Use of the Registered Aquatic Herbicide Fluridone (Sonar)

450 Pages·2008·9.59 MB·English

Project Title:
USE OF THE REGISTERED AQUATIC HERBICIDE FLURIDONE (SONAR")
AND THE
USE OF THE REGISTERED AQUATIC HERBICIDE GLYPHOSATE
(RODEO• AND ACCORD")
IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK
FINAL
GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT
Prepared for:
DowElanco
9002 Purdue Road
Indianapolis, Indiana 46268
Monsanto
The Agricultural Group
800 N. Lindbergh Boulevard
St. Louis, Missouri 63167
Prepared by:
McLaren/Hart Environmental Engineering Corporation
25 Independence Boulevard
Warren, New Jersey 070'59
January 10, 1995
Version 5.0

Document Type: Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
Project Title: Use of the Registered Aquatic Herbicide Fluridone (Sonarj and Use of
the Registered Aquatic Herbicide Glyphosate (Rodeo• and Accordj in the
State of New York
Lead Agency: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, New York 12233
Contact: Mr. Charles Lockrow
Department of Regulatory Affairs
[phone]
Action Sponsors: DowElanco
9002 Purdue Road
Indianapolis, Indiana 46268
Monsanto
The Agricultural Group
800 N. Lindbergh Boulevard
St. Louis, Missouri 63167
Document McLaren/Hart Environmental Engineering Corporation
Prepared By: 25 Independence Boulevard
Warren, New Jersey 07059
Principal Author: Charles R. Harman
Senior Environmental Scientist
[phone]
Date of Acceptance of Draft GEIS: April 6, 1994
Deadline for Accepting Comments on Draft GEIS: June 6, 1994
Date of Acceptance of Final GEIS: January 25, 1995
January 10, 1995
Version S.O

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Paee No.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................1-1
1.1 Purpose of the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) . . . . . . . . . 1-1
1.2 Objective of the GEIS ..................................1-1
1. 3 Regulatory Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1
1.4 Identification and Jurisdiction of the Involved Agencies .............. 1-2
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF TIIE PROPOSED ACTION - USE OF SONAR• ....... 2-1
2.1 General Description of the Aquatic Herbicide Fluridone (Sonar} . . ; . . . . . 2-1
2.1.1 Purpose of the Product ..............................2-2
2.1.2 Need for the Product ...............................2-2
2.1.3 Benefits of the Product ..............................2-3
2.1.4 History of Product Use ..............................2-4
2.1.4. 1 Registration Status in States and Canadian Provinces
That Are Neighboring New York State ............. 2-5
2.2 General Location of the Proposed Action ....................... 2-5
2.3 Potential Aquatic Macrophyte Target Species .................... 2-6
2.3.1 Eurasian Watermilfoil (Myriophyllum :micatum L.) ............ 2-6
2.3.2 Other Potential Aquatic Macrophyte Target Species ............ 2-6
3.0 ENVIRONMENT AL SETTING - SONAR• ........................ 3-1
3.1 General Description of New York State Aquatic Ecosystems ........... 3-1
3.2 General Characterization of Aquatic Plant Communities in
New York State Waterbodies ..............................3-2
3.2.1 Submerged, Deepwater and Floating Plant Communities ......... 3-4
3.3 Distribution and Ecology of Primary Potential Aquatic Macrophyte
Target Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 3-5
3.3.1 Eurasian Watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum L.) ............ 3-6
3.4 Distribution and Ecology of Other Potential Aquatic Macrophyte
Target Species of Sonar• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-9
3.5 Role of Potential Aquatic Macrophyte Target Species in Plant
Communities Within New York State Waterbodies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-13
, 3.5.1 Submerged, Floating-leaved, and Floating Plant Communities ..... 3-13
il'c,.
3.6 General Characterization of Aquatic Vegetation Management
Objectives for the Use of Sonar• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-14
January 10, 1995
Version S.O 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Section Pa&e No.
4.0 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SONAR• AND ITS ACTIVE INGREDIENT
FI.,URIDONE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4.1 General Description of Sonar• A.S. and SRP Formulations ............ 4-1
4.1.1 Active Ingredients .................................4-1
4.1.2 Inert Ingredients ..................................4-1
4.1.3 Product Contaminants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
4.2 Selection of Sonar• SRP versus Sonar• A.S. . .................... 4-1
4.3 Description of Use .....................................4-2
4.4 Mode of Action/Efficacy .................................4-2
4.5 Application Considerations That Maximize the Selectivity of Sonar• ...... 4-3
4.5.1 Time of Application ...............................4-3
4.5.2 Rate of Application ................................4-3
4.5. 3 Method of Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4
4 .5 .4 Species Susceptibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4
4.5.5 Dilution Effects ..................................4-4
4.6 Fluridone Product Solubility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6
4.7 Surfactants .........................................4-6
4.8 Fate of Fluridone and Its Primary Metabolite in the
Aquatic Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6
4.8.1 Water (aerobic and anaerobic) .........................4-7
4.8.2 Sediment ..................................... .4-8
4.8.3 Plants ........................................4-8
4.8.4 Fish .........................................4-8
4.8.5 Mammals ......................................4-9
4.8.6 Bioaccumulation/Biomagnification ....................... 4-9
4.9 Fluridone Residue Tolerances ............................. 4-10
4.9.1 Water ....................................... 4-10
4.9. 2 Fish/Shellfish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-10
4.9.3 Crops/ Agricultural Products .......................... 4-10
5.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH SONAR• 5-1
5.1 Direct and Indirect Impacts to Non-target Species .................. 5-1
5.1.1 Macrophytes and Aquatic Plant Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 5-2
5.1.2 Algal and Planktonic Species ..........................5-6
5.1.3 Fish, Shellfish and Aquatic Macroinvertebrates ............... 5-7
5.1.4 Avian Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-8
5.1.5 Mammals ......................................5-8
5. 1.6 Reptiles and Amphibians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . 5-9
5.1. 7 Federal and State Listed Rare, Threatened, and
Endangered Species ...............................5-9
5.1.8 Biodiversity Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-9
January 10, 1995
Versioo 5.0 ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Section Paae No.
