CA Almond 1.3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( banded) 15.5 0.005 0.001 0.044 0.431 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 46.2 0.014 0.004 0.132 1.283 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 20.2 0.006 0.002 0.058 0.561 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 60.7 0.018 0.005 0.173 1.686 OR Filbert 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 22.4 0.007 0.002 0.064 0.622 1.3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( banded) 23.0 0.007 0.002 0.066 0.630 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 23.7 0.007 0.002 0.068 0.639 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 83.0 0.024 0.006 0.237 2.306 FL Citrus 1.3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( banded) 75.1 0.022 0.006 0.215 2.086 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 224.5 0.066 0.017 0.641 6.236 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 129.0 0.038 0.010 0.369 13.583 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 43.5 0.013 0.003 0.124 1.208 CA Citrus 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 22.4 0.007 0.002 0.064 0.622 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 14.9 0.004 0.001 0.043 0.414 OR Berry 4 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 38.9 0.011 0.003 0.111 1.081 PA Apple 1.3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( banded) 39.1 0.012 0.003 0.112 1.086 Crop scenario Application Peak EEC ( ppb) Acute RQ value Green algae ( EC50 = 3400 ppb) Blue green algae ( EC50 = 13000 ppb) Non edangered aquatic vascular plant ( EC50 = 350 ppb) Endangered aquatic vascular plant ( EC05 = 36 ppb)

64 of 82 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 24.5 0.007 0.002 0.070 0.681 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 73.6 0.022 0.006 0.210 2.044 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 117.1 0.034 0.009 0.335 3.253 OR Apple 1.3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( banded) 20.2 0.006 0.002 0.058 0.561 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 23.6 0.007 0.002 0.067 0.656 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 47.3 0.014 0.004 0.135 1.314 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 60.3 0.018 0.005 0.172 1.675 NC Apple 1.3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( banded) 27.3 0.008 0.002 0.078 0.758 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 28.7 0.008 0.002 0.082 0.797 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 86.3 0.025 0.007 0.247 2.397 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 127.5 0.038 0.010 0.364 3.542 GA Pecan 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 156.0 0.046 0.012 0.446 4.333 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 209.4 0.062 0.016 0.598 5.817 1.3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( banded) 52.3 0.015 0.004 0.149 1.453 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 69.7 0.021 0.005 0.199 1.936 CA Tomato 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 23.6 0.007 0.002 0.067 0.656 Crop scenario Application Peak EEC ( ppb) Acute RQ value Green algae ( EC50 = 3400 ppb) Blue green algae ( EC50 = 13000 ppb) Non edangered aquatic vascular plant ( EC50 = 350 ppb) Endangered aquatic vascular plant ( EC05 = 36 ppb)

65 of 82 FL Tomato 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 76.6 0.023 0.006 0.219 2.128 FL Pepper 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 75.9 0.022 0.006 0.217 2.108 OR Mint 4 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 50.8 0.015 0.004 0.145 1.411 CA Grape 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 41.9 0.012 0.003 0.120 1.164 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 28.3 0.008 0.002 0.081 0.786 NC Tobacco 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 21.5 0.006 0.002 0.061 0.597 1 lb ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 10.8 0.003 0.001 0.031 0.300 PA Turf 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 60.2 0.018 0.005 0.172 1.672 3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 11.4 0.003 0.001 0.033 0.317 FL Turf 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 59.6 0.018 0.005 0.170 1.656 3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 36.8 0.011 0.003 0.105 1.022 RQ = EEC/ EC50 2. Non target Terrestrial Animals The EEC values for terrestrial exposure were derived from the Kenaga nomograph, as modified by Fletcher et al., ( 1994), which is based on a large set of actual field residue data. Risk quotients are calculated using the most sensitive LC 50 and NOAEC for birds, LD 50 for mammals ( based on laboratory rat studies), and appropriate EEC values.

Birds: No acute RQs were calculated for birds exposed to napropamide via spray or granular application because the core acute toxicity studies demonstrated that the LC50 and LD50 were greater the greatest dose tested ( highest dose tested in the acute dietary test was 7200 ppm; highest dose tested in the acute oral test was 4640 mg/ kg ). These results classify napropamide as practically nontoxic to birds. Therefore the maximum avian environmental dietary exposure 66 of 82 concentration of napropamide ( 1428 ppb) ( See T REX Model Appendix C) is not expected to cause significant acute toxicity to birds.

No chronic RQ values were calculated for birds because decreased body weights measured in the core chronic toxicity study were deemed unrelated to napropamide exposure ( See Appendix F, Table 2).

Mammals: No acute RQs were calculated for mammals exposed to napropamide via spray or granular application because the core acute toxicity studies demonstrated that the LD 50 was greater the greatest dose tested ( highest dose tested in the acute dietary test was 5000 mg/ kg). These results classify napropamide as practically nontoxic to mammals. Therefore the maximum mammalian environmental dietary exposure concentration of napropamide ( See T REX Model Appendix C, separate document) is not expected to cause significant acute toxicity to mammals.

Chronic mammalian RQ values exceeded the LOC of 1.0 on all food types and at all napropamide maximum application rates. Additionally, chronic mammalian RQ values exceeded the LOC on grasses, broadleaf plants, and small insects at the lowest average napropamide use rate of 1 lb ai/ A ( tobacco). RQ values ranged from 1.00 to 41.77. Chronic mammalian RQ values are summarized in Table 22.

Table 22. Mammalian chronic RQ values for napropamide Application rate Mammalian Chronic Risk Quotients1 Short grass Tall grass Broadleaf plants/ small insects Fruits/ pods/ large insects 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 38.00 22.00 27.00 3.00 6 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 16.00 7.33 9.00 1.00 4 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 2 41.77 19.13 23.50 2.60 4 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 32.00 14.67 18.00 2.00 3 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( broadcast) 31.30 14.37 17.60 1.97 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 16.00 7.33 9.00 1.00 2 lbs ai/ A x 1 ( banded) 5.33 2.43 3.00 0.33 1.33 lbs ai/ A x 2 ( banded) 4.57 2.13 2.60 0.30 1 lb ai/ A x 1 ( broadcast) 3 8.00 3.67 4.50 0.50 1Rat NOAEC = 30 mg/ kg/ diet 2Application interval of 60 days 3Lowest average use rate ( tobacco) exceedances indicated in bold Insects: An acute oral toxicity study for honey bees indicated an LD 50 of > 113.5 ug ai/ bee. Based on this information, napropamide has been determined to be practically non toxic to 67 of 82 honeybees on an acute oral basis. Contact data that were submitted were determined to be invalid; therefore, EFED cannot determine the acute contact risk for honeybees.

3. Non target Terrestrial and Semi Aquatic Plants EFED used a conservative first screen to estimate risk to terrestrial plants. This screening method used the maximum one application rate of the different types of uses ( orchards and vineyards at 6 lbs ai/ A, vineyards at 6 lbs ai/ A, and row crops at 2 and 4 lbs ai./ A), as well as the lowest average use rate of 1 lb ai/ A for tobacco. The labels require incorporation by either wetting in or by mechanical means. EFED modeled the risk to terrestrial plants assuming incorporation to 2 and 4 inches of depth to bracket potential exposure. These depths are specified in labels as being minimum depths to incorporate applied napropamide.

EFED used the TERRPLANT model to estimate risk to monocot and dicot terrestrial plants in areas adjacent to the treated field ( sheet runoff), wetland areas ( channelized runoff), and from spray drift. For the highest application rates ( 1.33, 2, 4, and 6 lbs. ai/ A), potential risk was predicted to non endangered and endangered terrestrial monocot and dicot plants living in both adjacent areas and wetlands. Also, spray drift risk to dicot plants was predicted from these application rates. ( Table 23).

The lowest average application rates of 1 lb ai/ A and 1.33 lbs ai/ A primarily pose a risk to endangered species inhabiting wetlands and other areas adjacent to napropamide applications. Exceedances also occur for non endangered plant species inhabiting adjacent wetlands.

Table 23. Terrestrial Plant Risk Quotients ( RQs)

App rate Form App method Plant Type Adjacent Area Runoff RQ values Wetland Area Runoff RQ values Spray Drift RQ values non end. 1 end. 2 nonend 3 end 4 non end. 5 end. 6 6 lbs ai/ A liquid Ground Unincorp. Monocot 1.64 6.00 11.45 42.00 0.08 0.18 Dicot 1.14 20.45 7.95 143.18 0.10 3.10 Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 1.09 4.00 6.00 22.00 0.08 0.18 Dicot 0.76 13.64 4.17 75.00 0.10 3.10 Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.82 3.00 3.27 12.00 0.08 0.18 Dicot 0.57 10.23 2.27 40.91 0.10 3.10 App rate Form App method Plant Type Adjacent Area Runoff RQ values Wetland Area Runoff RQ values Spray Drift RQ values non end. 1 end. 2 nonend 3 end 4 non end. 5 end. 6 68 of 82 Aerial, Airblast, Spray Chemigation Monocot 3.38 12.40 9.27 34.00 0.38 0.91 Dicot 2.35 42.27 6.44 115.91 0.49 15.50 granular Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.55 2.00 5.45 20.00 NA NA Dicot 0.38 6.82 3.79 68.18 NA NA Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.27 1.00 2.73 10.00 NA NA Dicot 0.19 3.41 1.89 34.09 NA NA Ground Unincorp. Monocot 1.09 4.00 10.91 40.0 NA NA Dicot 0.76 13.64 5.45 136.36 NA NA 4 lbs ai/ A liquid Ground Unincorp. Monocot 1.09 4.00 7.64 28.00 0.05 0.12 Dicot 0.76 13.64 5.30 95.45 0.07 2.07 Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.73 2.67 4.00 14.67 0.05 0.12 Dicot 0.51 9.09 2.78 50.00 0.07 2.07 Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.55 2.00 2.18 8.00 0.05 0.12 Dicot 0.38 6.82 1.52 27.27 0.07 2.07 Aerial, Airblast, Spray Chemigation Monocot 2.25 8.27 6.18 22.67 0.25 0.61 Dicot 1.57 28.18 4.29 77.27 0.33 10.33 granular Ground Unincorp. Monocot 0.73 2.67 7.27 26.67 NA NA Dicot 0.51 9.09 5.05 90.91 NA NA Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.36 1.33 3.64 13.33 NA NA Dicot 0.25 4.55 2.53 45.45 NA NA Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.18 0.67 1.82 6.67 NA NA Dicot 0.13 2.27 1.26 22.73 NA NA 2 lbs ai/ A liquid Ground Unicorp. Monocot 0.55 2.00 3.82 14.00 0.03 0.06 Dicot 0.38 6.82 2.65 47.73 0.03 1.03 Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.36 1.33 2.00 7.33 0.03 0.06 Dicot 0.25 4.55 1.39 25.00 0.03 1.03 App rate Form App method Plant Type Adjacent Area Runoff RQ values Wetland Area Runoff RQ values Spray Drift RQ values non end. 1 end. 2 nonend 3 end 4 non end. 5 end. 6 69 of 82 Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.27 1.00 1.09 4.00 0.03 0.06 Dicot 0.19 3.41 0.76 13.64 0.03 1.03 Aerial, Airblast, Spray Chemigation Monocot 1.13 4.13 3.09 11.33 0.13 0.3 Dicot 0.78 14.09 2.15 36.64 0.16 5.17 granular Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.18 0.67 1.82 6.67 NA NA Dicot 0.13 2.27 1.26 22.73 NA NA Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.09 0.33 0.91 3.33 NA NA Dicot 0.06 1.14 0.63 11.36 NA NA Ground Unincorp. Monocot 0.36 1.33 3.64 13.33 NA NA Dicot 0.25 4.55 2.53 45.45 NA NA 1.33 lb ai/ A liquid Ground Unincorp Monocot 0.36 1.33 2.54 9.31 0.02 0.04 Dicot 0.25 4.53 1.76 31.74 0.02 0.69 Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.24 0.89 1.33 4.88 0.02 0.04 Dicot 0.17 3.02 0.92 16.63 0.02 0.69 Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.18 0.67 0.73 2.66 0.02 0.04 Dicot 0.13 2.27 0.50 9.07 0.02 0.69 Aerial, Airblast, Spray Chemigation Monocot 0.75 2.75 2.06 7.54 0.08 0.20 Dicot 0.52 9.37 1.43 25.69 0.11 3.43 granular Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.12 0.44 1.21 4.43 NA NA Dicot 0.08 1.51 0.84 15.11 NA NA Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.06 0.22 0.60 2.22 NA NA Dicot 0.04 0.76 0.42 7.56 NA NA Ground Unincorp. Monocot 0.24 0.89 2.42 8.87 NA NA Dicot 0.17 3.02 1.68 30.23 NA NA 1 lb ai/ A liquid Ground Unincorp Monocot 0.27 1.00 1.91 7.00 0.01 0.03 Dicot 0.19 3.41 1.33 23.86 0.02 0.52 App rate Form App method Plant Type Adjacent Area Runoff RQ values Wetland Area Runoff RQ values Spray Drift RQ values non end. 1 end. 2 nonend 3 end 4 non end. 5 end. 6 70 of 82 Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.18 0.67 1.00 3.67 0.01 0.03 Dicot 0.13 2.27 0.69 12.50 0.02 0.52 Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.27 1.00 0.14 0.50 0.56 2.07 Dicot 0.19 3.41 0.09 1.70 0.39 7.05 Aerial, Airblast, Spray Chemigation Monocot 0.56 2.07 1.55 5.67 0.06 0.15 Dicot 0.39 7.05 1.07 19.32 0.08 2.58 granular Ground Incorp. ( 2 in.) Monocot 0.09 0.33 0.91 3.33 NA NA Dicot 0.06 1.14 0.63 11.36 NA NA Ground Incorp. ( 4 in.) Monocot 0.05 0.17 0.45 1.67 NA NA Dicot 0.03 0.57 0.32 5.68 NA NA Ground Unincorp. Monocot 0.18 0.67 1.82 6.67 NA NA Dicot 0.13 2.27 1.26 22.73 NA NA exceedances are indicated in bold 1RQ = EEC / Seedling emergence EC25 2RQ = EEC / Seedling emergence EC05 or NOAEC 3RQ = EEC / Seedling emergence EC25 4RQ = EEC / Seedling emergence EC05 or NOAEC 5RQ = Drift EEC / Vegetative Vigor EC25 6RQ = DriftEEC / Vegetative Vigor EC05 or NOAEC 71 of 82 B. Risk Description  Interpretation of Direct Effects 1. Risk to Aquatic Animals and Plants Summary of major conclusions ° Acute and chronic LOCs were not exceeded for freshwater fish and invertebrates at all napropamide application levels and in all evaluated scenarios.

