[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 107 (Friday, June 3, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32103-32105]
[FR Doc No: 2011-13766]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2011-0562; Directorate Identifier 2011-CE-015-AD]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Cessna Aircraft Company 310, 320, 340,
401, 402, 411, 414, and 421 Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the
products listed above. This proposed AD would require you to install a
placard that prohibits flight into known icing conditions and install a
placard that increases published speed on approach 17 mph (15 knots) in
case of an inadvertent encounter with icing. This proposed AD was
prompted by an investigation of recent and historical icing-related
accidents and incidents for the products listed above. We are proposing
this AD to prohibit flight into known icing conditions as well as
increase the approach speed in case of an inadvertent encounter with
icing. This condition, if not corrected, could result in unusual flight
characteristics that could lead to loss of control after flight into
known icing conditions or an inadvertent encounter with icing
conditions. Based on the data, an example of the unusual flight
characteristics seen in many of the accidents is high sink speeds that
resulted in a hard landing.

DATES: We must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 18, 2011.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments by any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    For service information identified in this proposed AD, contact
Cessna Aircraft Company, Product Support, P.O. Box 7706, Wichita, KS
67277; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet: http://www.cessna.com. You may review copies of the referenced service
information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas
City, MO 64106. For information on the availability of this material at
the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this proposed AD, the regulatory
evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The street
address for the Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is in the ADDRESSES
section. Comments will be available in the AD docket shortly after
receipt.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jason Brys, Flight Test Engineer, FAA,
Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 S. Airport Road, Room 100,
Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    We invite you to send any written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send your comments to an address listed
under the ADDRESSES section. Include ``Docket No. FAA-2011-0562;
Directorate Identifier 2011-CE-015-AD'' at the beginning of your
comments. We specifically invite comments on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of this proposed AD. We
will consider all comments received by the closing date and may amend
this proposed AD because of those comments.
    We will post all comments we receive, without change, to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you provide. We
will also post a report summarizing each substantive verbal contact we
receive about this proposed AD.

Discussion

    We are proposing this AD as a result of an investigation of 51
recent and historical icing-related accidents and incidents over the
last 30 years that resulted in 36 fatalities for aircraft listed in
Cessna Aircraft Company (Cessna) Service Bulletin MEB97-4. The non-
fatal events usually resulted in injuries and substantial aircraft
damage. The National Transportation Safety Board dockets showed for two
non-fatal landing events airplane stall with no activation of the stall
warning system.
    Our investigation concluded that these aircraft, even if equipped
with pneumatic deicing boots, are not approved for flight into known
icing and will accrete critical amounts of ice on the protected and
unprotected areas. Additionally, data suggest potentially large
increases in stall speeds with no stall warning.
    The differences in the icing protection systems for the aircraft
identified in this proposed AD differ greatly from later models that
were approved for icing conditions. Some of these differences could
include electric windshield (instead of alcohol), de-ice propeller
(some might have had boots without the de-ice propeller), de-ice boots
on entire span of wing as well as a different style de-ice boots,
different pitot probe and static ports, and some models also added a
de-ice boot to the vertical tail.
    These airplanes' certification basis did not include Amendment 7 of
CAR 3 Dated May 15, 1956, which required an applicant to provide to the
pilot the types of operations and meteorological conditions (e.g. icing
conditions) to which the operation of the airplane is limited by the
equipment installed (CAR 3 Sec.  3.772). Therefore, the pilot may not
realize that, even with de-ice boots or other similar equipment
installed, the airplane is not certificated for flight into known icing
conditions. To address this condition and based on the accident
history, there is a need to add a limitation to prohibit flight into
known icing conditions due to the limitations of the installed
equipment.
    This condition, if not corrected, could result in unusual flight
characteristics that could lead to loss of control after flight into
known icing conditions or an inadvertent encounter with icing
conditions. Based on the data, an example of the unusual flight
characteristics seen in many of the accidents is high sink speeds that
resulted in a hard landing.

Relevant Service Information

    We reviewed Cessna Service Bulletin MEB97-4, dated March 24, 1997.
The service information describes procedures for providing a placard to
inform the pilot that flight in known icing conditions is prohibited
with the aircraft identified in the service information.

FAA's Determination

    We are proposing this AD because we evaluated all the relevant
information and determined the unsafe condition described previously is
likely to exist or develop in other products of these same type
designs.

Proposed AD Requirements

    This proposed AD would require you to install a placard that
prohibits flight into known icing conditions and install a placard that
increases published speed on approach 17 mph (15 knots) in case of an
inadvertent encounter with icing.

Differences Between the Proposed AD and the Service Information

    The service information provides instructions on obtaining a
placard from Cessna that prohibits flight into known icing conditions
and that the airplane owner or a service facility may install the
placard. This proposed AD requires fabrication and installation of an
additional placard that increases the published speed on approach 17
mph (15 knots). This proposed AD also requires that a properly
certificated aircraft mechanic must fabricate the additional placard
and install both of these placards. The airplane owner or pilot is not
allowed to fabricate and install the placards unless they are also a
properly certificated aircraft mechanic.

Costs of Compliance

    We estimate that this proposed AD affects 6,883 airplanes of U.S
registry.
    We estimate the following costs to comply with this proposed AD:

                                                 Estimated Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Cost on U.S.
              Action                    Labor cost           Parts cost      Cost per product      operators
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fabricate and install placards...  1 work-hour x $85                   $1                $86           $591,938
                                    per hour = $85.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
subtitle VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701: ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We determined that this proposed AD would not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This proposed AD would not
have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify this proposed
regulation:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT Regulatory Policies
and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

    1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

    2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by adding the following new
airworthiness directive (AD):

Cessna Aircraft Company: Docket No. FAA-2011-0562; Directorate
Identifier 2011-CE-015-AD.

Comments Due Date

    (a) We must receive comments by July 18, 2011.

Affected ADs

    (b) None.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to Cessna Aircraft Company 310, 320, 340,
401, 402, 411, 414, and 421 airplanes identified in Cessna Aircraft
Company Service Bulletin MEB97-4, dated March 24, 1997, certificated
in any category.

Subject

    (d) Joint Aircraft System Component (JASC)/Air Transport
Association (ATA) of America Code: 11, Placards and Markings.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD was prompted by an investigation of recent and
historical icing-related accidents and incidents for the products
listed above. We are issuing this AD to prohibit flight into known
icing conditions as well as increase the approach speed in case of
an inadvertent encounter with icing. This condition, if not
corrected, could result in unusual flight characteristics that could
lead to loss of control after flight into known icing conditions or
an inadvertent encounter with icing conditions. Based on the data,
an example of the unusual flight characteristics seen in many of the
accidents is high sink speeds that resulted in a hard landing.

Compliance

    (f) Comply with this AD within the compliance times specified,
unless already done.

                                  Table 1--Actions, Compliance, and Procedures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Actions                             Compliance                            Procedures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) For all airplanes: Install        Within 100 hours time-in-service      (i) If installing the placard Cessna
 placard Cessna part number (P/N)      (TIS) after the effective date of     P/N DP0500-13, obtain the placard
 DP0500-13 or fabricate and install    this AD or within 3 calendar months   following Cessna Aircraft Company
 a placard that states: ``This         after the effective date of this      Service Bulletin MEB97-4, dated
 aircraft is prohibited from flight    AD, whichever occurs first.           March 24, 1997.
 into known icing conditions.''                                             (ii) If fabricating the placard,
                                                                             fabricate the placard using \1/8\-
                                                                             inch black lettering on a white
                                                                             background.
                                      ....................................  (iii) The placards must be installed
                                                                             by a properly certificated aircraft
                                                                             mechanic on the instrument panel in
                                                                             clear view of the pilot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) For all airplanes:                Within 100 hours TIS after the        (i) Fabricate the placard using
(A) If Airspeed Indicator Reads in     effective date of this AD or within   black lettering at least \1/8\-inch
 MPH. Fabricate and install a          3 calendar months after the           on a white background.
 placard that states: ``For            effective date of this AD,           (ii) The placards must be installed
 inadvertent encounters with icing     whichever occurs first.               by a properly certificated aircraft
 conditions, increase published                                              mechanic on the instrument panel as
 speed on approach 17 mph.''                                                 close as practical to the airspeed
(B) If Airspeed Indicator Reads in                                           indicator in clear view of the
 Knots. Fabricate and install a                                              pilot.
 placard that states: ``For
 inadvertent encounters with icing
 conditions, increase published
 speed on approach 15 KIAS.''
(3) For all airplanes: After both     Within 100 hours TIS after the        Not Applicable.
 placards required by paragraphs       effective date of this AD or within
 (f)(1) and (f)(2)(A) or (f)(2)(B)     3 calendar months after the
 of this AD are installed, make an     effective date of this AD,
 entry into the aircraft logbook to    whichever occurs first.
 record compliance with this AD.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Special Flight Permit

    (g) Special flight permits are permitted with the following
limitation: Flight into known icing is prohibited.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (h)(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO),
FAA, has the authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested
using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14
CFR 39.19, send your request to your principal inspector or local
Flight Standards District Office, as appropriate. If sending
information directly to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in the Related Information
section of this AD.
    (2) Before using any approved AMOC, notify your appropriate
principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding
district office.

