UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 Date: 8/ 17/ 04 Chemical: Napropamide PC Code: 103001 DP Barcode: D305601 MEMORANDUM Subject: Drinking Water Assessment for Napropamide for Terrestrial Uses Registrant:

To: Susan Lewis, PM 51, Demson Fuller, Chemical Review Manager Special Review and Reregistration Division ( 7508C)

From: James Breithaupt, Agronomist Environmental Risk Branch II Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( 7507C)

Thru: Nelson Thurman, Senior Scientist Environmental Risk Branch II Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( 7507C)

Tom Bailey, Chief Environmental Risk Branch II Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( 7507C)

Summary This memorandum contains a drinking water assessment for napropamide for terrestrial uses. This assessment incorporates environmental fate data and transport data as inputs into Tier I and II models to predict drinking water exposure for 10 of the registered crops.

Human exposure to napropamide through ingestion of drinking water from the use on many small acreage crops was assessed through modeling. Surface water concentrations from use on terrestrial crops were estimated using the Tier II model PRZM version 3.12/ EXAMS version 2.98.04 and ground water concentrations were estimated using the Tier I model SCIGROW version 2.2. A total of 10 scenarios were modeled for napropamide use on terrestrial crops based on individual EFED standard scenarios. The scenarios modeled may be seen in Tables 1 and 2, and represent the highest use rates, number of applications, and most vulnerable sites for runoff to surface water. Some uses without a scenario were not modeled. These scenarios were chosen to estimate the concentration of napropamide in surface drinking water over a geographically dispersed range of existing terrestrial crop production areas and different crop types ( orchards, vineyards, and row crops). These scenarios chosen for this assessment represent most relevant PRZM/ EXAMS scenarios for the terrestrial use of napropamide. Napropamide is to be applied by ground equipment only as per the use information provided by BEAD. Appendix A provides the model outputs for PRZM EXAMS. Additional details on each scenario may be seen at the website: http:// www. epa. gov/ oppefed1/ models/ water .

Based on modeling results, the estimated surface water drinking water concentrations for napropamide are:

112.0 m g / L for the 1 in 10 year annual peak concentration ( acute) 0.5 m g / L for the 1 in 10 year annual mean concentration ( non cancer chronic) and 0.2 m g / L for the 36 year annual mean concentration ( cancer chronic).

These 1 in 10 year annual peak ( acute), 1 in 10 year annual mean ( non cancer chronic), and 36 year annual mean concentrations ( cancer chronic) were derived from modeling napropamide on the labeled terrestrial crops in Table 1. The estimates of surface water concentrations ranged from 9.1 to 112.0, 0.05 to 0.5, and 0.04 to 0.3 ug/ L for the peak, annual mean, and overall means, respectively. These concentrations will likely be lower because any napropamide residues on the soil surface may degrade faster than the aerobic soil metabolism rate. However, this reduction in aqueous concentrations cannot be quantified for two reasons. There are uncertainties regarding the amount of residues left on the surface after incorporation, and the factors affecting photolysis in the field are highly variable. For shallow ground water used for drinking water, the SCI GROW model estimates are not expected to exceed 4.5 : g/ L . These modeled concentrations can be considered as both the acute and chronic value. Since no degradates of concern have been identified, no degradates of napropamide were modeled in this assessment. Should the Health Effects Division ( HED) determine that any of the environmental fate degradates are of concern, a separate assessment will be conducted as an addendum to this document.

For most compounds, modeled concentrations in surface water and ground water are generally higher than monitored concentrations. Napropamide was not detected in USGS surface water monitoring as of 2001.

MODELING ASSESSMENT To estimate concentrations of napropamide in surface water or groundwater, modeling was used and compared to surface water or groundwater monitoring data. Typically, Tier I drinking water assessments ( FIRST) are completed for terrestrial uses by EFED for chemicals without higher tier scenarios or as a screening level assessment. In the case of napropamide, Tier II scenarios were used for 18 of the labeled terrestrial uses for napropamide. Of these 18 scenarios, 10 were chosen to estimate the concentration of napropamide in surface drinking water over a geographically dispersed range of existing terrestrial crop production areas and different crop types ( orchards, vineyards, and row crops). These scenarios chosen for this assessment represent most relevant PRZM/ EXAMS scenarios for the terrestrial use of napropamide. Therefore, drinking water exposure assessments for people who drink surface water were completed using Tier II model predictions.

Surface Water Modeling of Terrestrial Uses for Napropamide Proposed drinking water concentrations are based on modeling and monitoring estimates. The modeled scenarios may be seen in Tables 1 and 2. Some uses without a scenario were not modeled and some uses with scenarios were represented with other scenarios in th same geographic region. PRZM 3.12/ EXAMS 2.98.04 modeling was performed with index reservoir ( IR) scenarios and percent cropped area ( PCA) adjustment factors. For a description of the IR/ PCA scenarios and the uncertainties associated with them see R. D. Jones et al ( March 21, 2000). For the five scenarios, a PCA adjustment of 0.87 was applied to the model. A PCA of 0.87 is the default value. The PCA adjusted model results are presented in Table 1.

Table 2 presents the input parameters used in the Tier II PRZM/ EXAMS modeling for drinking water from a surface water source and Table 3 presents the input parameters used in the Tier I SCI GROW modeling for drinking water from a groundwater source. Input parameters used in Tier I groundwater ( SCI GROW version 2.2) modeling were selected using EFED guidance (" Guidance for Chemistry and Management Practice Input Parameters for Use in Modeling the Environmental Fate and Transport of Pesticides" dated February 28, 2002).

Table 1. DrinkingWater EECs for Napropamide EECs ( ug/ L)

Scenario and crop Peak 4 day 21 day 60 day 90 day Annual mean Overall mean CA almonds 18.2 6.0 1.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 FL citrus 72.5 22.8 5.1 2.4 1.7 0.4 0.3 OR berry 9.1 4.6 1.1 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.08 OR apple 12.8 5.5 1.5 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 PA apple 52.0 14.4 4.5 2.0 1.4 0.4 0.2 PA turf 19.2 6.6 2.1 0.7 0.5 0.1 0.1 FL tomato 23.9 8.5 2.3 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.1 CA grape 9.1 2.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.05 0.05 GA pecan 112.0 29.4 6.5 3.0 2.1 0.5 0.2 NC tobacco 7.9 2.4 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.04 Table 2. Surface Water Exposure Inputs for Drinking Water Exposure for Terrestrial Uses of Napropamide using the PRZM EXAMS Model ( EFED Shell).

MODEL INPUT VARIABLE1 INPUT VALUE COMMENTS Application Rate ( kg/ ha) CA Almonds FL Citrus OR Berry OR Apple PA Apple PA Turf FL Tomato CA Grape GA Pecan NC Tobacco 4 4 4 4 4 6 2 4 4 2 Based on BEAD use data lbs ai/ A Maximum No. of Applications OR berry, CA tomato, PA turf, NC tobacco CA almonds, OR, PA apple, CA grape, GA pecan, FL citrus, 1 2 Based on BEAD use data lbs ai/ A Interval between applications 21 days for all crops with two applications Application Date( s) May 15 June 5 for all crops with two applications Method of application Ground Ground All uses Molecular Weight 271 g/ Mol Vapor pressure 7.1e 4 Torr at 25 oC Application Efficiency ( Drinking Water) All uses 0.99 Per 2/ 8/ 02 Input Parameter Guidance for Ground Applications Spray Drift ( Drinking Water) All uses 0.064 Per 2/ 8/ 02 Input Parameter Guidance Kd ( ml/ g) 8 Average of values in MRID 41575302 Percent Cropped Area CA Almonds FL Citrus OR Berry OR Apple PA Apple PA Turf FL Tomato CA Grape GA Pecan NC Tobacco 0.87 Default Value Aerobic Soil Metabolic Half life ( days) parent 1338 3X 446 day half life based on extractable residues in MRID 41105901 Incorporation depth ( cm) All uses 5 Broadcast application CAM= 4 Solubility ( mg/ L) 730 73 mg/ L at 20 oC x 10 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolic Halflife ( days) Kbacw in EXAMS 0 No data Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism half life ( days) Kbacs in EXAMS 0 Essentially stable MRID 42699701 Photolysis Half life ( days, ppm) 0.003 4.3 minutes/ 1440 minutes/ day 41575301 Include parent + Isomer I + Isomer II 1 Input parameters based on 2/ 8/ 02 Input Parameter Guidance Ground Water Assessment Ground water EECs were modeled using SCI GROW, a screening groundwater regression model developed using data from prospective groundwater studies submitted to the OPP in support of registration. SCI GROW provides a high end estimate of ground water concentrations of pesticides on soils that are known to be vulnerable to pesticide leaching ( i. e. high sand content with shallow depth to groundwater).

Tables 3 and 4 provide the environmental fate inputs and ground water concentration for parent napropamide, respectively. The estimated EEC is considered representative of both a peak and longterm average concentration because of the inherent transport nature of ground water ( i. e. generally slow movement from source of contamination both laterally and horizontally). Based on SCI GROW modeling, the acute and chronic napropamide concentrations are not expected to exceed 4.5 : g/ L. However, the USGS has not found any detections in ground water as of 2001. Table 3. SCI GROW Inputs for Napropamide using the SCI GROW2 Model.

