The barcharts shown in Figures 2 through 7 are specific to the maximum application rate for pasture/ rangeland ( 0.0625 lbs ai/ acre). Appendix 9b contains phytotoxicity barcharts for a middle of the range application rate from the Finesse product label for preemergent spraying to wheat ( 0.012 lbs ai/ acre). Page 41 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Aerial: Coarse Spray Figure 2. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from an aerial application conducted with a coarse spray in a 10 mph wind with a 10 foot release height at an application rate of 0.0625 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The plant species listed on the bottom right axis are test species for which the registrant submitted phytotoxicity data ( the toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable so cucumber results are not shown). Page 42 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Aerial: Medium Spray Figure 3. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from an aerial application conducted with a medium spray in a 10 mph wind with a 10 foot release height at an application rate of 0.0625 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 43 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Ground: Low Boom, Medium Coarse Spray Figure 4. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from a ground boom application conducted with a medium/ coarse spray in an approximate 10 mph wind with a 2 foot release height at an application rate of 0.0625 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 44 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 w heat t omato so rg hum co rn p ea sug arb eet so yb ean rap e o nion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Ground: HIgh Boom, M e d ium Coarse Spray Figure 5. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from a ground boom application conducted with a medium/ coarse spray in an approximate 10 mph wind with a 4 foot release height at an application rate of 0.0625 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 45 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Ground: Low Boom, Medium Spray Figure 6. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from a ground boom application conducted with a medium spray in an approximate 10 mph wind with a 2 foot release height at an application rate of 0.0625 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 46 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Ground: HIgh Boom, Medium Spray Figure 7. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from a ground boom application conducted with a medium spray in an approximate 10 mph wind with a 4 foot release height at an application rate of 0.0625 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 47 of 90 Conclusions Based on the phytotoxicity study results for wheat and chlorsulfuron use sites such as pasture/ range land, certain grass species appear to be tolerant to acute chlorsulfuron effects. Some tolerant species apparently are susceptible to reproductive effects from single exposures based on product claims of inhibiting seed head formation described on some product labels. Because of lack of data, reproductive effects cannot be evaluated at this time. Available data suggest that it is unlikely that field edges and areas downwind comprised of grass would be greatly affect by acute effects of chlorsulfuron.

Figures 2 through 7 above show the phytotoxicity downwind of chlorsulfuron applications is expected to vary based on a number of parameter including application method ( ground boom versus aerial), the droplet size spectrum, and the release height.

Figures 2 through 7 show effects ( EC x effect levels) by distance, but do not show at what distance plants are likely to be killed outright. When plants are tested by pesticide companies for efficacy generally a 70% effect level is considered to be a threshold for lethal effects to a healthy weed ( Pallett 2003). Thus the EC 70 effect level can serve as estimate of when non target plants are expected to have a high likelihood of rapid death similar to the desired effect for weed species.

Aerial Applications For aerial applications, medium and coarse sprays are apparently the most commonly used sprays by aerial applicators in Washington and Oregon  see Appendix 9b. Medium spray is expected to produce higher drift levels than coarse sprays resulting in greater phytotoxicity at greater downwind distances. Using the EC 70 as an estimate for an exposure that would lead to rapid death, Figure 3 shows that 3 of the 9 tested species downwind of an application with a medium spray would be expected to be killed soon after application in an area stretching from the edge of the treated field to a distance exceeding 1000 feet downwind from the treatment area. Using a coarse spray, Figure 2 shows that 2 of the 9 tested species would be expected to be killed from the edge of the field to a distance exceeding 1000 feet downwind from the treatment area. Aerial applications with a medium spray are expected to affect at least 8 of the 9 species tested at the EC 20 level or above for shoot weight greater than 1000 feet downwind of applications. In other words, a 20% or more reduction in shoot weight would be expected for at least 8 of 9 tested species for over 1000 feet downwind of applications under the assumed conditions. With a coarse spray, under the same conditions, at least 8 of the 9 tested species are expected to be affected at the EC 10 level 1000 feet or more downwind ( i. e. a 10% reduction in shoot weight in an areas stretching for more than 1000 feet downwind).

Ground boom Applications In all instances the ground boom applications modeled resulted in lower drift deposition levels and downwind phytotoxicity than modeled aerial applications. Ground boom deposition values were affected by both droplet size and release height. Spray drift and predicted off target effects can be Page 48 of 90 reduced by lowering the release height and/ or increasing spray droplet size.

Under the lowest ground boom drift conditions allowed by AgDRIFT 2.01 ( 2 foot boom height and medium/ coarse spray), 5 of 9 tested species would be expected to be rapidly killed from 10 to 85 feet downwind the treated area ( Fig. 4). Under the same conditions, 5 of the 9 tested species would be affected at the EC 10 level in the area stretching for the edge of the field to beyond 1000 feet downwind.

Under the highest ground boom drift conditions ( 4 foot boom and medium spray), plant species would be expected to be killed in the area that stretches from 0 to 10 feet ( for 8 of 9 tested plants) and 0 to 500 feet ( for the most sensitive tested plant) downwind of the treated field ( Fig. 7). Under the same conditions, 6 7 of the 10 tested species are expected to be affected at the EC 10 level at distances from 0 to beyond 1000 feet downwind. Tested species are expected to be affected at the 90% effect level at 10 feet ( 5 of 9 species) to 150 feet ( 1 of 9 species) downwind.

Risk Characterization Chlorsulfuron is a selective herbicide. Some species, such as certain grasses, are relatively tolerant to chlorsulfuron while other species are sensitive to acute effects and reproductive effects. If certain plants in a plant community consisting of many species are consistently selected against through inhibiting growth, reducing reproductive success, or being killed, the sensitive plant species are likely to be removed from the community. Plants under selective pressure are not able to compete as successfully with other plants for resources such as light and water. Thus with pressure on a particular group of species other species would be likely displace the sensitive species and become more common. Changes in the species composition in the boundaries of herbicide treated fields have been noted in the literature ( Kleijn and Snoeijing 1997, Jobin et al 1997). Given the selectivity of chlorsulfuron and the drift potential associated with spray application methods, it is expected that chlorsulfuron is applying selective pressure against certain species downwind of application areas. The magnitude of the selective pressure is expected to depend on the level of drift as well as the sensitivity of exposed species.

The results of this analysis suggest that placing restrictions on droplet size for aerial applications and droplet size and boom height for ground boom application may reduce risks associated with chlorsulfuron applications. Typical values for both wind speed and release height are likely to vary geographically . Aerial applicators balance low release heights with flight safety. Aerial applicators will generally use higher release heights in hilly areas or fields with tall windbreaks at their boundaries. For ground boom applications, high release heights are used to avoid having the ends of the spray boom hitting the ground in uneven fields or when relatively high sprayer speed is desired. Ground boom release height can vary from less than 2 feet to more than 6 feet above the ground or crop canopy. Average wind speed for chlorsulfuron use areas vary with location with higher wind speed occurring in plains states. Table 15 shows wind speeds ranges for some representative areas. Page 49 of 90 Table 15. Wind speeds during the windiest month of the year for cities in high agricultural chlorsulfuron use areas.

City, State Approximate location in state Month Wind speed ( mph)

75th Percentile 50th Percentile 25th Percentile Yakima, WA south central April 10 6 4.5 Pendleton, OR northwestern April 10.5 6 4.5 North Platte, NE central southwestern April 14 11 7 More wind speed data for the above locations are in Appendix 9c.

Uncertainty and Potential Refinement of Risk Estimates A number of uncertainties exist in this assessment of potential effects of chlorsulfuron spray drift to plants. With additional information it may be possible to further refine this assessment.

1) The representativeness of tested species for non target plant species in chlorsulfuron use areas. In chlorsulfuron use areas woody and other perennial species are exposed to spray drift but their sensitivity to chlorsulfuron is uncertain. Toxicity data on a wider range of plants could be used to reduce uncertainty as to the potential effects of chlorsulfuron on perennial and woody species at field edges and farther downwind.

2) The duration of exposure. Laboratory data is based on single exposures to plants with observation continuing for two weeks after dosing. Non target plants in chlorsulfuron use areas may be exposed to multiple pulses of chlorsulfuron. Data on the effect of repeat exposures at environmentally relevant levels could be used to determine the potential impacts to plants that are exposed to drift from multiple applications.

3) The toxic endpoint measured. Some chlorsulfuron product labels and research on non target plants show chlorsulfuron negatively affects plant reproduction. Data defining what exposure levels at various developmental stages result in impaired plant reproduction could be used for assessing potential impacts of spray drift on plant reproduction.