Related Information

    (i) For more information about this AD, contact Jason Brys,
Flight Test Engineer, Wichita ACO, 1801 S. Airport Road, Room 100,
Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax: (316) 946-
4107.
    (j) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Cessna Aircraft Company, Product Support, P.O. Box 7706, Wichita, KS
67277; telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>; Internet:
http://www.cessna.com. You may review copies of the referenced
service information at the FAA, Small Airplane Directorate, 901
Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106. For information on the availability
of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May 27, 2011.
Earl Lawrence,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2011-13766 Filed 6-2-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 23, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 8957]
[FR Doc No: 2016-03715]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9942-67-OEI]

Agency Information Collection Activities OMB Responses

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This document announces the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) responses to Agency Clearance requests, in compliance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA regulations are listed
in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Courtney Kerwin<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>and please refer to the appropriate
EPA Information Collection Request (ICR) Number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

OMB Responses to Agency Clearance Requests

OMB Approvals

    EPA ICR Number 1688.08; RCRA Expanded Public Participation
(Renewal); 40 CFR 270.62, 270.66, 124.31, 124.32, and 124.33; was
approved without change on 8/26/2015; OMB Number 2050-0149; expires on
8/31/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 2381.03; Lead; Clearance and Clearance Testing
Requirements for the Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program
(Renewal); 40 CFR part 745; was approved without change on 8/27/2015;
OMB Number 2070-0181; expires on 8/31/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 1715.14; TSCA Section 402 and Section 404 Training
and Certification, Accreditation and Standards for Lead-Based Paint
Activities and Renovation, Repair, and Painting (Renewal); 40 CFR part
745; was approved without change on 8/27/2015; OMB Number 2070-0155;
expires on 8/31/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 1669.07; Lead-Based Paint Pre-Renovation Information
Dissemination--TSCA sec. 406(b) (Renewal); 40 CFR part 745; was
approved without change on 8/27/2015; OMB Number 2070-0158; expires on
8/31/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 2205.15; Focus Groups as Used by EPA For Economics
Projects (Renewal); was approved without change on 9/29/2015; OMB
Number 2090-0028; expires on 9/30/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 1608.07; State Program Adequacy Determination:
Municipal Solid Waste Landfills (MSWLFs) and Non-Municipal, Non-
Hazardous Waste Disposal Units that Receive Conditionally Exempt Small
Quantity Generator (CESQG) Hazardous Waste (Renewal); 40 CFR parts 239,
257 and 258; was approved without change on 9/14/2015; OMB Number 2050-
0152; expires on 9/30/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 0969.10; Final Authorization for Hazardous Waste
Management Programs (Renewal); 40 CFR parts 271.5, 271.7, 271.8,
271.20, 271.21, 271.6 and 271.23; was approved without change on 9/14/
2015; OMB Number 2050-0041; expires on 9/30/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 1057.13; NSPS for Sulfuric Acid Plants (Renewal); 40
CFR part 60, subpart H and A; was approved without change on 9/10/2015;
OMB Number 2060-0041; expires on 9/30/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 0143.12; Recordkeeping Requirements for Producers,
Registrants, and Applicants of Pesticides and Pesticide Devices under
Section 8 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA) (Renewal); 40 CFR part 169; was approved without change on 9/
10/2015; OMB Number 2070-0028; expires on 9/30/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 1049.13; Notification of Episodic Releases of Oil
and Hazardous Substances (Renewal); 40 CFR parts 110, 117 and 302; was
approved without change on 9/10/2015; OMB Number 2050-0046; expires on
9/30/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 1442.22; Land Disposal Restrictions (Renewal); 40
CFR part 268; was approved with change on 9/10/2015; OMB Number 2050-
0085; expires on 9/30/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 1204.12; Submission of Unreasonable Adverse Effects
Information under FIFRA (Renewal); 40 CFR part 159, subpart D; was
approved without change on 9/8/2015; OMB Number 2070-0039; expires on
9/30/2018.
    EPA ICR Number 2427.03; Aircraft Engines--Supplemental Information
Related to Exhaust Emissions (Renewal); 40 CFR part 87; was approved
without change on 9/1/2015; OMB Number 2060-0680; expires on 9/30/2018.

Courtney Kerwin,
Acting Director, Collections Strategies Division.
[FR Doc. 2016-03715 Filed 2-22-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register: June 4, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 106)]
[Notices]
[Page 30901-30906]
[DOCID:fr04jn07-111]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-55817; File No. SR-Phlx-2007-07]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Order Granting Accelerated Approval of Proposed
Rule Change and Amendment No. 1 Thereto Relating to Index Linked
Securities

 May 25, 2007.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on January 25, 2007, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc. (``Phlx'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and
II below, which Items have been substantially prepared by the Exchange.
On May 9, 2007, Phlx filed Amendment No. 1 to the proposed rule change.
The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change, as amended, from interested persons and approves
the proposal on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Phlx proposes to amend Phlx Rule 803--Criteria for Listing--
Tier 1, for the purpose of adopting generic listing standards pursuant
to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act \3\ in connection with index-linked
securities (``Index Securities''). The text of the proposed rule change
is available on Phlx's Web site at http://www.phlx.com, at Phlx's

principal office, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Phlx included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item III below. The Phlx has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections
A, B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    Under Rule 803(f), the Exchange may approve for listing and trading
securities that cannot be readily categorized under the listing
criteria for common and preferred securities, bonds, debentures, or
warrants.\4\ The Exchange proposes to add a new section (n) to Phlx
Rule 803 to provide generic listing standards to permit the listing and
trading of Index Securities pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) under the Act.\5\
Rule 19b-4(e) provides that the listing and trading of a new derivative
securities product by a self-regulatory organization (``SRO'') shall
not be deemed a proposed rule change, pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of
Rule 19b-4 \6\ if the Commission has approved, pursuant to Section
19(b) of the Act,\7\ the SRO's trading rules, procedures, and listing
standards for the product class that would include the new derivatives
product, and the SRO has a surveillance program for the product
class.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 30466 (March 11,
1992), 57 FR 9301 (March 17, 1992) (SR-Phlx-92-01).
    \5\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e). The Exchange has previously received
Commission approval to list and trade certain index options,
exchange-traded funds and trust issued receipts pursuant to Rule
19b-4(e). See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 43683 (December
6, 2000), 65 FR 78235 (December 14, 2000) (SR-Phlx-00-67) (Index
Options); 45178 (December 20, 2001), 66 FR 67610 (December 31, 2001)
(SR-Phlx-00-68) (Trust Shares); and 44826 (September 20, 2001), 66
FR 49990 (October 1, 2001) (SR-Phlx-2001-75) (TIRs).
    \6\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(c)(1).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b).
    \8\ When relying on Rule 19b-4(e), the SRO must submit Form 19b-
4(e) to the Commission within 5 business days after the SRO begins
trading the new product(s). See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
40761 (December 8, 1998), 63 FR 70952 (December 22, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Index Securities are designed for investors who desire to
participate in a specific market segment or combination of market
segments through index products. Each Index Security is intended to
provide investors with exposure to an identifiable underlying market
index. Despite the fact that Index Securities are linked to an
underlying index, each will trade as a single, exchange-listed
security.
    The Exchange proposes that generic listing standards appropriate
for Index Securities provide that each index or combination of indexes
(the ``Underlying Index'' or ``Underlying Indexes'') meet the criteria
set forth in proposed Phlx Rule 803(n) or an index previously approved
for the trading of options or other derivative securities by