MODEL INPUT VARIABLE1 INPUT VALUE COMMENTS Application Rate ( kg/ ha) CA Almonds FL Citrus OR Berry OR Apple PA Apple PA Turf FL Tomato CA Grape GA Pecan NC Tobacco 44 4 44 6 2 44 2 Based on BEAD use data lbs ai/ A Maximum No. of Applications OR berry, FL tomato, PA turf, NC tobacco CA almonds, OR, PA apple, CA grape, GA pecan, FL citrus, 1 2 Based on BEAD use data lbs ai/ A Median Koc ( ml/ g) 577 Average of values in MRID 41575302 Aerobic Soil Metabolic Half life ( days) parent 446 446 day half life based on extractable residues in MRID 41105901 1 Input parameters based on 2/ 8/ 02 Input Parameter Guidance Table 4. Drinking Water EECs for Napropamide from Ground Water EECs ( ug/ L)

Scenario and crop GW Screening Concentration CA almonds 4.5 FL citrus 4.5 OR berry 2.3 OR apple 4.5 PA apple 4.5 PA turf 3.4 FL tomato 1.1 CA grape 4.5 GA pecan 4.5 NC tobacco 1.1 If there are any questions, please call Jim Breithaupt at ( 703) 305 5925. Appendix A. Model Outputs using PRZM EXAMS for Endothall Applied to Terrestrial Crops California Almonds stored as caalmond. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAalmondC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 30: 38 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w23232. 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 19.990 6.554 1.709 0.599 0.400 0.155 1962 99.340 36.970 7.383 2.586 1.745 0.489 1963 10.460 2.813 0.547 0.355 0.238 0.090 1964 10.460 3.145 0.673 0.354 0.236 0.132 1965 10.460 2.497 0.481 0.336 0.246 0.079 1966 10.460 3.061 1.122 0.525 0.350 0.143 1967 10.460 2.554 0.493 0.341 0.227 0.060 1968 10.460 2.565 0.495 0.338 0.226 0.082 1969 10.460 4.023 0.860 0.332 0.221 0.135 1970 27.100 10.830 2.200 0.836 0.557 0.214 1971 10.460 2.848 0.554 0.359 0.240 0.071 1972 10.460 2.529 0.572 0.337 0.225 0.099 1973 10.460 2.517 0.485 0.336 0.224 0.092 1974 10.460 2.417 0.482 0.399 0.266 0.080 1975 10.460 2.427 0.467 0.326 0.217 0.054 1976 10.460 2.417 0.465 0.324 0.216 0.053 1977 10.460 2.807 0.801 0.421 0.281 0.148 1978 10.460 2.420 0.486 0.325 0.217 0.109 1979 10.460 2.464 0.506 0.324 0.216 0.117 1980 10.460 2.565 0.495 0.341 0.228 0.081 1981 17.780 6.903 1.854 0.690 0.466 0.238 1982 10.600 3.325 0.786 0.398 0.268 0.132 1983 14.490 5.389 1.268 0.579 0.386 0.151 1984 10.460 2.475 0.476 0.328 0.219 0.056 1985 20.990 6.084 1.233 0.436 0.291 0.127 1986 10.460 2.607 0.503 0.338 0.225 0.061 1987 10.460 2.552 0.492 0.338 0.225 0.067 1988 10.460 2.654 0.513 0.353 0.235 0.078 1989 18.560 4.417 0.850 0.335 0.242 0.115 1990 11.930 3.409 1.108 0.548 0.366 0.130 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 99.340 36.970 7.383 2.586 1.745 0.489 0.065 27.100 10.830 2.200 0.836 0.557 0.238 0.097 20.990 6.903 1.854 0.690 0.466 0.214 0.129 19.990 6.554 1.709 0.599 0.400 0.155 0.161 18.560 6.084 1.268 0.579 0.386 0.151 0.194 17.780 5.389 1.233 0.548 0.366 0.148 0.226 14.490 4.417 1.122 0.525 0.350 0.143 0.258 11.930 4.023 1.108 0.436 0.291 0.135 0.290 10.600 3.409 0.860 0.421 0.281 0.132 0.323 10.460 3.325 0.850 0.399 0.268 0.132 0.355 10.460 3.145 0.801 0.398 0.266 0.130 0.387 10.460 3.061 0.786 0.359 0.246 0.127 0.419 10.460 2.848 0.673 0.355 0.242 0.117 0.452 10.460 2.813 0.572 0.354 0.240 0.115 0.484 10.460 2.807 0.554 0.353 0.238 0.109 0.516 10.460 2.654 0.547 0.341 0.236 0.099 0.548 10.460 2.607 0.513 0.341 0.235 0.092 0.581 10.460 2.565 0.506 0.338 0.228 0.090 0.613 10.460 2.565 0.503 0.338 0.227 0.082 0.645 10.460 2.554 0.495 0.338 0.226 0.081 0.677 10.460 2.552 0.495 0.337 0.225 0.080 0.710 10.460 2.529 0.493 0.336 0.225 0.079 0.742 10.460 2.517 0.492 0.336 0.225 0.078 0.774 10.460 2.497 0.486 0.335 0.224 0.071 0.806 10.460 2.475 0.485 0.332 0.221 0.067 0.839 10.460 2.464 0.482 0.328 0.219 0.061 0.871 10.460 2.427 0.481 0.326 0.217 0.060 0.903 10.460 2.420 0.476 0.325 0.217 0.056 0.935 10.460 2.417 0.467 0.324 0.216 0.054 0.968 10.460 2.417 0.465 0.324 0.216 0.053 0.1 20.9 6.9 1.8 0.7 0.5 0.2 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Adjusted EECs 0.1 18.2 6.0 1.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: caalmond Metfile: w23232. dvf PRZM scenario: CAalmondC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

Florida Citrus stored as flcitrus. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLcitrusC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 39: 50 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 21.74 5.942 1.6 0.9883 0.7881 0.2019 1962 21.32 5.792 1.94 1.049 0.7242 0.1941 1963 24.35 8.068 3.728 1.733 1.27 0.3196 1964 32.03 7.985 3.419 1.853 1.364 0.3373 1965 46.45 20.98 5.292 2.245 1.605 0.3968 1966 83.14 26.19 6.302 2.672 1.922 0.4759 1967 13.66 4.838 1.978 1.177 0.9173 0.2336 1968 35.09 12.85 2.852 2.09 1.42 0.3544 1969 62.22 17.48 4.095 2.342 1.879 0.4657 1970 29.97 7.394 2.311 1.054 1.034 0.2786 1971 97.91 22.31 4.322 1.876 1.426 0.3605 1972 74.96 20.49 4.691 2.209 1.595 0.4198 1973 13.65 3.61 1.197 0.8061 0.691 0.1756 1974 83.41 32.59 6.983 3.092 2.081 0.5152 1975 64.78 15.96 5.575 2.338 1.644 0.41 1976 111 29.33 5.915 3.537 2.375 0.5908 1977 16.62 4.037 1.269 0.7506 0.6106 0.1613 1978 10.46 2.759 1.356 0.6729 0.6721 0.1684 1979 31.49 7.535 2.086 1.335 1.188 0.3033 1980 30.86 7.228 3.211 1.415 1.118 0.2814 1981 24.77 8.314 3.17 1.455 0.9709 0.2733 1982 50.78 15.58 4.775 2.715 1.879 0.4645 1983 72.86 17.03 4.855 2.462 1.724 0.4264 1984 32.5 7.618 1.965 1.238 0.9154 0.2303 1985 50.19 26.11 5.732 2.304 1.667 0.4145 1986 16.07 4.102 1.67 0.9636 0.7019 0.1778 1987 36.41 10.12 1.979 1.425 1.061 0.267 1988 29.13 8.265 2.911 1.415 1.091 0.2942 1989 42.37 10.53 2.573 1.261 0.8999 0.2228 1990 19.09 4.866 1.729 1.245 0.9562 0.2369 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 111.000 32.590 6.983 3.537 2.375 0.591 0.065 97.910 29.330 6.302 3.092 2.081 0.515 0.097 83.410 26.190 5.915 2.715 1.922 0.476 0.129 83.140 26.110 5.732 2.672 1.879 0.466 0.161 74.960 22.310 5.575 2.462 1.879 0.465 0.194 72.860 20.980 5.292 2.342 1.724 0.426 0.226 64.780 20.490 4.855 2.338 1.667 0.420 0.258 62.220 17.480 4.775 2.304 1.644 0.415 0.290 50.780 17.030 4.691 2.245 1.605 0.410 0.323 50.190 15.960 4.322 2.209 1.595 0.397 0.355 46.450 15.580 4.095 2.090 1.426 0.361 0.387 42.370 12.850 3.728 1.876 1.420 0.354 0.419 36.410 10.530 3.419 1.853 1.364 0.337 0.452 35.090 10.120 3.211 1.733 1.270 0.320 0.484 32.500 8.314 3.170 1.455 1.188 0.303 0.516 32.030 8.265 2.911 1.425 1.118 0.294 0.548 31.490 8.068 2.852 1.415 1.091 0.281 0.581 30.860 7.985 2.573 1.415 1.061 0.279 0.613 29.970 7.618 2.311 1.335 1.034 0.273 0.645 29.130 7.535 2.086 1.261 0.971 0.267 0.677 24.770 7.394 1.979 1.245 0.956 0.237 0.710 24.350 7.228 1.978 1.238 0.917 0.234 0.742 21.740 5.942 1.965 1.177 0.915 0.230 0.774 21.320 5.792 1.940 1.054 0.900 0.223 0.806 19.090 4.866 1.729 1.049 0.788 0.202 0.839 16.620 4.838 1.670 0.988 0.724 0.194 0.871 16.070 4.102 1.600 0.964 0.702 0.178 0.903 13.660 4.037 1.356 0.806 0.691 0.176 0.935 13.650 3.610 1.269 0.751 0.672 0.168 0.968 10.460 2.759 1.197 0.673 0.611 0.161 0.1 83.4 26.2 5.9 2.7 1.9 0.5 Average of yearly averages: 0.3 Adjusted EECs 0.1 72.5 22.8 5.1 2.4 1.7 0.4 0.3 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: flcitrus Metfile: w12842. dvf PRZM scenario: FLcitrusC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