° The acute endangered species LOC was exceeded for marine/ estuarine invertebrates ( crustaceans) under the Florida citrus scenario in which 2 applications were applied 60 days apart at 4 lbs ai/ A.

° Although no RQs calculated for freshwater invertebrates exceeded the endangered species LOC, there remains an uncertainty as to whether current freshwater invertebrate toxicity tests are protective of freshwater mollusk species. Therefore, the Agency uses the estuarine/ marine mollusk RQ values as a surrogate for freshwater mollusks. There are potential exceedances for freshwater mollusks exposed to napropamide applications to FL citrus, OR filbert, PA apple, NC apple, GA pecan, FL tomato, and FL pepper based on these surrogate data. Most of these exceedences were based on application of either the maximum broadcast rates ( 4 and 6 lbs ai/ A) and two applications/ year.

° A freshwater fish sub chronic study ( MRID 464591 09) and freshwater invertebrate life cycle study ( MRID 464787 04) were submitted, which have been used to assess chronic risk to aquatic organisms. Based on the data from these studies, RQs do not exceed any chronic LOCs for freshwater fish and invertebrates. However, the sub chronic study on freshwater fish, which has been used in place of a guideline early life stage fish study, has been classified as supplemental. EFED acknowledges uncertainties that are associated with use of non guideline studies in the risk assessment. Chronic toxicity data have not been submitted for estuarine/ marine fish and invertebrates. The Agency has determined that chronic toxicity data should be submitted because of the potential environmental persistence of napropamide which may cause chronic exposure to aquatic organisms. Chronic exposure is likely from the compound because the only apparent route of degradation in surface water is by sunlight. Laboratory data show a half life of 26 minutes in clear, shallow, well mixed water. However, persistence is likely to be longer in surface water because of the presence of suspended sediment, shading, deeper water, and cloudy conditions. The halflives in laboratory studies indicate that napropamide is stable to hydrolysis and essentially stable to anaerobic aquatic metabolism and to anaerobic soil metabolism ( T 1/ 2 > 51 days). 72 of 82 ° EFED recognizes that there are no federally listed endangered estuarine/ marine invertebrates. However, endangered species and restricted use acute LOCs were exceeded for estuarine/ marine mollusks for napropamide applications to Oregon filberts, Florida citrus, North Carolina apple, Georgia pecans, Florida tomato, and Florida pepper. Although no RQs calculated for freshwater invertebrates exceeded the endangered species LOC, there remains an uncertainty as to whether current freshwater invertebrate toxicity tests are protective of freshwater mollusk species. Therefore, the Agency concludes the potential risk to freshwater mollusks under these scenarios.

° The modeling of napropamide used in cranberry production indicates that risk to aquatic organisms is not likely to be significant. This is primarily because the maximum napropamide concentration ( 2,213 ug/ L) in cranberry field flood water rapidly degrades ( within 1 hr) to concentrations below the Agency's level of concern for acute risk to aquatic organisms ( Table 19). Thus, because flood water contaminated with napropamide is typically held in a cranberry field for several days, the napropamide concentration released into the surrounding aquatic environment is not expected to be significant.

° With the exception of applications to cranberries, no LOCs were exceeded for non listed aquatic plants based on green alga toxicity data and supplemental studies on toxicity to Lemna minor and Anabaena sp. In the cranberry scenario, the RQ for aquatic vascular plants exceeded plant LOCs at peak EECs. However, at 1 hour after flooding, RQs did not exceed; therefore, EFED concludes that there is minimal risk to aquatic plants under this scenario. RQs did exceed the LOC for listed aquatic vascular plants under several scenarios ( some or all application rates related to CA almond, OR filbert, OR berry, PA apple, OR apple, NC apple, GA pecan, FL tomato, FL pepper, OR mint, CA grape, PA turf, and FL turf). Data were not submitted for several algal and aquatic plant species, such as Lemna gibba, Skeletonema costatum and a freshwater diatom ( such as Navicula pelliculosa). The submission of supplemental studies provides additional information about the toxicity of napropamide to aquatic plants; however, the data do present uncertainties. As a result of these uncertainties and continued missing toxicity data, EFED cannot fully assess the potential adverse effects of napropamide exposure to aquatic plants and algae.

With the exception of the aforementioned estuarine/ marine invertebrate scenarios, napropamide use poses minimal risk to aquatic animals and non listed aquatic plants. Napropamide does pose a risk to listed aquatic vascular plants.

2. Risk to Terrestrial Organisms 73 of 82 Summary of major conclusions ° Acute RQ values for birds for both spray and granular napropamide applications were not calculated because the core acute toxicity studies demonstrated that the LC 50 and LD 50 were greater the greatest dose tested ( highest dose tested in the acute dietary test was 7200 ppm; highest dose tested in the acute oral test was 4640 mg/ kg ). These results classify napropamide as practically nontoxic to birds. Therefore the maximum avian environmental dietary exposure concentration of napropamide ( 1428 ppb) ( See T REX Model Appendix C) is not expected to cause significant acute toxicity to birds.

° Chronic RQ values for birds were not calculated because decreased body weights measured in the core chronic toxicity study were deemed unrelated to napropamide exposure. The effect demonstrated on body weight was deemed not related to the toxicant effects of napropamide. This is because the effects was only demonstrated in the 3000 ppm males during the last two weeks of the study. The differences observed were slight, and appeared to be related to a slightly lighter initial body weight of the males in this group. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in mean body weight change between the control group and the 3000 ppm treatment group at any time during the course of the study. Therefore, EFED conclusion is that a LOAEC was not established in the study. Therefore, this NOAEC will not be used to calculate an RQ.

° Acute RQ values for mammals for both spray and granular napropamide applications were not calculated because the core acute toxicity studies demonstrated that the LD 50 was greater the greatest dose tested ( highest dose tested in the acute dietary test was 5000 mg/ kg). These results classify napropamide as practically nontoxic to mammals. Therefore the maximum mammalian environmental dietary exposure concentration of napropamide ( See T REX Model Appendix C, separate document) is not expected to cause significant acute toxicity to mammals.

° Chronic risk to mammals ( including threatened and endangered mammals) is possible from maximum labeled application rates of napropamide on all crops, as well as from the lowest average application rate of 1 lb ai/ A ( tobacco).

° There is potential risk to non endangered and endangered terrestrial plants living in both adjacent areas and wetlands at maximum and average use rates.

° Napropamide was determined to be practically non toxic to honeybees on an acute oral basis. As a result, risk to beneficial terrestrial insects due to napropamide applications is not expected. Discussion 74 of 82 Risk to Aquatic Animals Although no RQs calculated for freshwater invertebrates exceeded the endangered species LOC, there remains an uncertainty as to whether current freshwater invertebrate toxicity tests are protective of freshwater mollusk species. Therefore, the Agency uses the estuarine/ marine mollusk RQ values as a surrogate for freshwater mollusks. There are potential exceedances for freshwater mollusks exposed to napropamide resulting from application to Oregon filberts, Florida citrus, North Carolina apple, Georgia pecans, Florida tomato, and Florida pepper based on these surrogate data. The models used to calculate environmental concentrations used an incorporation value of 0.5 inches, which models negligible incorporation and therefore simulates a runoff event immediately following application. However, the RQ values for endangered mollusks do not exceed the LOC if incorporation ( 2 inches) occurs. Given the information that soil incorporation mitigates risk to mollusks, it is possible that a geographically specific label for each of these crops could be used to lessen the risk of napropamide use to endangered mollusks.

Risk to Aquatic Plants A significant risk to non listed aquatic plants and algae was not calculated in this risk assessment, except immediately following flooding of a cranberry bog. In this case, significant risk was calculated only for aquatic vascular plants, and was also determined to be below LOCs for aquatic plants within 1 hour. Based on these data, water released from cranberry bogs is not expected to pose an acute or chronic risk to aquatic organisms living in waters downstream.

Listed aquatic vascular species were determined to be at risk under several scenarios modeled. Reductions in application rates, number of applications, and increases in application intervals may reduce risks to listed aquatic vascular plants under some scenarios.

Risk to Terrestrial Plants EFED used a conservative first screen to estimate risk to terrestrial plants. This screening method used the maximum one application rate of the different types of uses ( orchards and vineyards at 6 lbs ai./ A, vineyards at 6 lbs ai/ A, and row crops at 2 and 4 lbs ai/ A), as well as the lowest average use rate of 1 lb/ ai A ( tobacco). The labels require incorporation by either wetting in or by mechanical means, but EFED modeled the risk to terrestrial plants assuming incorporation to 2 and 4 inches of depth to bracket potential exposure. These depths are specified in labels as being minimum depths to incorporate applied napropamide.

EFED used the TERRPLANT model to estimate risk to monocot and dicot terrestrial plants in areas adjacent to the treated field ( sheet runoff), wetland areas ( channelized runoff), and from spray drift. For the highest application rates ( 2, 4 and 6 lbs ai/ A), potential risk was predicted to non endangered and endangered terrestrial plants living in both adjacent areas and wetlands with liquid application. Granular applications lead to apparent risk to both endangered monocots and dicots at both incorporation depths ( 2 and 4 inches). Spray drift poses a potential risk to endangered dicots at all application rates ( Table 23). 75 of 82 The lowest average application rates of 1 lb ai/ A and 1.33 lbs ai/ A primarily pose a risk to endangered species inhabiting wetlands and other areas adjacent to napropamide applications. Exceedances also occur for non endangereds plant species inhabiting adjacent wetlands.

Risk to plants from runoff will vary with application conditions and application technique. Application of a pesticide to soil followed by mechanical incorporation is expected to reduce risk to plants relative to wetting in because the pesticide will be partially buried and exposed to soil where it can sorb prior to a runoff. However, wetting in can also reduce runoff if the rate of rainfall/ irrigation is slow enough to allow infiltration into the soil. The particular method of incorporation will depend on whether the crop allows mechanical incorporation or not. The roots of an orchard crop may be damaged by mechanical incorporation and watering in may be the predominant method of incorporation. The soil properties also affect runoff. If a sandy soil is present, applied water will have a greater tendency to go into the soil rather than run off the irrigated area, as would be expected with a clay soil. If a field is sloped instead of being flat, runoff will be favored over infiltration into the soil.

Risk to Mammals EFED has determined that napropamide may pose a chronic risk to mammals feeding on short grass, tall grass, broadleaf plants, small insects, fruits, pods, and large insects at all maximum use rates, as well as the lowest average use rate of 1 lb ai/ A x 1 ( tobacco). This determination is based on the premise that chronic mammalian risk quotients exceeded the Agency Level of Concern for chronic risk to mammals including endangered species. The napropamide mammalian chronic toxicity study demonstrated that napropamide chronic dietary exposure caused chronic loss in body weight for parents and offspring. This indicates that napropamide dietary exposure may negatively impair mammalian growth and development. Mammals may be exposed to napropamide by its application to treated areas, where they feed on seeds, insects, and plant materials. Such application may contaminate mammalian food materials. Even though napropamide is required to be incorporated into the soil upon application, mammalian exposure may occur because some mammals may dig into the soil as they forage for food items. Additionally, napropamide is very persistent in soil ( aerobic soil metabolism = 446 days; terrestrial field dissipation half lives = 15 131 days). This persistence in soil may is predicted to contribute to chronic exposure and consequently chronic risk.