the Commission under Section 19(b)(2) of the Act and rules thereunder.
In all cases, an Underlying Index is required to have a minimum of (10)
component securities. The specific criteria for each underlying
component security in proposed Phlx Rule 803(n) are set forth below in
the section entitled ``Eligibility Standards for Underlying Component
Securities.'' In general, the criteria for the underlying component
securities of an Underlying Index is substantially similar to the
requirements for index options set forth in Phlx Rule 1009A(a).
Index-Linked Securities
    Index Securities are the non-convertible debt of an issuer that
have a term of at least one (1) year but not greater than thirty (30)
years. The issuer of an Index Security may or may not provide for
periodic interest payments to holders based on dividends or other cash
distributions paid on the securities comprising the Underlying Index or
Indexes during a prescribed period.\9\ The holder of an Index Security
may or may not be fully exposed to the appreciation and/or depreciation
of the underlying component securities. For example, an Index Security
may be subject to a ``cap'' on the maximum principal amount to be
repaid to holders or a ``floor'' on the minimum principal amount to be
repaid to holders at maturity. The proposed generic listing standards
may provide for accelerated returns based on a multiple of the positive
performance of an index, but will not be applicable to Index Securities
where the payment at maturity may be based on a multiple of negative
performance of an underlying index or indexes. The structure of an
Index Security may provide ``principal protection,'' i.e., a minimum
guaranteed amount to be repaid, or provide that the principal amount is
fully exposed to the performance of a market index. An Index Security
may also provide ``contingent'' protection of the principal amount,
whereby the principal protection may disappear if the Underlying Index
at any point in time during the life of such security reaches a certain
pre-determined level. The Exchange believes that the flexibility to
list a variety of Index Securities will offer investors the opportunity
to more precisely focus their specific investment strategies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Interest payments may be based on a fixed or floating rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The original public offering price of Index Securities may vary
with the most common offering price expected to be $10 or $1,000 per
unit. The initial offering price for an Index Security will be
established on the date the security is priced for sale to the public.
The Exchange states that the final value of an Index Security will be
determined on the valuation date at or near maturity consistent with
the mechanics detailed in the prospectus for such Index Security. The
Exchange states that Index Securities are expected to trade at a lower
cost than the cost of trading each of the underlying component
securities separately because of reduced commission and custody costs
and are also expected to give investors the ability to maintain index
exposure without the corresponding management or administrative fees
and ongoing expenses.
    The Index Securities do not give the holder any right to receive a
portfolio security, dividend payments, or any other ownership right or
interest in the portfolio or index of securities comprising the
Underlying Index. Index Securities may or may not be structured with
accelerated upside returns based on the performance of the Underlying
Index.\10\ For example, an Index Security may provide for an
accelerated return of 3-to-1 if the Underlying Index achieves a
positive return at maturity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See telephone conference between John Dayton, Director and
Counsel, Phlx, and Jan Woo, Attorney, Division of Market Regulation,
Commission, on May 25, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange submits that Index Securities are ``hybrid''
securities whose rates of return are largely the result of the
performance of Underlying Index or Indexes comprised of component
securities. In connection with the listing and trading or the trading
pursuant to unlisted trading privileges (``UTP'') of Index Securities,
the Exchange will issue an Memorandum to members detailing the special
risks and characteristics of each Index Security that it will list or
trade.\11\ Accordingly, the particular structure and corresponding risk
of any Index Security traded on the Exchange will be highlighted and
disclosed.\12\ In particular, the Information Memorandum will set forth
the Exchange's suitability rule that requires every member, either
personally or through a general partner or an officer who is a holder
of voting stock in his organization to use due diligence to learn the
essential facts relative to every customer and to every order or
account accepted by his organization.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.
    \12\ The Exchange notes that members that carry customer
accounts must be members of the NASD and would therefore be subject
to the rules and regulations of the NASD, including NASD Rule
2310(a) and (b). Accordingly, NASD Notice to Members 03-71 (November
2003) (``Notice 03-71'') regarding non-conventional investments or
``NCIs'' applies to Exchange members recommending/selling index-
linked securities to public customers. Notice 03-71 specifically
reminds members in connection with NCIs (such as index-linked
securities) of their obligations to: (1) Conduct adequate due
diligence to understand the features of the product; (2) perform a
reasonable-basis suitability analysis; (3) perform customer-specific
suitability analysis in connection with any recommended
transactions; (4) provide a balanced disclosure of both the risks
and rewards associated with the particular product, especially when
selling to retail investors; (5) implement appropriate internal
controls; and (6) train registered persons regarding the features,
risk and suitability of these products.
    \13\ See Phlx Rule 746.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Proposed Listing Criteria for Index-Linked Securities
Eligibility Standards for Issuers
    The following standards are proposed for each issuer of Index
Securities:
    (1) Both the issue and the issuer of such security meet the
criteria set forth in Phlx Rule 803(f) except that the minimum public
distribution and minimum public shareholders requirement will not be
applicable to an issue traded in thousand dollar denominations. In
addition, the minimum public shareholders requirement will not apply if
the securities are redeemable at the option of the holders thereof on
at least a weekly basis.
    (2) The issue has a minimum term of one (1) year but not greater
than thirty (30) years.
    (3) The issue must be the non-convertible debt of the issuer.
    (4) The payment at maturity may or may not provide for a multiple
of the positive performance of an underlying index or indexes; however,
in no event will payment at maturity be based on a multiple of the
negative performance of an underlying index or indexes.
    (5) The issuer will be expected to have a minimum tangible net
worth in excess of $250,000,000, and to otherwise substantially exceed
the earnings requirements set forth in Phlx Rule 803(a)(2). In the
alternative, the issuer will be expected: (A) To have a minimum
tangible net worth of $150,000,000 and to otherwise substantially
exceed the earnings requirement set forth in Phlx Rule 803(a)(2), and
(B) not to have issued securities where the original issue price of all
the issuer's other index-linked note offerings (combined with index-
linked note offerings of the issuer's affiliates) listed on a national
securities exchange or traded through the facilities of Nasdaq exceeds
25% of the issuer's net worth.
    (6) The issuer is in compliance with Rule 10A-3 under the Act.

Description of Underlying Indexes
    Each Underlying Index will either be (i) an index meeting the
specific criteria set forth in proposed Phlx Rule 803(n); or (ii) an
index approved for the trading of options or other derivative
securities by the Commission under Section 19(b)(2) of the Act and
rules thereunder. However, in all cases, an Underlying Index must
contain at least ten (10) component securities.
    The Exchange will require that all changes to an Underlying Index,
including the deletion and addition of underlying component securities,
index rebalancings and changes to the calculation of the index, will be
made in accordance with the proposed generic criteria or the
Commission's Section 19(b)(2) order approving a similar derivative
product based on the Underlying Index.
    If a broker-dealer is responsible for maintaining (or has a role in
maintaining) the Underlying Index, such broker-dealer is required to
erect and maintain a ``firewall,'' in a form satisfactory to the
Exchange, to prevent the flow of information regarding the Underlying
Index from the index production personnel to the sales and trading
personnel.\14\ In addition, an Underlying Index that is maintained by a
broker-dealer is also required to be calculated by an independent third
party who is not a broker-dealer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For certain indexes, an index provider, such as Dow Jones,
may select the components and calculate the index, but overseas
broker-dealer affiliates of U.S. registered broker-dealers may sit
on an ``advisory'' committee that recommends component selections to
the index provider. In such case, the Exchange would ensure that
appropriate information barriers and insider trading policies exist
for this advisory committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eligibility Standards for Underlying Securities
    Index Securities will be subject to the criteria in proposed Phlx
Rule 803(n)(7) and (8) for initial and continued listing. For an
Underlying Index to be appropriate for the initial listing of and Index
Security, such Index must either be approved for the trading of options
or other derivative securities by the Commission under Section 19(b)(2)
of the Act and rules thereunder or meet the following requirements:
     Each component security must have a minimum market value
of at least $75 million, except that for each of the lowest weighted
Underlying Securities in the index in the aggregate account for no more
than 10% of the weight of the index, the market value can be at least
$50 million;
     Each component security must have a trading volume in each
of the last six months of not less than 1,000,000 shares, except that
for each of the lowest weighted Underlying Securities in the index that
in the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the weight of the
index, the trading volume shall be at least 500,000 shares in each of
the last six months;
     In the case of a capitalization-weighted index, the lesser
of the five highest weight Underlying Securities in the index or the
highest weighted Underlying Securities in the index that in the
aggregate represent at least 30% of the total number of Underlying
Securities in the index, each have an average monthly trading volume of
at least 2,000,000 shares over the previous six months;
     No component security will represent more than 25% of the
weight of the index, and the five highest weighted component securities
in the index will not in the aggregate account for more than 50% of the
weight of the index (60% for an index consisting of fewer than 25
Underlying Securities);
     90% of the index's numerical index value and at least 80%
of the total number of component securities will meet the then current
criteria for standardized options trading set forth in Exchange Rule
1009;
     Each component security shall be (A) securities (other
than foreign country securities and American Depository Receipts
(``ADRs'')), that are (1) issued by an Act reporting company which is
listed on a national securities exchange and (2) NMS stocks, as defined
in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS,\15\ or (B) foreign country securities or
ADRs, provided that foreign country securities or foreign country
securities underlying ADRs having their primary trading market outside
the United States on foreign trading markets that are not members of
the Intermarket Surveillance Group (``ISG'') or parties to
comprehensive surveillance sharing agreements with the Exchange will
not, in the aggregate, represent more than 20% of the dollar weight of
the index.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See 17 CFR 242.600(b)(47).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed continued listing criteria set forth in proposed Rule
803(n)(8)(A) regarding the underlying components of an Underlying Index
provides that the Exchange will commence delisting or removal
proceedings of an Index Security if any of the standards set forth in
the initial eligibility criteria of proposed Rule 803(n)(7) are not
continuously maintained, except that:
     The criteria that no single component represent more than
25% of the weight of the index and the five highest weighted components
in the index can not represent more than 50% (or 60% for indexes with
less than 25 components) of the weight of the Index, need only be
satisfied for capitalization weighted and price weighted indexes as of
the first day of January and July in each year;
     The total number of components in the index may not
increase or decrease by more than 33-1/3% from the number of components
in the index at the time of its initial listing, and in no event may be
less than ten (10) components;
     The trading volume of each component security in the index
must be at least 500,000 shares for each of the last six months, except
that for each of the lowest weighted components in the index that in
the aggregate account for no more than 10% of the weight of the index,
trading volume must be at least 400,000 shares for each of the last six
months; and
     In a capitalization-weighted index, the lesser of the five
highest weighted component securities in the index or the highest
weighted component securities in the index that in the aggregate
represent at least 30% of the total number of stocks in the index have
had an average monthly trading volume of at least 1,000,000 shares over
the previous six months.
    In connection with an Index Security that is listed pursuant to
proposed Rule 803(n)(7)(l), the Exchange will commence delisting or
removal proceedings if an underlying index or indexes fails to satisfy
the maintenance standards or conditions for such index or indexes as
set forth by the Commission in its order under Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act approving the index or indexes for the trading of options or other
derivatives.
    As set forth in proposed Rule 803(n)(8)(C), the Exchange will also
commence delisting or removal proceedings of an Index Security (unless
the Commission has approved the continued trading of the Index
Security), under any of the following circumstances:
     If the aggregate market value or the principal amount of
the securities publicly held is less than $400,000;
     If the value of the Underlying Index or composite value of
the Underlying Indexes is no longer calculated and widely disseminated
on at least a 15-second basis during the time the security is traded on
the Exchange; or
     If such other event shall occur or condition exists which
is the opinion of the Exchange makes further dealings on the Exchange
inadvisable.
    The Phlx represents that Index Securities listed and traded on the