Oregon Berry stored as orberry. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: ORberriesC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17: 17: 16 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w24232. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 06: 10 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 10.460 5.030 1.174 0.418 0.279 0.078 1962 10.460 5.422 1.319 0.462 0.308 0.104 1963 10.460 4.606 1.014 0.356 0.237 0.096 1964 10.460 4.873 1.105 0.387 0.258 0.077 1965 10.460 4.658 1.031 0.376 0.251 0.090 1966 10.460 4.467 0.970 0.340 0.227 0.085 1967 10.460 4.591 1.009 0.354 0.236 0.088 1968 10.460 4.890 1.189 0.419 0.280 0.088 1969 10.460 4.547 0.995 0.511 0.341 0.123 1970 10.460 4.511 0.984 0.345 0.230 0.075 1971 10.460 4.768 1.068 0.399 0.266 0.093 1972 11.020 6.344 1.423 0.500 0.334 0.097 1973 10.460 4.576 1.005 0.352 0.235 0.069 1974 10.460 4.999 1.150 0.403 0.269 0.109 1975 10.460 4.533 0.991 0.347 0.232 0.077 1976 10.460 4.599 1.012 0.355 0.237 0.058 1977 10.750 5.308 1.247 0.437 0.292 0.079 1978 10.460 4.768 1.068 0.374 0.251 0.073 1979 10.460 4.518 0.986 0.362 0.247 0.120 1980 10.460 5.035 1.164 0.433 0.289 0.089 1981 10.460 5.009 1.157 0.517 0.345 0.107 1982 10.460 4.482 0.975 0.342 0.228 0.065 1983 10.460 4.599 1.012 0.361 0.250 0.074 1984 10.460 4.914 1.120 0.492 0.328 0.091 1985 10.460 4.898 1.114 0.679 0.453 0.127 1986 10.460 4.913 1.119 0.405 0.270 0.074 1987 10.460 4.651 1.029 0.361 0.459 0.160 1988 10.460 5.050 1.174 0.412 0.275 0.083 1989 10.460 4.815 1.085 0.380 0.254 0.094 1990 10.460 5.130 1.221 0.428 0.286 0.089 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 11.020 6.344 1.423 0.679 0.459 0.160 0.065 10.750 5.422 1.319 0.517 0.453 0.127 0.097 10.460 5.308 1.247 0.511 0.345 0.123 0.129 10.460 5.130 1.221 0.500 0.341 0.120 0.161 10.460 5.050 1.189 0.492 0.334 0.109 0.194 10.460 5.035 1.174 0.462 0.328 0.107 0.226 10.460 5.030 1.174 0.437 0.308 0.104 0.258 10.460 5.009 1.164 0.433 0.292 0.097 0.290 10.460 4.999 1.157 0.428 0.289 0.096 0.323 10.460 4.914 1.150 0.419 0.286 0.094 0.355 10.460 4.913 1.120 0.418 0.280 0.093 0.387 10.460 4.898 1.119 0.412 0.279 0.091 0.419 10.460 4.890 1.114 0.405 0.275 0.090 0.452 10.460 4.873 1.105 0.403 0.270 0.089 0.484 10.460 4.815 1.085 0.399 0.269 0.089 0.516 10.460 4.768 1.068 0.387 0.266 0.088 0.548 10.460 4.768 1.068 0.380 0.258 0.088 0.581 10.460 4.658 1.031 0.376 0.254 0.085 0.613 10.460 4.651 1.029 0.374 0.251 0.083 0.645 10.460 4.606 1.014 0.362 0.251 0.079 0.677 10.460 4.599 1.012 0.361 0.250 0.078 0.710 10.460 4.599 1.012 0.361 0.247 0.077 0.742 10.460 4.591 1.009 0.356 0.237 0.077 0.774 10.460 4.576 1.005 0.355 0.237 0.075 0.806 10.460 4.547 0.995 0.354 0.236 0.074 0.839 10.460 4.533 0.991 0.352 0.235 0.074 0.871 10.460 4.518 0.986 0.347 0.232 0.073 0.903 10.460 4.511 0.984 0.345 0.230 0.069 0.935 10.460 4.482 0.975 0.342 0.228 0.065 0.968 10.460 4.467 0.970 0.340 0.227 0.058 0.1 10.5 5.3 1.2 0.5 0.3 0.1 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Adjusted EECs 0.1 9.1 4.6 1.1 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.08 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: orberry Metfile: w24232. dvf PRZM scenario: ORberriesC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.005 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

Oregon Apple stored as orapple. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: ORappleC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17: 16: 34 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w24232. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 06: 10 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 10.460 3.642 0.739 0.462 0.308 0.119 1962 10.460 3.919 1.039 0.528 0.362 0.170 1963 18.160 6.364 1.709 0.671 0.447 0.188 1964 10.460 3.523 0.716 0.488 0.326 0.137 1965 10.460 4.029 1.453 0.547 0.370 0.162 1966 10.900 6.136 1.520 0.632 0.421 0.177 1967 11.650 3.915 0.969 0.521 0.360 0.160 1968 11.260 4.429 0.924 0.495 0.374 0.164 1969 10.460 3.530 0.815 0.701 0.468 0.189 1970 10.460 3.154 0.622 0.433 0.289 0.126 1971 16.130 4.635 0.942 0.498 0.363 0.157 1972 10.460 3.913 0.781 0.491 0.328 0.143 1973 10.460 3.424 0.685 0.459 0.306 0.125 1974 14.760 6.875 2.193 0.802 0.535 0.207 1975 10.460 3.297 0.883 0.446 0.297 0.130 1976 10.460 3.270 0.649 0.448 0.299 0.075 1977 10.590 3.728 0.758 0.474 0.316 0.124 1978 10.460 3.332 0.663 0.454 0.303 0.123 1979 12.980 3.738 0.815 0.542 0.382 0.188 1980 10.460 3.564 1.181 0.556 0.371 0.174 1981 10.460 5.072 1.129 0.644 0.430 0.176 1982 10.460 3.263 0.701 0.440 0.293 0.117 1983 10.460 3.570 0.721 0.477 0.328 0.112 1984 10.460 4.293 1.140 0.646 0.431 0.147 1985 14.360 6.207 1.252 0.680 0.454 0.156 1986 10.460 3.458 0.693 0.452 0.302 0.105 1987 13.630 7.919 2.052 0.806 0.538 0.251 1988 10.470 3.579 0.796 0.478 0.319 0.138 1989 10.840 3.996 0.976 0.672 0.448 0.186 1990 10.460 3.650 0.926 0.505 0.337 0.171 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 18.160 7.919 2.193 0.806 0.538 0.251 0.065 16.130 6.875 2.052 0.802 0.535 0.207 0.097 14.760 6.364 1.709 0.701 0.468 0.189 0.129 14.360 6.207 1.520 0.680 0.454 0.188 0.161 13.630 6.136 1.453 0.672 0.448 0.188 0.194 12.980 5.072 1.252 0.671 0.447 0.186 0.226 11.650 4.635 1.181 0.646 0.431 0.177 0.258 11.260 4.429 1.140 0.644 0.430 0.176 0.290 10.900 4.293 1.129 0.632 0.421 0.174 0.323 10.840 4.029 1.039 0.556 0.382 0.171 0.355 10.590 3.996 0.976 0.547 0.374 0.170 0.387 10.470 3.919 0.969 0.542 0.371 0.164 0.419 10.460 3.915 0.942 0.528 0.370 0.162 0.452 10.460 3.913 0.926 0.521 0.363 0.160 0.484 10.460 3.738 0.924 0.505 0.362 0.157 0.516 10.460 3.728 0.883 0.498 0.360 0.156 0.548 10.460 3.650 0.815 0.495 0.337 0.147 0.581 10.460 3.642 0.815 0.491 0.328 0.143 0.613 10.460 3.579 0.796 0.488 0.328 0.138 0.645 10.460 3.570 0.781 0.478 0.326 0.137 0.677 10.460 3.564 0.758 0.477 0.319 0.130 0.710 10.460 3.530 0.739 0.474 0.316 0.126 0.742 10.460 3.523 0.721 0.462 0.308 0.125 0.774 10.460 3.458 0.716 0.459 0.306 0.124 0.806 10.460 3.424 0.701 0.454 0.303 0.123 0.839 10.460 3.332 0.693 0.452 0.302 0.119 0.871 10.460 3.297 0.685 0.448 0.299 0.117 0.903 10.460 3.270 0.663 0.446 0.297 0.112 0.935 10.460 3.263 0.649 0.440 0.293 0.105 0.968 10.460 3.154 0.622 0.433 0.289 0.075 0.1 14.7 6.3 1.7 0.7 0.5 0.2 Average of yearly averages: 0.2 Adjusted EECs 0.1 12.8 5.5 1.5 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: orapple Metfile: w24232. dvf PRZM scenario: ORappleC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