C. Threatened and Endangered Species Concerns 1. Taxonomic Groups Potentially at Risk The Agency's levels of concern for endangered and threatened mammals and non target terrestrial plants are exceeded for the use of napropamide. Appendix G provides a count of endangered and threatened species for each crop where napropamide is used, as well as a list of all of the endangered mammals and plants potentially at risk. The Agency also recognizes that there are no Federally listed estuarine/ marine invertebrates or mollusks. However, there are 76 of 82 numerous endangered freshwater mollusks and the Agency uses the estuarine/ marine mollusk data to reflect the potential effects of napropamide use on endangered freshwater mollusks.

The registrant must provide information on the proximity of Federally listed endangered species to the napropamide usage sites. This requirement may be satisfied in one of three ways: 1) having membership in the FIFRA Endangered Species Task Force ( Pesticide Registration Notice 2000 2); 2) citing FIFRA Endangered Species Task Force data; or 3) independently producing these data, provided the information is of sufficient quality to meet FIFRA requirements. The information will be used by the OPP Endangered Species Protection Program to develop recommendations to avoid adverse effects to listed species.

There are 542 endangered or threatened plant species in states that grow crops where napropamide is potentially used. These species are largely state specific, with California and Hawaii containing the largest number of endangered plant species.

There are 62 endangered or threatened mammal species in states that grow crops where napropamide is potentially used. Based on this assessment, these species could potentially be at risk from chronic napropamide exposure. Several species, such as the gray bat, Indiana bat, and black footed ferret occur in numerous states.

2. Probit Slope Analysis The probit slope response relationship is evaluated to calculate the chance of an individual event corresponding to the listed species acute LOCs. Probit slope analysis is not performed for plant species or chronic risks. Therefore, no probit slope analyses were done in this assessment.

3. Critical Habitats In the evaluation of pesticide effects on designated critical habitat, consideration is given to the physical and biological features ( constituent elements) of a critical habitat identified by the U. S Fish and Wildlife and National Marine Fisheries Services as essential to the conservation of a listed species and which may require special management considerations or protection. The evaluation of impacts for a screening level pesticide risk assessment focuses on the biological features that are constituent elements and is accomplished using the screening level taxonomic analysis ( risk quotients, RQs) and listed species levels of concern ( LOCs) that are used to evaluate direct and indirect effects to listed organisms.

The screening level risk assessment has identified potential concerns for indirect effects on listed species for those organisms dependant upon terrestrial plants and mammals. In light of the potential for indirect effects, the next step for EPA and the Service( s) is to identify which listed species and critical habitat are potentially implicated. Analytically, the identification of such species and critical habitat can occur in either of two ways. First, the agencies could determine whether the action area overlaps critical habitat or the occupied range of any listed species. If so, EPA would examine whether the pesticide's potential impacts on non endangered species 77 of 82 would affect the listed species indirectly or directly affect a constituent element of the critical habitat. Alternatively, the agencies could determine which listed species depend on biological resources, or have constituent elements that fall into, the taxa that may be directly or indirectly impacted by the pesticide. Then EPA would determine whether use of the pesticide overlaps the critical habitat or the occupied range of those listed species. At present, the information reviewed by EPA does not permit use of either analytical approach to make a definitive identification of species that are potentially impacted indirectly or critical habitats that is potentially impacted directly by the use of the pesticide. EPA and the Service( s) are working together to conduct the necessary analysis.

This screening level risk assessment for critical habitat provides a listing of potential biological features that, if they are constituent elements of one or more critical habitats, would be of potential concern. These correspond to the taxa identified above as being of potential concern for indirect effects and include terrestrial plants and mammals. This list should serve as an initial step in problem formulation for further assessment of critical habitat impacts outlined above, should additional work be necessary 4. Indirect Effect Analyses The Agency acknowledges that pesticides have the potential to exert indirect effects upon the listed organisms by, for example, perturbing forage or prey availability, altering the extent of nesting habitat, creating gaps in the food chain, etc.

In conducting a screen for indirect effects, direct effect LOCs for each taxonomic group are used to make inferences concerning the potential for indirect effects upon listed species that rely upon non endangered organisms in these taxonomic groups as resources critical to their life cycle.

Screening level chronic RQs for mammals exceed the endangered LOC; therefore, there may be a potential concern for indirect effects. The nature of the chronic toxicological endpoint can not be considered to determine if a rationale for a " not likely to adversely effect" determination is possible. As such, Services provided " species profiles", and further evaluation of the geographical and temporal nature of the exposure are all that can be considered to determine if a rationale for a " not likely to adversely effect" determination is possible. Indirect effects to mammals may result from reduced food items to animals, behavior modifications from reduced or a modified habitat, and from alterations of habitats. Alterations of habitats can affect the reproductive capacity of some terrestrial animals.

Screening level acute RQs for terrestrial plants are above the non endangered species LOCs. The Agency considers this to be indicative of a potential for adverse effects to those listed species that rely either on a specific plant species ( plant species obligate) or multiple plant species ( plant dependent) for some important aspect of their life cycle. The Agency may determine if listed organisms for which plants are a critical component of their resource needs are within the pesticide use area. This is accomplished through a comparison of Service provided " species profiles" and listed species location data. If no listed organisms that are either plant species 78 of 82 obligates or plant dependent reside within the pesticide use area, a no effect determination on listed species is made. If plant species obligate or dependent organism may reside within the pesticide use area, the Agency may consider temporal and geographical nature of exposure, and the scope of the effects data, to determine if any potential effects can be determined to not likely adversely affect a plant species obligate or dependent listed organism.

D. Description of Assumptions, Uncertainties, Strengths, and Limitations 1. Assumptions and Limitations Related to Exposure for Terrestrial Species a. Location of Wildlife Species For screening terrestrial risk assessments for listed species, a generic bird or mammal is assumed to occupy either the treated field or adjacent areas receiving pesticide at a rate commensurate with the treatment rate on the field. Spray drift model predictions suggest that this assumption leads to an overestimation of exposure to species that do not occupy the treated filed. For screening risk assessment purposes, the actual habitat requirements of any particular terrestrial species are not considered, and it assumed that species occupy, exclusively and permanently, the treated area being modeled. This assumption leads to a maximum level of exposure in the risk characterization.

Terrestrial EEC are based on peak value of the Kenaga nomogram as modified by Fletcher. The residues from the Kenaga nomogram are measured immediately after application. The peak maximum value is the upper limit value and may be conservative.

b. Routes of Exposure Screening level risk assessments for spray applications of pesticides consider dietary exposure alone. Other routes of exposure, not considered in this assessment, are discussed below:

° Incidental soil ingestion exposure  This risk assessment does not consider incidental soil ingestion. Available data suggests that up to 15% of the diet can consist of incidentally ingested soil depending on the species and feeding strategy ( Beyer et al., 1994).

° Dermal Exposure  The screening assessment does not consider dermal exposure, except as it is indirectly included in calculations of RQs based on lethal doses per unit of pesticide treated area. Dermal exposure may occur through three potential sources: ( 1) direct application of spray to terrestrial wildlife in the treated area or within the drift footprint, ( 2) incidental contact with contaminated vegetation, or ( 3) contact with contaminated water or soil. ° Drinking Water Exposure  Drinking water exposure to a pesticide active ingredient may be the result of consumption of surface water or consumption of the pesticide in dew or other water on the surfaces of treated vegetation. For 79 of 82 pesticide active ingredients with a potential to dissolve in runoff, puddles on the treated field may contain the chemical.

c. Residue Levels Selection As discussed earlier in the exposure section of this document, the Agency relies on the work of Fletcher et al. ( 1994) for setting the assumed pesticide residues in wildlife dietary items. The Agency believes that these residue assumptions reflect a realistic upper bound residue estimate, although the degree to which this assumption reflects a specific percentile estimate is difficult to quantify. It is important to note that the field measurement efforts used to develop the Fletcher estimates of exposure involve highly varied sampling techniques. It is entirely possible that much of these data reflect residues averaged over entire above ground plants in the case of grass and forage sampling. Depending upon a specific wildlife species' foraging habits, whole aboveground plant samples may either underestimate or overestimate actual exposure.

d. Dietary Intake  Difference Between Laboratory and Field Conditions The acute and chronic characterization of risk rely on comparisons of wildlife dietary residues with LC 50 or NOAEC values expressed in concentrations of pesticides in laboratory feed. These comparisons assume that ingestion of food items in the field occurs at rates commensurate with those in the laboratory. Although the screening assessment process adjusts dry weight estimates of food intake to reflect the increased mass in fresh weight wildlife food intake estimates, it does not allow for gross energy and assimilative efficiency differences between wildlife food items and laboratory feed.

On gross energy content alone, direct comparison of a laboratory dietary concentration based effects threshold to a fresh weight pesticide residue estimate would result in an underestimation of field exposure by food consumption by a factor of 1.25  2.5 for most food items. Only for seeds would the direct comparison of dietary threshold to residue estimate lead to an overestimate of exposure.

Differences in assimilative efficiency between laboratory and wild diets suggest that current screening assessment methods do not account for a potentially important aspect of food requirements. Depending upon species and dietary matrix, bird assimilation of wild diet energy ranges from 23  80%, and mammal's assimilation ranges from 41  85% ( U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993). If it is assumed that laboratory chow is formulated to maximize assimilative efficiency ( e. g., a value of 85%), a potential for underestimation of exposure may exist by assuming that consumption of food in the wild is comparable with consumption during laboratory testing. In the screening process, exposure may be underestimated because metabolic rates are not related to food consumption.

Finally, the screening procedure does not account for situations where the feeding rate may be above or below requirements to meet free living metabolic requirements. Gorging behavior is a possibility under some specific wildlife scenarios ( e. g., bird migration) where the food intake rate 80 of 82 may be greatly increased. Kirkwood ( 1983) has suggested that an upper bound limit to this behavior might be the typical intake rate multiplied by a factor of 5. Additionally, food intake may decrease due to pesticide application because food items contaminated with pesticide residues may be unpalatable.

e. Estimated Environmental Concentrations for Non Target Plants Currently the model for predicting the exposure to non target plants adjacent to application sites and also to low lying wetlands are based on the application rate, method of application ( aerial or ground), and the solubility of the pesticide. Several transport factors are not incorporated into the model. The exposure prediction may be underestimated or overestimated. The model also assumes1% spray drift from ground application ( napropamide is not applied aerially).

f. Data Gaps ° No foliar dissipation studies were supplied by the registrant. Therefore, the default assumption foliar half life of 35 days was used to calculate napropamide residue concentrations on terrestrial food items.

° The extent of photodegradation in surface water is uncertain. While napropamide is persistent in the field, laboratory studies demonstrated rapid ( t 1/ 2 = 6.8 minutes for parent napropamide and 26 minutes for parent + Isomers I and II) aqueous photolysis in clear, shallow, well mixed water. In contrast, surface water in the natural environment usually contains suspended solids, significantly reducing sunlight penetration and subsequent napropamide degradation. Therefore, EECs in surface water may be underestimated. Additionally, the cranberry bogs model indicated very reduced napropamide concentrations within 3 hours.

° No explanation for the difference between the persistence predicted by the laboratory data ( stable in all studies except photodegradation) and the field data has been put forth by the registrant ( photolysis was not considered a major route of dissipation since the product was soil incorporated). The fate of napropamide under field conditions remains an uncertainty.

2. Assumptions and Limitations Related to Exposure for Aquatic Species a. Uncertainties in PRZM EXAMS Modeling 81 of 82 ° The exact timing of applications in different parts of the U. S. was not known, so EFED assumed two sequential applications seven days apart for those crops with two applications. This assumption likely overestimates exposure on these crops.

° Broadcast applications were assumed in the modeling, which may be inaccurate for many crops. In many vineyard and orchard crops, only the banded area under the treeline are typically treated. Other areas are typically grassed in or plowed and may not be sprayed with for weed control. Vegetable crops may only be treated in a band around the plant roots, and mechanical cultivation is likely used in areas between rows. Therefore, EECs may be overestimated in these situations because lower amounts of pesticide are applied as a band, and non treated plowed or grassed areas may increase infiltration and prevent some runoff to surface water bodies.

° North Carolina was used as a surrogate for other tobacco producing states even though the labels do not allow use in North Carolina. This is the only scenario and may not represent runoff potential in the eastern U. S., which extends as far north as Massachusetts.