Exchange will be required to be in compliance with rule 10A-3 under the
Act.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Rule 10A-3(c)(7), 17 CFR 240.10A-3(c)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Exchange Rules Applicable to Index-Linked Securities

    Index Securities will be treated as equity instruments and will be
subject to all Exchange rules governing the trading of equity
securities, including, among others, rule governing XLE, the Exchange's
equity trading system, and related trading halt provisions pursuant to
Phlx Rule 133. Exchange equity margin rules and the trading hours of 8
a.m. to 6 p.m. will apply to transactions in Index Securities.
    In addition, the Exchange represents that it will prepare and
distribute, if appropriate, an Information Memorandum that describes
the product to each member organization highlighting the particular
structure and corresponding risks of an Index Security. In particular,
the Memorandum will set forth the Exchange's suitability rule that sets
forth certain requirements for member organizations recommending a
transaction in Index Securities. In addition, the Information
Memorandum will note that all of the Exchange's equity trading rules
will be applicable to trading in the Index Securities. The Memorandum
will also reference the member requirements to deliver a prospectus to
each investor purchasing newly issued Index Securities prior to or
concurrently with the confirmation of a transaction.
    The Exchange will closely monitor activity in Index Securities to
identify and deter any potential improper trading activity in Index
Securities. The Exchange represents that its surveillance procedures
will be adequate to properly monitor the trading of Index Securities.
Specifically, the Phlx will rely on its existing surveillance
procedures governing equities, options and exchange-traded funds. The
Exchange will develop procedures to closely monitor activity in the
Index Security and related Underlying Securities to identify and deter
potential improper trading activity. Proposed Rule 803(n)(10) provides
that the Exchange will implement written surveillance procedures for
Index Securities.
    The Exchange also has a general policy prohibiting the distribution
of material, non-public information by its employees. For Index
Securities where the Underlying Index is maintained by a broker-dealer,
the broker-dealer will be required to erect a ``firewall'' around the
personnel responsible for the maintenance of the Underlying Index or
who have access to information concerning changes and adjustments to
the Underlying Index, and the Underlying Index will be calculated by a
third party who is not a broker-dealer. Any advisory committee,
supervisory board, or similar entity that advises an Index Licensor or
Administrator or that makes decisions regarding the Underlying Index or
portfolio composition, methodology, and related matters would be
required to implement and maintain, or be subject to, procedures
designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material, non-public
information regarding the applicable Underlying Index or portfolio.
    Proposed Phlx Rule 136(c)-(e) sets out Phlx's trading halt
parameters for all of the Exchange's derivative securities products,
including Index Securities. In particular, proposed Phlx Rule 136(c)
sets out that, where the Exchange is the listing market for an Index
Security, if the Intraday Indicative Value (``IIV'') or the index value
applicable to that series of Index Security is not being disseminated
as required, the Exchange may halt trading during the day in which the
interruption to the dissemination of the IIV of the index value occurs.
If the interruption to the dissemination of the IIV or the index value
persists past the trading day in which it occurred, the Exchange would
halt trading no later than the beginning of the trading day following
the interruption. Proposed Phlx Rule 136(d) provides how and when the
Exchange will halt trading in a series of Index Securities traded
pursuant to UTP if the primary listing market halts trading in that
series of Shares because the IIV or the index value applicable to that
series of Shares is not being disseminated as required. Proposed Phlx
Rule 136(e) provides definitions used in Phlx Rule 136.
2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that its proposal is consistent with Section
6(b) of the Act \17\ in general, and furthers the objectives of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act \18\ in particular, in that it is designed to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest, and is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    No written comments were either solicited or received.

III. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. SR-Phlx-2007-07 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2007-07. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all

written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection and
copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the Phlx.

    All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-Phlx-2007-07
and should be submitted on or before June 25, 2007.

IV. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change, as amended, is consistent with the requirements of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national
securities exchange.\19\ In particular, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of Section
6(b)(5) of the Act,\20\ which requires, among other things, that the
Exchange's rules be designed to promote just and equitable principles
of trade, to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged
in regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect
to, and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments
to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system and, in general, to protect investors and the public
interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ In approving this proposed rule change, the Commission
notes that it has considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Generic Listing Standards for Index Securities

    To list and trade Index Securities, the Exchange currently must
file a proposed rule change with the Commission pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Act \21\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder.\22\ However, Rule
19b-4(e) provides that the listing and trading of a new derivative
securities product by a SRO will not be deemed a proposed rule change
pursuant to Rule 19b-4(c)(1) if the Commission has approved, pursuant
to Section 19(b) of the Act, the SRO's trading rules, procedures, and
listing standards for the product class that would include the new
derivative securities product, and the SRO has a surveillance program
for the product class. The Exchange's proposed rules for the listing
and trading of Index Securities pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) fulfill these
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange's ability to rely on Rule 19b-4(e) to list and trade
Index Securities that meet the requirements of proposed Phlx Rule
803(n) should reduce the time frame for bringing these securities to
the market and thereby reduce the burdens on issuers and other market
participants, while also promoting competition and making Index
Securities available to investors more quickly.
    The Commission has previously approved generic listing standards
that are substantially similar to the Exchange's proposal.\23\ In
approving these securities for Exchange trading, the Commission
considered applicable Exchange rules that govern their trading. The
Commission believes that the proposed generic listing standards for
Index Securities should fulfill the intended objective of Rule 19b-4(e)
and allow Index Securities that satisfy these standards to commence
trading without the need for public comment and Commission
approval.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ See Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 55687 (May 1,
2007), 72 FR 25824 (May 7, 2007) (SR-NYSE-2007-27) (adopting generic
listing standards for index linked securities); and 51563 (April 15,
2005), 70 FR 21257 (Aril 25, 2005) (SR-Amex-2005-001) (approving the
generic listing standards for index-linked securities).
    \24\ The Commission notes that the failure of a particular
product or index to comply with the proposed generic listing
standards under Rule 19b-4(e), however, would not preclude the
Exchange from submitting a separate filing pursuant to Section
19(b)(2), requesting Commission approval to list and trade such
product.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Listing and Trading Index Securities

    Taken together, the Commission finds that the Exchange's proposal
contains adequate rules and procedures to govern the listing and
trading of Index Securities listed pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e) on the
Exchange. All Index Securities listed under the proposed generic
standards will be subject to the full panoply of Exchange rules and
procedures that currently govern the trading of equity securities on
the Exchange.
    As set forth more fully above, the Exchange has proposed size,
earnings, and minimum tangible net worth requirements for each Index
Security issuer, as well as minimum distribution and holder, principal
amount/market value, and term thresholds for each issuance of Index
Securities. The Exchange's proposed listing criteria include minimum
market capitalization, monthly trading volume, and relative weighting
requirements for each Index Security and the components underlying each
such security. These requirements are designed to ensure that the
trading markets for the Underlying Index components are adequately
capitalized and sufficiently liquid, and that no one component
dominates the Underlying Index. The Commission believes that these
requirements should minimize the potential for manipulation.
    The Commission notes that each component security of an Index
Security (other than foreign country securities and ADRs) must be
issued by a reporting company under the Act, listed on a national
securities exchange, and be an ``NMS stock,'' as such term is defined
in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS.\25\ The Commission believes that such a
requirement will contribute to the transparency of the Underlying
Index. Alternatively, such component securities may also be foreign
country securities or ADRs, so long as the foreign country securities
or foreign country securities underlying ADRs having their primary
trading market on foreign markets that are not ISG members or parties
to comprehensive surveillance agreements with the Exchange do not, in
the aggregate, represent more than 20 percent of the dollar weight of
the Underlying Index. The Commission also believes that the requirement
that 90 percent of the index's numerical value and at least 80 percent
of the total number of component securities be eligible for
standardized options trading should prevent an Index Security from
being a vehicle for trading options on a security not otherwise options
eligible. The Commission also notes that, by requiring pricing
information for the relevant Underlying Index or Indexes and the Index
Security to be readily available, the proposed listing standards should
help ensure a fair and orderly market for Index Securities listed and
traded pursuant to Rule 19b-4(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 17 CFR 240.600(b)(47).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange has also developed delisting criteria that will permit
it to suspend trading of an Index Security in circumstances that make
further dealings in the product on the Exchange inadvisable. The
Commission believes that the delisting criteria should help ensure that
a minimum level of liquidity exists for each Index Security to allow
for the maintenance of fair and orderly markets. Also, in the event
that the value of the Underlying Index is no longer calculated and
widely disseminated on at least a 15-second basis, the Exchange may
halt trading during the day on which the interruption first occurs;
however, if the interruption persists past the trading day on which it
occurred, the Exchange will halt trading no later than the beginning of
the trading day following the interruption and will commence delisting
proceedings.

C. Surveillance

    The Commission notes that any Index Security approved for listing
and trading would be subject to the Exchange's existing surveillance
procedures governing equities, options, and exchange-traded funds, as
well as procedures the Exchange represents it will develop to closely
monitor activity in Index Securities and their underlying components.
The Exchange has represented that its surveillance procedures will be
adequate to properly monitor the trading of Index Securities listed
pursuant to these proposed generic listing standards.