Pennsylvania Apple stored as paaple. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: PAappleC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17: 24: 46 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w14737. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 06: 12 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 40.750 12.160 3.250 1.356 1.061 0.287 1962 27.730 8.199 2.228 1.002 0.848 0.334 1963 19.730 5.692 1.341 0.617 0.456 0.252 1964 10.460 3.358 1.082 0.610 0.425 0.194 1965 10.490 2.999 0.781 0.429 0.330 0.167 1966 10.460 3.256 0.811 0.536 0.375 0.207 1967 77.850 22.300 5.364 2.331 1.645 0.475 1968 14.900 7.043 2.252 1.036 0.706 0.289 1969 25.390 12.030 3.038 1.394 1.077 0.316 1970 10.650 3.367 0.891 0.563 0.534 0.183 1971 14.760 6.306 1.309 0.693 0.678 0.222 1972 49.120 16.850 5.292 2.849 2.002 0.518 1973 59.850 18.160 3.676 2.052 1.401 0.432 1974 14.320 4.550 1.668 0.846 0.765 0.265 1975 32.840 10.550 2.489 1.173 0.924 0.249 1976 27.030 8.053 1.590 0.695 0.737 0.248 1977 14.420 4.467 1.519 0.747 0.605 0.223 1978 10.470 3.959 1.351 0.733 0.760 0.237 1979 17.820 6.580 1.991 1.026 0.922 0.295 1980 10.590 3.172 0.665 0.444 0.297 0.135 1981 18.540 5.440 1.447 0.905 0.617 0.178 1982 35.880 13.910 5.351 2.322 1.889 0.547 1983 12.750 3.439 1.218 0.709 0.520 0.176 1984 25.250 8.131 3.455 2.070 1.437 0.382 1985 17.900 5.450 1.602 0.941 0.777 0.233 1986 10.490 3.155 1.077 0.609 0.522 0.169 1987 17.650 5.280 1.273 0.797 0.802 0.235 1988 37.770 13.110 3.346 1.393 1.216 0.351 1989 17.020 7.209 2.066 1.358 0.978 0.286 1990 23.670 7.599 2.402 1.321 1.166 0.306 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 77.850 22.300 5.364 2.849 2.002 0.547 0.065 59.850 18.160 5.351 2.331 1.889 0.518 0.097 49.120 16.850 5.292 2.322 1.645 0.475 0.129 40.750 13.910 3.676 2.070 1.437 0.432 0.161 37.770 13.110 3.455 2.052 1.401 0.382 0.194 35.880 12.160 3.346 1.394 1.216 0.351 0.226 32.840 12.030 3.250 1.393 1.166 0.334 0.258 27.730 10.550 3.038 1.358 1.077 0.316 0.290 27.030 8.199 2.489 1.356 1.061 0.306 0.323 25.390 8.131 2.402 1.321 0.978 0.295 0.355 25.250 8.053 2.252 1.173 0.924 0.289 0.387 23.670 7.599 2.228 1.036 0.922 0.287 0.419 19.730 7.209 2.066 1.026 0.848 0.286 0.452 18.540 7.043 1.991 1.002 0.802 0.265 0.484 17.900 6.580 1.668 0.941 0.777 0.252 0.516 17.820 6.306 1.602 0.905 0.765 0.249 0.548 17.650 5.692 1.590 0.846 0.760 0.248 0.581 17.020 5.450 1.519 0.797 0.737 0.237 0.613 14.900 5.440 1.447 0.747 0.706 0.235 0.645 14.760 5.280 1.351 0.733 0.678 0.233 0.677 14.420 4.550 1.341 0.709 0.617 0.223 0.710 14.320 4.467 1.309 0.695 0.605 0.222 0.742 12.750 3.959 1.273 0.693 0.534 0.207 0.774 10.650 3.439 1.218 0.617 0.522 0.194 0.806 10.590 3.367 1.082 0.610 0.520 0.183 0.839 10.490 3.358 1.077 0.609 0.456 0.178 0.871 10.490 3.256 0.891 0.563 0.425 0.176 0.903 10.470 3.172 0.811 0.536 0.375 0.169 0.935 10.460 3.155 0.781 0.444 0.330 0.167 0.968 10.460 2.999 0.665 0.429 0.297 0.135 0.1 48.3 16.6 5.1 2.3 1.6 0.5 Average of yearly averages: 0.3 Adjusted EECs 0.1 42.0 14.4 4.5 2.0 1.4 0.4 0.2 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: paaple Metfile: w14737. dvf PRZM scenario: PAappleC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

Pennsylvania Turf stored as patrf2. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: PAturfC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17: 27: 02 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w14737. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 06: 12 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 15.690 4.843 0.961 0.337 0.247 0.061 1962 15.690 4.559 0.894 0.388 0.259 0.064 1963 15.690 4.458 0.872 0.305 0.204 0.051 1964 15.690 4.246 0.826 0.298 0.199 0.049 1965 15.690 4.416 0.862 0.302 0.201 0.050 1966 15.690 4.812 0.951 0.333 0.222 0.055 1967 16.730 4.924 0.977 0.674 0.450 0.111 1968 15.690 4.991 1.539 0.540 0.360 0.089 1969 15.690 4.269 0.831 0.293 0.196 0.049 1970 15.690 4.664 0.918 0.321 0.215 0.053 1971 15.690 4.782 1.044 0.366 0.244 0.061 1972 24.790 7.684 2.424 0.886 0.591 0.146 1973 15.690 5.167 1.468 0.525 0.350 0.087 1974 15.690 4.623 0.908 0.364 0.243 0.060 1975 15.690 4.888 0.969 0.372 0.248 0.061 1976 15.690 4.865 0.963 0.341 0.228 0.056 1977 15.690 4.407 0.860 0.328 0.219 0.054 1978 15.690 5.116 1.031 0.362 0.242 0.060 1979 15.690 5.240 1.996 0.699 0.467 0.115 1980 15.690 4.664 0.919 0.322 0.215 0.053 1981 22.180 6.374 1.248 0.440 0.293 0.073 1982 15.690 4.596 1.714 0.610 0.407 0.101 1983 15.690 4.816 0.971 0.341 0.227 0.056 1984 16.570 5.226 2.470 0.866 0.578 0.142 1985 15.690 4.545 0.891 0.325 0.217 0.054 1986 15.690 4.232 1.194 0.419 0.279 0.069 1987 15.690 4.578 0.898 0.329 0.219 0.054 1988 31.510 11.210 3.144 1.101 0.735 0.181 1989 20.670 9.153 1.897 0.671 0.447 0.111 1990 15.690 5.120 1.975 0.694 0.463 0.114 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 31.510 11.210 3.144 1.101 0.735 0.181 0.065 24.790 9.153 2.470 0.886 0.591 0.146 0.097 22.180 7.684 2.424 0.866 0.578 0.142 0.129 20.670 6.374 1.996 0.699 0.467 0.115 0.161 16.730 5.240 1.975 0.694 0.463 0.114 0.194 16.570 5.226 1.897 0.674 0.450 0.111 0.226 15.690 5.167 1.714 0.671 0.447 0.111 0.258 15.690 5.120 1.539 0.610 0.407 0.101 0.290 15.690 5.116 1.468 0.540 0.360 0.089 0.323 15.690 4.991 1.248 0.525 0.350 0.087 0.355 15.690 4.924 1.194 0.440 0.293 0.073 0.387 15.690 4.888 1.044 0.419 0.279 0.069 0.419 15.690 4.865 1.031 0.388 0.259 0.064 0.452 15.690 4.843 0.977 0.372 0.248 0.061 0.484 15.690 4.816 0.971 0.366 0.247 0.061 0.516 15.690 4.812 0.969 0.364 0.244 0.061 0.548 15.690 4.782 0.963 0.362 0.243 0.060 0.581 15.690 4.664 0.961 0.341 0.242 0.060 0.613 15.690 4.664 0.951 0.341 0.228 0.056 0.645 15.690 4.623 0.919 0.337 0.227 0.056 0.677 15.690 4.596 0.918 0.333 0.222 0.055 0.710 15.690 4.578 0.908 0.329 0.219 0.054 0.742 15.690 4.559 0.898 0.328 0.219 0.054 0.774 15.690 4.545 0.894 0.325 0.217 0.054 0.806 15.690 4.458 0.891 0.322 0.215 0.053 0.839 15.690 4.416 0.872 0.321 0.215 0.053 0.871 15.690 4.407 0.862 0.305 0.204 0.051 0.903 15.690 4.269 0.860 0.302 0.201 0.050 0.935 15.690 4.246 0.831 0.298 0.199 0.049 0.968 15.690 4.232 0.826 0.293 0.196 0.049 0.1 22.0 7.6 2.4 0.8 0.6 0.1 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Adjusted EECs 0.1 19.2 6.6 2.1 0.7 0.5 0.1 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: patrf2 Metfile: w14737. dvf PRZM scenario: PAturfC. tx t EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 18 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 30 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 6.72 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