4) The adequacy of laboratory spraying treatments in representing spray drift far from field boundaries. Plants in laboratory studies are exposed to herbicide in volumes of carrier that are adequate to cover the test plants. Plants exposed to spray drift away from field boundaries would contact the same amounts of herbicides tested in the laboratory but in much lower volumes of carrier. Plants are exposed to spray drift away far away from the field edge in discrete spots where droplets impact the plant foliage opposed to the diffuse coating used in lab studies. The effect of small concentrated exposures relative to diffuse exposure is uncertain. Data on the effect of exposure volume on phytotoxicity could be used to refine effect level estimates. Page 50 of 90 4. ENDANGERED/ THREATENED SPECIES Available data indicate that chlorsulfuron does not exceed the LOC for endangered/ threatened terrestrial or aquatic animals. However, the screening level risk assessment for endangered species indicates that chlorsulfuron does exceed the endangered species level of concern for endangered and threatened terrestrial and vascular aquatic plants. The endangered species assessment on all use sites will be refined using data submitted as a result of this RED. Further analysis regarding the overlap of individual species with each use site is required prior to determining the likelihood of potential impact to listed species. After the new data are reviewed, the risk assessment will be refined and exceedances of levels of concern for high risks to endangered species will be addressed.

Chlorsulfuron was included in the small grains cluster consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service ( FWS) in 1983. As chlorsulfuron's risks were determined to be a " no effect" determination with regard to aquatic and terrestrial animals, Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives and Reasonable and Prudent Measures were not provided for this pesticide. Risks to endangered plants were not considered in this Biological Opinion.

The current risk assessment does not evaluate risk from direct application to plants. However, given that endangered plant risk quotients for spray drift alone from aerial applications range from 17.5 thousand to 68 thousand, it is likely that nontarget plants receiving direct applications would be even more vulnerable to adverse effects.

The Office of Pesticide Programs recently published on its web site ( http:// www. epa. gov/ espp/ consultation/ index. html), an overview of our ecological risk assessment process for threatened and endangered species. Because of the timing of that document and the fact that it still may undergo slight changes, the process described therein was not fully utilized for this screening level endangered species risk assessment. The Agency will reassess the potential risk of chlorsulfuron use to endangered species using the new process at a later date and consult as appropriate with the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service at that time. Page 51 of 90 5.0 REFERENCES Andersen, S. A., Hertz, P. B., Holst, T, Bossi, Rosanna, Jacobsen, C. S., ( 2001) Mineralization studies of 14C labeled metsulfuron methyl, tribenuron methyl, chlorsulfuron and thifensulfuronmethyl in one Danish soil and groundwater sediment profile. Chemosphere 45, 775 782.

Battaglin, W. A., Furlon, E. T., Burkhardt, M. R., and Peter, C. J. ( 2000) Occurrence of Sulfonylurea, Sulfonamide, Imidazolinone, and Other Herbicides in Rivers, Reservoirs, and Ground Water in the Midwestern United States, 1998. The Science of the Total Environment, 248( 2 3), 123 133.

Berger, B and Wolfe, N. L. ( 1996) Hydrolysis and Biodegradation of Sulfonylurea Herbicides in Aqueous Buffers and Anaerobic Water Sediment Systems: Assessing Fate Pathways using Molecular Descriptors, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 15( 9), 1500 1507.

Beyer, E. M., M. E. Duffy, J. V. Hay and D. D Schlueter. 1988 Sulfonylurea herbicides. In P. C. Kearny and D. D. Kaufman, eds., Herbicides Chemistry, Degradation , and Mode of Action. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA, pp. 117 189.

Bhatti, M. A., K. Al Khatib, A. S. Felsot, R. Parker and S. Kadir 1995. Effects of Simulated Chlorsulfuron Drift on Fruit Yield and Quality of Sweet Cherries ( Prunus Avium L.). Environ. Tox. Chem. Vol 14 No. 3, pp. 537 544.

Bird, S. L. 1992. A Compilation of Aerial Spray Drift Data. Abstracts, 13th Annual Meeting, Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. Cincinnati, OH, USA, November 8 12, pp. 27 Bird, S. L., D. M. Esterly, and S. G. Perry. 1996. Off Target Deposition of Pesticides from Agricultural Aerial Spray Applications. J. Environ. Qual. 25: 1095 1104.

Correll, D. L., Wu, T. L., 1982. Atrazine Toxicity to Submerged Vascular Plants in Simulated Estuarine Microcosms. Aqu. Bot. 14, pp. 151 158.

Coyner, A., G. Gupta, and T. Jones 2000. Effect of Chlorsulfuron on Growth of Submerged Aquatic Macrophyte. Potamogeton pectinatus ( Sago Pondweed). Environ. Pollut. 111, pp 453 455.

Dupont Vegetation Management. 2002. Noxious/ Selective Weed Control, Escort XP herbicide and Telar DF Herbicide. 25 pp.

Felsot, AS, MA Bhatti, GI Mink, and G Reisenauer. 1996. Biomonitoring with Sentinel Plants to Assess Exposure of Nontarget Crops to Atmospheric Deposition of Herbicides. Environmental Toxicology and Chemisty. 15( 4): 452 459.

Ferenc, SA. ( Editor). Impacts of Low Dose High Potency Herbicides on Nontarget and Unintended Page 52 of 90 Plant Species. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 2001.

Fletcher, J. S. 1991. Horse Heaven Hills/ Badger Canyon, A case Study of Alleged Pesticide Drift Damage. Presentation at the 84th Annual Meeting & Exhibition, Vancouver, British Columbia 91 150.7 Fletcher J. S., T. G. Pfleeger and H. C. Ratsch 1993. Potential Environmental Risks Associated with the New Sulfonylurea Herbicides. Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol 27, No 10, pp. 2250 2252.

Fletcher J. S., T. G. Pfleeger and H. C. Ratsch 1995. Chlorsulfuron Influence on Garden Pea Reproduction. Physiologia Plantarum 94: pp 261 267.

Fletcher J. S., T. G. Pfleeger, H. C. Ratsch and R. Hayes 1996. Potential Impacts of Low Levels of Chlorsulfuron and Other Herbicides on Growth and Yields of Non target Plants. Environ, Tox. and Chem. Vol. 15, No. 7. pp 1189 1196.

Hewitt, A. J., D. R. Johnson, J. D. Fish, C. G. Hermansky, and D. L. Valcore. 2002. Development of the Spray Drift Task Force Database for Aerial Applications. Environmental Toxicology and Chemisty. 21( 3): 648 358.

Hurly, L. M., 1994. Field Guide to the Submerged Aquatic Vegetation of Chesapeake Bay. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Annapolis, MD.

Jobin, B., C Boutin, and JL DesGranges. 1997. Effects of agricultural practices on the flora of hedgerows and woodland edges in southern Quebec. Can J Plant Sci 77: 293 299.

Kleijn, D., and GI Snoeijing. 1997. Field boundary vegetation and the effects of agrochemical drift: botanical change caused by low levels of herbicide and fertilizer. Journal of Applied Ecology 34: 1413 1425.

Pallett, K. Efficacy testing processes in Industry: relevance for NTTP assessment. Efficacy Data Workshop. August 20, 2003. Office of Pesticide Programs, Crystal City, Arlington, VA.

Teske, M. E., S. L. Bird, D. M. Esterly, T. B. Curbishley, S. L. Ray, and S. G. Perry. AgDRIFT: A Model for Estimating Near Field Spray Drift from Aerial Applications. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 21( 3) 659 671.

Weed Science Society of America. 1989. Herbicide Handbook. Published by the Weed Science Society of America. Champaign, IL.