D. Information Memorandum

    The Exchange has represented that it will distribute, as
appropriate, an Information Memorandum to members describing the
product, the structure of the product, and the corresponding risks of
the Index Security. In addition, the Information Memorandum will set
forth the Exchange's suitability requirements with respect to
recommendations in transactions in Index Securities to customers and
the prospectus delivery requirements. The Memorandum will also identify
the Exchange's trading rules governing the Index Securities.

E. Firewall Procedures

    The Exchange has further represented that, if the Underlying Index
is maintained by a broker-dealer, such broker-dealer will establish a
``firewall'' around personnel responsible for the maintenance of the
Underlying Index. As an added measure, a third-party who is not a
broker-dealer will calculate the Underlying Index. In addition, the
Exchange has stated that any advisory committee, supervisory board, or
similar entity that advises an Index Licensor or Administrator or that
makes decisions regarding the Underlying Index or portfolio
composition, methodology, and related matters will be subject to
procedures designed to prevent the use and dissemination of material,
non-public information.

F. Acceleration

    The Commission finds good cause for approving the proposed rule
change before the 30th day after the date of publication of notice of
filing thereof in the Federal Register. The Exchange requested
accelerated approval of the proposal to enable the Exchange to
immediately list and trade Index Securities. The Commission notes that
the Exchange's proposed generic listing standards are substantially
similar to previously approved listing standards for Index Securities
\26\ and presently is not aware of any regulatory issue that should
cause it to revisit that finding or would preclude the trading of such
securities on the Exchange. Therefore, accelerating approval of this
proposal should benefit investors by creating, without undue delay,
additional competition in the market for Index Securities, subject to
the standards and representations discussed herein. Therefore, the
Commission finds good cause, consistent with Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\27\ to approve the proposed rule change on an accelerated basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ See supra note 22.
    \27\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (SR-Phlx-2007-07), as amended, is hereby
approved on an accelerated basis.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-10665 Filed 6-1-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 19, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57820-57821]
[FR Doc No: 2021-22732]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 6470-008]

Winooski Hydroelectric Company; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection.
    a. Type of Application: Subsequent Minor License.
    b. Project No.: 6470-008.
    c. Date Filed: July 30, 2021.
    d. Applicant: Winooski Hydroelectric Company (WHC).
    e. Name of Project: Winooski 8 Hydroelectric Project (project).
    f. Location: On the Winooski River in Washington County, Vermont.
The project does not affect federal lands.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r).
    h. Applicant Contact: Mathew Rubin, General Partner, Winooski
Hydroelectric Company, 26 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05602;
(802) 793-5939; or email at [email protected].
    i. FERC Contact: Kristen Sinclair at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
[email protected].
    j. Deadline for filing motions to intervene and protests: December
13, 2021.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and protests using the Commission's eFiling system
at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx. For assistance, please
contact FERC Online Support at [email protected], (866) 208-
3676 (toll free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY). In lieu of electronic
filing, you may submit a paper copy. Submissions sent via the U.S.
Postal Service must be addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Room 1A,
Washington, DC 20426. Submissions sent via any other carrier must be
addressed to: Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue,
Rockville, Maryland 20852. All filings must clearly identify the
project name and docket number on the first page: Winooski 8
Hydroelectric Project (P-6470-008).
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person on the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency.
    k. This application has been accepted for filing, but is not ready
for environmental analysis at this time.
    l. The Winooski 8 Hydroelectric Project consists of the following
constructed facilities: (1) A 222.5-foot-long, 26-foot-high concrete
gravity dam impounding a reservoir with a storage capacity of
approximately 20 acre-feet at an elevation of 615 feet mean sea level;
(2) a 148-foot-long spillway with 4-foot-high flashboards built into
the crest of the dam; (3) a 24-foot-long, hydraulically operated crest
gate; (4) a 1,100-square-foot forebay located adjacent to the project
impoundment; (5) three hydraulically operated trashracks; (6) a 1,550-
square-foot powerhouse that contains two semi-Kaplan turbines and one
fixed propeller turbine for a total installed capacity of 856
kilowatts; (7) a 100-foot-long tailrace; (8) a 1,000 kilovolt-amp
station transformer; (9) a 30-foot long, 13-kilovolt transmission line
and (10) appurtenant facilities. The project generates an average of
3,507 megawatt-hours annually.
    WHC proposes to continue to operate the project in an automated
run-of-river mode. WHC also proposes to add 3.6 acres to the existing
project boundary to enclose a 4,100-foot-long dirt road currently used
by WHC to access the dam and powerhouse and to enclose an existing
unimproved recreation site that provides access to the river for
boating and fishing activities downstream of the dam.
    m. A copy of the application is available for review via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov),
using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number, excluding the
last three digits in the docket number field, to access the document.
At this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's
Public Reference Room due to the proclamation declaring a National
Emergency concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued
by the President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact FERC Online
Support.
    You may also register online at https://ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.
    n. Anyone may submit a protest or a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18
CFR 385.210, 385.211, and 385.214. In determining the appropriate
action to take, the Commission will consider all protests filed, but
only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the
Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any protests
or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
deadline date for the particular application.
    When the application is ready for environmental analysis, the
Commission will issue a public notice requesting comments,
recommendations, terms and conditions, or prescriptions.
    All filings must (1) bear in all capital letters the title
``PROTEST'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE;'' (2) set forth in the heading
the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application.
    o. Procedural schedule: The application will be processed according
to the following schedule. Revisions to the schedule will be made as
appropriate.

Issue Scoping Document 1 for comments--December 2021
Comments on Scoping Document 1 Due--February 2022
Issue Scoping Document 2 (if necessary)--March 2022
Request Additional Information (if necessary)--March 2022
Water Quality Study Results Due--November 2022
Issue Notice of Ready for Environmental Analysis--December 2022

    Dated: October 13, 2021.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-22732 Filed 10-18-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D. C.  20460

	OFFICE OF

PREVENTION, PESTICIDES

AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES

Nov. 1, 2005

									PC Code: 027401

									DP Barcode: 322919

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: 	Drinking Water Assessment for New Use of Dichlobenil on
Rhubarb

FROM: 	Jonathan Angier, Ph.D.

		Environmental Risk Branch 2

		Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507C)

TO:		Daniel Rosenblatt, Chief

		Minor Use, Inerts & Emergency Response Branch

		Registration Division (7505C)

THRU:	Tom A. Bailey, Ph.D.

		Chief, Environmental Risk Branch 2

		Environmental Fate and Effects Division (7507C)

	This memorandum regards a proposed new use for Dichlobenil as an
herbicide for use on the food crop Rhubarb.  The proposed usage would
entail applying annually up to 2 lbs a.i. per acre of Rhubarb crop, in a
single application.  This proposed new use should not present additional
significant contamination potential for either surface water drinking
water sources or ground water drinking water sources; this is largely
because the recommended application amount is 2-10X lower than maximum
amounts currently allowed for other uses.  In addition, Rhubarb is a
very minor crop grown in relatively small amounts in few places.  For
example, the predicted maximum ground water concentration obtained from
the SciGrow model for proposed Rhubarb usage is 0.93 ppb.  The predicted
ground water concentration for control of Nutsedge in non-crop areas
(using the already approved maximum allowed amount of 20 lbs a.i./acre,
according to the label) is 9.27 ppb.

	Below are the model results for predicted surface water concentrations
(using PRZM/EXAMS model) and ground water concentrations (using
SciGrow).  There were no specific PRZM scenarios for Rhubarb, so the
closest surrogates were used instead.  In this case, the nearest
surrogates for which scenarios were available (in terms of crop type,
agricultural practices, and setting) were: Lettuce, Cabbage, and Sugar
Beet.  Three different regions were also selected, to evaluate impacts
in different areas where the crop might be grown: California (lettuce),
Florida (cabbage), and Minnesota (sugar beet).  Results from SciGrow
were obtained using the maximum proposed application rate for Rhubarb.
Results are listed below; all PRZM values have had Percent Cropped Area
(PCA) adjustments of 87% applied.

SURFACE WATER DRINKING WATER CONCENTRATIONS (ppb) FOR PARENT DICHLOBENIL
USE ON RHUBARB, MODELED USING PRZM/EXAMS:

		Peak (acute)		1 in 10 Year Annual Mean		30 Year Overall Mean

CAlettuce*	54.97				2.42					1.233

FLcabbage*	35.82				0.894					0.422

MNbeet*	15.28				0.711					0.346

	* Surrogate scenarios chosen to represent Rhubarb, in the absence of an
approved PRZM/EXAMS scenario specific to Rhubarb production.

GROUND WATER DRINKING WATER CONCENTRATIONS FOR PARENT DICHLOBENIL USE ON
RHUBARB, MODELED USING SCIGROW:

SciGrow output = 0.93 ppb

	In comparison, results from PRZM/EXAMS model runs indicate that
potential surface water concentrations resulting from already approved
label usage are likely to be substantially higher.  Included below are
results from runs using recommended maximum application rates for
control of weeds in fruit and nut orchards (6 lbs a.i./acre), in
non-crop areas (12 lbs a.i./acre), and for control of Nutsedge (20 lbs
a.i./acre).  The Oregon Apple PRZM scenario was used for orchard crops,
Florida Turf was used as a proxy for Nutsedge control in non-crop areas,
and Pennsylvania Turf used for weed control in non-crop areas.  In each
case, predicted concentrations were consistently higher for these
approved uses than for the proposed new use on Rhubarb.  Predicted PRZM
surface water concentration values (with PCA adjustments) are listed
below.

