized in Table B.1.2. At each trial, two foliar applications of the test substance 6-9 days apart were made to the treated plots. The application rates ranged from to lb ai/a per application for a total rate range of to lb ai/a per season (see Table B.1.2). All applications were made using appropriate spray equipment, and the spray volume was sufficient to provide adequate dispersal of the test substance. Sampling started in the untreated control plot and ended in the treated plot. At all the field trials, samples were harvested 1 day after the last application (see Table C.3). Additionally, at the CA*57 trial, duplicate samples were collected 3, 5, and 9 days after the last application. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 52 of 61

53 The total residues of acetamiprid ranged from 0.03 to 0.25 ppm in samples taken at 1 day after the last application. In the decline trial (CA*57), the residues declined from a mean of 0.23 ppm in samples taken at 1 day after the last application, to 0.19 ppm in samples taken at 3 days, to 0.15 ppm in samples taken at 5 days, to 0.09 ppm in samples taken at 9 days. See Table C.3 for additional information. The storage interval for field-treated samples in this study ranged from 6 to 109 days (see Table C.2). Storage stability samples were fortified with acetamiprid at ppm soon after the receipt of the samples by the analytical laboratory. The storage stability samples were held in frozen storage under similar conditions to the field generated samples. After 148 days of freezer storage, the storage stability samples were analyzed for acetamiprid. The recoveries for the storage stability samples were in the range 87% to 89%; see Table C.2. A concurrent recovery for a spike analyzed along with the storage stability samples was 92%. This data indicates that acetamiprid is stable under the conditions which the samples were held between harvest and analysis. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 53 of 61

54 Table C.1: Summary of Recoveries Matrix Analyte Spike level (ppm) Sample size (n) Strawberry Acetamiprid Type of Recovery 1 MV 89 MV 87 MV 85 MV 86 MV 82 MV 86 Recoveries (%) Mean ±Std Dev Strawberry Acetamiprid CR Strawberry Acetamiprid Strawberry Acetamiprid MV 88 MV 88 MV 87 CR 94 CR 95 CR 96 CR 91 CR 88 CR 93 CR 89 CR 103 CR 90 CRSS 92 MV 100 MV 101 MV 100 CR MV = Method Validation Recoveries; CR = Concurrent Recoveries; CRSS = Concurrent Recoveries, Storage Stability Table C.2: Summary of Storage Conditions Matrix (RAC or Extract) Analyte Storage Stability Recoveries (%) 87 Storage Temp. ( C) Maximum Actual Sample Storage Duration (days) Limit of Demonstrated Storage Stability (days) Strawberry Acetamiprid to IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 54 of 61

55 Table C.3: Residue Data from Strawberry Field Trials Trial ID CA*56 Trial Location (City, State or Province) NAFTA Growing Region Trial Start Year Crop Variety Commodity Total Rate lbs ai/a 1 Residues from Treated Samples Acetamiprid Total PHI Max. (days) (ppm) (ppm) Salinas, CA Strawberry Ventana Fruit with cap removed CA*57 Salinas, CA Strawberry Camarosa Fruit with cap removed CA58 Madera, CA Strawberry Seascape Fruit with cap removed FL26 Dover, FL Strawberry Festival Fruit with cap removed NJ14 Bridgeton, NJ Strawberry Avalon Fruit with cap removed NS04 St. Edouard de Kent, NB Strawberry Annapolis Fruit ON01 Thorndale, ON Strawberry Mesiabi Fruit with cap removed OR08 QC Aurora, OR Strawberry Totem Fruit with cap removed St. Paul d Abbotsford, QC 5B 2004 Strawberry Jewel Fruit with cap removed WI07 Arlington, WI 5/5A 2004 Strawberry Honeoye Fruit with cap removed Treatment 02 consisted of 2 foliar applications of ASSAIL 70 WP Insecticide. 2 For metric equivalents see Field Data Summaries. 3 The field data book from this trial had no indication of cap removal. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 55 of 61

56 Table C.4: Summary of Residue Data from Strawberry Field Trials Total Application PHI Treated Sample Residue Levels (ppm) Commodity Treatment Rate, lb ai/a (days) Analyte n Min. Max. HAFT 1 Mean Std. Dev. Strawberry Assail 70 WP to Acetamiprid Strawberry Assail 70 WP Acetamiprid Strawberry Assail 70 WP Acetamiprid Strawberry Assail 70 WP Acetamiprid HAFT = Highest Average Field Trial. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 56 of 61

57 SECTION E Since it is unlikely that residues of acetamiprid in or on strawberry and other lowgrowing berries will exceed the proposed tolerances, methods for removing the residues are not necessary. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 57 of 61

58 SECTION F PROPOSED TOLERANCE FOR THE PESTICIDE CHEMICAL ACETAMIPRID USE IN OR ON STRAWBERRY AND OTHER LOW-GROWING BERRIES AMENDS 40 CFR The petitioner, IR-4, on behalf of the Agricultural Experiment Stations of Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania requests the establishment of a tolerance for combined residues of the insecticide acetamiprid N1-[(6-chloro-3-pyridyl)methyl]- N2-cyano-N1-methylacetamidine in or on the following commodities: Proposed Tolerance Commodity (Parts per million, ppm) Strawberry 0.60 Bearberry 0.60 Bilberry 0.60 Blueberry, lowbush 0.60 Cloudberry 0.60 Cranberry 0.60 Lingonberry 0.60 Muntries 0.60 Partridgeberry 0.60 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 58 of 61

59 IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 59 of 61

60 SECTION G REASONABLE GROUNDS IN SUPPORT OF OUR PETITION FOR ACETAMIPRID ON STRAWBERRY AND OTHER LOW-GROWING BERRIES IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 60 of 61

61 Section G The IR-4 Project received a request from the states of Michigan, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania for the clearance of acetamiprid in or on strawberry. Acetamiprid is wanted as a foliar application to control aphids, Japanese beetles, lygus bugs, plant bugs, thrips, and whiteflies in strawberry production. Strawberry is the representative commodity for Lowgrowing berry subgroup 13G that has been accepted at EPA. This subgroup includes bearberry, bilberry, lowbush blueberry, cloudberry, cranberry, lingonberry, muntries, and partridgeberry. Ten field trials were conducted in the USA and Canada to develop residue data in support of tolerances. The nature of the residues of acetamiprid is adequately understood, and an acceptable analytical method is available for enforcement purposes. Based on these results, the establishment of the tolerances proposed for strawberry and other lowgrowing berries in Section F of this volume would provide the growers with an effective insecticide for the control of aphids, Japanese beetles, lygus bugs, plant bugs, thrips, and whiteflies. IR-4 Acetamiprid Petition for Strawberry and Other Low-Growing Berries Page 61 of 61