Florida Tomato stored as fltomato. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLtomatoC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 44: 04 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w12844. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 30 Water segment concentrations ( ppb) Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 6.432 2.385 0.728 0.344 0.231 0.069 1962 7.966 2.767 0.912 0.459 0.321 0.080 1963 5.231 1.339 0.262 0.133 0.098 0.031 1964 16.100 4.542 1.944 0.861 0.583 0.145 1965 10.770 4.411 1.890 0.802 0.589 0.146 1966 7.661 4.153 1.514 0.784 0.524 0.129 1967 8.838 2.460 1.213 0.545 0.369 0.092 1968 27.660 9.936 3.864 1.509 1.007 0.248 1969 13.320 3.482 1.389 0.665 0.451 0.111 1970 15.190 4.505 1.817 0.758 0.508 0.126 1971 44.010 10.820 2.141 1.036 0.692 0.172 1972 8.594 3.229 1.579 0.664 0.448 0.111 1973 11.260 2.928 1.051 0.676 0.496 0.123 1974 6.230 1.535 0.454 0.309 0.230 0.057 1975 12.550 4.618 1.245 0.609 0.411 0.102 1976 24.780 8.749 2.693 0.982 0.663 0.166 1977 43.620 13.310 3.026 1.140 0.774 0.195 1978 19.560 4.991 1.605 0.831 0.574 0.142 1979 15.880 5.128 0.993 0.537 0.362 0.099 1980 24.640 7.058 2.246 0.895 0.622 0.154 1981 12.350 2.931 1.080 0.528 0.362 0.100 1982 10.490 3.093 1.402 0.719 0.481 0.119 1983 14.770 4.766 1.599 0.668 0.450 0.111 1984 21.770 8.135 2.489 0.996 0.672 0.166 1985 5.363 1.895 0.762 0.431 0.345 0.085 1986 6.251 1.925 0.811 0.410 0.279 0.069 1987 10.050 4.090 1.058 0.486 0.338 0.088 1988 15.130 5.473 2.001 0.960 0.642 0.158 1989 6.433 2.182 0.445 0.245 0.188 0.048 1990 26.040 7.550 2.021 0.885 0.604 0.149 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 44.010 13.310 3.864 1.509 1.007 0.248 0.065 43.620 10.820 3.026 1.140 0.774 0.195 0.097 27.660 9.936 2.693 1.036 0.692 0.172 0.129 26.040 8.749 2.489 0.996 0.672 0.166 0.161 24.780 8.135 2.246 0.982 0.663 0.166 0.194 24.640 7.550 2.141 0.960 0.642 0.158 0.226 21.770 7.058 2.021 0.895 0.622 0.154 0.258 19.560 5.473 2.001 0.885 0.604 0.149 0.290 16.100 5.128 1.944 0.861 0.589 0.146 0.323 15.880 4.991 1.890 0.831 0.583 0.145 0.355 15.190 4.766 1.817 0.802 0.574 0.142 0.387 15.130 4.618 1.605 0.784 0.524 0.129 0.419 14.770 4.542 1.599 0.758 0.508 0.126 0.452 13.320 4.505 1.579 0.719 0.496 0.123 0.484 12.550 4.411 1.514 0.676 0.481 0.119 0.516 12.350 4.153 1.402 0.668 0.451 0.111 0.548 11.260 4.090 1.389 0.665 0.450 0.111 0.581 10.770 3.482 1.245 0.664 0.448 0.111 0.613 10.490 3.229 1.213 0.609 0.411 0.102 0.645 10.050 3.093 1.080 0.545 0.369 0.100 0.677 8.838 2.931 1.058 0.537 0.362 0.099 0.710 8.594 2.928 1.051 0.528 0.362 0.092 0.742 7.966 2.767 0.993 0.486 0.345 0.088 0.774 7.661 2.460 0.912 0.459 0.338 0.085 0.806 6.433 2.385 0.811 0.431 0.321 0.080 0.839 6.432 2.182 0.762 0.410 0.279 0.069 0.871 6.251 1.925 0.728 0.344 0.231 0.069 0.903 6.230 1.895 0.454 0.309 0.230 0.057 0.935 5.363 1.535 0.445 0.245 0.188 0.048 0.968 5.231 1.339 0.262 0.133 0.098 0.031 0.1 27.5 9.8 2.7 1.0 0.7 0.2 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Adjusted EECs 0.1 23.9 8.5 2.3 0.9 0.6 0.1 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: fltomato Metfile: w12844. dvf PRZM scenario: FLtomatoC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 2.24 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

California Grape stored as cagrape. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAgrapesC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 36: 14 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w93193. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 24 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 10.460 2.512 0.484 0.327 0.218 0.054 1962 10.460 2.540 0.489 0.328 0.219 0.054 1963 10.460 2.694 0.521 0.345 0.230 0.057 1964 10.460 2.532 0.488 0.338 0.226 0.055 1965 10.460 2.393 0.460 0.321 0.214 0.053 1966 10.460 2.496 0.480 0.329 0.220 0.054 1967 10.460 2.469 0.475 0.329 0.219 0.054 1968 10.460 2.457 0.473 0.324 0.216 0.053 1969 10.460 2.465 0.474 0.323 0.216 0.053 1970 10.460 2.416 0.464 0.322 0.215 0.053 1971 10.460 2.737 0.531 0.342 0.228 0.056 1972 10.460 2.544 0.491 0.331 0.221 0.054 1973 10.460 2.477 0.477 0.330 0.220 0.054 1974 10.460 2.314 0.444 0.311 0.207 0.051 1975 10.460 2.342 0.449 0.312 0.208 0.051 1976 10.460 2.393 0.460 0.321 0.214 0.053 1977 10.460 2.698 0.522 0.355 0.237 0.058 1978 10.460 2.338 0.449 0.312 0.208 0.051 1979 10.460 2.389 0.459 0.317 0.211 0.052 1980 10.460 2.603 0.502 0.336 0.224 0.055 1981 10.460 2.480 0.477 0.323 0.216 0.053 1982 10.460 2.457 0.473 0.325 0.216 0.053 1983 10.460 2.389 0.459 0.320 0.214 0.053 1984 10.460 2.358 0.453 0.317 0.211 0.052 1985 10.460 2.375 0.456 0.317 0.211 0.052 1986 10.460 2.461 0.473 0.320 0.214 0.053 1987 13.240 3.210 0.619 0.377 0.252 0.062 1988 10.460 2.481 0.477 0.333 0.222 0.055 1989 10.460 2.465 0.474 0.323 0.216 0.053 1990 10.460 2.512 0.498 0.330 0.220 0.054 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 13.240 3.210 0.619 0.377 0.252 0.062 0.065 10.460 2.737 0.531 0.355 0.237 0.058 0.097 10.460 2.698 0.522 0.345 0.230 0.057 0.129 10.460 2.694 0.521 0.342 0.228 0.056 0.161 10.460 2.603 0.502 0.338 0.226 0.055 0.194 10.460 2.544 0.498 0.336 0.224 0.055 0.226 10.460 2.540 0.491 0.333 0.222 0.055 0.258 10.460 2.532 0.489 0.331 0.221 0.054 0.290 10.460 2.512 0.488 0.330 0.220 0.054 0.323 10.460 2.512 0.484 0.330 0.220 0.054 0.355 10.460 2.496 0.480 0.329 0.220 0.054 0.387 10.460 2.481 0.477 0.329 0.219 0.054 0.419 10.460 2.480 0.477 0.328 0.219 0.054 0.452 10.460 2.477 0.477 0.327 0.218 0.054 0.484 10.460 2.469 0.475 0.325 0.216 0.053 0.516 10.460 2.465 0.474 0.324 0.216 0.053 0.548 10.460 2.465 0.474 0.323 0.216 0.053 0.581 10.460 2.461 0.473 0.323 0.216 0.053 0.613 10.460 2.457 0.473 0.323 0.216 0.053 0.645 10.460 2.457 0.473 0.322 0.215 0.053 0.677 10.460 2.416 0.464 0.321 0.214 0.053 0.710 10.460 2.393 0.460 0.321 0.214 0.053 0.742 10.460 2.393 0.460 0.320 0.214 0.053 0.774 10.460 2.389 0.459 0.320 0.214 0.053 0.806 10.460 2.389 0.459 0.317 0.211 0.052 0.839 10.460 2.375 0.456 0.317 0.211 0.052 0.871 10.460 2.358 0.453 0.317 0.211 0.052 0.903 10.460 2.342 0.449 0.312 0.208 0.051 0.935 10.460 2.338 0.449 0.312 0.208 0.051 0.968 10.460 2.314 0.444 0.311 0.207 0.051 0.1 10.5 2.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.1 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Adjusted EECs 0.1 9.1 2.3 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.05 0.05 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: cagrape Metfile: w93193. dvf PRZM scenario: CAgrapesC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

