Fact sheets on production, use and release of priority substances in the WFD, Royal Haskoning

Isoproturon, Final draft

For official use only

Draft version: final draft (previous version: 1 in pesticides general)

Status date: 15 October 2002

Comments:

- Changed format

- Remarks of EU letter ENV B.1/PMM/JD’E/ipD (2002) 310893 (30-702) incorporated

- Measures added

SUBSTANCE: Isoproturon
I Chemical identity
CAS number:34123-59-6
Chemical group:Urea herbicide
Chemical formula:C12-H18-N2-O
Homologues:Not relevant
Synonyms:3-(4-isopropylphenyl)-1,1-dimethylurea
Technical mixtures:Not relevant
II Physical properties
Water solubility:143.8 mg/l [SRC, 2000]
Vapour pressure:2.72 x 10-5 mmHg [SRC, 2000]
Log Kow:2.84 [SRC, 2000]
III Production and use in 15 EU member states and accession states
  1. Way of production/Process description:
Crop protection production can be defined as the sequential operations of
1)manufacturing of the crop protection active ingredients (usually the organic chemical synthesis) and
2)formulating of the crop protection active ingredients (mixing and blending the crop protection active ingredients with other substances)
Crop protection active ingredient manufacturing are usually batch processes. Continuous processes do also occur however. Formulating processes are virtually all batch processes and can be divided in dry and wet processes:
Manufacturing:batch processes:- multipurpose
- single product
continuous processes
Formulation:batch processes- dry
- wet
Because of the diversity and complexity carried out in crop protection active ingredient manufacturing, no attempt has been made to describe all processes of the manufacturing of individual chemicals in detail. [EC, 1994]
  1. Fields of application:
Herbicide against annual grasses and broad leave weeds. [Eurostat, 1996]
  1. Production volume:
No data available in project database.
  1. Number of production sites and locations of production:
No data available in project database.
  1. Use volume:
Most frequently used in UK: 3,304 tonnes/y [UK department of the environment, 2001]
6.0 % of all herbicide use.[Eurostat, 1996]
  1. Relative use volumes in various applications:
No data available in project database.
  1. Existing regulation in member states or associated member states:
Isoproturon specific regulation
Currently authorised for agricultural use in almost all EU member states.
Review of authorisation under 91/414 List 1; Pending.
Pesticides general regulation
Relation between Directive 91/414 and WFD
The assessment of active substances and PPPs carried out under Directive 91/414 concerns an authorisation based on a risk assessment of plant protection products under conditions of proper use. As indicated in Article 3, paragraph 3 of Directive 91/414 “proper use shall include compliance with the conditions established in accordance with Article 4 and specified on the labelling, and the application of the principles of good plant protection practice as well as, whenever possible, the principles of integrated control”
The WFD serve as an instrument to ensure control of pollution due to various actions such as incorrect use, unauthorised use, spillages, production site discharges for priority substances (PS). Other important possible releases covered by the WFD are: point source release at production and formulation, losses and spills from irregular use, losses and spills from cleaning tools or cleaning emballage, discharge of residues, releases originating from obsolete pesticides, etc.
Not regulated by 91/414 are non agricultural practices – weed control railways, paved area in municipalities, waterways, wool and vegetable washing. Production for export cannot be forbidden under Dir 91/4141 [EUREAU, 2001]
PIC procedure
The Pre Informed Concent (PIC) procedure requires that for export the restrictions within the EU are mentioned to the client outside the EU. This is required if the restrictions are based on environmental concern.
  1. Industrial associations to be addressed:
ECPA
IV Releases to environment
  1. General way of entrance and schematic picture:
A schematic picture of release routes of isoproturon to the atmospheric and aquatic environment is added in appendix I.
Releases can be differentiated in:
-Drift after spraying
-Leaching
-Runoff
-Spills
-Evaporation and deposition [EUREAU, 2001]
-Drift
The release to surface water due to drift is extremely variable and influenced by many factors:
-Wind speed
-wind direction
-rel. humidity
-air temp.
-crop type, life stage and size (season, direction and height of spraying)
-equipment, nozzles, pressure
-distance to the surface water
-width of the surface water
  1. Atmospheric cycle:
  1. Industrial Point Sources to the air
At the production site no release < 0.1 g/l.
  1. Municipal Collective Sources to the Air:
Not relevant.
  1. Diffuse sources to air and deposition
Some drift from crop fields.
  1. Aquatic releases:
  1. Industrial Point Sources to the aquatic environment
At the production site no release < 0.1 g/l.
  1. Municipal Collective Sources to the aquatic environment:
Not relevant.
  1. Diffuse sources to water
Some run-off from crop fields.
  1. Overall Releases and Summary:
Only some drift and run-off from crop fields is reported. No release figures are given.
V Environmental fate of releases to environment
  1. Adsorption to solids (sediment, sludge, soil):
Absorption to the soil or in suspended particles can be a meaningful contribution to lowering the concentration of pesticides in the Water. [Bach et al., 2000]
Runoff
A generic value for the runoff-related loss of pesticide is usually less than 0.5 % of the applied substance [Wauchope, 1978 in Schultz, 2001]
  1. Volatilisation:
Vapour pressure: 2.72 x 10-5 mmHg (25C) [SRC, 2000]
  1. Degradation:
Absorption to the soil or in suspended particles can be a meaningful contribution to lowering the concentration of pesticides in the Water. Degradation occurs due to chemical an biological degradation. [Bach et al., 2000]
  1. Partition to compartments:
No data available in project database.
  1. Behaviour:
No data available in project database.
VI Evaluation
  1. Relevant NOSE-codes of point sources:
NOSE-codesourcesIPPC-code
107.06Use of pesticides (other than agriculture and forestry)
110.06Use of pesticides in agriculture and forestry
  1. Evaluation of emission data:
  1. Emission to water
No discharges to water by industrial sources.
Unknown amount of isoproturon releases at crop fields.
A pie-chart can not be made.
  1. Emission to air
Unknown amount of isoproturon drift at crop fields.
  1. Deposition
No data available in project database.
  1. Gaps and questions:
See VI.2.a-c
VII Measures
  1. Measures at production level:
  1. Contribution to water at production level
No data available in project database.
  1. Relevant IPPC sector, documents and available emission criteria
There is no specific set of BAT that will cover all active ingredient manufacturing sites. BAT can only be defined on a case by case basis. (EC 1994)
For the formulation the application of BAT can be more straight forward.(EC 1994)
  1. Voluntary agreements
Not relevant.
  1. Substitution
No data available in project database.
  1. Process control, modifications
No data available in project database.
  1. Effluent treatment
BAT in common waste water treatment:
- chemical oxidation
  1. Measures at use level:
  1. Contribution to water at use level
No data available in project database.
  1. Use by IPPC sectors
No data available in project database.
  1. Use by SME groups
No data available in project database.
  1. Use by consumers
Not relevant.
  1. Use in agriculture
Conservation tillage is considered to be a best management practice to reduce run-off. [Christensen et al., 1993 in Smith et al., 2001]
Although the losses to surface water could be reduced significantly the Conservation tillage could increase the leaching to groundwater because of a better porosity. [Edwards et al., 1988 in Masse et al., 1998]
Best Practices involves:
-Intensive education
-Financial rewards for reduced application
-Optimisation of spray tools
-Precision of application
-Optimisation of use to climatic and weather conditions
-tank mixing, washing equipment, waste disposal
Integrated farming implies:
-Sowing resistant varieties
-Adjusting crop rotations
-Proper timing of cultivations and drilling
-Forecasting models
-Frequent crop inspections, diagnostic kits
-Maintaining or enhancing soil organic matter content
-Minimum tillage
-Minimise structure damage by vehicles
-Managing soil water by drainage or moisture conservation
-Avoiding run off
-Avoiding spillages
-Detailed analysis of nutrient status and requirements
[EISA, Year unknown]
  1. Measures at community level:
  1. Sewage treatment
Not relevant.
  1. Waste disposal
Remediation of old stock and/or soil pollution at production sites.
  1. Incineration
Not relevant.
  1. Recycling
Not relevant.
  1. Measures at regulatory level:
  1. EU level: IPPC emission control
No data available in project database.
  1. EU level: Substitution or outphasing
No data available in project database.
  1. EU level: Limitations of use in certain applications
Currently authorised for agricultural use in almost all EU member states.
Review of authorisation under 91/414 List 1; Pending.
  1. Other regulatory and/or national policy measures
No data available in project database.