° The model assumes aqueous photolysis can occur throughout the water column in a surface water body. This assumption is expected to increase the degradation rate of pesticides prone to undergo photodegradation in water. For napropamide, this assumption may lead to underestimation of pesticide concentrations in water because of suspended sediment, cloudy days, and shading.

b. Uncertainties in the Cranberry Model ° The model assumes aqueous photolysis can occur throughout the water column in a flooded cranberry bog. This assumption is expected to increase the degradation rate of pesticides prone to undergo photodegradation in water. For napropamide, this assumption may lead to underestimation of pesticide concentrations in water because of shading from floating cranberries, any weeds present, suspended sediment, cloudy days, and the cranberry plants themselves.

° The model is designed to account for only first order degradation rates in soil and water environments. The inability to account for non first order degradation kinetics may impact prediction potential for pesticides with biphasic or monad type ( initial lag phase) of kinetic patterns.

° The model does not directly account for volatilization, soil photodegradation, anaerobic metabolism, and leaching in soil/ water environments. The lack of consideration for several routes of dissipation can lead to more conservative estimates of pesticide concentrations in soil and water for most pesticides. However, in the case of napropamide, the lack of consideration of these processes may not make a difference 82 of 82 because of limited volatility in all studies and essential stability in the anaerobic aquatic metabolism study.

° Agronomic factors included in the modeling include application rate, application interval, and flooding time. Spray drift, tillage practices, plant growth phenology, and plant residue management are not considered in the model. There are uncertainties associated with the impact of model estimates on model estimates.

° Pesticides in bog water are based on a Kd equilibrium model and are estimated using first order degradation kinetics. This assessment process assumes that pesticide sorption and desorption kinetics do not limit microbial degradation and photodegradation.

° Soil bulk density is assumed to be constant in the model. Soil bulk density is know to alter the pore volume of the sediment interaction zone. The model does not account for the auto correlative effects of soil particle size distribution, organic matter contends, etc. on soil bulk density.

° Cranberry bogs can either allow flow through to surface water or have a recirculating water system. Either way, berms or levees act to hold water in the field because cranberries require 2 inches of water per week. However, exposure in a closed system may be negligible while flow through systems may create more aquatic exposure.

3. Assumptions and Limitations Related to Effects Assessment a. Age Class and Sensitivity of Effects Thresholds It is generally recognized that test organism age may have a significant impact on the observed sensitivity to a toxicant. The screening risk assessment acute toxicity data for fish are collected on juvenile fish between 0.1 and 5 grams. Aquatic invertebrate acute testing is performed on recommended immature age classes ( e. g., first instar for daphnids, second instar for amphipods, stoneflies and mayflies, and third instar for midges). Similarly, acute dietary testing with birds is also performed on juveniles, with mallard being 5 10 days old and quail 10 14 days old.

Testing of juveniles may overestimate toxicity at older age classes for pesticidal active ingredients, such as napropamide, that act directly because younger age classes may not have the enzymatic systems associated with detoxifying xenobiotics. The screening risk assessment has no current provisions for a generally applied method that accounts for this uncertainty. In so far as the available toxicity data may provide ranges of sensitivity information with respect to age class, the risk assessment uses the most sensitive life stage information as the conservative screening endpoint.

b. Use of the Most Sensitive Species Tested 83 of 82 Although the screening risk assessment relies on a selected toxicity endpoint from the most sensitive species tested, it does not necessarily mean that the selected toxicity endpoints reflect sensitivity of the most sensitive species existing in a given environment. The relative position of the most sensitive species tested in the distribution of all possible species is a function of the overall variability among species to a particular chemical. In the case of listed species, there is uncertainty regarding the relationship of the listed species' sensitivity and the most sensitive species tested.

The Agency is not limited to a base set of surrogate toxicity information in establishing risk assessment conclusions. The Agency also considers toxicity data on non standard test species when available.

c. Data Gaps ° Currently, EFED cannot assess the chronic risk of napropamide to aquatic organisms because chronic toxicity data was not submitted to the Agency. However, the Agency has determined that chronic toxicity data should be submitted because of the potential environmental persistence of napropamide which may cause chronic exposure to aquatic organisms. Chronic exposure is likely from the compound because the only apparent route of degradation in surface water is photolysis. Laboratory data show a total half life of 26 minutes in clear, shallow, well mixed water. However, persistence is likely to be longer in surface water because of the presence of suspended sediment, shading, deeper water, and cloudy conditions. The half lives in laboratory studies indicate that napropamide is stable to hydrolysis and stable to anaerobic aquatic metabolism.

° Data were not submitted for several algal and aquatic plant species, such as Lemna gibba, Skeletonema costatum, Anabaena flos aquae, and a freshwater diatom ( such as Navicula pelliculosa). Therefore, EFED cannot fully assess the potential adverse effects of napropamide exposure to aquatic plants and algae.

° A review of the open literature from the ECOTOX database was not performed for napropamide. Analysis of this open literature data may allow further refinement of this assessment. A 1 APPENDIX A. Environmental Fate Assessment Environmental Fate Data Requirements for Napropamide Guideline # Data Requirement Is Data Requirement Satisfied? MRID #' s Study Classificatio n 161 1 Hydrolysis yes 41863201 acceptable 161 2 Photodegradation in Water yes 41575301 43175301 acceptable 161 3 Photodegradation on Soil yes 41863202 acceptable 161 4 Photodegradation in Air not required 162 1 Aerobic Soil Metabolism yes 41105901 acceptable 162 2 Anaerobic Soil Metabolism yes 00163271 92125017 acceptable 162 3 Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism yes 42699701 162 4 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism not required1 163 1 Leaching Adsorption/ Desorption yes 41575302 43514401 acceptable 163 2 Laboratory Volatility not required 163 3 Field Volatility not required 164 1 Terrestrial Field Dissipation yes 43742401 43742402 acceptable 164 2 Aquatic Field Dissipation not required 164 3 Forestry Dissipation not required 165 4 Accumulation in Fish yes 39774 acceptable 165 5 Accumulation aquatic nontarget not required 166 1 Ground Water small prospective not required 166 2 Ground Water small retrospective not required 201 1 Droplet Size Spectrum reserved2 202 1 Drift Field Evaluation reserved2 1 A method validation study ( MRID 45074201) was incorrectly submitted as a 162 4 study. A 2 2 United Phosphorus is a member of the Spray Drift Task Force and may satisfy the 201 1 and 202 1 data requirements through the Task Force. B 1 APPENDIX B. AQUATIC EXPOSURE ASSESSMENT PRZM EXAMS Table B 1. Inputs for napropamide ecological effects EECs applied using ground equipment to terrestrial crops ( PRZM EXAMS)

MODEL INPUT VARIABLE1 INPUT VALUE COMMENTS Application Rate ( kg/ ha) and # apps Based on Bead Use Data and Registrant CA Almonds 4.48 6.72 1.5 2.24 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast 2 apps banded 1 app banded FL Citrus 4.48 6.72 1.5 2.24 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast 2 apps banded 1 app banded CA Citrus 4.48 6.72 1.5 2.24 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast 2 apps banded 1 app banded OR Berry 4.48 1 app broadcast OR Filbert 4.48 6.72 1.5 2.24 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast 2 apps banded 1 app banded OR Apple 4.48 6.72 1.5 2.24 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast 2 apps banded 1 app banded OR Mint 4.48 1 app broadcast PA Apple 4.48 6.72 1.5 2.24 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast 2 apps banded 1 app banded NC Apple 4.48 6.72 1.5 2.24 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast 2 apps banded 1 app banded PA Turf 3.36 6.72 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast CA Tomato 2.24 1 app broadcast FL Pepper 2.24 1 app broadcast CA Grape 4.48 6.72 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast MODEL INPUT VARIABLE1 INPUT VALUE COMMENTS B 2 GA Pecan 4.48 6.72 1.5 2.24 2 apps broadcast 1 app broadcast 2 apps banded 1 app banded NC Tobacco 2.24 1 app broadcast Interval between applications 60 days for all crops with two applications. Application interval of 90 days was used suggested by the registrant labels. Label for turf suggests retreatment at 8 10 weeks after first application 60 days was used because the PE 4 Shell would not run with an application interval of 90 days Application Date( s) 3/ 1 FL citrus and pepper, GA pecan, and NC tobacco 4/ 1 NC apple, PA turf, and PA apple 11/ 1 CA almonds, citrus, tomato, and grape, OR berry and apple, PA apple, OR mint and filberts Application method Ground per labels Molecular Weight 271 g/ Mol Vapor pressure 1.7 x 10 7 Torr at 25 oC 46105003 Henry's Law Constant 8.2 x 10 10 calculated ( Vapor pressure * Molecular weight)/ ( 760 * water solubility)

Application Efficiency ( Drinking Water) Per 2/ 8/ 02 Input Parameter Guidance for Ground Applications All non granular uses 0.99 Granular uses ( turf) 1.00 Spray Drift ( Drinking Water) Per 2/ 8/ 02 Input Parameter Guidance All non granular uses 0.01 Granular uses ( turf and 6 lb rate on fruit and nut crops) 0.00 Kd ( ml/ g) 8 Average of values in MRID 41575302 Aerobic Soil Metabolic Halflife ( days) parent 1338 3X 446 day half life based on extractable residues in MRID 41105901 Incorporation depth ( cm) All uses 5 Assumes compound is watered in or mechanically incorporated to 2 inches of depth soon after application Solubility ( mg/ L) 740 74 mg/ L at 20 oC MODEL INPUT VARIABLE1 INPUT VALUE COMMENTS B 3 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolic Half life ( days) Kbacw in EXAMS 0 No data Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism half life ( days) Kbacs in EXAMS 557 MRID 46478703 Upper 10th cb on mean of 254 and 403 days Photolysis Half life ( days) 0.0047 D303453, dated 11/ 30/ 04 41575301 1 Input parameters based on 2/ 8/ 02 Input Parameter Guidance Table B 2. PRZM EXAMS Ecological Effects EECs for Napropamide EECs Scenario Peak 21 day 60 day CA Almonds ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha 60 days apart) 15.5 1.7 0.6 CA Almonds ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha 60 days apart) 46.2 5.2 1.9 CA Almonds ( 1 banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 20.2 1.8 0.7 CA Almonds ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 60.7 5.3 2.0 CA Citrus ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 22.4 1.6 0.6 CA Citrus ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 14.9 1.0 0.4 CA grapes ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 28.3 2.7 1.0 CA grapes ( 2 broadcast app of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 41.9 3.9 1.4 CA tomato ( 1 broadcast app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 23.6 2.8 1.0 FL citrus ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha) 75.1 4.1 1.6 FL citrus ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 224.5 12.2 4.6 FL citrus ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 129.0 7.5 3.2 FL citrus ( 1 banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha). 43.5 2.5 1.1 FL pepper ( 1 broadcast app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 75.9 6.1 3.0 FL tomato ( 1 broadcast app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 76.6 6.1 3.1 FL turf ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 59.6 3.2 1.2 FL turf ( 2 broadcast apps of 3.36 kg ai/ ha) 36.8 2.1 0.8 B 4 GA pecan ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 156.0 12.1 4.7 GA pecan ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 209.4 17.8 6.7 GA pecan ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha) 52.3 4.0 1.6 GA pecan ( 1 banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 69.7 5.9 2.2 NC apple ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha) 27.3 2.3 1.0 NC apple ( 1 banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 28.7 2.2 0.9 NC apple ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 86.3 6.5 2.6 NC apple ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 127.5 51.3 20.6 NC tobacco ( 1 broadcast app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 21.5 1.5 0.7 NC tobacco ( 1 broadcast app of 1.12 kg ai/ ha) 10.8 0.7 0.4 OR apple ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha) 20.2 2.8 1.0 OR apple ( 1 banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 23.6 3.4 1.4 OR apple ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 47.3 6.9 2.8 OR apple ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 60.3 8.3 3.0 OR berry ( 1 broadcast app of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 38.9 4.5 1.9 OR filbert ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 22.4 1.6 0.6 OR filbert ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha) 23.0 3.3 1.2 OR filbert ( 1 banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 23.7 3.5 1.5 OR filbert ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 83.0 10.6 4.5 OR mint ( 1 broadcast app of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 50.8 7.6 3.0 PA apple ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha) 39.1 2.8 1.1 PA apple ( 1banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha) 24.5 2.1 0.9 PA apple ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 73.6 6.3 2.6 PA apple ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha) 117.1 8.4 3.4 PA turf ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha) 60.2 4.3 1.5 PA turf ( 2 broadcast apps of 3.36 kg ai/ ha) 11.4 0.9 0.3 CA almond ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha 60 days apart)