Georgia Pecan stored as gapecan. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: GAPecansC. txt modified Tueday, 22 April 2003 at 07: 57: 20 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w93805. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 32 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 10.460 2.855 0.860 0.492 0.393 0.099 1962 14.510 5.217 1.864 0.830 0.591 0.147 1963 15.250 7.452 2.302 1.218 0.853 0.211 1964 72.920 20.090 4.095 2.269 1.632 0.403 1965 89.960 25.760 9.690 3.812 2.577 0.638 1966 138.000 35.520 7.412 3.547 2.537 0.631 1967 28.040 6.931 1.916 1.283 0.873 0.218 1968 10.460 2.720 0.721 0.456 0.328 0.090 1969 15.880 3.876 1.364 0.800 0.686 0.170 1970 20.740 5.615 1.912 1.229 0.945 0.234 1971 15.550 4.774 1.544 0.925 0.666 0.165 1972 133.000 34.690 7.482 3.130 2.091 0.518 1973 44.840 11.740 3.839 1.676 1.141 0.283 1974 20.430 7.223 1.758 0.839 0.782 0.196 1975 16.710 4.742 2.345 1.280 0.923 0.228 1976 34.200 10.750 2.916 1.885 1.273 0.315 1977 23.390 6.610 1.491 0.711 0.796 0.204 1978 26.010 7.220 1.550 1.141 0.845 0.209 1979 39.080 17.070 3.875 1.933 1.441 0.357 1980 13.220 4.971 1.495 0.914 0.766 0.189 1981 10.460 2.701 1.318 0.658 0.445 0.111 1982 167.000 42.170 8.666 3.548 2.419 0.601 1983 43.230 15.560 3.711 1.883 1.259 0.316 1984 10.470 3.236 1.307 0.898 0.626 0.155 1985 76.740 20.830 5.220 2.208 1.492 0.369 1986 61.980 16.000 3.935 1.801 1.234 0.306 1987 45.670 19.380 5.236 2.141 1.433 0.356 1988 10.460 2.629 0.508 0.344 0.296 0.079 1989 27.560 9.246 3.461 1.693 1.130 0.279 1990 34.080 8.425 2.125 0.930 0.715 0.183 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 167.000 42.170 9.690 3.812 2.577 0.638 0.065 138.000 35.520 8.666 3.548 2.537 0.631 0.097 133.000 34.690 7.482 3.547 2.419 0.601 0.129 89.960 25.760 7.412 3.130 2.091 0.518 0.161 76.740 20.830 5.236 2.269 1.632 0.403 0.194 72.920 20.090 5.220 2.208 1.492 0.369 0.226 61.980 19.380 4.095 2.141 1.441 0.357 0.258 45.670 17.070 3.935 1.933 1.433 0.356 0.290 44.840 16.000 3.875 1.885 1.273 0.316 0.323 43.230 15.560 3.839 1.883 1.259 0.315 0.355 39.080 11.740 3.711 1.801 1.234 0.306 0.387 34.200 10.750 3.461 1.693 1.141 0.283 0.419 34.080 9.246 2.916 1.676 1.130 0.279 0.452 28.040 8.425 2.345 1.283 0.945 0.234 0.484 27.560 7.452 2.302 1.280 0.923 0.228 0.516 26.010 7.223 2.125 1.229 0.873 0.218 0.548 23.390 7.220 1.916 1.218 0.853 0.211 0.581 20.740 6.931 1.912 1.141 0.845 0.209 0.613 20.430 6.610 1.864 0.930 0.796 0.204 0.645 16.710 5.615 1.758 0.925 0.782 0.196 0.677 15.880 5.217 1.550 0.914 0.766 0.189 0.710 15.550 4.971 1.544 0.898 0.715 0.183 0.742 15.250 4.774 1.495 0.839 0.686 0.170 0.774 14.510 4.742 1.491 0.830 0.666 0.165 0.806 13.220 3.876 1.364 0.800 0.626 0.155 0.839 10.470 3.236 1.318 0.711 0.591 0.147 0.871 10.460 2.855 1.307 0.658 0.445 0.111 0.903 10.460 2.720 0.860 0.492 0.393 0.099 0.935 10.460 2.701 0.721 0.456 0.328 0.090 0.968 10.460 2.629 0.508 0.344 0.296 0.079 0.1 128.7 33.8 7.5 3.5 2.4 0.6 Average of yearly averages: 0.3 Adjusted EECs 0.1 112.0 29.4 6.5 3.0 2.1 0.5 0.2 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: gapecan Metfile: w93805. dvf PRZM scenario: GAPecansC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 21 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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)

North Carolina Tobacco stored as nctobacc. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: NCtobaccoC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17: 13: 36 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w13722. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 05: 50 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 5.231 1.447 0.282 0.116 0.090 0.026 1962 5.231 1.353 0.277 0.225 0.154 0.038 1963 5.231 1.458 0.626 0.223 0.152 0.041 1964 5.231 1.414 0.275 0.133 0.102 0.038 1965 8.302 2.769 0.866 0.448 0.301 0.074 1966 5.231 1.525 0.540 0.255 0.195 0.051 1967 11.880 3.347 0.773 0.379 0.259 0.066 1968 5.231 1.479 0.403 0.183 0.125 0.033 1969 5.231 1.358 0.324 0.150 0.115 0.029 1970 5.231 1.370 0.325 0.180 0.147 0.038 1971 7.288 2.049 0.510 0.219 0.149 0.039 1972 8.526 2.605 0.519 0.296 0.215 0.054 1973 7.213 2.251 0.651 0.354 0.243 0.060 1974 5.231 1.461 0.420 0.150 0.121 0.031 1975 5.231 1.511 0.390 0.157 0.143 0.036 1976 8.022 2.279 0.486 0.171 0.114 0.037 1977 5.231 1.380 0.384 0.134 0.104 0.041 1978 5.231 1.494 0.292 0.169 0.159 0.041 1979 5.231 1.509 0.382 0.147 0.142 0.041 1980 9.193 2.347 0.454 0.293 0.196 0.053 1981 5.231 1.401 0.395 0.195 0.144 0.037 1982 5.231 1.414 0.438 0.253 0.170 0.042 1983 5.231 1.425 0.408 0.147 0.098 0.025 1984 13.810 3.730 1.001 0.370 0.278 0.069 1985 5.231 1.445 0.307 0.140 0.120 0.032 1986 5.231 1.427 0.432 0.156 0.120 0.036 1987 5.231 1.413 0.339 0.124 0.098 0.040 1988 5.231 1.754 0.351 0.125 0.088 0.028 1989 5.231 1.427 0.286 0.197 0.135 0.035 1990 5.231 1.547 0.564 0.199 0.133 0.037 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 13.810 3.730 1.001 0.448 0.301 0.074 0.065 11.880 3.347 0.866 0.379 0.278 0.069 0.097 9.193 2.769 0.773 0.370 0.259 0.066 0.129 8.526 2.605 0.651 0.354 0.243 0.060 0.161 8.302 2.347 0.626 0.296 0.215 0.054 0.194 8.022 2.279 0.564 0.293 0.196 0.053 0.226 7.288 2.251 0.540 0.255 0.195 0.051 0.258 7.213 2.049 0.519 0.253 0.170 0.042 0.290 5.231 1.754 0.510 0.225 0.159 0.041 0.323 5.231 1.547 0.486 0.223 0.154 0.041 0.355 5.231 1.525 0.454 0.219 0.152 0.041 0.387 5.231 1.511 0.438 0.199 0.149 0.041 0.419 5.231 1.509 0.432 0.197 0.147 0.040 0.452 5.231 1.494 0.420 0.195 0.144 0.039 0.484 5.231 1.479 0.408 0.183 0.143 0.038 0.516 5.231 1.461 0.403 0.180 0.142 0.038 0.548 5.231 1.458 0.395 0.171 0.135 0.038 0.581 5.231 1.447 0.390 0.169 0.133 0.037 0.613 5.231 1.445 0.384 0.157 0.125 0.037 0.645 5.231 1.427 0.382 0.156 0.121 0.037 0.677 5.231 1.427 0.351 0.150 0.120 0.036 0.710 5.231 1.425 0.339 0.150 0.120 0.036 0.742 5.231 1.414 0.325 0.147 0.115 0.035 0.774 5.231 1.414 0.324 0.147 0.114 0.033 0.806 5.231 1.413 0.307 0.140 0.104 0.032 0.839 5.231 1.401 0.292 0.134 0.102 0.031 0.871 5.231 1.380 0.286 0.133 0.098 0.029 0.903 5.231 1.370 0.282 0.125 0.098 0.028 0.935 5.231 1.358 0.277 0.124 0.090 0.026 0.968 5.231 1.353 0.275 0.116 0.088 0.025 0.1 9.1 2.8 0.8 0.4 0.3 0.1 Average of yearly averages: 0.04 Adjusted EECs 0.1 7.9 2.4 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.04 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: nctobacc Metfile: w13722. dvf PRZM scenario: NCtobaccoC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 04 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.003 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 0 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 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 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 2.24 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 5 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 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) APPENDIX B. SCI GROW Input Table and Runs for Napropamide for Assessed Terrestrial Crops Assumptions SCIGROW is a regression based model that uses few input parameters: pesticide's organic carbon partition coefficient ( Koc), aerobic soil degradation half life, and product label application rate and frequency ( Barrett, 1997). It provides a groundwater screening concentration to be used in determining the potential risk to human health from drinking water contaminated with a pesticide. The groundwater concentration is estimated based on the maximum application rates in areas where groundwater is exceptionally vulnerable to contamination. These vulnerable areas are characterized by high rainfall, rapidly permeable soil, and shallow aquifer. Since the concentrations estimated from this model are likely to be approached in only a very small percentage of drinking water sources, SCIGROW is apparently not to be applied for national or regional estimates. Tables 1 and 2 present the Inputs and Outputs for the SCI GROW Model, respectively.