Zahnow, E. W. 1982. Analysis of the Herbicide Chlorsulfuron in Soil by Liquid Chromatography. J. Agric. Food Chem. 30: 854 857. Page 53 of 90 APPENDIX 1. PRZM and EXAMS input files PRZM input for Florida Turf FL 8/ 09/ 2001 Osceola County; Representation of the Lake Kissimmee/ Indian River Region; MLRA 156A; Metfile: W12834. dvf [ Daytona Beach] ( old: Met156A. met) *** Record 3: 0.78 0 0 25 1 3 *** Record 6  ERFLAG 4 *** Record 7: 0.04 0.303 1 172.8 4 2 600 *** Record 8 1 *** Record 9 1 0.1 10 100 3 74 74 74 0 5 *** Record 9a d 1 25 0101 1601 0102 1602 0103 1603 0104 1604 0105 1605 0106 1606 0107 1507 1607 0108 .023 .026 .030 .035 .042 .050 .056 .060 .063 .068 .074 .079 .082 .125 .148 .189 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 1608 0109 1609 0110 1610 0111 1611 0112 1612 .229 .265 .294 .314 .326 .017 .018 .019 .021 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 .023 *** Record 10  NCPDS, the number of cropping periods 30 *** Record 11 010261 150261 151261 1 010262 150262 151262 1 010263 150263 151263 1 010264 150264 151264 1 010265 150265 151265 1 010266 150266 151266 1 010267 150267 151267 1 010268 150268 151268 1 010269 150269 151269 1 010270 150270 151270 1 010271 150271 151271 1 010272 150272 151272 1 010273 150273 151273 1 010274 150274 151274 1 010275 150275 151275 1 010276 150276 151276 1 010277 150277 151277 1 010278 150278 151278 1 010279 150279 151279 1 010280 150280 151280 1 010281 150281 151281 1 010282 150282 151282 1 010283 150283 151283 1 010284 150284 151284 1 010285 150285 151285 1 010286 150286 151286 1 010287 150287 151287 1 010288 150288 151288 1 010289 150289 151289 1 010290 150290 151290 1 *** Record 12  PTITLE chlor  1 applications @ 0.0625 kg/ ha *** Record 13 30 1 0 0 *** Record 15  PSTNAM chlor *** Record 16 010461 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010462 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010463 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010464 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010465 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 Page 54 of 90 010466 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010467 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010468 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010469 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010470 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010471 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010472 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010473 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010474 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010475 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010476 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010477 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010478 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010479 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010480 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010481 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010482 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010483 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010484 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010485 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010486 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010487 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010488 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010489 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010490 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 *** Record 17 0 1 0 *** Record 18 0 0 0.5 *** Record 19  STITLE Adamsville Sand; Hydrologic Group C *** Record 20 102 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 *** Record 26 0 0 0 *** Record 30 4 36 *** Record 33 4 1 2 0.37 0.47 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 0.1 0.47 0.27 7.5 0 2 10 1.44 0.086 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 0.1 0.086 0.036 0.58 0 3 10 1.44 0.086 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 0.1 0.086 0.036 0.58 0 4 80 1.58 0.03 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 5 0.03 0.023 0.116 0 *** Record 40 0 YEAR 10 YEAR 10 YEAR 10 1 1 1  7 YEAR PRCP TCUM 0 0 RUNF TCUM 0 0 INFL TCUM 1 1 ESLS TCUM 0 0 1.0E3 RFLX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 EFLX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 RZFX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 PRZM input for Pennsylvania Turf PA Turf; 9/ 28/ 01 " York Co, MLRA 148; Metfile: W14737. dvf ( old: Met148. met), *** Record 3: Page 55 of 90 0.76 0.3 0 12.5 1 3 *** Record 6  ERFLAG 4 *** Record 7: 0.33 0.123 1 172.8 3 12 600 *** Record 8 1 *** Record 9 1 0.1 10 100 3 74 74 74 0 5 *** Record 9a d 1 26 0101 1601 0102 1602 0103 1503 1603 0104 1604 0105 1605 0106 1506 1606 0107 1607 .015 .015 .015 .015 .015 .017 .012 .006 .002 .007 .004 .002 .007 .005 .003 .001 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 0108 1608 0109 1609 0110 1610 0111 1611 0112 1612 .005 .003 .003 .005 .009 .013 .013 .014 .014 .015 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 .110 *** Record 10  NCPDS, the number of cropping periods 30 *** Record 11 010461 150461 011161 1 010462 150462 011162 1 010463 150463 011163 1 010464 150464 011164 1 010465 150465 011165 1 010466 150466 011166 1 010467 150467 011167 1 010468 150468 011168 1 010469 150469 011169 1 010470 150470 011170 1 010471 150471 011171 1 010472 150472 011172 1 010473 150473 011173 1 010474 150474 011174 1 010475 150475 011175 1 010476 150476 011176 1 010477 150477 011177 1 010478 150478 011178 1 010479 150479 011179 1 010480 150480 011180 1 010481 150481 011181 1 010482 150482 011182 1 010483 150483 011183 1 010484 150484 011184 1 010485 150485 011185 1 010486 150486 011186 1 010487 150487 011187 1 010488 150488 011188 1 010489 150489 011189 1 010490 150490 011190 1 *** Record 12  PTITLE chlor  1 applications @ 0.0625 kg/ ha *** Record 13 30 1 0 0 *** Record 15  PSTNAM chlor *** Record 16 010461 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010462 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010463 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010464 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010465 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010466 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010467 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010468 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010469 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010470 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010471 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010472 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010473 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010474 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010475 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 Page 56 of 90 010476 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010477 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010478 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010479 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010480 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010481 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010482 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010483 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010484 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010485 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010486 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010487 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010488 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010489 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 010490 0 2 0.00.0625 0.95 0.16 *** Record 17 0 1 0 *** Record 18 0 0 0.5 *** Record 19  STITLE " Glenville, Silt Loam, HYDG: C" *** Record 20 102 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 *** Record 26 0 0 0 *** Record 30 4 36 *** Record 33 4 1 2 0.37 0.47 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 0.1 0.47 0.27 7.5 0 2 10 1.4 0.254 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 0.1 0.254 0.094 1.74 0 3 12 1.4 0.254 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 2 0.254 0.094 1.74 0 4 78 1.8 0.201 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 2 0.201 0.121 0.174 0 *** Record 40 0 YEAR 10 YEAR 10 YEAR 10 1 1 1  7 YEAR PRCP TCUM 0 0 RUNF TCUM 0 0 INFL TCUM 1 1 ESLS TCUM 0 0 1.0E3 RFLX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 EFLX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 RZFX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 Page 57 of 90 PRZM input for North Dakota Wheat North Dakota Spring Wheat MLRA F56 Cass County Bearden silty clay loam " Red River Valley of the North MLRA 56 MN, ND, SD 1948 1983; Metfile: W14914. dvf ( old: Met56. met), *** Record 3: 0.75 0.5 0 12 1 1 *** Record 6  ERFLAG 4 *** Record 7: 0.28 0.17 1 172.8 3 1.5 600 *** Record 8 1 *** Record 9 1 0.1 22 100 1 91 85 87 0 100 *** Record 9a d 1 28 0101 1601 0102 1602 0103 1603 0104 1604 2004 0105 0505 1605 0106 1606 0107 1607 .583 .581 .579 .577 .574 .574 .575 .575 .611 .617 .610 .562 .468 .268 .092 .064 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 0108 0508 1008 1608 0109 1609 0110 1610 0111 1611 0112 1612 .065 .036 .098 .110 .126 .139 .152 .162 .168 .170 .171 .171 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 *** Record 10  NCPDS, the number of cropping periods 30 *** Record 11 150561 250761 050861 1 150562 250762 050862 1 150563 250763 050863 1 150564 250764 050864 1 150565 250765 050865 1 150566 250766 050866 1 150567 250767 050867 1 150568 250768 050868 1 150569 250769 050869 1 150570 250770 050870 1 150571 250771 050871 1 150572 250772 050872 1 150573 250773 050873 1 150574 250774 050874 1 150575 250775 050875 1 150576 250776 050876 1 150577 250777 050877 1 150578 250778 050878 1 150579 250779 050879 1 150580 250780 050880 1 150581 250781 050881 1 150582 250782 050882 1 150583 250783 050883 1 150584 250784 050884 1 150585 250785 050885 1 150586 250786 050886 1 150587 250787 050887 1 150588 250788 050888 1 150589 250789 050889 1 150590 250790 050890 1 *** Record 12  PTITLE chlor  1 applications @ 0.023 kg/ ha *** Record 13 30 1 0 0 *** Record 15  PSTNAM chlor *** Record 16 050161 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050162 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050163 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050164 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050165 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050166 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050167 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050168 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050169 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050170 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 Page 58 of 90 050171 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050172 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050173 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050174 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050175 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050176 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050177 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050178 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050179 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050180 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050181 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050182 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050183 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050184 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050185 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050186 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050187 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050188 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050189 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 050190 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 *** Record 17 0 1 0 *** Record 18 0 0 0.5 *** Record 19  STITLE Bearden silty clay loam; HTDG: C *** Record 20 100 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 *** Record 26 0 0 0 *** Record 30 4 36 *** Record 33 3 1 10 1.4 0.377 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 0.1 0.377 0.207 1.74 0 2 52 1.5 0.292 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 1 0.292 0.132 0.116 0 3 38 1.8 0.285 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 2 0.285 0.125 0.058 0 *** Record 40 0 YEAR 10 YEAR 10 YEAR 10 1 1 1  7 YEAR PRCP TCUM 0 0 RUNF TCUM 0 0 INFL TCUM 1 1 ESLS TCUM 0 0 1.0E3 RFLX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 EFLX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 RZFX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 Page 59 of 90 PRZM input for Texas Wheat TX wheat; 8/ 13/ 2001 " Winter wheat in Blacklands prairie section of Texas grown on benchmark Crockett soil. HGRP: D; MLRA 87; Metfile: W13958. dvf ( old: Met87. met), Waco met station " *** Record 3: 0.71 0.5 0 10 1 3 *** Record 6  ERFLAG 4 *** Record 7: 0.43 0.103 1 172.8 1 3 600 *** Record 8 1 *** Record 9 1 0.1 110 99 3 94 87 88 0 90 *** Record 9a d 1 28 0101 1601 0102 1602 0103 1603 0104 1604 0105 1605 0106 1606 2006 0107 1607 0108 .125 .111 .101 .094 .074 .043 .044 .046 .080 .083 .086 .087 .026 .027 .029 .031 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 1608 0109 1009 1609 2009 2509 0110 1610 0111 1611 0112 1612 .033 .035 .110 .119 .266 .318 .318 .293 .218 .187 .163 .136 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 .014 *** Record 10  NCPDS, the number of cropping periods 30 *** Record 11 101061 300461 170661 1 101062 300462 170662 1 101063 300463 170663 1 101064 300464 170664 1 101065 300465 170665 1 101066 300466 170666 1 101067 300467 170667 1 101068 300468 170668 1 101069 300469 170669 1 101070 300470 170670 1 101071 300471 170671 1 101072 300472 170672 1 101073 300473 170673 1 101074 300474 170674 1 101075 300475 170675 1 101076 300476 170676 1 101077 300477 170677 1 101078 300478 170678 1 101079 300479 170679 1 101080 300480 170680 1 101081 300481 170681 1 101082 300482 170682 1 101083 300483 170683 1 101084 300484 170684 1 101085 300485 170685 1 101086 300486 170686 1 101087 300487 170687 1 101088 300488 170688 1 101089 300489 170689 1 101090 300490 170690 1 *** Record 12  PTITLE chlor  1 applications @ 0.023 kg/ ha *** Record 13 30 1 0 0 *** Record 15  PSTNAM chlor *** Record 16 150961 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150962 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150963 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150964 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150965 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150966 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150967 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150968 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150969 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 Page 60 of 90 150970 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150971 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150972 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150973 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150974 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150975 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150976 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150977 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150978 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150979 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150980 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150981 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150982 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150983 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150984 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150985 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150986 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150987 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150988 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150989 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 150990 0 2 0.0 0.023 0.95 0.16 *** Record 17 0 1 0 *** Record 18 0 0 0.5 *** Record 19  STITLE " Crockett fine sandy loam  Fine, smectic, thermic Udertic Paleustalf " *** Record 20 110 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 *** Record 26 0 0 0 *** Record 30 4 36 *** Record 33 3 1 10 1.6 0.17 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 0.1 0.17 0.06 1.16 0 2 10 1.6 0.17 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 10 0.17 0.06 1.16 0 3 90 1.7 0.247 0 0 0 0.0021660.002166 0 10 0.247 0.127 0.29 0 *** Record 40 0 YEAR 10 YEAR 10 YEAR 10 1 1 1  7 YEAR PRCP TCUM 0 0 RUNF TCUM 0 0 INFL TCUM 1 1 ESLS TCUM 0 0 1.0E3 RFLX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 EFLX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 RZFX TCUM 0 0 1.0E5 Page 61 of 90 Typical EXAMS input file ( index reservoir shown here, farm pond differs only by setting STFLO to zero)