stored as caalm4bd. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAalmondIC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 30: 38 B 5 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 8.627 3.117 0.811 0.300 0.206 0.051 1962 1.426 0.612 0.155 0.093 0.062 0.025 1963 3.895 1.814 0.384 0.143 0.101 0.047 1964 15.650 5.577 1.133 0.407 0.272 0.107 1965 2.913 1.055 0.244 0.086 0.057 0.027 1966 4.023 1.338 0.516 0.259 0.179 0.047 1967 4.583 1.670 0.399 0.149 0.100 0.030 1968 2.513 0.831 0.290 0.126 0.085 0.033 1969 9.961 4.223 1.602 0.625 0.417 0.132 1970 13.560 6.075 1.272 0.499 0.339 0.139 1971 0.838 0.335 0.119 0.048 0.038 0.011 1972 3.731 1.461 0.557 0.201 0.140 0.037 1973 6.201 3.218 1.112 0.450 0.304 0.100 1974 1.974 0.657 0.132 0.078 0.058 0.019 1975 0.750 0.214 0.042 0.015 0.016 0.006 1976 0.750 0.231 0.046 0.016 0.016 0.005 1977 5.421 1.880 0.469 0.242 0.167 0.064 1978 11.450 4.100 1.740 0.617 0.412 0.118 1979 7.561 2.529 0.952 0.336 0.224 0.071 1980 7.331 3.366 0.880 0.310 0.207 0.059 1981 13.820 5.700 1.454 0.529 0.359 0.169 1982 34.740 11.300 2.287 0.807 0.539 0.209 1983 7.248 2.950 0.767 0.379 0.259 0.108 1984 0.750 0.253 0.073 0.026 0.023 0.008 1985 10.150 3.260 0.674 0.256 0.177 0.047 1986 1.891 0.811 0.268 0.159 0.107 0.030 1987 1.097 0.381 0.086 0.044 0.037 0.015 1988 2.219 0.971 0.224 0.080 0.053 0.024 1989 2.446 0.674 0.132 0.061 0.046 0.013 1990 33.190 10.530 2.114 0.745 0.498 0.127 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 34.740 11.300 2.287 0.807 0.539 0.209 0.065 33.190 10.530 2.114 0.745 0.498 0.169 0.097 15.650 6.075 1.740 0.625 0.417 0.139 0.129 13.820 5.700 1.602 0.617 0.412 0.132 0.161 13.560 5.577 1.454 0.529 0.359 0.127 0.194 11.450 4.223 1.272 0.499 0.339 0.118 0.226 10.150 4.100 1.133 0.450 0.304 0.108 0.258 9.961 3.366 1.112 0.407 0.272 0.107 0.290 8.627 3.260 0.952 0.379 0.259 0.100 0.323 7.561 3.218 0.880 0.336 0.224 0.071 0.355 7.331 3.117 0.811 0.310 0.207 0.064 0.387 7.248 2.950 0.767 0.300 0.206 0.059 0.419 6.201 2.529 0.674 0.259 0.179 0.051 0.452 5.421 1.880 0.557 0.256 0.177 0.047 0.484 4.583 1.814 0.516 0.242 0.167 0.047 0.516 4.023 1.670 0.469 0.201 0.140 0.047 B 6 0.548 3.895 1.461 0.399 0.159 0.107 0.037 0.581 3.731 1.338 0.384 0.149 0.101 0.033 0.613 2.913 1.055 0.290 0.143 0.100 0.030 0.645 2.513 0.971 0.268 0.126 0.085 0.030 0.677 2.446 0.831 0.244 0.093 0.062 0.027 0.710 2.219 0.811 0.224 0.086 0.058 0.025 0.742 1.974 0.674 0.155 0.080 0.057 0.024 0.774 1.891 0.657 0.132 0.078 0.053 0.019 0.806 1.426 0.612 0.132 0.061 0.046 0.015 0.839 1.097 0.381 0.119 0.048 0.038 0.013 0.871 0.838 0.335 0.086 0.044 0.037 0.011 0.903 0.750 0.253 0.073 0.026 0.023 0.008 0.935 0.750 0.231 0.046 0.016 0.016 0.006 0.968 0.750 0.214 0.042 0.015 0.016 0.005 0.1 15.5 6.0 1.7 0.6 0.4 0.1 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: caalm4bd Metfile: w23232. d vf PRZM scenario: CAalmondIC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 days Halfife Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half life Method: CAM 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 1.5 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 60 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 UPTKF Record 18: PLVKRT B 7 PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

CA Almond ( 2 broadcast applications of 4.48 kg ai/ ha 60 days apart)

stored as caalmond. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAalmondIC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 30: 38 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 25.770 9.314 2.421 0.898 0.616 0.152 1962 4.258 1.827 0.462 0.278 0.186 0.076 1963 11.630 5.416 1.148 0.427 0.301 0.141 1964 46.750 16.660 3.384 1.216 0.812 0.320 1965 8.698 3.152 0.729 0.257 0.171 0.080 1966 12.020 3.997 1.541 0.773 0.534 0.142 1967 13.690 4.987 1.191 0.446 0.298 0.089 1968 7.509 2.483 0.865 0.377 0.253 0.097 1969 29.740 12.610 4.785 1.867 1.246 0.395 1970 40.490 18.140 3.798 1.490 1.012 0.414 1971 2.502 1.001 0.355 0.143 0.113 0.034 1972 11.140 4.364 1.664 0.599 0.418 0.111 1973 18.520 9.611 3.320 1.345 0.907 0.299 1974 5.894 1.961 0.394 0.233 0.173 0.056 1975 2.240 0.639 0.125 0.044 0.047 0.017 1976 2.240 0.690 0.137 0.048 0.049 0.015 1977 16.190 5.617 1.399 0.724 0.500 0.191 1978 34.180 12.240 5.195 1.844 1.232 0.354 1979 22.580 7.553 2.844 1.004 0.670 0.211 1980 21.900 10.060 2.630 0.925 0.617 0.176 1981 41.270 17.020 4.343 1.578 1.071 0.504 1982 104.000 33.740 6.830 2.410 1.610 0.624 1983 21.640 8.811 2.289 1.132 0.773 0.323 1984 2.240 0.755 0.218 0.076 0.069 0.022 1985 30.320 9.738 2.013 0.765 0.528 0.140 1986 5.646 2.422 0.801 0.474 0.318 0.090 1987 3.276 1.137 0.258 0.132 0.110 0.046 1988 6.626 2.901 0.669 0.239 0.159 0.071 1989 7.305 2.011 0.393 0.181 0.138 0.038 1990 99.140 31.440 6.315 2.226 1.486 0.381 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 104.000 33.740 6.830 2.410 1.610 0.624 0.065 99.140 31.440 6.315 2.226 1.486 0.504 0.097 46.750 18.140 5.195 1.867 1.246 0.414 B 8 0.129 41.270 17.020 4.785 1.844 1.232 0.395 0.161 40.490 16.660 4.343 1.578 1.071 0.381 0.194 34.180 12.610 3.798 1.490 1.012 0.354 0.226 30.320 12.240 3.384 1.345 0.907 0.323 0.258 29.740 10.060 3.320 1.216 0.812 0.320 0.290 25.770 9.738 2.844 1.132 0.773 0.299 0.323 22.580 9.611 2.630 1.004 0.670 0.211 0.355 21.900 9.314 2.421 0.925 0.617 0.191 0.387 21.640 8.811 2.289 0.898 0.616 0.176 0.419 18.520 7.553 2.013 0.773 0.534 0.152 0.452 16.190 5.617 1.664 0.765 0.528 0.142 0.484 13.690 5.416 1.541 0.724 0.500 0.141 0.516 12.020 4.987 1.399 0.599 0.418 0.140 0.548 11.630 4.364 1.191 0.474 0.318 0.111 0.581 11.140 3.997 1.148 0.446 0.301 0.097 0.613 8.698 3.152 0.865 0.427 0.298 0.090 0.645 7.509 2.901 0.801 0.377 0.253 0.089 0.677 7.305 2.483 0.729 0.278 0.186 0.080 0.710 6.626 2.422 0.669 0.257 0.173 0.076 0.742 5.894 2.011 0.462 0.239 0.171 0.071 0.774 5.646 1.961 0.394 0.233 0.159 0.056 0.806 4.258 1.827 0.393 0.181 0.138 0.046 0.839 3.276 1.137 0.355 0.143 0.113 0.038 0.871 2.502 1.001 0.258 0.132 0.110 0.034 0.903 2.240 0.755 0.218 0.076 0.069 0.022 0.935 2.240 0.690 0.137 0.048 0.049 0.017 0.968 2.240 0.639 0.125 0.044 0.047 0.015 0.1 46.2 18.0 5.2 1.9 1.2 0.4 Average of yearly averages: 0.2 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: caalmond Metfile: w23232. dv f PRZM scenario: CAalmondIC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 730 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 days Halfife Hydrolysis : pH 5 0 days Half life Hydrolysis : pH 7 0 days Half life B 9 Hydrolysis : pH 9 0 days Half life Method: CAM 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 60 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

CA almonds ( 1 banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha)

stored as caalm6bd. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAalmond0C. txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004 at 09: 13: 20 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 13.010 4.703 1.222 0.429 0.286 0.071 1962 7.649 3.629 0.896 0.316 0.211 0.063 1963 18.440 8.432 1.792 0.684 0.465 0.141 1964 13.390 4.771 0.969 0.340 0.227 0.112 1965 1.521 0.515 0.120 0.076 0.051 0.016 1966 6.494 2.159 0.805 0.388 0.259 0.066 1967 5.648 2.018 0.454 0.160 0.107 0.028 1968 3.504 1.165 0.320 0.128 0.091 0.034 1969 7.063 3.005 0.663 0.232 0.155 0.073 1970 20.440 9.162 1.918 0.725 0.483 0.140 1971 1.264 0.506 0.139 0.049 0.032 0.009 1972 5.854 2.291 0.786 0.282 0.191 0.050 1973 2.210 0.904 0.428 0.187 0.124 0.048 1974 2.978 0.991 0.199 0.094 0.063 0.016 1975 1.150 0.363 0.139 0.073 0.050 0.012 1976 0.956 0.292 0.057 0.039 0.026 0.006 1977 7.084 2.116 0.809 0.421 0.281 0.090 B 10 1978 4.387 1.572 0.588 0.212 0.142 0.054 1979 3.708 1.443 0.415 0.159 0.108 0.043 1980 3.103 1.415 0.358 0.150 0.101 0.031 1981 21.040 8.679 1.842 0.699 0.470 0.174 1982 17.720 6.128 1.508 0.652 0.435 0.138 1983 10.930 4.448 1.084 0.544 0.363 0.097 1984 0.496 0.167 0.034 0.012 0.008 0.003 1985 15.990 5.136 1.061 0.376 0.251 0.067 1986 1.586 0.710 0.183 0.092 0.062 0.015 1987 3.774 1.166 0.232 0.157 0.115 0.032 1988 1.811 0.610 0.123 0.059 0.039 0.016 1989 3.701 1.019 0.199 0.070 0.049 0.016 1990 21.460 6.807 1.355 0.542 0.362 0.095 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 21.460 9.162 1.918 0.725 0.483 0.174 0.065 21.040 8.679 1.842 0.699 0.470 0.141 0.097 20.440 8.432 1.792 0.684 0.465 0.140 0.129 18.440 6.807 1.508 0.652 0.435 0.138 0.161 17.720 6.128 1.355 0.544 0.363 0.112 0.194 15.990 5.136 1.222 0.542 0.362 0.097 0.226 13.390 4.771 1.084 0.429 0.286 0.095 0.258 13.010 4.703 1.061 0.421 0.281 0.090 0.290 10.930 4.448 0.969 0.388 0.259 0.073 0.323 7.649 3.629 0.896 0.376 0.251 0.071 0.355 7.084 3.005 0.809 0.340 0.227 0.067 0.387 7.063 2.291 0.805 0.316 0.211 0.066 0.419 6.494 2.159 0.786 0.282 0.191 0.063 0.452 5.854 2.116 0.663 0.232 0.155 0.054 0.484 5.648 2.018 0.588 0.212 0.142 0.050 0.516 4.387 1.572 0.454 0.187 0.124 0.048 0.548 3.774 1.443 0.428 0.160 0.115 0.043 0.581 3.708 1.415 0.415 0.159 0.108 0.034 0.613 3.701 1.166 0.358 0.157 0.107 0.032 0.645 3.504 1.165 0.320 0.150 0.101 0.031 0.677 3.103 1.019 0.232 0.128 0.091 0.028 0.710 2.978 0.991 0.199 0.094 0.063 0.016 0.742 2.210 0.904 0.199 0.092 0.062 0.016 0.774 1.811 0.710 0.183 0.076 0.051 0.016 0.806 1.586 0.610 0.139 0.073 0.050 0.016 0.839 1.521 0.515 0.139 0.070 0.049 0.015 0.871 1.264 0.506 0.123 0.059 0.039 0.012 0.903 1.150 0.363 0.120 0.049 0.032 0.009 0.935 0.956 0.292 0.057 0.039 0.026 0.006 0.968 0.496 0.167 0.034 0.012 0.008 0.003 0.1 20.2 8.3 1.8 0.7 0.5 0.1 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: caalm6bd Metfile: w23232. d B 11 vf PRZM scenario: CAalmond0C. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 2.24 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