Table 1. SCI GROW Inputs for Napropamide using the SCI GROW2 Model.

MODEL INPUT VARIABLE1 INPUT VALUE COMMENTS Application Rate ( kg/ ha) CA Almonds FL Citrus OR Berry OR Apple PA Apple PA Turf FL Tomato CA Grape GA Pecan NC Tobacco 4 4 44 4 6 24 4 2 Based on BEAD use data lbs ai/ A Maximum No. of Applications OR berry, FL tomato, PA turf, NC tobacco CA almonds, OR, PA apple, CA grape, GA pecan, FL citrus, 1 2 Based on BEAD use data lbs ai/ A Median Koc ( ml/ g) 577 Average of values in MRID 41575302 Aerobic Soil Metabolic Half life ( days) parent 446 446 day half life based on extractable residues in MRID 41105901 1 Input parameters based on 2/ 8/ 02 Input Parameter Guidance Table 2. Drinking Water EECs for Napropamide from Ground Water EECs ( ug/ L)

Scenario and crop GW Screening Concentration CA almonds 4.5 FL citrus 4.5 OR berry 2.3 OR apple 4.5 PA apple 4.5 PA turf 3.4 FL tomato 1.1 CA grape 4.5 GA pecan 4.5 NC tobacco 1.1 Model Outputs SCIGROW VERSION 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE AND EFFECTS DIVISION OFFICE OF PESTICIDE PROGRAMS U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY SCREENING MODEL FOR AQUATIC PESTICIDE EXPOSURE SciGrow version 2.3 chemical: napropamide time is 7/ 14/ 2004 12: 43: 31  Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate ( lb/ acre) applications ( lb/ acre/ yr) ( ml/ g) metabolism ( days)  4.000 2.0 8.000 5.77E+ 02 446.0  groundwater screening cond ( ppb) = 4.51E+ 00 ************************************************************************

SciGrow version 2.3 chemical: napropamide time is 7/ 14/ 2004 12: 43: 53  Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate ( lb/ acre) applications ( lb/ acre/ yr) ( ml/ g) metabolism ( days)  4.000 1.0 4.000 5.77E+ 02 446.0  groundwater screening cond ( ppb) = 2.26E+ 00 ************************************************************************

SciGrow version 2.3 chemical: napropamide time is 7/ 14/ 2004 12: 44: 0  Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate ( lb/ acre) applications ( lb/ acre/ yr) ( ml/ g) metabolism ( days)  2.000 1.0 2.000 5.77E+ 02 446.0  groundwater screening cond ( ppb) = 1.13E+ 00 ************************************************************************

SciGrow version 2.3 chemical: napropamide time is 7/ 14/ 2004 12: 44: 6  Application Number of Total Use Koc Soil Aerobic rate ( lb/ acre) applications ( lb/ acre/ yr) ( ml/ g) metabolism ( days)  6.000 1.0 6.000 5.77E+ 02 446.0  groundwater screening cond ( ppb) = 3.38E+ 00 ************************************************************************


[Federal Register: May 21, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 98)]
[Notices]
[Page 28677-28682]
[DOCID:fr21my10-157]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket ID FMCSA-2010-0115]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Diabetes
Mellitus

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemptions from the diabetes
mellitus standard; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 37 individuals
for exemptions from the prohibition against persons with insulin-
treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) operating commercial motor vehicles
(CMVs) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would enable
these individuals with ITDM to operate CMVs in interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 21, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket ID FMCSA-2010-0115 using any of the
following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground
Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Each submission must include the Agency name and the docket ID for
this Notice. Note that DOT posts all comments received without change
to http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review the DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement in the Federal
Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19476). This information is
also available at http://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Mary D. Gunnels, Director, Medical
Programs,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>FMCSA, Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Room W64-224, Washington,
DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
for a 2-year period if it finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a
level of safety that is equivalent to, or greater than, the level that
would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The statute also allows the
Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the 2-year period. The 37
individuals listed in this notice have recently requested an exemption
from the diabetes prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(3), which applies to
drivers of CMV in interstate commerce. Accordingly, the Agency will
evaluate the qualifications of each applicant to determine whether
granting the exemption will achieve the required level of safety
mandated by the statutes.

Qualifications of Applicants

Billy Banks

    Mr. Banks, age 45, has had ITDM since 1999. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Banks
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he has
stable proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class E
operator's license from New York which allows him to operate a vehicle
with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 26,000 lbs.

Joseph P. Beagan

    Mr. Beagan, 45, has had ITDM since 1979. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Beagan
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class 10 operator's license from
Rhode Island, which allows him to operate any motor vehicle except a
motorcycle and a vehicle that weighs more than 26,000 pounds.

John M. Charlton

    Mr. Charlton, 34, has had ITDM since 1990. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Charlton
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he has
stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A
Commercial Driver's License (CDL) from Utah.

Stuart A. Dietz

    Mr. Dietz, 60, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Dietz
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Kansas.

Marie C. Eddy

    Ms. Eddy, 50, has had ITDM since 1991. Her endocrinologist examined
her in 2009 and certified that she has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of her diabetes mellitus using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Eddy meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). Her
ophthalmologist examined her in 2009 and certified that she has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class D operator's
license from Vermont.

Michael G. Eikenberry

    Mr. Eikenberry, 55, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr.
Eikenberry meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2009 and

certified that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class
A CDL from Indiana.

Francisco K. Gallardo

    Mr. Gallardo, 50, has had ITDM since 2005. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gallardo
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has
stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D
operator's license from Arizona.

John P. Gould

    Mr. Gould, 44, has had ITDM since 1982. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Gould
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
Alaska.

David B. Graef

    Mr. Graef, 44, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Graef
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Indiana.

Jason C. Green

    Mr. Green, 35, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Green
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class R operator's license from
Mississippi, which allows him to drive any non-commercial vehicle
except motorcycles.

Kimmy D. Hall

    Mr. Hall, 51, has had ITDM since 1983. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes mellitus using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hall meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has stable
nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from
Arkansas.

Bruce G. Hammill, Jr.

    Mr. Hammill, 32, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hammill
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from California.

Edward G. Harbin

    Mr. Harbin, 29, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Harbin
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Arkansas.

Timothy R. Hefling

    Mr. Hefling, 48, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hefling
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has
stable proliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Indiana.

Christopher M. Hultman

    Mr. Hultman, 29, has had ITDM since 1993. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Hultman
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Wisconsin.

Michael R. Jackson

    Mr. Jackson, 48, has had ITDM since 1998. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus

using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Jackson meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class 2 operator's license from
Connecticut.

Gerald A. Johnson

    Mr. Johnson, 48, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Johnson
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Wisconsin.

Jay T. Kirschmann

    Mr. Kirschmann, 32, has had ITDM since 1985. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr.
Kirschmann meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that
he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's
license from North Dakota.

Duane K. Kohls

    Mr. Kohls, 55, has had ITDM since 1997. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Kohls
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he has
stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL
from Minnesota.

John F. Lohmuller

    Mr. Lohmuller, 55, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr.
Lohmuller meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified
that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from
Indiana.

Rodney A. Markham

    Mr. Markham, 54, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Markham
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Wisconsin.