set mode = 3 set outfil( 4) to Y set outfil( 2) to N READ ENV C:\ models\ INPUTS\ EXAMSenv\ ir298. exv READ MET C:\ models\ INPUTS\ Metfiles\ w12834. dvf SET YEAR1 = 1961 recall chem 1 chemical name is chlor set MWT( 1) = 357.8 set VAPR( 1) = 4.6e 6 set SOL( 1,1) = 31800 set KOC( 1) = 36 set QTBAS(*, 1,1) = 2 set QTBAW(*, 1,1) = 2 READ PRZM P2E C1. D61 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 RUN READ PRZM P2E C1. D62 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D63 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D64 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D65 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D66 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D67 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D68 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 Page 62 of 90 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D69 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D70 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D71 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D72 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D73 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D74 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D75 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D76 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D77 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D78 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE Page 63 of 90 READ PRZM P2E C1. D79 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D80 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D81 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D82 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D83 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D84 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D85 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D86 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D87 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D88 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D89 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 Page 64 of 90 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE READ PRZM P2E C1. D90 SET STFLO( 1,*) = 22.2104590672629 set EVAP(*,*) = 0.0 set NPSFL(*,*)= 0.0 set NPSED(*,*)= 0.0 set RAIN(*) = 0.0 CONTINUE QUIT Page 65 of 90 APPENDIX 2. SUMMARY OF CHLORSULFURON TOXICITY TESTS FOR TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ANIMALS.

Study Type (% Active Ingredient) Species Toxicity Value ( ai) Toxicity Category MRID/ Acc.# Author ( Year) Study Classification Dietary LC 50 Mallard duck ( Anus platyrhynchos) LC 50> 5,000 ppm Practically nontoxic 099462 ( 1979) Core Dietary LC 50 Northern bobwhite ( Colinus virginianus) LC 50 > 5,000 ppm Practically nontoxic 099462 ( 1979) Invalid 1 Acute Oral LD 50 Northern bobwhite ( Colinus virginianus) LD 50> 5,000 mg/ kg Practically nontoxic 099462 ( 1980) Core Acute Oral LD 50 Mallard duck ( Anus platyrhynchos) LD 50> 5,000 mg/ kg Practically nontoxic 099462 ( 1980) Core Avian Reproduction Mallard duck ( Anus platyrhynchos) NOAEL > 961 ppm LOAEL > 961 ppm N/ A 42634002 Beavers, J. B. et al. ( 1992) Core Avian Reproduction Northern bobwhite ( Colinus virginianus) NOAEL = 174 ppm LOAEL = 961 ppm N/ A 42634001 Beavers, J. B. et al. ( 1992) Core Rat two generation reproduction Laboratory rat NOAEL = 35 mg/ kg/ day N/ A 40089316 N/ A Rat acute oral Laboratory rat LD 50 = 5.5 g/ kg N/ A 00031406 N/ A Acute LC 50 Blue gill sunfish LC 50 > 300 ppm practically nontoxic 099462 Core Acute LC 50 Channel catfish LC 50 > 50 ppm Practically nontoxic 099462 Core Acute LC 50 Fathead minnow LC 50 > 300 ppm Practically nontoxic 099462 Core Acute LC 50 Rainbow trout LC 50 > 250 ppm Practically nontoxic 099462 Core Acute LC 50 Daphnia magna LC 50 > 370 ppm Practically nontoxic 099462 Core Early life stage Rainbow trout NOAEC = 32 mg/ l N/ A 419764 Pierson, K. B. ( 1991) Core Life cycle Daphnia magna NOAEC = 20 mg/ l N/ A 419764 08 Hutton, D. G. ( 1989) Supplemental 3 Acute LC 50 Mysid ( Mysidopsis b LC 50 = 89 mg/ l slightly 419764 02 Core Acute LC 50 Sheepshead minnow ( Cyprinodon LC 50 > 980 mg/ l practically nontoxic 419764 01 Ward, T. J. and R. L. Core Embryo larvae Eastern Oyster EC 50 = 376 mg/ l practically 419764 03 Supplemental 4 Embryo larvae Eastern Oyster ( Crassostrea virginica EC 50 = 384 ppm Practically nontoxic 423286 01 Ward, T. J. and R. L. Boeri ( 1991) Core Acute contact Honey bees LD 50 > 25 ug/ bee Practically 421299 02 Core Page 66 of 90 1/ Due to mortality in the controls, this study is invalid and does not fulfil test guideline requirements. 2/ Although the reproduction study is unacceptable, a NOAEL was determined for the effect of concern ( still births) and the LOAEL was 356 mg/ kg/ day. Reproductive toxicity was observed in both generations/ both litters, as evidenced by decreased fertility of the dams. No parental toxicity was observed.

3/ This study does not fulfill test guidelines requirements. It is repairable if additional information on the solvent control and dilution water is submitted.

4/ This study does not fulfill test guideline requirements because mortality data were not provided in the report. Page 67 of 90 APPENDIX 3. ESTIMATED ENVIRONMENTAL CONCENTRATIONS ON AVIAN AND MAMMALIAN FOOD ITEMS ( ppm) FOLLOWING A SINGLE APPLICATION AT 1 LB a. i./ A Food Items EEC ( ppm) Predicted Maximum Residue1 EEC ( ppm) Predicted Mean Residue1 Short grass 240 85 Tall grass 110 36 Broadleaf/ forage plants and small insects 135 45 Fruits, pods, seeds, and large insects 15 7 1 Predicted maximum and mean residues are for a 1 lb ai/ a application rate and are based on Hoerger and Kenaga ( 1972) as modified by Fletcher et al. ( 1994). Page 68 of 90 APPENDIX 4. NON TARGET TERRESTRIAL PLANT SEEDLING EMERGENCE TOXICITY ( TIER II) FOR 98.2% CHLORSULFURON WITH BUFFER AND VALENT X 77 SURFACTANT IN SOME SOLUTIONS.