CA Almond ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha)

stored as caalm6p. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAalmond0C. txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004 at 09: 13: 20 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 39.050 14.110 3.668 1.288 0.859 0.212 1962 22.950 10.890 2.687 0.949 0.634 0.190 1963 55.310 25.290 5.377 2.051 1.396 0.423 1964 40.160 14.310 2.908 1.019 0.682 0.335 1965 4.564 1.545 0.359 0.229 0.153 0.047 1966 19.480 6.476 2.416 1.165 0.777 0.198 B 12 1967 16.940 6.051 1.360 0.480 0.321 0.084 1968 10.510 3.495 0.961 0.384 0.274 0.101 1969 21.190 9.015 1.988 0.696 0.464 0.219 1970 61.310 27.480 5.752 2.174 1.449 0.420 1971 3.791 1.517 0.417 0.146 0.097 0.027 1972 17.560 6.871 2.359 0.847 0.574 0.151 1973 6.629 2.711 1.284 0.560 0.373 0.145 1974 8.933 2.972 0.597 0.283 0.189 0.049 1975 3.450 1.089 0.416 0.220 0.149 0.037 1976 2.868 0.875 0.171 0.116 0.077 0.019 1977 21.260 6.350 2.426 1.264 0.843 0.271 1978 13.160 4.716 1.765 0.636 0.426 0.162 1979 11.120 4.330 1.246 0.478 0.324 0.131 1980 9.310 4.245 1.075 0.451 0.302 0.093 1981 63.110 26.040 5.527 2.098 1.409 0.521 1982 53.160 18.380 4.523 1.957 1.305 0.413 1983 32.780 13.350 3.253 1.633 1.089 0.290 1984 1.489 0.502 0.101 0.035 0.024 0.008 1985 47.970 15.410 3.184 1.127 0.752 0.201 1986 4.759 2.130 0.550 0.277 0.186 0.046 1987 11.320 3.497 0.695 0.472 0.344 0.096 1988 5.433 1.830 0.369 0.176 0.118 0.048 1989 11.100 3.057 0.597 0.210 0.148 0.049 1990 64.390 20.420 4.065 1.626 1.085 0.284 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 64.390 27.480 5.752 2.174 1.449 0.521 0.065 63.110 26.040 5.527 2.098 1.409 0.423 0.097 61.310 25.290 5.377 2.051 1.396 0.420 0.129 55.310 20.420 4.523 1.957 1.305 0.413 0.161 53.160 18.380 4.065 1.633 1.089 0.335 0.194 47.970 15.410 3.668 1.626 1.085 0.290 0.226 40.160 14.310 3.253 1.288 0.859 0.284 0.258 39.050 14.110 3.184 1.264 0.843 0.271 0.290 32.780 13.350 2.908 1.165 0.777 0.219 0.323 22.950 10.890 2.687 1.127 0.752 0.212 0.355 21.260 9.015 2.426 1.019 0.682 0.201 0.387 21.190 6.871 2.416 0.949 0.634 0.198 0.419 19.480 6.476 2.359 0.847 0.574 0.190 0.452 17.560 6.350 1.988 0.696 0.464 0.162 0.484 16.940 6.051 1.765 0.636 0.426 0.151 0.516 13.160 4.716 1.360 0.560 0.373 0.145 0.548 11.320 4.330 1.284 0.480 0.344 0.131 0.581 11.120 4.245 1.246 0.478 0.324 0.101 0.613 11.100 3.497 1.075 0.472 0.321 0.096 0.645 10.510 3.495 0.961 0.451 0.302 0.093 0.677 9.310 3.057 0.695 0.384 0.274 0.084 0.710 8.933 2.972 0.597 0.283 0.189 0.049 0.742 6.629 2.711 0.597 0.277 0.186 0.049 0.774 5.433 2.130 0.550 0.229 0.153 0.048 0.806 4.759 1.830 0.417 0.220 0.149 0.047 0.839 4.564 1.545 0.416 0.210 0.148 0.046 0.871 3.791 1.517 0.369 0.176 0.118 0.037 0.903 3.450 1.089 0.359 0.146 0.097 0.027 B 13 0.935 2.868 0.875 0.171 0.116 0.077 0.019 0.968 1.489 0.502 0.101 0.035 0.024 0.008 0.1 60.7 24.8 5.3 2.0 1.4 0.4 Average of yearly averages: 0.2 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: caalm6p Metfile: w23232. d vf PRZM scenario: CAalmond0C. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 6.72 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

CA Citrus ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha 60 days apart)

stored as cacitrus. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAcitrus0C. txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004 at 09: 14: 54 B 14 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 Metfile: w23155. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 20 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 2.240 0.623 0.122 0.045 0.047 0.012 1962 22.610 7.976 2.506 0.902 0.602 0.160 1963 20.010 6.170 1.223 0.445 0.298 0.087 1964 2.240 0.652 0.128 0.046 0.048 0.016 1965 8.225 3.116 0.594 0.230 0.171 0.050 1966 8.272 2.460 0.485 0.213 0.142 0.068 1967 2.240 0.705 0.140 0.049 0.050 0.022 1968 2.240 0.708 0.141 0.049 0.051 0.016 1969 5.860 1.876 0.373 0.158 0.106 0.040 1970 6.988 2.087 0.411 0.163 0.109 0.043 1971 6.091 1.700 0.331 0.116 0.077 0.034 1972 3.495 0.893 0.194 0.068 0.064 0.029 1973 20.020 5.966 1.197 0.433 0.293 0.084 1974 6.703 2.197 0.440 0.198 0.176 0.068 1975 2.496 0.726 0.143 0.071 0.048 0.022 1976 2.240 0.653 0.128 0.045 0.047 0.014 1977 14.500 5.225 0.995 0.364 0.260 0.087 1978 172.000 70.260 14.310 5.055 3.376 0.846 1979 2.240 0.630 0.123 0.043 0.046 0.018 1980 2.240 0.595 0.139 0.049 0.045 0.019 1981 2.240 0.655 0.129 0.046 0.048 0.016 1982 3.563 1.148 0.229 0.131 0.106 0.031 1983 15.390 5.594 1.561 0.580 0.392 0.117 1984 2.240 0.686 0.136 0.050 0.051 0.017 1985 2.240 0.676 0.139 0.050 0.051 0.017 1986 2.240 0.603 0.117 0.044 0.046 0.016 1987 23.060 7.417 1.546 0.543 0.362 0.107 1988 2.240 0.655 0.129 0.046 0.048 0.016 1989 2.240 0.586 0.114 0.041 0.044 0.014 1990 2.240 0.590 0.114 0.040 0.044 0.014 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 172.000 70.260 14.310 5.055 3.376 0.846 0.065 23.060 7.976 2.506 0.902 0.602 0.160 0.097 22.610 7.417 1.561 0.580 0.392 0.117 0.129 20.020 6.170 1.546 0.543 0.362 0.107 0.161 20.010 5.966 1.223 0.445 0.298 0.087 0.194 15.390 5.594 1.197 0.433 0.293 0.087 0.226 14.500 5.225 0.995 0.364 0.260 0.084 0.258 8.272 3.116 0.594 0.230 0.176 0.068 0.290 8.225 2.460 0.485 0.213 0.171 0.068 0.323 6.988 2.197 0.440 0.198 0.142 0.050 0.355 6.703 2.087 0.411 0.163 0.109 0.043 0.387 6.091 1.876 0.373 0.158 0.106 0.040 0.419 5.860 1.700 0.331 0.131 0.106 0.034 0.452 3.563 1.148 0.229 0.116 0.077 0.031 0.484 3.495 0.893 0.194 0.071 0.064 0.029 0.516 2.496 0.726 0.143 0.068 0.051 0.022 0.548 2.240 0.708 0.141 0.050 0.051 0.022 B 15 0.581 2.240 0.705 0.140 0.050 0.051 0.019 0.613 2.240 0.686 0.139 0.049 0.050 0.018 0.645 2.240 0.676 0.139 0.049 0.048 0.017 0.677 2.240 0.655 0.136 0.049 0.048 0.017 0.710 2.240 0.655 0.129 0.046 0.048 0.016 0.742 2.240 0.653 0.129 0.046 0.048 0.016 0.774 2.240 0.652 0.128 0.046 0.047 0.016 0.806 2.240 0.630 0.128 0.045 0.047 0.016 0.839 2.240 0.623 0.123 0.045 0.046 0.016 0.871 2.240 0.603 0.122 0.044 0.046 0.014 0.903 2.240 0.595 0.117 0.043 0.045 0.014 0.935 2.240 0.590 0.114 0.041 0.044 0.014 0.968 2.240 0.586 0.114 0.040 0.044 0.012 0.1 22.4 7.3 1.6 0.6 0.4 0.1 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: cacitrus Metfile: w23155. dvf PRZM scenario: CAcitrus0C. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. ex v Chemical Name: napropamid e Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 60 days Set to 0 or delete line for single app. Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 B 16 UPTKF Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

CA Citrus ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha)

stored as cacit6p. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAcitrus0C. txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004 at 09: 14: 54 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 Metfile: w23155. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 20 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1962 15.400 5.433 1.712 0.600 0.400 0.099 1963 14.640 4.515 0.895 0.315 0.210 0.052 1964 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1965 8.275 2.713 0.517 0.181 0.121 0.032 1966 5.356 1.767 0.362 0.131 0.087 0.042 1967 0.888 0.298 0.060 0.021 0.014 0.004 1968 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1969 3.926 1.256 0.250 0.098 0.065 0.016 1970 4.888 1.459 0.288 0.101 0.067 0.021 1971 3.983 1.112 0.217 0.076 0.051 0.013 1972 2.337 0.597 0.116 0.040 0.027 0.009 1973 12.840 3.826 0.753 0.264 0.179 0.044 1974 7.273 2.384 0.478 0.167 0.141 0.046 1975 1.595 0.464 0.091 0.032 0.022 0.005 1976 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1977 14.890 4.943 0.942 0.330 0.220 0.068 1978 115.000 47.240 9.622 3.387 2.262 0.559 1979 0.483 0.163 0.033 0.012 0.008 0.002 1980 0.545 0.243 0.051 0.019 0.013 0.003 1981 0.022 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 1982 4.025 1.296 0.258 0.090 0.060 0.016 1983 10.410 3.784 1.053 0.377 0.253 0.070 1984 0.072 0.025 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.000 1985 0.092 0.028 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.000 1986 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1987 14.610 4.701 0.938 0.329 0.220 0.059 1988 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1989 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1990 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 115.000 47.240 9.622 3.387 2.262 0.559 0.065 15.400 5.433 1.712 0.600 0.400 0.099 0.097 14.890 4.943 1.053 0.377 0.253 0.070 B 17 0.129 14.640 4.701 0.942 0.330 0.220 0.068 0.161 14.610 4.515 0.938 0.329 0.220 0.059 0.194 12.840 3.826 0.895 0.315 0.210 0.052 0.226 10.410 3.784 0.753 0.264 0.179 0.046 0.258 8.275 2.713 0.517 0.181 0.141 0.044 0.290 7.273 2.384 0.478 0.167 0.121 0.042 0.323 5.356 1.767 0.362 0.131 0.087 0.032 0.355 4.888 1.459 0.288 0.101 0.067 0.021 0.387 4.025 1.296 0.258 0.098 0.065 0.016 0.419 3.983 1.256 0.250 0.090 0.060 0.016 0.452 3.926 1.112 0.217 0.076 0.051 0.013 0.484 2.337 0.597 0.116 0.040 0.027 0.009 0.516 1.595 0.464 0.091 0.032 0.022 0.005 0.548 0.888 0.298 0.060 0.021 0.014 0.004 0.581 0.545 0.243 0.051 0.019 0.013 0.003 0.613 0.483 0.163 0.033 0.012 0.008 0.002 0.645 0.092 0.028 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.677 0.072 0.025 0.005 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.710 0.022 0.007 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.742 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.774 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.806 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.839 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.871 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.903 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.935 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.968 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.1 14.9 4.9 1.0 0.4 0.2 0.1 Average of yearly averages: 0.04 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: cacit6p Metfile: w23155. dv f PRZM scenario: CAcitrus0C. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1338 days Halfife Hydrolysis pH 5 0 days Half life B 18 : Hydrolysis : pH 7 0 days Half life Hydrolysis : pH 9 0 days Half life Method: CAM 4 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 6.72 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 0 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