5. 2 Potential for Impact from the Accumulation/Degradation of
Treated Plant Biomass on Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-12
5.3 Impact of Residence Time of Sonar• in the Water Column ........... 5-12
5.4 Recolonization of Non-target Plants After Control of
Target Plants is Achieved ............................... 5-12
5.5 Impacts on Coastal Resources ............................. 5-13
6.0 POTENTIAL PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACTS OF SONAR• .............. 6-1
6.1 Brief Overview of Fluridone Toxicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1
6.2 NYS Drinking Water Standard .............................6-1
7.0 MITIGATION MEASURES TO MINIMIZE ENVIRONMENTAL AND
HEALTH IMPACTS FROM SONAR• ...........................7-1
7.1 Use Controls ........................................7-1
7 .2 Label Instructions .....................................7-1
7.3 Relationship to the NYS Drinking Water Standard ................. 7-2
7.4 Rulemaking Decisions ..................................7-2
7.5 Spill Control ........................................7-3
7.6 Other Mitigation Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-4
7.6.1 Timing of Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-4
7.6.2 Application Techniques ..............................7-4
8.0 UNA VOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IF USE OF SONAR• IS
IMPLEMENTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1
9.0 ALTERNATIVES TO SONAR• ................................9-1
9.1 No-Action Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-1
9.2 Chemical Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-3
9.2.1 Endothall ......................................9-3
9.2.2 Diquat ........................................9-4
9.2.3 2,4-D ........................................9-5
9.3 Non-Chemical Alternatives ...............................9-5
9.3.1 Mechanical Alternatives .............................9-5
9.3.1.1 Aquatic Weed Harvesters ......................9-5
9.3.1.2 Benthic Barriers ............................9-7
9.3.1.3 Hand Cutting ..............................9-7
9.3. l.4 Rototilling or Rotovating ....................•.. 9-8
9.3.1.5 Diver-Operated Suction Dredging ................. 9-8
9.3.2 Biological Alternatives ..............................9-9
9.3.2. l Grass Carp .............................. 9-10
9.3.2. 2 Insects ................................. 9-10
Janwuy 10, 1995
Version 5.0 111
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Section Paee No.
9.3.2.3 Pathogens ............................... 9-10
9.3.3 Water Manipulation - Drawdown ...................... 9-11
9.4 Integrated Pest Management .............................. 9-12
9.5 Alternatives Analysis .................................. 9-12
10.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION - USE OF
RODEO./ACCORD• HERBICIDES ........................... 10-1
10.1 General Description of the Aquatic Herbicides Glyphosate
(Rodeo• and Accord• Herbicides) ........................... 10-1
10.1.1 Purpose of the Products ........................... 10-2
10.1.2 Need for the Products ............................. 10-2
10.1.3 Benefits of the Products ........................... 10-3
10.1.4 History of Product Use ............................ 10-3
10.1.4.1 Registration Status in States and Canadian Provinces
That Are Neighboring New York State ............ 10-3
10.2 General Location of the Proposed Action ...................... 10-3
10.3 Potential Aquatic Macrophyte Target Species ................... 10-4
10.3.1 Phragmites (Phragmites spp.) ........................ 10-4
10.3.2 Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) ................... 10-4
10.3.3 Cattail (Typha spp.) .............................. 10-4
10.3.4 Other Potential Aquatic Macrophyte Target Species .......... 10-5
11.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING - THE RODEO./ACCORD• HERBICIDES . 11-1
11.1 General Description of New York State Aquatic Ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . 11-1
11.2 General Characterization of Aquatic Plant Communities in
New York State Waterbodies ............................. 11-2
11.2.1 Emergent and Marginal Plant Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-4
11.3 Distri~ution and Ecology of Primary Potential Aquatic Macrophyte
Target Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-4
11.3.1 Phragmites(Phragmitesspp.) ........................ 11-5
11.3.2 Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) ................... 11-8
11.3. 3 Cattail (Typha spp.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-9
11.4 Distribution and Ecology of Other Potential Aquatic Macrophyte
Target Species of Rodeo/ Accord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-11
11.5 Role of Potential Aquatic Macrophyte Target Species in Plant Communities
Within New York State Waterbodies ........................ 11-17
11.5.1 Emergent and Marginal Plant Communities ............... 11-17
11.6 General Characterization of Aquatic Vegetation Management
Objectives for the Use of Rodeo/Accord ..................... 11-18
January 10, 1995
Version 5.0 iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Section
12.0 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF IBE RODEO• AND ACCORD• HERBICIDES
AND mEm ACTIVE INGREDIENT GLYPHOSATE .............. 12-1