Christopher P. Martin

    Mr. Martin, 31, has had ITDM since 1990. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Martin
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he has
stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class OPR-MC
operator's license from New Hampshire, which allows him to drive any
non-commercial vehicle.

H. Alan Miller

    Mr. Miller, 54, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Miller
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from Oregon.

Andrew D. Monson

    Mr. Monson, 36, has had ITDM since 2010. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Monson
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Minnesota.

Cheryl T. Murphy

    Ms. Murphy, 50, has had ITDM since 2008. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2010 and certified that she has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of her diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Murphy
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
Her ophthalmologist examined her in 2009 and certified that she does
not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class D operator's license
from Washington, DC.

Kurt D. Oertelt

    Mr. Oertelt, 59, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the

assistance of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive
function that occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands
diabetes management and monitoring; and has stable control of his
diabetes mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr.
Oertelt meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR
391.41(b)(10). His ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified
that he does not have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL from
New York.

Joseph M. Pirrello

    Mr. Pirrello, 56, has had ITDM since 2008. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Pirrello
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class D operator's license from
New Jersey.

Audrey R. Roddy

    Ms. Roddy, 44, has had ITDM since 2001. Her endocrinologist
examined her in 2009 and certified that she has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of her diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Ms. Roddy
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
Her ophthalmologist examined her in 2009 and certified that she does
not have diabetic retinopathy. She holds a Class B CDL from Michigan.

Theodore J. Rolfe

    Mr. Rolfe, 42, has had ITDM since 2006. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Rolfe
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Maine.

Ross R. Romano

    Mr. Romano, 23, has had ITDM since 2000. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Romano
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class O operator's license from
Michigan, which allows him to drive any non-commercial vehicle except
motorcycles

Max S. Sklarski

    Mr. Sklarski, 61, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sklarski
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from New Mexico.

Gerald J. Solwey

    Mr. Solwey, 63, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Solwey
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2009 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from North Dakota.

Darren G. Steil

    Mr. Steil, 41, has had ITDM since 1986. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Steil
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Iowa.

Jason D. Sweet

    Mr. Sweet, 34, has had ITDM since 2007. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Sweet
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class C operator's license from
California.

Robert M. Thomson

    Mr. Thomson, 37, has had ITDM since 2002. His endocrinologist
examined him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic
reactions resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance
of another person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that
occurred without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes
management and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes
mellitus using insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Thomson
meets the requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10).
His ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he has
stable nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class B CDL
from Illinois.

Kevin R. Welch

    Mr. Welch, 50, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist
examined him

in 2009 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes mellitus using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Welch meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
optometrist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not have
diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Florida.

Scott A. Yon

    Mr. Yon, 44, has had ITDM since 2009. His endocrinologist examined
him in 2010 and certified that he has had no hypoglycemic reactions
resulting in loss of consciousness, requiring the assistance of another
person, or resulting in impaired cognitive function that occurred
without warning in the past 5 years; understands diabetes management
and monitoring; and has stable control of his diabetes mellitus using
insulin, and is able to drive a CMV safely. Mr. Yon meets the
requirements of the vision standard at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). His
ophthalmologist examined him in 2010 and certified that he does not
have diabetic retinopathy. He holds a Class A CDL from Pennsylvania.

Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this Notice. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated in the date section
of the Notice.
    FMCSA notes that section 4129 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible
and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-
LU) requires the Secretary to revise its diabetes exemption program
established on September 3, 2003 (68 FR 52441).\1\ The revision must
provide for individual assessment of drivers with diabetes mellitus,
and be consistent with the criteria described in section 4018 of the
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (49 U.S.C. 31305).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Section 4129(a) refers to the 2003 Notice as a ``final
rule.'' However, the 2003 Notice did not issue a ``final rule'' but
did establish the procedures and standards for issuing exemptions
for drivers with ITDM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 4129 requires: (1) The elimination of the requirement for
three years of experience operating CMVs while being treated with
insulin; and (2) the establishment of a specified minimum period of
insulin use to demonstrate stable control of diabetes before being
allowed to operate a CMV.
    In response to section 4129, FMCSA made immediate revisions to the
diabetes exemption program established by the September 3, 2003 Notice.
FMCSA discontinued use of the 3-year driving experience and fulfilled
the requirements of section 4129 while continuing to ensure that
operation of CMVs by drivers with ITDM will achieve the requisite level
of safety required of all exemptions granted under 49 USC. 31136(e).
    Section 4129(d) also directed FMCSA to ensure that drivers of CMVs
with ITDM are not held to a higher standard than other drivers, with
the exception of limited operating, monitoring and medical requirements
that are deemed medically necessary. FMCSA concluded that all of the
operating, monitoring and medical requirements set out in the September
3, 2003 Notice, except as modified, were in compliance with section
4129(d). Therefore, all of the requirements set out in the September 3,
2003 Notice, except as modified by the Notice in the Federal Register
on November 8, 2005 (70 FR 67777), remain in effect.

    Issued on: May 13, 2010.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2010-12186 Filed 5-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 220 (Thursday, November 18, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64569-64570]
[FR Doc No: 2021-25172]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[SEC File No. 270-603, OMB Control No. 3235-0658]

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549-2736

Extension:
    Rule 22e-3

    Notice is hereby given that, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management and Budget a
request for extension of the previously approved collection of
information discussed below.
    Section 22(e) of the Investment Company Act [15 U.S.C. 80a-22(e)]
(``Act'') generally prohibits funds, including money market funds, from
suspending the right of redemption, and from postponing the payment or
satisfaction upon redemption of any redeemable security for more than
seven days. The provision was designed to prevent funds and their
investment advisers from interfering with the redemption rights of
shareholders for improper purposes, such as the preservation of
management fees. Although section 22(e) permits funds to postpone the
date of payment or satisfaction upon redemption for up to seven days,
it does not permit funds to suspend the right of redemption for any
amount of time, absent certain specified circumstances or a Commission
order.
    Rule 22e-3 under the Act [17 CFR 270.22e-3] exempts money market
funds from section 22(e) to permit them to suspend redemptions in order
to facilitate an orderly liquidation of the fund. Specifically, rule
22e-3 permits a money market fund to suspend redemptions and postpone
the payment of proceeds pending board-approved liquidation proceedings
if: (i) The fund's board of directors, including a majority of
disinterested directors, determines pursuant to Sec.  270.2a-
7(c)(8)(ii)(C) that the extent of the deviation between the fund's
amortized cost price per share and its current net asset value per
share calculated using available market quotations (or an appropriate
substitute that reflects current market conditions) may result in
material dilution or other unfair results to investors or existing
shareholders; (ii) the fund's board of directors, including a majority
of

disinterested directors, irrevocably approves the liquidation of the
fund; and (iii) the fund, prior to suspending redemptions, notifies the
Commission of its decision to liquidate and suspend redemptions. Rule
22e-3 also provides an exemption from section 22(e) for registered
investment companies that own shares of a money market fund pursuant to
section 12(d)(1)(E) of the Act (``conduit funds''), if the underlying
money market fund has suspended redemptions pursuant to the rule. A
conduit fund that suspends redemptions in reliance on the exemption
provided by rule 22e-3 is required to provide prompt notice of the
suspension of redemptions to the Commission. Notices required by the
rule must be provided by electronic mail, directed to the attention of
the Director of the Division of Investment Management or the Director's
designee.\1\ Compliance with the notification requirement is mandatory
for money market funds and conduit funds that rely on rule 22e-3 to
suspend redemptions and postpone payment of proceeds pending a
liquidation, and are not kept confidential.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See rule 22e-3(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Commission staff estimates that, on average, one fund would be
required to make the required notice every year.\2\ Commission staff
further estimates that a money market fund or conduit fund would spend
approximately one hour of an in-house attorney's time to prepare and
submit the notice required by the rule. Given these estimates, the
total annual burden of the notification requirement of rule 22e-3 for
all money market funds and conduit funds would be approximately one
hour at a cost of $425.\3\ The Commission staff estimates that there is
no cost burden associated with the information collection requirement
of rule 22e-3 other than this cost. The estimate of average burden
hours is made solely for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act,
and is not derived from a comprehensive or even a representative survey
or study of the costs of Commission rules and forms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The Commission has not received any notices invoking rule
22e-3 to halt redemptions. However, for administrative purposes, we
are reporting one respondent and one annual response.
    \3\ This figure for an Attorney is from SIFMA's Management &
Professional Earnings in the Securities Industry 2013, modified by
Commission staff to account for an 1800-hour work-year and
inflation, and multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses, firm size,
employee benefits and overhead.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Compliance with the collection of information requirements of the
rule is necessary to obtain the benefit of relying on the rule. 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 control number.
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information has practical
utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's estimate of the burden of
the collection of information; (c) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information collected; and (d) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques or other
forms of information technology. Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted in writing within 60 days after this
publication.
    Please direct your written comments to David Bottom, Director/Chief
Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, C/O John R.
Pezzullo, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549; or send an email to:
[email protected].

    Dated: November 15, 2021.
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-25172 Filed 11-17-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P