		Peak (acute)		1 in 10 Year Annual Mean		30 Year Overall Mean

ORapple	108.75				3.724					1.953

FLturf		298.3				4.615					1.145

PAturf		78.5				2.907					1.159

SciGrow output for FLturf (Nutsedge control) = 9.27 ppb

FATE PARAMETERS USED FOR MODELING DICHLOBENIL:

Parameter	Value	Reference

Molecular Weight	172 g/mol	ChemFinder.com (  HYPERLINK
"http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com/result.asp"
http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com/result.asp )

Vapor Pressure	5E-4 torr	1998 Dichlobenil RED

Henry’s Law Constant	1.01E-5 atm-m3/mol	ChemFinder.com (  HYPERLINK
"http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com/result.asp"
http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com/result.asp )

Solubility	21 mg/L	PAN Pesticides Database (  HYPERLINK
"http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC35057"
http://www.pesticideinfo.org/Detail_Chemical.jsp?Rec_Id=PC35057 )

Kd	6.4	Averaged from 5 soils (MRID 43611101)

Koc	237	Averaged from 5 soils (MRID 43611101)

Hydrolysis	pH 5: stable

pH 7: stable

pH 9: stable	(MRID 40548502)

Aqueous Photolysis	15.1 days	(MRID 41709801)

Aerobic Aquatic	2.4 days	(MRID 41149501)

Anaerobic Aquatic	1022 days	(MRID 41306001)

Aerobic Soil	324 days	(MRID 41340601, 43006803)

Kow	549.5	ChemFinder.com (  HYPERLINK
"http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com/result.asp"
http://chemfinder.cambridgesoft.com/result.asp )

Environmental Fate Summary:

	Dichlobenil dissipates in the environment (on soil and in surface
water) principally by volatilization. However, it is persistent under
field conditions that reduce the potential for volatilization (e.g.,
cooler climates).  When transformation occurs through aerobic soil
metabolism, a degradate, 2,6-dichlorobenzamide (BAM), is generated
(13.1% at 50 weeks – MRID 41340601).  Under conditions where
dichlobenil does not volatilize there is potential for both dichlobenil
and BAM to move into ground water; this is especially likely in regions
with soils that are permeable and have low organic matter content, and
where groundwater is shallow.

	Dichlobenil was stable to hydrolysis and photodegradation on soil.
Dichlobenil was persistent in aerobic soil conditions (half-life of 324
days) and extremely persistent under anaerobic aquatic conditions
(half-life of 2.8 years).

	Terrestrial field dissipation study results were consistent with lab
study results, with volatilization occurring more readily in warmer
climates.  Field dissipation studies also determined that BAM forms
throughout the subsurface and typically leaches much further into the
soil profile than the parent (MRID 41385601).  Dichlobenil was detected
in an Oregon soil (silt loam) at depths up to 60 inches, with most of
the compound remaining within the top 12 inches over the course of the
540 day study.  The degradate BAM was found at depths of 96 inches;
however, this was the deepest depth sampled in this study, so it is
likely that BAM is capable of penetrating much deeper, especially since
it was found at this depth in most of the sampling intervals.  These
deeper samples were not obtained until 393 days after treatment, so BAM
had penetrated below 96 inches prior to this time.

	Both dichlobenil and BAM can be very mobile and persistent under
anaerobic conditions.  A tier 1 ground water assessment (SciGrow model)
yielded a predicted ground water drinking water concentration of 9.3
ppb.  With an estimated lifetime Health Advisory of 9 ppb for
dichlobenil, it is possible that residues that approach or exceed these
levels will be found in ground water.  	There is currently insufficient
data available on the formation and degradation of BAM, and its fate in
the environment.  Thus, BAM can neither be assessed individually, nor as
a cumulative risk along with parent dichlobenil.  However, given what is
known about this degradate (e.g., solubility, persistence, leaching
potential), it is likely to be a greater concern for ground water than
the parent dichlobenil.

	Dichlobenil is predicted to volatilize from most surface waters;
therefore, its persistence in the surface water environment will depend
primarily on the environmental factors which control volatility rates
(temperature, wind speed, humidity, etc.).

PRZM/EXAMS RUN FOR DICHLOBENIL USAGE ON RHUBARB (CA lettuce surrogate):

stored as Dichlobenil rhubarb-CA(DW).out

Chemical: Dichlobenil

PRZM environment: CAlettuceC.txt	modified Monday, 11 October 2004 at
16:23:40

EXAMS environment: ir298.exv	modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15:34:12

Metfile: w23273.dvf	modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:22

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

1961	42.5	36.64	17.06	6.345	4.23	1.043

1962	50.17	43.18	23.28	12.5	8.508	2.13

1963	31.37	26.23	13.78	6.747	4.916	1.243

1964	10.47	8.507	3.938	1.574	1.549	0.675

1965	24.17	18.63	4.08	1.935	1.291	0.5384

1966	61.65	48.97	25.17	9.746	6.498	2.134

1967	52.02	39.75	18.24	7.071	4.877	1.552

1968	4.808	3.603	1.512	0.7035	0.6856	0.3258

1969	43.97	34.55	22.72	9.575	6.441	1.603

1970	44.36	34.35	14.29	5.627	3.753	1.814

1971	16.66	14.54	4.856	1.757	1.172	0.5774

1972	9.571	7.766	3.941	2.754	1.944	0.6769

1973	58.43	45.61	22.76	11.73	7.962	2.858

1974	109	84.39	35.7	14.21	9.499	3.621

1975	28.57	22.89	10.27	5.393	4.03	1.032

1976	52.47	42.96	18.78	7.312	4.962	1.475

1977	63.35	47.07	14.78	5.174	3.451	1.778

1978	39.74	33	21.4	10.91	7.42	1.994

1979	29.05	22.3	9.559	4.851	3.399	1.242

1980	36.49	30.86	14.22	7.966	5.56	1.85

1981	24.72	20.24	14.12	8.023	5.477	1.386

1982	13.36	10.58	5.037	2.884	2.19	0.8266

1983	66.22	54.51	33.33	14.24	9.799	2.92

1984	42.82	34.03	18.51	7.077	4.734	1.288

1985	17.66	13.71	6.073	2.607	1.758	0.8154

1986	24.37	19.36	8.642	4.523	3.159	1.22

1987	22.28	17.14	8.508	4.292	2.95	1.457

1988	36.08	28.17	17.37	6.086	4.059	1.616

1989	9.706	7.63	3.461	1.56	1.065	0.2811

1990	13.46	10.31	5.284	2.824	1.917	0.532

Sorted results

Prob.	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

0.032258064516129	109	84.39	35.7	14.24	9.799	3.621

0.0645161290322581	66.22	54.51	33.33	14.21	9.499	2.92

0.0967741935483871	63.35	48.97	25.17	12.5	8.508	2.858

0.129032258064516	61.65	47.07	23.28	11.73	7.962	2.134

0.161290322580645	58.43	45.61	22.76	10.91	7.42	2.13

0.193548387096774	52.47	43.18	22.72	9.746	6.498	1.994

0.225806451612903	52.02	42.96	21.4	9.575	6.441	1.85

0.258064516129032	50.17	39.75	18.78	8.023	5.56	1.814

0.290322580645161	44.36	36.64	18.51	7.966	5.477	1.778

0.32258064516129	43.97	34.55	18.24	7.312	4.962	1.616

0.354838709677419	42.82	34.35	17.37	7.077	4.916	1.603

0.387096774193548	42.5	34.03	17.06	7.071	4.877	1.552

0.419354838709677	39.74	33	14.78	6.747	4.734	1.475

0.451612903225806	36.49	30.86	14.29	6.345	4.23	1.457

0.483870967741936	36.08	28.17	14.22	6.086	4.059	1.386

0.516129032258065	31.37	26.23	14.12	5.627	4.03	1.288

0.548387096774194	29.05	22.89	13.78	5.393	3.753	1.243

0.580645161290323	28.57	22.3	10.27	5.174	3.451	1.242

0.612903225806452	24.72	20.24	9.559	4.851	3.399	1.22

0.645161290322581	24.37	19.36	8.642	4.523	3.159	1.043

0.67741935483871	24.17	18.63	8.508	4.292	2.95	1.032

0.709677419354839	22.28	17.14	6.073	2.884	2.19	0.8266

0.741935483870968	17.66	14.54	5.284	2.824	1.944	0.8154

0.774193548387097	16.66	13.71	5.037	2.754	1.917	0.6769

0.806451612903226	13.46	10.58	4.856	2.607	1.758	0.675

0.838709677419355	13.36	10.31	4.08	1.935	1.549	0.5774

0.870967741935484	10.47	8.507	3.941	1.757	1.291	0.5384

0.903225806451613	9.706	7.766	3.938	1.574	1.172	0.532

0.935483870967742	9.571	7.63	3.461	1.56	1.065	0.3258

0.967741935483871	4.808	3.603	1.512	0.7035	0.6856	0.2811

0.1	63.18	48.78	24.981	12.423	8.4534	2.7856

					Average of yearly averages:	1.41682

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Dichlobenil rhubarb-CA(DW)

Metfile:	w23273.dvf

PRZM scenario:	CAlettuceC.txt

EXAMS environment file:	ir298.exv

Chemical Name:	Dichlobenil

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	172	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry	1.01E-5	atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5E-4	torr