VIII Literature

  • Bach, M., A. Huber, H.G. Frede, V. Mohaupt, N. Zullei-Seibert, 2000. Schätzung de Einträge von Pflanzenschutzmitteln aus der Landwirtschaft in die Oberflächengewässer Deutschlands. Umweltbundesamt UBA-FB 99-114. Germany.
  • EC (European Commission), 1994. Techno-economic study on the reduction measures, based on best available techniques, of emissions from the pesticide manufacturing industry.
  • EISA (European Initiative for Sustainable Development in Agriculture), year unknown. A common Codex for Integrated Farming.EISA.
  • EUREAU, 2001. Keeping raw drinking water resources safe from pesticides.EUREAU.
  • Masse, L., N.K. Patni, P.Y. Jui, B.S. Clegg, 1998. Groundwater quality under conventional and no tillage: atrazine deethylatrazine and metachlor. J. Environ, Vol. 47, p. 877-883, Madison, United States.
  • Seracuse (SRC), 2000, SRC Programme MPBPWIN (v1.03) & WS-KOW (v1.33), Seracuse
  • Smith, S. Jr., R.M. Johnson, A.B. Pepperman, 2001. Formulation and tillage effects on atrazine and alachlor in shallow groundwater in upland corn production.Bull. Environ. Contam. And Toxicol., vol. 67, p. 113-121, Springer-Verlag New York Inc.
  • UK department for environment, transport and the regions, 2001, Pesticide forum Papers, England

4K0976.A0/O0031/JVS/TL1

Fact sheets on production, use and release of priority substances in the WFD, Royal Haskoning

Isoproturon, Final draft

For official use only

Appendix I, scheme of release routes for Isoproturon

4K0976.A0/O0031/JVS/TL1