Species % ai Endpoints NOAEL / EC 25 ( lbs ai/ A) MRID No. Author/ Year Study Classification Cucumber 98.2 Plant height Emergence 0.000035 / 0.00025 > 0.00439 / ND 42587201 McKelvey, R. A., and Kuratle, H. 1992 Supplemental Pea Plant height Emergence 0.000035 / 0.000113 0.000176 / 0.000281 Rape Plant height Emergence 0.000035 / 0.000113 > 0.00439 / ND Soybean Plant height Emergence 0.000875 / 0.0015 > 0.00439 / ND Sugarbeet * Plant height Emergence 0.0000068 / 0.000038 0.000176 / 0.000281 Tomato Plant height Emergence 0.0000351 / 0.000169 > 0.02194 / ND Corn Plant height Emergence < 0.00035 / 0.0003 0.00439 / 0.05 Onion Plant height Emergence 0.000035 / 0.000163 0.000035 / 0.000413 Sorgum Plant height Emergence 0.000163 / 0.00138 > 0.0219 / ND * Used in RQ calculations Page 69 of 90 APPENDIX 5. NON TARGET TERRESTRIAL PLANT VEGETATIVE VIGOR TOXICITY ( TIER II) FOR 98.2% CHLORSULFURON WITH BUFFER AND VALENT X 77 SURFACTANT IN SOME SOLUTIONS.

Species % ai Endpoints NOAEL / EC 25 ( lbs ai/ A) MRID No. Author/ Year Study Classification Cucumber 98.2 Plant height Shoot weight 0.000225 / 0.001875 0.001125 / 0.006125 42587201 McKelvey, R. A., and Kuratle, H. 1992 Supplemental Pea Plant height Shoot weight 00.00045 / 0.00025 0.000045 / 0.000181 Rape Plant height Shoot weight 0.000045 / 0.0001 0.0000087 / 0.0002 Soybean Plant height Shoot weight 0.000045 / 0.0000443 0.0000087 / 0.0000193 Sugarbeet Plant height Shoot weight 0.0000087 / 0.0002062 0.0000087 / 0.0000268 Tomato Plant height Shoot weight 0.000045 / 0.002 0.000045 / 0.0005562 Corn Plant height Shoot weight 0.000225 / 0.000625 0.000225 / 0.0001937 Onion Plant height Shoot weight * 0.0000087 / 0.0000368 0.0000087 / 0.0000044 Sorgum Plant height Shoot weight 0.000225 / 0.002625 < 0.000720 / 0.0001562 Wheat Plant height Shoot weight 0.001125 / 0.05563 0.02813 / 0.005813 * The most sensitive parameter in the vegetative vigor toxicity study was the sugarbeet root weight ( EC05 = 1.94 x 10 8 lbs ai/ acre ). However, the EC05 for onion shoot weight ( 4.56 x 10 8 lbs ai/ acre) was used in the risk assessment for endangered species. Page 70 of 90 APPENDIX 6. RQ CALCULATIONS FOR SURFACE AND GROUNDWATER IRRIGATION To calculate risk quotients for plants when groundwater contaminated by chlorsulfuron is applied to crops, the following method was used.

If a one acre field is irrigated with one inch of water containing 1.6 ppb chlorsulfuron, the effective mass of chlorsulfuron applied to the field is 0.00036 lbs chlorsulfuron/ acre, calculated as follows:

1.6 µ g chlorsulfuron x 1 kg x 1 # x 1 Acre x 4.356 x 104 ft2 x 1 ft x 28.32 Liter Liter 109 µ g 0.4536 kg Acre 12 ft3 Therefore, the risk quotients for sensitive crops within the field that is irrigated with groundwater containing 1.6 ppb chlorsulfuron and surface water containing 6.0 ppb are calculated as follows:

Ground water: EEC/ EC 25 for vegetative vigor = 0.00036 lbs ai/ acre = 91 0.000004 lbs ai/ acre Surface water: EEC/ EC 25 for vegetative vigor = 0.00136 lbs ai/ acre = 341 0.000004 lbs ai/ acre Page 71 of 90 APPENDIX 7. FIRST ORDER DEGRADATION FOR CHLORSULFURON Simulation 1.

Initial test concentration: 0.00096 ( Based on a single 0.16 lbs ai/ acre ground application for small grains, 5% drift and one acre to one acre runoff)

Soil dissipation Half life: 60 days Length of simulation: 365 days Day 0 = 0.00096 Day 100 = 3.02E 04 Day 200 = 9.52E 05 Day 298 = 3.11E 05 Day 300 = 3.0E 05 Day 365 = 1.42E 05 Maximum residue = 9.6E 04 Average residue = 2.25E 04 Day 298 EEC = 0.000031 and the EC 25 = 0.0000306 ( seedling emergence) Day 298 RQ = 1.0 Therefore, the LOC is exceeded for 298 days.

Simulation 2.

Initial test concentration: 0.00816 ( Based on a single 0.16 lbs ai/ acre application for small grains, 5% drift and ten acre to one acre runoff to wetlands)

Soil dissipation Half life: 60 days; Length of simulation: 365 days Day 0 = 8.16E 03 Day 100 = 2.57E 03 Day 200 = 8.10E 04 Day 300 = 2.55E 04 Day 365 = 1.20E 04 Maximum residue = 8.16E 03 Average residue = 1.91E 04 Day 365 EEC = 0.00012 and the EC 25 = 0.0000306 ( seedling emergence) Day 365 RQ = 3.9 Therefore, the LOC is exceeded for well over 365 days. Page 72 of 90 APPENDIX 8. TIER 1 DRINKING WATER ASSESSMENT MEMORANDUM UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES, AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES PC Code: 118601 DP Barcode: D266073 MEMORANDUM June 25, 2002 SUBJECT: Drinking Water Assessment to Support TRED for Chlorsulfuron FROM: Lucy Shanaman, Chemist Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division THROUGH: R. David Jones, Senior Agronomist Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division Betsy Behl, Chief Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division TO: Jim Tompkins, Product Manager 25 Herbicide Branch, Registration Division This memo presents the Tier I Drinking Water Assessment for the parent compound, chlorsulfuron, calculated using FIRST ( surface water; version 1.0, 8/ 1/ 01) and SCIGROW ( groundwater; version 1.0, 11/ 12/ 97) for use in the human health risk assessment. This assessment does not encompass degradation products of chlorsulfuron. For drinking water derived from surface water sources, the acute ( peak) value is 46.8

g/ L ( ppb), and the chronic ( average annual) value is 16.4

g/ L ( ppb), for non crop, non residential turf. The groundwater screening concentrations for both acute and chronic exposure values are 3.5

g/ L ( ppb) for non crop, non residential turf. These concentrations were predicted from maximum label use information. The reported values represent upper bound estimates of the concentrations that might be found in locations vulnerable to pesticide contamination, for either surface water used for drinking water, or in groundwater, due to the use of chlorsulfuron on non residential turf. Modeling was also done using label information for application to wheat crops. Should the results of this assessment indicate a need for further refinement, or if any degradation products become of toxicological concern, please contact us as soon as possible so that we may schedule a Tier II assessment. A more conservative estimate which included the degradation products, assuming both stability and mobility equal to the parent compound, was also made.

Table 1. Modeling Results Based on Low Pressure Ground Spray Application of Chlorsulfuron 3Concentration of Selected Sulfonylurea, Sulfonamide, and Imidazolinone Herbicides, Other Pesticides, and Nutrients in 71 Streams, 5 Reservoir Outflows, and 25 Wells in the Midwestern United States, 1998; Battaglin WA, Furlong ET, Burkhardt MR; U. S. Department of the Interior, U. S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigations Report 00 4225, Denver, Colorado; 2001.

Page 73 of 90 Model Concentration From Use on Wheat Concentration From Use on Non Residential Turf FIRST Surface Water Peak Day ( Acute) 1.6 ppb 46.8 ppb FIRST Surface Water Annual Average ( Chronic) 0.55 ppb 16.4 ppb SCIGROW Ground Water ( Acute and Chronic) Value 0.16 ppb 3.5 ppb Monitoring Data:

Chlorsulfuron was not an analyte in the USGS, NAWQA monitoring program. Pesticides in Groundwater Database, A Compilation Of Monitoring Studies: 1971 1991 National Summary, US EPA September 1992, entries indicate that of eight wells tested, there were no recorded detections of chlorsulfuron. An article from the open literature examining streams, reservoir outflows, and wells in the Midwestern United States3 indicates that chlorsulfuron was detected in 5 %, or fewer, of the 71 streams tested, only detected in one of the outflow samples from the five reservoirs, and was not detected in groundwater samples collected from 25 wells. Maximum concentrations, measured using high performance liquid chromatography in tandem with mass spectroscopy ( HPLC MS), were less than one µ g/ L ( ppb). The estimated reporting limit ( MRL) was 0.010 µ g/ L.