Solubility	sol	21	mg/L

Kd	Kd	6.4	mg/L

Koc	Koc	237	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	15.1	days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	2.4	days	Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	1022	days	Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	324	days	Halfife

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	0	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	0	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	0	days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	1	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	0	cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	2.24	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.99	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT		fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	1-12	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

	IPSCND

	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

	PLDKRT

	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	IR

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	total	none, monthly or total(average of
entire run)

PRZM/EXAMS RUN FOR DICHLOBENIL USAGE ON RHUBARB (FL cabbage surrogate):

stored as Dichlobenil rhubarb-FL(DW).out

Chemical: Dichlobenil

PRZM environment: FLcabbageC.txt	modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at
16:39:00

EXAMS environment: ir298.exv	modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15:34:12

Metfile: w12842.dvf	modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:28

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

1961	41.74	28.35	9.335	3.267	2.178	0.5371

1962	4.398	3.1	1.411	0.5769	0.6176	0.1659

1963	14.96	11.82	5.414	2.616	1.792	0.53

1964	28.66	20.38	7.632	3.745	2.559	1.029

1965	14.98	10.63	3.517	1.231	0.8211	0.2999

1966	12.48	9.053	3.964	1.719	1.176	0.3081

1967	10.93	7.762	3.553	1.307	0.8739	0.3552

1968	4.65	2.571	0.6849	0.3626	0.2599	0.1061

1969	66.06	51.93	19.81	7.004	4.67	1.837

1970	7.339	6.081	3.024	1.768	1.264	0.3185

1971	25.68	19.97	6.922	2.596	1.812	0.5919

1972	16.3	11.02	5.084	2.133	1.448	0.5711

1973	10.94	7.761	3.895	1.697	1.131	0.459

1974	16.04	11.98	4.373	1.531	1.021	0.3524

1975	2.074	1.091	0.5172	0.2103	0.1729	0.0678

1976	20.44	11.93	3.339	1.362	1.049	0.2723

1977	9.617	7.326	3.037	1.39	0.9388	0.3163

1978	11.29	7.925	2.115	1.406	0.9618	0.3553

1979	14.27	10.22	5.676	2.87	2.244	0.6755

1980	3.456	2.535	1.243	0.7683	0.6384	0.1687

1981	55.55	38.8	13.5	5.151	3.449	1.318

1982	13.98	9.988	4.708	2.08	1.577	0.4886

1983	36.07	26.93	10.75	3.761	2.508	1.019

1984	5.412	3.942	1.586	0.8963	0.6536	0.1727

1985	7.031	4.379	1.235	0.6611	0.471	0.1897

1986	17.48	13.44	4.501	1.637	1.422	0.3791

1987	8.356	5.541	2.456	1.388	1.494	0.4027

1988	15.94	11.12	3.862	2.137	1.477	0.6028

1989	11.4	9.342	5.787	2.158	1.439	0.5112

1990	6.372	4.232	1.926	0.8253	0.5942	0.1579

Sorted results

Prob.	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

0.032258064516129	66.06	51.93	19.81	7.004	4.67	1.837

0.0645161290322581	55.55	38.8	13.5	5.151	3.449	1.318

0.0967741935483871	41.74	28.35	10.75	3.761	2.559	1.029

0.129032258064516	36.07	26.93	9.335	3.745	2.508	1.019

0.161290322580645	28.66	20.38	7.632	3.267	2.244	0.6755

0.193548387096774	25.68	19.97	6.922	2.87	2.178	0.6028

0.225806451612903	20.44	13.44	5.787	2.616	1.812	0.5919

0.258064516129032	17.48	11.98	5.676	2.596	1.792	0.5711

0.290322580645161	16.3	11.93	5.414	2.158	1.577	0.5371

0.32258064516129	16.04	11.82	5.084	2.137	1.494	0.53

0.354838709677419	15.94	11.12	4.708	2.133	1.477	0.5112

0.387096774193548	14.98	11.02	4.501	2.08	1.448	0.4886

0.419354838709677	14.96	10.63	4.373	1.768	1.439	0.459

0.451612903225806	14.27	10.22	3.964	1.719	1.422	0.4027

0.483870967741936	13.98	9.988	3.895	1.697	1.264	0.3791

0.516129032258065	12.48	9.342	3.862	1.637	1.176	0.3553

0.548387096774194	11.4	9.053	3.553	1.531	1.131	0.3552

0.580645161290323	11.29	7.925	3.517	1.406	1.049	0.3524

0.612903225806452	10.94	7.762	3.339	1.39	1.021	0.3185

0.645161290322581	10.93	7.761	3.037	1.388	0.9618	0.3163

0.67741935483871	9.617	7.326	3.024	1.362	0.9388	0.3081

0.709677419354839	8.356	6.081	2.456	1.307	0.8739	0.2999

0.741935483870968	7.339	5.541	2.115	1.231	0.8211	0.2723

0.774193548387097	7.031	4.379	1.926	0.8963	0.6536	0.1897

0.806451612903226	6.372	4.232	1.586	0.8253	0.6384	0.1727

0.838709677419355	5.412	3.942	1.411	0.7683	0.6176	0.1687

0.870967741935484	4.65	3.1	1.243	0.6611	0.5942	0.1659

0.903225806451613	4.398	2.571	1.235	0.5769	0.471	0.1579

0.935483870967742	3.456	2.535	0.6849	0.3626	0.2599	0.1061

0.967741935483871	2.074	1.091	0.5172	0.2103	0.1729	0.0678

0.1	41.173	28.208	10.6085	3.7594	2.5539	1.028

					Average of yearly averages:	0.485293333333333

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Dichlobenil rhubarb-FL(DW)

Metfile:	w12842.dvf

PRZM scenario:	FLcabbageC.txt

EXAMS environment file:	ir298.exv

Chemical Name:	Dichlobenil

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	172	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry	1.01E-5	atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5E-4	torr

Solubility	sol	21	mg/L

Kd	Kd	6.4	mg/L

Koc	Koc	237	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	15.1	days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	2.4	days	Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	1022	days	Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	324	days	Halfife

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	0	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	0	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	0	days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	1	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	0	cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	2.24	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.99	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT		fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	1-12	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

	IPSCND

	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

	PLDKRT

	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	IR

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	total	none, monthly or total(average of
entire run)

PRZM/EXAMS RUN FOR DICHLOBENIL USAGE ON RHUBARB (MN sugar beet
surrogate):

stored as Dichlobenil rhubarb-MN(DW).out

Chemical: Dichlobenil

PRZM environment: MNsugarbeetC.txt	modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at
17:05:10

EXAMS environment: ir298.exv	modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15:34:12

Metfile: w14914.dvf	modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:05:52