12.1 Description of the Rodeo• and Accord• Herbicides Formulations ........ 12-1
12.1.1 Active Ingredients ............................... 12-1
12.1.2 Inert Ingredients ................................ 12-1
12.l.3 Product Contaminants ............................. 12-1
12.2 Selection of Rodeo Versus Accord .......................... 12-2
12.3 Description of Use .................................... 12-2
12.4 Mode of Action/Efficacy ................................ 12-2
12.5 Application Considerations That Maximize Selectivity of the Rodeo•
and Accord• Herbicides ................................. 12-3
12.5.l Time of Application .............................. 12-3
12.5.2 Rate of Application .............................. 12-4
12.5.3 Method of Application ............................ 12-4
12.5.4 Species Susceptibility ............................. 12-5
12.5.5 Dilution Effects ................................ 12-5
12.6 Rodeo/ Accord Product Solubility ........................... 12-5
12.7 Surfactant ......................................... 12-5
12.7.1 Surfactant Toxicity to Aquatic Organisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-10
12.8 Fate of Glyphosate and AMPA (primary metabolite) in the
Aquatic Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-10
12.8.1 Water (aerobic and anaerobic) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-10
12.8.2 Sediment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-14
12.8.3 Plants ..................................... 12-15
12.8.4 Fish ....................................... 12-15
12.8.5 Mammals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-15
12.8.6 Bioaccumulation/Biomagnification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-15
12.9 Glyphosate Residue Tolerances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-17
12.9.1 Water ..................................... 12-17
12.9.2 Fish/Shellfish ................................. 12-17
12.9.3 Crops/Agricultural Products ........................ 12-17
13.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVffiONMENTAL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH IBE
AQUATIC HERBICIDES RODEO./ ACCORD• ................... 13-1
13. l Direct and Indirect Impacts to Non-target Species ................. 13-2
13. l. l Macrophytes and Aquatic Plant Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-3
13.1.2 Algal and Planktonic Species ........................ 13-4
13.1.3 Fish, Shellfish and Aquatic Macroinvertebrates ............. 13-6
13. 1.4 Avian Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-7
13.1.5 Mammals ................................... 13-10
13.1.6 Reptiles and Amphibians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-13
January 10, 1995
Version 5.0 v
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
Section Paie No.
13.1.7 Federal and State Listed Rare, Threatened and
Endangered Species . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-13
13.1. 8 Biodiversity Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-16
13.2 Potential for Impact from the Accumulation/Degradation of
Treated Plant Biomass on Water Quality ..................... 13-16
13.3 Impact of Residence Time of Rodeo./ Accord• Herbicides
in the Water Column ................................. 13-16
13.4 Recolonization of Non-target Plants After Control of
Target Plants is Achieved . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-17
13.5 Impacts on Coastal Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-17
14.0 POTENTIAL PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACTS OF THE
RODEO./ ACCORD• HERBICIDES ........................... 14-1
14. l Brief Overview of Glyphosate Toxicity ....................... 14-1
14.2 NYS Drinking Water Standard ............................ 14-2
15.0 MITIGATION MEASURES TO MINIMIZE ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH
IMPACTS FROM THE HERBICIDES RODEO./ACCORD• ........... 15-1
15.1 Use Controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15-1
15.2 Label Instructions .................................... 15-1
15.3 Relationship to NYS Drinking Water Standard ................... 15-2
15.4 Rulemaking Decisions ................................. 15-3
15.5 Spill Control ....................................... 15-4
15.6 Other Mitigation Considerations ............................ 15-4
15.6.1 Timing of Application ............................ 15-4
15.6.2 Application Techniques ............................. 15-5
16.0 UNAVOIDABLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IF USE OF THE
HERBICIDES RODEO/ACCORD IS IMPLEMENTED .............. 16-1
17.0 ALTERNATIVES TO RODEO/ACCORD ....................... 17-1
17.l No-Action Alternative .................................. 17-1
f7.2 Chemical Alternatives ....................... , .......... 17-2
17.2.1 Endothall .................................... 17-3
17.2.2 Diquat ...................................... 17-4
17.2.3 2,4-D ....................................... 17-4
17.2.4 Dicamba ..................................... 17-4
17.3 Non-Chemical Alternatives ............................... 17-4
17.3.1 Mechanical Alternatives ........................... 17-5
17.3 .1. 1 Harvesting (Mowing or Pulling) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-5
17.3.1.2 BenthicBarriers .......................... 17-6
January 10, 1995
Version 5.0 Vl