Environmental Fate:

Chlorsulforon is expected to be very mobile in the environment. Laboratory data ( soil thin layer chromatography) indicates that the degradation product sulfonamide is less mobile than chlorsulfuron, and that triazine amine is less mobile than both the parent compound, chlorsulfuron, and the degradation product, sulfonamide. However, a precise estimate of the specific degree of mobility which can be attributed to either of these degradation products is undetermined. Laboratory studies indicate that chlorsulfuron is not expected to be highly persistent in the environment. With some exceptions, reported concentrations of degradation products peaked at study termination. Triazine amine concentrations were reported to peak relatively early in aerobic soil metabolism studies, transforming into hydroxy triazine amine with concentrations increasing steadily throughout the study.

Drinking Water Treatment Effects:

Primary water treatment is not expected to remove chlorsulfuron from drinking water. The predicted high mobility of chlorsulfuron means that it is not expected to sorb appreciably to soil and/ or sediment, indicating that it would not be expected to be removed from drinking water by either sedimentation or flocculation. Additionally, water treatment processes are more likely to raise the pH during treatment, therefore, hydrolysis is not expected to be a primary degradation pathway. 4http:// www. epa. gov/ oppefed1/ models/ water/ index. htm 5http:// www. epa. gov/ oppefed1/ models/ water/ index. htm Page 74 of 90 Background Information on FIRST:

FIRST4 is a screening model designed by the Office of Pesticide Programs to estimate the concentrations found in drinking water from surface water sources for use in human health risk assessment. As such, it provides upper bound values on the concentrations that might be found in drinking water due to the use of a pesticide. It was designed to be simple to use and to only require data which is typically available early in the pesticide registration process. FIRST is a single event model ( one runoff event), but can account for spray drift from multiple applications. FIRST is hardwired to represent the Index Reservoir, a standard water body used by the Office of Pesticide Programs to assess drinking water exposure ( Hetrick et al, 1998). It is based on a real reservoir in Illinois that is known to vulnerable to pesticide contamination. The single runoff event moves a maximum of 8% of the applied pesticide into the pond. This amount can be reduced due to degradation on the field and the effects of binding to soil in the field.

Background Information on SCIGROW:

SCIGROW5 ( version 1.0, November 12, 1997) provides a Tier 1, groundwater screening exposure value to be used in determining the potential risk to human health from drinking water contaminated with the pesticide. SCIGROW estimates likely groundwater concentrations if the pesticide is used at the maximum allowable rate in areas where groundwater is vulnerable to contamination. In most cases, a large majority of the use area will have groundwater that is less vulnerable to contamination than the areas used to drive the SCIGROW estimate.

Modeling Inputs and Results:

A conservative estimate of surface water EEC's and drinking water concentrations were made which would included any possible degradation products. While laboratory data did indicate that some of the degradation products were less mobile than the parent, the results were unquantified. A conservative estimate of degradate mobility equal to that of the parent compound, chlorsulfuron, was made. In the absence of any quantified biotic or abiotic degradation date for the transformation products, which generally reached the reported maximum at study termination, complete stability was assumed for both parent and the degradates. This assumption assured that both the parent compound and the degradation products would be included in the estimated surface water concentrations. The modeling results from FIRST, using these assumed parameters, estimates pre treatment surface water concentrations of total chlorsulfuron residues ( both parent and degradation products), resulting from two applications, at 60 day intervals, of the maximum use rate of LESCO TFC Dispersible Granule Turf Herbicide ® , at an acute ( peak) value of 59.7

g/ L ( ppb), and a chronic ( average annual) value of 41.3

g/ L ( ppb). Please note that these values for parent, and any possible degradation products, are more conservative, and replace the values which were included in the FQPA memo. The values reported at the beginning of this memo are for parent only, as Health Effects Division has indicated that only the parent compound is of toxicological concern.

Table 2 and Table 3 summarize the general input values used in the model runs for FIRST and SCIGROW for chlorsulfuron, applied two times by low pressure ground spray and incorporated to a depth of 3 to 4 inches for wheat crops, at a rate of 0.0156 pounds of active ingredient per acre for wheat crops and 0.333 pounds of active ingredient per acre for non crop, non residential turf. Labeled non crop, non residential turf uses include industrial turf grass areas such as: airports, military installations, fence rows, roadsides, right of ways, lumberyards, tank farms, pipeline and utility right ofways pumping installations, railroads, storage areas, plant sites, and other similar areas. Input parameter values were selected in accordance with US EPA OPP EFED water model parameter selection guidelines, Guidance for Selecting Input 6 http:// www. epa. gov/ oppefed1/ models/ water/ index. htm Page 75 of 90 Parameters in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides, Version II, February 28, 20026. In the absence of anaerobic metabolism data, that value was multiplied by two, as outlined in the guidelines, to generate an anaerobic metabolism half life of 160 days. Application rates were obtained from submitted labels.

FIRST predicted surface water acute peak concentrations of 1.6 ppb for wheat and 46.8 ppb for non residential turf. Chronic ( average annual) concentrations were 0.55 ppb for wheat and 16.4 ppb for non residential turf. SCIGROW predicted groundwater concentration s of 0.16 ppb for wheat and 3.5 ppb for non residential turf. Modeling results appear in Table 2 and Table 3. FIRST and SCIGROW output files have been appended to this document.

Table 2. Input Parameters for FIRST Parameter Wheat Crops Non Residential Turf Chemical chlorsulfuron chlorsulfuron Water Solubility ( pH 7; 25  C) 31,800 mg/ L 31,800 mg/ L Hydrolysis Half Life ( pH7) stable stable Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half Life 80 days 80 days Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism Half Life 160 days ( 2 x aerobic soil halflife 160 days ( 2 x aerobic soil halflife

Photolysis Half Life stable stable Organic Carbon Adsorption Coefficient ( Koc) 21 L/ kg 21 L/ kg Application Method ground spray, incorporate 3 inches low pressure ground spray Application Rate 0.0156 lbs. a. i./ acre 0.33 lbs. a. i./ acre Application Frequency 2 per year 2 per year Interval Between Applications 30 days 60 days Table 3. Input Parameters for SCIGROW Parameter Wheat Crops Non Residential Turf Chemical chlorsulfuron chlorsulfuron Organic Carbon Adsorption Coefficient ( Koc) 21 L/ kg 21 L/ kg Aerobic Soil Metabolism Half Life 80 days 80 days Page 76 of 90 Application Rate 0.0156 lbs. a. i./ acre 0.333 lbs. a. i./ acre Application Frequency 2 per year 2 per year Page 77 of 90 APPENDIX I FIRST SURFACE WATER MODELING RESULTS FOR CHLORSULFURON OUTPUT TABLES FOR CHLORSULFURON ON WHEAT RUN No. 1 FOR CHLORSULFURON ON WHEAT * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE % CROPPED INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Koc ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) AREA ( IN)  .016( .028) 2 30 21.031800.0 GROUND( 6.4) 56.0 .0 FIELD AND RESERVOIR HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( RESERVOIR) ( RES. EFF) ( RESER.) ( RESER.)  80.00 2 N/ A .00 .00 160.00 160.00 UNTREATED WATER CONC ( MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB)) Ver 1.0 AUG 1, 2001  PEAK DAY ( ACUTE) ANNUAL AVERAGE ( CHRONIC) CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION  1.566 .550 Page 78 of 90 FIRST SURFACE WATER MODELING RESULTS FOR CHLORSULFURON OUTPUT TABLES FOR CHLORSULFURON ON NON RESIDENTIAL TURF RUN No. 2 FOR CHLORSULFURON ON NON_ RESIDE * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE % CROPPED INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Koc ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) AREA ( IN)  .333( .531) 2 60 21.031800.0 GROUND( 6.4) 87.0 .0 FIELD AND RESERVOIR HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( RESERVOIR) ( RES. EFF) ( RESER.) ( RESER.)  80.00 2 N/ A .00 .00 160.00 160.00 UNTREATED WATER CONC ( MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB)) Ver 1.0 AUG 1, 2001  PEAK DAY ( ACUTE) ANNUAL AVERAGE ( CHRONIC) CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION  46.811 16.446 Page 79 of 90 FIRST SURFACE WATER MODELING RESULTS FOR CHLORSULFURON AND DEGRADATION PRODUCTS OUTPUT TABLES FOR BOTH CHLORSULFURON AND DEGRADATE RESIDUES ON NON RESIDENTIAL TURF RUN No. 1 FOR chlorsulfuron and degradates ON industrial turf * INPUT VALUES *  RATE (#/ AC) No. APPS & SOIL SOLUBIL APPL TYPE % CROPPED INCORP ONE( MULT) INTERVAL Koc ( PPM ) (% DRIFT) AREA ( IN)  .333( .666) 2 60 21.030000.0 GROUND( 6.4) 87.0 .0 FIELD AND RESERVOIR HALFLIFE VALUES ( DAYS)  METABOLIC DAYS UNTIL HYDROLYSIS PHOTOLYSIS METABOLIC COMBINED ( FIELD) RAIN/ RUNOFF ( RESERVOIR) ( RES. EFF) ( RESER.) ( RESER.)  .00 2 N/ A .00 .00 .00 .00 UNTREATED WATER CONC ( MICROGRAMS/ LITER ( PPB)) Ver 1.0 AUG 1, 2001  PEAK DAY ( ACUTE) ANNUAL AVERAGE ( CHRONIC) CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION  59.566 41.344 Page 80 of 90 APPENDIX II SCIGROW GROUND WATER MODELING RESULTS FOR CHLORSULFURON OUTPUT TABLES FOR CHLORSULFURON ON NON RESIDENTIAL TURF RUN No. 1 FOR chlorsulfuron INPUT VALUES  APPL (#/ AC) APPL. URATE SOIL SOIL AEROBIC RATE NO. (#/ AC/ YR) KOC METABOLISM ( DAYS)  .016 2 .031 21.0 80.0 GROUND WATER SCREENING CONCENTRATIONS IN PPB  .162135  A= 75.000 B= 26.000 C= 1.875 D= 1.415 RILP= 4.847 F= .716 G= 5.197 URATE= .031 GWSC= .162135 SCIGROW GROUND WATER MODELING RESULTS FOR CHLORSULFURON OUTPUT TABLES FOR CHLORSULFURON ON NON RESIDENTIAL TURF RUN No. 2 FOR chlorsulfuron INPUT VALUES  APPL (#/ AC) APPL. URATE SOIL SOIL AEROBIC RATE NO. (#/ AC/ YR) KOC METABOLISM ( DAYS)  .333 2 .666 21.0 80.0 GROUND WATER SCREENING CONCENTRATIONS IN PPB  3.460952  A= 75.000 B= 26.000 C= 1.875 D= 1.415 RILP= 4.847 F= .716 G= 5.197 URATE= .666 GWSC= 3.460952 Attachment from 5/ 12/ 2003 email from Jake Vukich ( DuPont) to Tyler Lane ( Chemical Review Manager, Special Review and Reregistration Division, OPP, EPA) Page 81 of 90 APPENDIX 9a SURVEY OF AERIAL APPLICATORS TO DETERMINE TYPICAL AIRCRAFT SETUPS Non Confidential Version of Attachment A to DuPont Letter to USEPA Dated May 2, 2003 In previous correspondence with EPA regarding the droplet size spectrum expected for typical aerial applications of chlorsulfuron products, we proposed a small, informal survey of aerial applicators to determine typical aircraft setups. To that end, we have obtained descriptions of the spray setups used on fifteen aircraft from fourteen applicators in Washington and Oregon.