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

1961	0	0	0	0	0	0

1962	2.6	2.216	1.453	0.8044	0.6168	0.1543

1963	9.637	8.154	3.935	1.755	1.226	0.3272

1964	6.152	4.821	2.723	1.321	1.092	0.2827

1965	15.76	12.83	7.934	3.269	2.196	0.5463

1966	11.05	9.929	6.605	3.072	2.083	0.5227

1967	6.03	5.028	2.947	2.236	1.556	0.3905

1968	2.908	2.296	1.585	1.175	0.8339	0.2091

1969	23.53	19.34	9.207	3.588	2.471	0.6477

1970	12.08	9.791	6.521	2.848	1.964	0.5013

1971	3.479	2.858	1.959	0.8605	0.8072	0.2152

1972	17.34	15.58	10.61	4.627	3.335	0.8359

1973	4.976	4.148	2.166	0.9199	0.6284	0.1694

1974	6.042	4.835	2.607	1.569	1.177	0.2978

1975	7.632	6.858	4.593	2.486	1.667	0.444

1976	5.612	5.043	3.344	1.949	1.309	0.3239

1977	20.91	13.67	9.936	5.187	3.9	1.095

1978	10.7	9.36	5.14	2.092	1.471	0.4714

1979	15.78	14.18	9.356	6.207	4.169	1.039

1980	7.143	6.029	2.727	1.018	0.7143	0.2299

1981	10.25	7.768	3.414	1.296	0.8741	0.2191

1982	9.487	8.339	4.375	2.006	1.359	0.3947

1983	3.086	2.773	1.904	0.8743	0.6102	0.1863

1984	4.887	4.391	3.158	1.57	1.179	0.3503

1985	5.796	5.008	2.662	1.077	1.149	0.3316

1986	11.09	9.393	5.602	3.77	2.544	0.6373

1987	4.261	2.959	1.406	0.5012	0.4162	0.1129

1988	4.906	4.518	3.129	1.537	1.03	0.288

1989	17.59	15.15	9.323	3.821	2.575	0.6477

1990	2.164	1.421	0.5191	0.2986	0.2173	0.06375

Sorted results

Prob.	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

0.032258064516129	23.53	19.34	10.61	6.207	4.169	1.095

0.0645161290322581	20.91	15.58	9.936	5.187	3.9	1.039

0.0967741935483871	17.59	15.15	9.356	4.627	3.335	0.8359

0.129032258064516	17.34	14.18	9.323	3.821	2.575	0.6477

0.161290322580645	15.78	13.67	9.207	3.77	2.544	0.6477

0.193548387096774	15.76	12.83	7.934	3.588	2.471	0.6373

0.225806451612903	12.08	9.929	6.605	3.269	2.196	0.5463

0.258064516129032	11.09	9.791	6.521	3.072	2.083	0.5227

0.290322580645161	11.05	9.393	5.602	2.848	1.964	0.5013

0.32258064516129	10.7	9.36	5.14	2.486	1.667	0.4714

0.354838709677419	10.25	8.339	4.593	2.236	1.556	0.444

0.387096774193548	9.637	8.154	4.375	2.092	1.471	0.3947

0.419354838709677	9.487	7.768	3.935	2.006	1.359	0.3905

0.451612903225806	7.632	6.858	3.414	1.949	1.309	0.3503

0.483870967741936	7.143	6.029	3.344	1.755	1.226	0.3316

0.516129032258065	6.152	5.043	3.158	1.57	1.179	0.3272

0.548387096774194	6.042	5.028	3.129	1.569	1.177	0.3239

0.580645161290323	6.03	5.008	2.947	1.537	1.149	0.2978

0.612903225806452	5.796	4.835	2.727	1.321	1.092	0.288

0.645161290322581	5.612	4.821	2.723	1.296	1.03	0.2827

0.67741935483871	4.976	4.518	2.662	1.175	0.8741	0.2299

0.709677419354839	4.906	4.391	2.607	1.077	0.8339	0.2191

0.741935483870968	4.887	4.148	2.166	1.018	0.8072	0.2152

0.774193548387097	4.261	2.959	1.959	0.9199	0.7143	0.2091

0.806451612903226	3.479	2.858	1.904	0.8743	0.6284	0.1863

0.838709677419355	3.086	2.773	1.585	0.8605	0.6168	0.1694

0.870967741935484	2.908	2.296	1.453	0.8044	0.6102	0.1543

0.903225806451613	2.6	2.216	1.406	0.5012	0.4162	0.1129

0.935483870967742	2.164	1.421	0.5191	0.2986	0.2173	0.06375

0.967741935483871	0	0	0	0	0	0

0.1	17.565	15.053	9.3527	4.5464	3.259	0.81708

					Average of yearly averages:	0.397831666666667

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Dichlobenil rhubarb-MN(DW)

Metfile:	w14914.dvf

PRZM scenario:	MNsugarbeetC.txt

EXAMS environment file:	ir298.exv

Chemical Name:	Dichlobenil

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	172	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry	1.01E-5	atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5E-4	torr

Solubility	sol	21	mg/L

Kd	Kd	6.4	mg/L

Koc	Koc	237	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	15.1	days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	2.4	days	Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	1022	days	Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	324	days	Halfife

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	0	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	0	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	0	days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	1	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	0	cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	2.24	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.99	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT		fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	1-12	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

	IPSCND

	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

	PLDKRT

	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	IR

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	total	none, monthly or total(average of
entire run)

PRZM/EXAMS RUN FOR DICHLOBENIL USAGE FOR CONTROL OF NUTSEDGE (Max Rate):

stored as Dichlobenil turf-FL(DW).out

Chemical: Dichlobenil

PRZM environment: FLturfC.txt	modified Monday, 16 June 2003 at 14:48:06

EXAMS environment: ir298.exv	modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15:34:12

Metfile: w12834.dvf	modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09:04:28

Water segment concentrations (ppb)

Year	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

1961	0	0	0	0	0	0

1962	0.4254	0.2425	0.06411	0.02266	0.01512	0.003735

1963	7.933	5.933	3.327	1.304	0.8706	0.2151

1964	55.97	38.94	13.45	4.765	3.177	1.03

1965	6.937	4.971	1.674	0.5864	0.3911	0.1327

1966	0.6839	0.5024	0.1939	0.0817	0.05585	0.01551

1967	80.18	55.66	19.15	6.703	4.469	1.13

1968	1.31	0.9654	0.3851	0.1566	0.1101	0.02945

1969	482	374	147	51.92	34.62	8.548

1970	16.34	12.81	6.145	2.397	1.637	0.4191

1971	105	79.99	30.88	11.11	7.419	2.486

1972	12.7	8.843	2.746	0.9613	0.6411	0.1645

1973	5.005	3.635	1.361	0.4819	0.3214	0.1123

1974	18.16	13.1	4.704	1.646	1.098	0.2978

1975	0.9336	0.646	0.2242	0.09367	0.06368	0.0165

1976	153	109	39.01	13.65	9.103	2.503

1977	8.62	6.67	3.346	1.292	0.8717	0.2196

1978	30.14	20.11	6.385	2.318	1.545	0.3826

1979	12.48	9.826	4.374	1.632	1.091	0.2704

1980	41.3	30.57	9.835	3.443	2.295	0.8735

1981	112	83.01	18.48	6.471	4.314	1.826

1982	51.56	38.13	15.78	5.854	3.914	1.314

1983	564	441	168	58.95	39.3	9.762

1984	17.82	13.42	5.531	2.169	1.495	0.3883

1985	4.538	3.012	0.9576	0.6281	0.4199	0.1055

1986	50.47	37.77	14.78	5.351	3.572	0.9212

1987	12.55	9.358	3.713	1.633	1.092	0.2702

1988	22.56	16.85	6.978	2.549	1.701	0.4194

1989	364	251	86.12	30.91	20.63	5.616

1990	1.307	0.9203	0.3329	0.1486	0.1046	0.02703

Sorted results

Prob.	Peak	96 hr	21 Day	60 Day	90 Day	Yearly

0.032258064516129	564	441	168	58.95	39.3	9.762

0.0645161290322581	482	374	147	51.92	34.62	8.548

0.0967741935483871	364	251	86.12	30.91	20.63	5.616

0.129032258064516	153	109	39.01	13.65	9.103	2.503

0.161290322580645	112	83.01	30.88	11.11	7.419	2.486

0.193548387096774	105	79.99	19.15	6.703	4.469	1.826

0.225806451612903	80.18	55.66	18.48	6.471	4.314	1.314

0.258064516129032	55.97	38.94	15.78	5.854	3.914	1.13

0.290322580645161	51.56	38.13	14.78	5.351	3.572	1.03

0.32258064516129	50.47	37.77	13.45	4.765	3.177	0.9212

0.354838709677419	41.3	30.57	9.835	3.443	2.295	0.8735

0.387096774193548	30.14	20.11	6.978	2.549	1.701	0.4194

0.419354838709677	22.56	16.85	6.385	2.397	1.637	0.4191

0.451612903225806	18.16	13.42	6.145	2.318	1.545	0.3883

0.483870967741936	17.82	13.1	5.531	2.169	1.495	0.3826

0.516129032258065	16.34	12.81	4.704	1.646	1.098	0.2978

0.548387096774194	12.7	9.826	4.374	1.633	1.092	0.2704

0.580645161290323	12.55	9.358	3.713	1.632	1.091	0.2702

0.612903225806452	12.48	8.843	3.346	1.304	0.8717	0.2196

0.645161290322581	8.62	6.67	3.327	1.292	0.8706	0.2151

0.67741935483871	7.933	5.933	2.746	0.9613	0.6411	0.1645

0.709677419354839	6.937	4.971	1.674	0.6281	0.4199	0.1327

0.741935483870968	5.005	3.635	1.361	0.5864	0.3911	0.1123

0.774193548387097	4.538	3.012	0.9576	0.4819	0.3214	0.1055

0.806451612903226	1.31	0.9654	0.3851	0.1566	0.1101	0.02945

0.838709677419355	1.307	0.9203	0.3329	0.1486	0.1046	0.02703

0.870967741935484	0.9336	0.646	0.2242	0.09367	0.06368	0.0165

0.903225806451613	0.6839	0.5024	0.1939	0.0817	0.05585	0.01551

0.935483870967742	0.4254	0.2425	0.06411	0.02266	0.01512	0.003735

0.967741935483871	0	0	0	0	0	0

0.1	342.9	236.8	81.409	29.184	19.4773	5.3047

					Average of yearly averages:	1.3166475

Inputs generated by pe4.pl - 8-August-2003

Data used for this run:

Output File: Dichlobenil turf-FL(DW)

Metfile:	w12834.dvf

PRZM scenario:	FLturfC.txt

EXAMS environment file:	ir298.exv

Chemical Name:	Dichlobenil

Description	Variable Name	Value	Units	Comments

Molecular weight	mwt	172	g/mol

Henry's Law Const.	henry	1.01E-5	atm-m^3/mol

Vapor Pressure	vapr	5E-4	torr

Solubility	sol	21	mg/L

Kd	Kd	6.4	mg/L

Koc	Koc	237	mg/L

Photolysis half-life	kdp	15.1	days	Half-life

Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacw	2.4	days	Halfife

Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism	kbacs	1022	days	Halfife

Aerobic Soil Metabolism	asm	324	days	Halfife

Hydrolysis:	pH 5	0	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 7	0	days	Half-life

Hydrolysis:	pH 9	0	days	Half-life

Method:	CAM	1	integer	See PRZM manual

Incorporation Depth:	DEPI	0	cm

Application Rate:	TAPP	22.4	kg/ha

Application Efficiency:	APPEFF	0.99	fraction

Spray Drift	DRFT		fraction of application rate applied to pond

Application Date	Date	1-12	dd/mm or dd/mmm or dd-mm or dd-mmm

Record 17:	FILTRA

	IPSCND

	UPTKF

Record 18:	PLVKRT

	PLDKRT

	FEXTRC	0.5

Flag for Index Res. Run	IR	IR

Flag for runoff calc.	RUNOFF	total	none, monthly or total(average of
entire run)