CA grapes ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha)

stored as cagrap6p. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAgrapes0C. txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004 at 09: 13: 38 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 6.927 2.668 0.816 0.288 0.192 0.047 1962 17.270 7.021 1.553 0.545 0.364 0.090 1963 18.090 6.434 1.758 0.641 0.432 0.129 1964 4.048 1.039 0.307 0.143 0.105 0.026 1965 6.404 1.851 0.363 0.130 0.086 0.041 1966 22.820 11.060 2.445 0.856 0.571 0.142 1967 5.022 1.603 0.380 0.150 0.147 0.040 1968 23.780 7.679 1.572 0.702 0.476 0.117 1969 22.300 8.885 5.286 1.944 1.300 0.321 1970 17.530 6.748 1.969 0.791 0.528 0.225 1971 3.896 1.276 0.492 0.172 0.115 0.030 1972 18.430 9.013 2.296 0.815 0.543 0.134 1973 5.906 2.008 0.407 0.155 0.109 0.049 1974 5.299 2.092 0.446 0.157 0.105 0.046 1975 0.381 0.118 0.024 0.009 0.006 0.003 B 19 1976 30.390 9.244 2.738 0.961 0.641 0.194 1977 28.840 10.040 2.617 0.916 0.611 0.160 1978 11.010 4.374 0.932 0.684 0.474 0.136 1979 2.013 0.699 0.242 0.099 0.066 0.022 1980 11.990 3.942 1.155 0.731 0.488 0.120 1981 16.680 5.784 1.384 0.506 0.340 0.084 1982 16.650 5.544 1.130 0.798 0.534 0.207 1983 19.850 7.559 2.728 0.989 0.662 0.194 1984 6.394 2.116 0.425 0.260 0.173 0.043 1985 3.279 1.079 0.324 0.136 0.091 0.023 1986 47.750 16.960 3.462 1.212 0.808 0.258 1987 4.543 1.575 0.331 0.139 0.094 0.024 1988 5.117 1.725 0.585 0.205 0.137 0.044 1989 1.347 0.405 0.080 0.038 0.034 0.010 1990 21.430 8.045 1.644 0.578 0.386 0.113 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 47.750 16.960 5.286 1.944 1.300 0.321 0.065 30.390 11.060 3.462 1.212 0.808 0.258 0.097 28.840 10.040 2.738 0.989 0.662 0.225 0.129 23.780 9.244 2.728 0.961 0.641 0.207 0.161 22.820 9.013 2.617 0.916 0.611 0.194 0.194 22.300 8.885 2.445 0.856 0.571 0.194 0.226 21.430 8.045 2.296 0.815 0.543 0.160 0.258 19.850 7.679 1.969 0.798 0.534 0.142 0.290 18.430 7.559 1.758 0.791 0.528 0.136 0.323 18.090 7.021 1.644 0.731 0.488 0.134 0.355 17.530 6.748 1.572 0.702 0.476 0.129 0.387 17.270 6.434 1.553 0.684 0.474 0.120 0.419 16.680 5.784 1.384 0.641 0.432 0.117 0.452 16.650 5.544 1.155 0.578 0.386 0.113 0.484 11.990 4.374 1.130 0.545 0.364 0.090 0.516 11.010 3.942 0.932 0.506 0.340 0.084 0.548 6.927 2.668 0.816 0.288 0.192 0.049 0.581 6.404 2.116 0.585 0.260 0.173 0.047 0.613 6.394 2.092 0.492 0.205 0.147 0.046 0.645 5.906 2.008 0.446 0.172 0.137 0.044 0.677 5.299 1.851 0.425 0.157 0.115 0.043 0.710 5.117 1.725 0.407 0.155 0.109 0.041 0.742 5.022 1.603 0.380 0.150 0.105 0.040 0.774 4.543 1.575 0.363 0.143 0.105 0.030 0.806 4.048 1.276 0.331 0.139 0.094 0.026 0.839 3.896 1.079 0.324 0.136 0.091 0.024 0.871 3.279 1.039 0.307 0.130 0.086 0.023 0.903 2.013 0.699 0.242 0.099 0.066 0.022 0.935 1.347 0.405 0.080 0.038 0.034 0.010 0.968 0.381 0.118 0.024 0.009 0.006 0.003 0.1 28.3 10.0 2.7 1.0 0.7 0.2 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: B 20 Output File: cagrap6p Metfile: w93193. d vf PRZM scenario: CAgrapes0C. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 6.72 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

CA grapes ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha)

stored as cagrape. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAgrapes0C. txt modified Thuday, 17 June 2004 at 09: 13: 38 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 4.571 1.760 0.539 0.234 0.173 0.043 1962 30.240 12.310 2.722 0.981 0.655 0.173 1963 26.670 9.490 2.590 0.944 0.643 0.191 1964 6.867 2.160 0.567 0.231 0.181 0.050 B 21 1965 12.550 3.629 0.712 0.254 0.187 0.076 1966 23.640 11.460 2.531 0.934 0.640 0.162 1967 11.040 3.523 0.834 0.329 0.337 0.103 1968 20.200 6.522 1.447 0.634 0.454 0.115 1969 47.850 19.070 11.290 4.248 2.838 0.716 1970 28.600 11.090 3.299 1.306 0.887 0.309 1971 3.690 1.208 0.542 0.207 0.155 0.046 1972 18.380 8.999 2.449 0.870 0.598 0.153 1973 13.210 4.490 0.908 0.367 0.258 0.094 1974 10.270 4.045 0.926 0.326 0.219 0.085 1975 2.320 0.696 0.151 0.053 0.053 0.019 1976 43.470 13.220 3.919 1.389 0.928 0.288 1977 26.380 9.187 2.476 0.884 0.606 0.167 1978 19.520 7.961 1.696 1.236 0.874 0.245 1979 3.334 1.157 0.475 0.190 0.127 0.047 1980 19.140 6.295 1.898 1.176 0.802 0.209 1981 24.370 8.451 2.026 0.742 0.512 0.140 1982 25.050 8.024 1.669 0.641 0.479 0.239 1983 42.500 16.180 5.825 2.124 1.440 0.393 1984 6.004 1.987 0.399 0.299 0.217 0.058 1985 3.069 1.010 0.301 0.177 0.137 0.039 1986 36.130 12.840 2.700 0.960 0.657 0.289 1987 8.107 2.796 0.633 0.254 0.172 0.055 1988 4.397 1.482 0.582 0.221 0.165 0.061 1989 2.588 0.778 0.154 0.072 0.081 0.034 1990 32.400 12.170 2.536 0.893 0.597 0.185 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 47.850 19.070 11.290 4.248 2.838 0.716 0.065 43.470 16.180 5.825 2.124 1.440 0.393 0.097 42.500 13.220 3.919 1.389 0.928 0.309 0.129 36.130 12.840 3.299 1.306 0.887 0.289 0.161 32.400 12.310 2.722 1.236 0.874 0.288 0.194 30.240 12.170 2.700 1.176 0.802 0.245 0.226 28.600 11.460 2.590 0.981 0.657 0.239 0.258 26.670 11.090 2.536 0.960 0.655 0.209 0.290 26.380 9.490 2.531 0.944 0.643 0.191 0.323 25.050 9.187 2.476 0.934 0.640 0.185 0.355 24.370 8.999 2.449 0.893 0.606 0.173 0.387 23.640 8.451 2.026 0.884 0.598 0.167 0.419 20.200 8.024 1.898 0.870 0.597 0.162 0.452 19.520 7.961 1.696 0.742 0.512 0.153 0.484 19.140 6.522 1.669 0.641 0.479 0.140 0.516 18.380 6.295 1.447 0.634 0.454 0.115 0.548 13.210 4.490 0.926 0.367 0.337 0.103 0.581 12.550 4.045 0.908 0.329 0.258 0.094 0.613 11.040 3.629 0.834 0.326 0.219 0.085 0.645 10.270 3.523 0.712 0.299 0.217 0.076 0.677 8.107 2.796 0.633 0.254 0.187 0.061 0.710 6.867 2.160 0.582 0.254 0.181 0.058 0.742 6.004 1.987 0.567 0.234 0.173 0.055 0.774 4.571 1.760 0.542 0.231 0.172 0.050 0.806 4.397 1.482 0.539 0.221 0.165 0.047 0.839 3.690 1.208 0.475 0.207 0.155 0.046 B 22 0.871 3.334 1.157 0.399 0.190 0.137 0.043 0.903 3.069 1.010 0.301 0.177 0.127 0.039 0.935 2.588 0.778 0.154 0.072 0.081 0.034 0.968 2.320 0.696 0.151 0.053 0.053 0.019 0.1 41.9 13.2 3.9 1.4 0.9 0.3 Average of yearly averages: 0.2 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: cagrape Metfile: w93193. d vf PRZM scenario: CAgrapes0C. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 60 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run) B 23 CA tomato ( 1 broadcast app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha)

stored as catomato. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: CAtomato0C. txt modified Tueday, 8 June 2004 at 12: 42: 50 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 12.260 4.164 1.795 0.653 0.435 0.107 1962 15.940 7.471 1.873 0.716 0.479 0.123 1963 17.300 6.538 2.452 0.930 0.674 0.235 1964 6.007 2.299 0.717 0.388 0.290 0.074 1965 6.714 2.724 0.743 0.392 0.268 0.091 1966 19.420 9.595 2.468 0.952 0.635 0.161 1967 6.099 1.946 0.534 0.227 0.174 0.081 1968 22.380 7.226 1.781 0.865 0.602 0.165 1969 17.660 7.036 3.863 1.420 0.949 0.257 1970 15.650 6.473 2.010 0.905 0.603 0.282 1971 6.221 2.170 0.776 0.305 0.205 0.062 1972 17.670 8.747 2.817 1.052 0.702 0.185 1973 6.146 2.317 0.462 0.311 0.213 0.091 1974 10.920 3.669 0.754 0.310 0.207 0.091 1975 3.709 1.139 0.227 0.083 0.060 0.023 1976 26.080 9.996 3.203 1.124 0.750 0.238 1977 23.780 8.279 2.429 0.865 0.581 0.167 1978 9.381 3.764 1.086 0.716 0.489 0.152 1979 4.240 1.588 0.642 0.298 0.201 0.068 1980 10.120 3.399 1.397 0.820 0.548 0.141 1981 14.480 5.052 1.753 0.653 0.442 0.120 1982 13.630 4.540 1.778 1.022 0.686 0.237 1983 13.590 5.563 2.333 0.875 0.586 0.217 1984 8.994 2.977 0.665 0.470 0.316 0.083 1985 11.320 4.304 1.332 0.574 0.384 0.103 1986 33.690 11.970 2.592 0.942 0.628 0.236 1987 8.560 3.317 0.718 0.321 0.239 0.078 1988 10.510 3.543 1.174 0.521 0.348 0.127 1989 2.529 0.666 0.130 0.102 0.097 0.038 1990 19.970 8.225 1.695 0.653 0.436 0.136 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 33.690 11.970 3.863 1.420 0.949 0.282 0.065 26.080 9.996 3.203 1.124 0.750 0.257 0.097 23.780 9.595 2.817 1.052 0.702 0.238 0.129 22.380 8.747 2.592 1.022 0.686 0.237 0.161 19.970 8.279 2.468 0.952 0.674 0.236 0.194 19.420 8.225 2.452 0.942 0.635 0.235 0.226 17.670 7.471 2.429 0.930 0.628 0.217 0.258 17.660 7.226 2.333 0.905 0.603 0.185 0.290 17.300 7.036 2.010 0.875 0.602 0.167 0.323 15.940 6.538 1.873 0.865 0.586 0.165 0.355 15.650 6.473 1.795 0.865 0.581 0.161 B 24 0.387 14.480 5.563 1.781 0.820 0.548 0.152 0.419 13.630 5.052 1.778 0.716 0.489 0.141 0.452 13.590 4.540 1.753 0.716 0.479 0.136 0.484 12.260 4.304 1.695 0.653 0.442 0.127 0.516 11.320 4.164 1.397 0.653 0.436 0.123 0.548 10.920 3.764 1.332 0.653 0.435 0.120 0.581 10.510 3.669 1.174 0.574 0.384 0.107 0.613 10.120 3.543 1.086 0.521 0.348 0.103 0.645 9.381 3.399 0.776 0.470 0.316 0.091 0.677 8.994 3.317 0.754 0.392 0.290 0.091 0.710 8.560 2.977 0.743 0.388 0.268 0.091 0.742 6.714 2.724 0.718 0.321 0.239 0.083 0.774 6.221 2.317 0.717 0.311 0.213 0.081 0.806 6.146 2.299 0.665 0.310 0.207 0.078 0.839 6.099 2.170 0.642 0.305 0.205 0.074 0.871 6.007 1.946 0.534 0.298 0.201 0.068 0.903 4.240 1.588 0.462 0.227 0.174 0.062 0.935 3.709 1.139 0.227 0.102 0.097 0.038 0.968 2.529 0.666 0.130 0.083 0.060 0.023 0.1 23.6 9.5 2.8 1.0 0.7 0.2 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: catomato Metfile: w93193. d vf PRZM scenario: CAtomato0C. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 2.24 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Nov dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or B 25 dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 1 UPTKF Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