To minimize drift, the Glean FC and Finesse labels specify the use of solid stream nozzles oriented straight back when the product is applied by air in the vicinity of sensitive crops. As shown in the attached table, most of the aircraft were fitted with solid stream nozzles with a nozzle angle of 0, as recommended on the label.

The drop size distribution was determined by the USDA   ARS model implemented in AgDRIFT

version 2.04. The model provides a drop size spectrum for a spray solution of water containing 0.25% Triton X 100. In general, we expect the drop size distribution from the model to be shifted toward the fine size distribution as compared to the size distribution for typical agricultural products. The inputs to the model  nozzle type, orientation angle, air speed, and pressure  were supplied by the applicators or representative values were selected as indicated in the attached table.

The drop size distributions were evenly split between ASAE medium, medium to coarse, and coarse. The intent of the label recommendations is to produce a drop size spectrum that will minimize drift, and we anticipated that most of the solid stream nozzles and spray settings would produce a coarse size distribution. We attribute the difference between our expectations and the model results primarily to the higher than expected air speed used for applications. We expected that air speeds would be in the range of 100 110 mph, as it was for aircraft 14 and 15 in the attached table. In contrast, 10 of the 15 applicators fly at a speed of 120 mph or higher. The droplet size distribution shifts toward the fine distribution at higher speeds. For example, aircraft 4 flown at 135 mph produces a medium to coarse size distribution, while at 100 mph would produce a very coarse to extremely coarse size distribution, according to the USDA model.

Since the USDA model simulates drop size distributions for a spray solution with low surface tension, those distributions are likely to show a greater volume of fine droplets than would be expected for typical products. Our experience in the Pacific Northwest suggests that the label recommendations have been successful in reducing drift, as compared to the potential indicated by the drop size distributions predicted by the USDA model. Page 82 of 90 Aircraft Setups for Application of Chlorsulfuron Products in Washington and Oregon Aircraft Setup GPA Boomlength Nozzle type Angle Speed Aircraft Pressure Assumed Variables Droplet spectrum ( ASAE)

1 7 65% CP 30 deg plate 0 90 110 188 Cessna 15 psi all orifices, 20 40psi, 90

110 mph Medium 2 5 75% CP 30 deg plate 0 110 120 Airtractor AT 400 & 502 all orifices, 20 40psi, 110

120 mph Medium 3 5 75% D 8 0 115 Thrush S2R 6 DC46 core, 40 psi Coarse 4 3 68% Lund multi tip 8 0 135 Turbine Thrush 40 psi Medium to coarse 5 3 70% CP 0 deg 0 125 130 Super Doer Thrush all orifices, 40 psi Medium to coarse 6 3 68% Lund multi tip  8 0 130 502 & 802 Air Tractor 40 psi Medium to coarse 7 5 68% D 8 0,10 100 110 Agcat G164 Super B 40 psi Coarse 8 3 68% CP Straight Stream 0 135 Super Doer 1200 Wright 1820 40 psi Medium to coarse 9 3 68% Spray Systems D

7 no core 0 120 125 Cessna Husky 20 psi Medium 10 3 to 5 68% D8, 10, or 12 35 120 Airtractor AT502

turbine DC46 core, 40 psi Medium 11 5 67% CP .171 15deg plate 15 120 Agcat 25 psi used 5 ° plate, 15 not in model Medium 12 5 67% D10/ 46 0 120 Airtractor AT502

turbine 30 psi Medium to coarse 13 5 67% D10 0 120 Airtractor AT502

turbine DC46 core, 40 psi Coarse 14 3 68% CP solid stream,

no plate 0 115 Air tractor 40 psi Coarse Page 83 of 90 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 w heat tomato sorghum c orn pea sugarbee t s oybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 P erc ent Effe c t No  Spr ay Z on e ( f t ) Ae rial: C oarse Spray 15 7.5 60% CP solid stream,

no plate 0 105 115 Turbo Agcat 22 psi Coarse APPENDIX 9b PHYTOTOXICITY RESULTING FROM SPRAY DRIFT DURING A MEDIUM APPLICATION RATE Finesse product applications to preemergent wheat. The application ranges from 0.0078 to 0.016 lbs ai/ acre. The mean of the high and low values was used for these graphs.

Figure 8. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from an aerial application conducted with a coarse spray in a 10 mph wind with a 10 foot release height at an application rate of 0.012 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The plant species listed on the bottom right axis are test species for which the registrant submitted phytotoxicity data ( the toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable so cucumber results are not shown). Page 84 of 90 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Aerial: Medium Spray Figure 2. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from an aerial application conducted with a medium spray in a 10 mph wind with a 10 foot release height at an application rate of 0.012 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 85 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Ground: Low Boom, Medium Coarse Spray Figure 3. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from a ground boom application conducted with a medium/ coarse spray in an approximate 10 mph wind with a 2 foot release height at an application rate of 0.012 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 86 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 w heat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Ground: HIgh Boom, Medium Coarse Spray Figure 4. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from a ground boom application conducted with a medium/ coarse spray in an approximate 10 mph wind with a 4 foot release height at an application rate of 0.012 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 87 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effec t No Spray Zone ( ft) Ground: Low Boom, Medium Spray Figure 5. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from a ground boom application conducted with a medium spray in an approximate 10 mph wind with a 2 foot release height at an application rate of 0.012 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 88 of 90 10 30 50 70 90 wheat tomato sorghum corn pea sugarbeet soybean rape onion 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Percent Effect No Spray Zone ( ft) Ground: HIgh Boom, Medium Spray Figure 6. Predicted phytotoxicity levels and associated downwind distances from a ground boom application conducted with a medium spray in an approximate 10 mph wind with a 4 foot release height at an application rate of 0.012 lbs chlorsulfuron per acre. The toxicity slope for cucumber was unavailable. Page 89 of 90 APPENDIX 9c PHYTOTOXICITY RESULTING FROM SPRAY DRIFT DURING A MEDIUM APPLICATION RATE Estimated agricultural usage of chlorsulfuron from the US Geological Survey ( http:// ca. water. usgs. gov/ pnsp/ use92/ chlrsulf. html):

Wind speed data for three representative cities in areas where chlorsulfuron is used agriculturally. Graphs show 75th, 50th, and 25th percentile wind speeds for each month. Wind speed data is from SAMSON weather monitoring stations.

Yakima, south central Washington: Page 90 of 90 Pendleton, northwestern Oregon:

North Platte, central southwestern Nebraska:


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 190 (Friday, September 30, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 67107-67110]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23410]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31095; Amdt. No. 3712]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These
regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised
criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace
System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities,
adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These
changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective September 30, 2016. The compliance date
for each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as
of September 30, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New
Jersey

Avenue SE., West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001;
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).
    For information on the availability of this material at NARA, call
202-741-6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov
to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedure
Standards Branch (AFS-420) Flight Technologies and Procedures Division,
Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, Mike
Monroney Aeronautical Center, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma
City, OK 73169 (Mail Address: P.O. Box 25082, Oklahoma City, OK 73125)
telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20.
The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is
unnecessary.
    This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies
the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective
dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the
procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97
of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this
amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP
and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC
permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific
conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in
this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an
emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to
published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than
30 days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these
SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find
that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these
SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979);
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air traffic control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 26, 2016.
John S. Duncan,
Director, Flight Standards Service.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums
and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113,
40114, 40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

Sec. Sec.  97.23, 97.25, 97.27, 97.29, 97.31, 97.33, 97.35  [Amended]

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31 RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC date          State           City            Airport        FDC No.      FDC date       Subject
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
13-Oct-16............  CA           San Francisco...  San Francisco         6/0046      8/15/16  RNAV (GPS) X
                                                       Intl.                                      RWY 28R, Amdt
                                                                                1A.
13-Oct-16............  CA           San Francisco...  San Francisco         6/0047      8/15/16  RNAV (GPS) PRM
                                                       Intl.                                      X RWY 28R
                                                                                (SIMULTANEOUS
                                                                                CLOSE
                                                                                PARALLEL),
                                                                                Amdt 1A.
13-Oct-16............  CA           San Francisco...  San Francisco         6/0048      8/15/16  LDA PRM RWY 28R
                                                       Intl.                                      (SIMULTANEOUS
                                                                                CLOSE
                                                                                PARALLEL),
                                                                                Amdt 2A.
13-Oct-16............  CA           San Francisco...  San Francisco         6/0049      8/15/16  LDA/DME RWY
                                                       Intl.                                      28R, Amdt 2A.
13-Oct-16............  CA           San Francisco...  San Francisco         6/0050      8/15/16  ILS OR LOC RWY
                                                       Intl.                                      28R, ILS RWY
                                                                                28R (SA CAT
                                                                                I), ILS RWY
                                                                                28R (CAT II-
                                                                                III), Amdt
                                                                                13A.
13-Oct-16............  TX           Perryton........  Perryton              6/0457      8/11/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Ochiltree                                  17, Orig-A.
                                                       County.
13-Oct-16............  TX           Perryton........  Perryton              6/0458      8/11/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Ochiltree                                  35, Amdt 1A.
                                                       County.
13-Oct-16............  TX           Perryton........  Perryton              6/0459      8/11/16  NDB-A, Amdt 4A.
                                                       Ochiltree
                                                       County.
13-Oct-16............  WI           Minocqua-         Lakeland/Noble        6/0534      8/23/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                     Woodruff.         F Lee Memorial                             18, Orig.
                                                       Field.
13-Oct-16............  NM           Grants..........  Grants-Milan          6/1350      8/15/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Muni.                                      13, Orig.
13-Oct-16............  ND           Rugby...........  Rugby Muni.....       6/2712      8/15/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                                                30, Orig-A.
13-Oct-16............  ND           Rugby...........  Rugby Muni.....       6/2714      8/15/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                                                12, Orig-A.
13-Oct-16............  MI           Gaylord.........  Gaylord Rgnl...       6/2719      8/11/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                                                9, Orig-A.
13-Oct-16............  MI           Gaylord.........  Gaylord Rgnl...       6/2720      8/11/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                                                27, Orig-A.
13-Oct-16............  OK           Oklahoma City...  Will Rogers           6/3132      8/15/16  RNAV (GPS) Y
                                                       World.                                     RWY 17L, Amdt
                                                                                3A.
13-Oct-16............  LA           Alexandria......  Alexandria Intl       6/3303      8/23/16  VOR/DME RWY 14,
                                                                                Orig-B.
13-Oct-16............  OK           Idabel..........  Mc Curtain            6/3469      8/15/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       County Rgnl.                               20, Orig.
13-Oct-16............  MO           Mexico..........  Mexico Memorial       6/3471      8/15/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                                                24, Amdt 1C.
13-Oct-16............  IN           French Lick.....  French Lick           6/3700      8/23/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Muni.                                      26, Orig-A.
13-Oct-16............  IN           French Lick.....  French Lick           6/3701      8/23/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Muni.                                      8, Amdt 1A.
13-Oct-16............  WV           Clarksburg......  North Central         6/5614      8/11/16  VOR-A, Amdt 1.
                                                       West Virginia.
13-Oct-16............  MI           Owosso..........  Owosso                6/5851      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Community.                                 11, Amdt 1B.
13-Oct-16............  MI           Owosso..........  Owosso                6/5852      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Community.                                 29, Amdt 1B.
13-Oct-16............  MI           Owosso..........  Owosso                6/5854      8/19/16  VOR/DME RWY 29,
                                                       Community.                                 Amdt 1B.
13-Oct-16............  IN           Lafayette.......  Purdue                6/6114      8/19/16  ILS RWY 10,
                                                       University.                                Amdt 11.
13-Oct-16............  IN           Lafayette.......  Purdue                6/6115      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       University.                                10, Amdt 1.
13-Oct-16............  IN           Lafayette.......  Purdue                6/6116      8/19/16  VOR-A, Amdt 26.
                                                       University.
13-Oct-16............  IN           Lafayette.......  Purdue                6/6117      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       University.                                28, Amdt 1.
13-Oct-16............  WI           Land O' Lakes...  Kings Land O'         6/7434      8/22/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Lakes.                                     32, Orig.
13-Oct-16............  WI           Land O' Lakes...  Kings Land O'         6/7435      8/22/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Lakes.                                     14, Orig.
13-Oct-16............  IL           Cahokia/St Louis  St Louis              6/7439      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Downtown.                                  30R, Orig-A.
13-Oct-16............  KS           Goodland........  Renner Fld/           6/7987      8/19/16  ILS OR LOC RWY
                                                       Goodland Muni/.                            30, Amdt 2A.
13-Oct-16............  KS           Goodland........  Renner Fld/           6/7988      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Goodland Muni/.                            12, Amdt 2.
13-Oct-16............  KS           Goodland........  Renner Fld/           6/7989      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Goodland Muni/.                            30, Amdt 1A.
13-Oct-16............  KS           Goodland........  Renner Fld/           6/7990      8/19/16  VOR RWY 30,
                                                       Goodland Muni/.                            Amdt 9A.
13-Oct-16............  KS           Goodland........  Renner Fld/           6/7991      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Goodland Muni/.                            23, Amdt 1A.

13-Oct-16............  TX           La Porte........  La Porte Muni..       6/7997      8/19/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                                                30, Amdt 2A.
13-Oct-16............  MN           Duluth..........  Duluth Intl....       6/8581      8/19/16  ILS OR LOC RWY
                                                                                27, Amdt 10A.
13-Oct-16............  IL           Bloomington/      Central Il Rgnl       6/8584      8/22/16  ILS OR LOC RWY
                                     Normal.           Arpt At                                    29, Amdt 11.
                                                       Bloomington-
                                                       Normal.
13-Oct-16............  DE           Georgetown......  Delaware              6/8745      8/11/16  RNAV (GPS) RWY
                                                       Coastal.                                   22, Amdt 2B.
13-Oct-16............  DE           Georgetown......  Delaware              6/8746      8/11/16  VOR RWY 22,
                                                       Coastal.                                   Amdt 7A.
13-Oct-16............  MI           Gaylord.........  Gaylord Rgnl...       6/8956      8/11/16  VOR RWY 27,
                                                                                Amdt 2A.
13-Oct-16............  FL           Miami...........  Miami Intl.....       6/9444      8/15/16  RNAV (RNP) Y
                                                                                RWY 27, Amdt
                                                                                2.
13-Oct-16............  KY           Louisville......  Louisville Intl-      6/9490      8/11/16  RNAV (RNP) Z
                                                       Standiford                                 RWY 35L, Amdt
                                                       Field.                                     1B.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2016-23410 Filed 9-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P