FL citrus ( 2 banded apps of 1.5 kg ai/ ha 60 days apart)

stored as flcit4bd. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLcitrusC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 39: 50 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 10.430 2.872 0.688 0.353 0.313 0.124 1962 6.926 2.905 0.941 0.390 0.313 0.119 1963 11.260 3.917 1.882 0.786 0.534 0.157 1964 35.420 11.540 2.333 1.257 0.996 0.301 1965 22.010 10.660 2.807 1.100 0.736 0.205 1966 39.270 12.730 3.048 1.347 0.909 0.244 1967 7.303 2.886 1.271 0.720 0.518 0.133 1968 29.220 9.270 1.890 1.034 0.759 0.195 1969 46.700 13.550 3.236 1.380 1.168 0.345 1970 26.160 7.193 1.761 0.653 0.662 0.199 1971 84.100 21.310 4.169 1.557 1.109 0.297 1972 28.410 8.659 1.771 0.868 0.701 0.197 1973 28.560 8.186 1.640 0.600 0.470 0.163 1974 37.050 15.310 3.369 1.499 1.006 0.288 1975 24.490 6.723 2.667 1.077 0.732 0.192 1976 77.340 22.760 4.677 1.908 1.294 0.329 1977 7.818 2.114 0.613 0.323 0.239 0.064 1978 11.420 3.050 0.989 0.471 0.382 0.111 1979 271.000 72.850 14.890 5.256 3.742 0.943 1980 20.700 5.558 1.172 0.683 0.586 0.184 1981 28.440 7.692 2.437 0.936 0.663 0.188 1982 16.560 7.048 2.154 1.062 0.727 0.213 1983 55.430 14.440 3.167 1.349 1.128 0.345 1984 34.990 9.129 1.783 0.812 0.591 0.160 1985 28.610 15.160 3.119 1.327 0.894 0.249 1986 28.460 8.854 1.761 0.736 0.502 0.167 1987 23.900 6.320 1.593 1.025 0.977 0.284 1988 14.460 3.839 1.059 0.513 0.407 0.166 1989 21.070 5.824 1.449 0.588 0.400 0.107 1990 7.384 2.097 0.711 0.508 0.353 0.110 B 26 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 271.000 72.850 14.890 5.256 3.742 0.943 0.065 84.100 22.760 4.677 1.908 1.294 0.345 0.097 77.340 21.310 4.169 1.557 1.168 0.345 0.129 55.430 15.310 3.369 1.499 1.128 0.329 0.161 46.700 15.160 3.236 1.380 1.109 0.301 0.194 39.270 14.440 3.167 1.349 1.006 0.297 0.226 37.050 13.550 3.119 1.347 0.996 0.288 0.258 35.420 12.730 3.048 1.327 0.977 0.284 0.290 34.990 11.540 2.807 1.257 0.909 0.249 0.323 29.220 10.660 2.667 1.100 0.894 0.244 0.355 28.610 9.270 2.437 1.077 0.759 0.213 0.387 28.560 9.129 2.333 1.062 0.736 0.205 0.419 28.460 8.854 2.154 1.034 0.732 0.199 0.452 28.440 8.659 1.890 1.025 0.727 0.197 0.484 28.410 8.186 1.882 0.936 0.701 0.195 0.516 26.160 7.692 1.783 0.868 0.663 0.192 0.548 24.490 7.193 1.771 0.812 0.662 0.188 0.581 23.900 7.048 1.761 0.786 0.591 0.184 0.613 22.010 6.723 1.761 0.736 0.586 0.167 0.645 21.070 6.320 1.640 0.720 0.534 0.166 0.677 20.700 5.824 1.593 0.683 0.518 0.163 0.710 16.560 5.558 1.449 0.653 0.502 0.160 0.742 14.460 3.917 1.271 0.600 0.470 0.157 0.774 11.420 3.839 1.172 0.588 0.407 0.133 0.806 11.260 3.050 1.059 0.513 0.400 0.124 0.839 10.430 2.905 0.989 0.508 0.382 0.119 0.871 7.818 2.886 0.941 0.471 0.353 0.111 0.903 7.384 2.872 0.711 0.390 0.313 0.110 0.935 7.303 2.114 0.688 0.353 0.313 0.107 0.968 6.926 2.097 0.613 0.323 0.239 0.064 0.1 75.1 20.7 4.1 1.6 1.2 0.3 Average of yearly averages: 0.2 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: flcit4bd Metfile: w12842. dv f PRZM scenario: FLcitrusC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life B 27 Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 1.5 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Mar dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 60 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

FL citrus ( 2 broadcast apps of 4.48 kg ai/ ha 60 days apart)

stored as flcitrus. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLcitrusC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 39: 50 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 31.140 8.576 2.054 1.055 0.936 0.369 1962 20.690 8.678 2.810 1.166 0.935 0.355 1963 33.630 11.700 5.621 2.347 1.594 0.470 1964 106.000 34.480 6.969 3.755 2.974 0.898 1965 65.730 31.840 8.383 3.284 2.197 0.613 1966 117.000 38.040 9.103 4.024 2.715 0.730 1967 21.800 8.618 3.796 2.152 1.546 0.396 B 28 1968 87.290 27.690 5.646 3.088 2.268 0.582 1969 139.000 40.450 9.664 4.122 3.487 1.031 1970 78.160 21.490 5.260 1.951 1.977 0.595 1971 251.000 63.630 12.450 4.648 3.313 0.886 1972 84.850 25.860 5.289 2.592 2.093 0.589 1973 85.310 24.450 4.898 1.792 1.404 0.486 1974 111.000 45.730 10.060 4.477 3.005 0.861 1975 73.140 20.080 7.966 3.217 2.186 0.574 1976 231.000 67.970 13.970 5.697 3.865 0.982 1977 23.360 6.316 1.832 0.964 0.715 0.193 1978 34.120 9.111 2.955 1.407 1.140 0.330 1979 808.000 218.000 44.460 15.700 11.170 2.816 1980 61.820 16.600 3.499 2.041 1.750 0.548 1981 84.930 22.970 7.277 2.795 1.980 0.560 1982 49.470 21.050 6.435 3.171 2.172 0.637 1983 166.000 43.120 9.458 4.030 3.369 1.030 1984 105.000 27.270 5.326 2.425 1.766 0.477 1985 85.410 45.280 9.312 3.963 2.670 0.743 1986 84.980 26.440 5.260 2.199 1.500 0.499 1987 71.380 18.870 4.755 3.062 2.916 0.849 1988 43.190 11.470 3.163 1.533 1.214 0.495 1989 62.950 17.400 4.330 1.757 1.195 0.319 1990 22.050 6.261 2.124 1.516 1.053 0.328 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 808.000 218.000 44.460 15.700 11.170 2.816 0.065 251.000 67.970 13.970 5.697 3.865 1.031 0.097 231.000 63.630 12.450 4.648 3.487 1.030 0.129 166.000 45.730 10.060 4.477 3.369 0.982 0.161 139.000 45.280 9.664 4.122 3.313 0.898 0.194 117.000 43.120 9.458 4.030 3.005 0.886 B 29 0.226 111.000 40.450 9.312 4.024 2.974 0.861 0.258 106.000 38.040 9.103 3.963 2.916 0.849 0.290 105.000 34.480 8.383 3.755 2.715 0.743 0.323 87.290 31.840 7.966 3.284 2.670 0.730 0.355 85.410 27.690 7.277 3.217 2.268 0.637 0.387 85.310 27.270 6.969 3.171 2.197 0.613 0.419 84.980 26.440 6.435 3.088 2.186 0.595 0.452 84.930 25.860 5.646 3.062 2.172 0.589 0.484 84.850 24.450 5.621 2.795 2.093 0.582 0.516 78.160 22.970 5.326 2.592 1.980 0.574 0.548 73.140 21.490 5.289 2.425 1.977 0.560 0.581 71.380 21.050 5.260 2.347 1.766 0.548 0.613 65.730 20.080 5.260 2.199 1.750 0.499 0.645 62.950 18.870 4.898 2.152 1.594 0.495 0.677 61.820 17.400 4.755 2.041 1.546 0.486 0.710 49.470 16.600 4.330 1.951 1.500 0.477 0.742 43.190 11.700 3.796 1.792 1.404 0.470 0.774 34.120 11.470 3.499 1.757 1.214 0.396 0.806 33.630 9.111 3.163 1.533 1.195 0.369 0.839 31.140 8.678 2.955 1.516 1.140 0.355 0.871 23.360 8.618 2.810 1.407 1.053 0.330 0.903 22.050 8.576 2.124 1.166 0.936 0.328 0.935 21.800 6.316 2.054 1.055 0.935 0.319 0.968 20.690 6.261 1.832 0.964 0.715 0.193 0.1 224.5 61.8 12.2 4.6 3.5 1.0 Average of yearly averages: 0.7 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: flcitrus B 30 Metfile: w12842. dvf PRZM scenario: FLcitrusC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. ex v Chemical Name: napropamid e Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atmm 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 4.48 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Mar dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Interval 1 interval 60 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

FL citrus ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha)

stored as flcit6p. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLcitrusC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 39: 50 B 31 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 47.190 12.990 2.535 1.245 0.910 0.288 1962 31.340 13.150 4.258 1.593 1.119 0.304 1963 18.150 6.410 3.048 1.247 0.843 0.301 1964 97.690 28.560 5.688 3.116 2.274 0.619 1965 32.700 15.790 4.093 1.545 1.032 0.340 1966 63.580 20.600 4.920 2.111 1.421 0.418 1967 15.100 5.973 2.622 1.470 1.050 0.260 1968 51.890 16.460 3.355 1.760 1.279 0.334 1969 72.780 22.040 7.482 2.652 2.726 0.728 1970 30.680 10.250 4.044 1.676 1.489 0.384 1971 143.000 36.340 7.088 2.892 1.973 0.533 1972 40.740 12.410 2.542 1.195 0.960 0.297 1973 129.000 37.040 7.420 2.652 1.843 0.481 1974 55.510 23.570 5.187 2.343 1.567 0.548 1975 42.060 11.550 4.643 1.844 1.308 0.337 1976 113.000 33.300 6.832 2.695 1.887 0.487 1977 14.360 3.882 1.130 0.585 0.425 0.106 1978 16.300 4.350 1.429 0.702 0.747 0.201 1979 465.000 125.000 25.520 8.997 7.079 1.772 1980 34.320 9.281 2.520 1.448 1.193 0.327 1981 53.350 14.430 4.544 1.722 1.442 0.391 1982 34.570 9.431 2.437 1.064 1.162 0.327 1983 89.190 24.890 7.249 3.156 2.457 0.629 1984 55.470 14.470 2.823 1.281 0.911 0.264 1985 46.950 24.660 5.072 2.112 1.601 0.457 1986 129.000 40.070 7.815 2.917 1.949 0.530 1987 98.370 28.590 7.205 4.571 3.189 0.800 1988 65.360 17.350 4.231 1.604 1.121 0.364 1989 34.980 9.670 2.383 0.934 0.626 0.176 1990 30.220 7.653 1.481 0.682 0.629 0.205 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 465.000 125.000 25.520 8.997 7.079 1.772 0.065 143.000 40.070 7.815 4.571 3.189 0.800 0.097 129.000 37.040 7.482 3.156 2.726 0.728 0.129 129.000 36.340 7.420 3.116 2.457 0.629 0.161 113.000 33.300 7.249 2.917 2.274 0.619 0.194 98.370 28.590 7.205 2.892 1.973 0.548 0.226 97.690 28.560 7.088 2.695 1.949 0.533 0.258 89.190 24.890 6.832 2.652 1.887 0.530 0.290 72.780 24.660 5.688 2.652 1.843 0.487 0.323 65.360 23.570 5.187 2.343 1.601 0.481 0.355 63.580 22.040 5.072 2.112 1.567 0.457 0.387 55.510 20.600 4.920 2.111 1.489 0.418 0.419 55.470 17.350 4.643 1.844 1.442 0.391 0.452 53.350 16.460 4.544 1.760 1.421 0.384 0.484 51.890 15.790 4.258 1.722 1.308 0.364 0.516 47.190 14.470 4.231 1.676 1.279 0.340 B 32 0.548 46.950 14.430 4.093 1.604 1.193 0.337 0.581 42.060 13.150 4.044 1.593 1.162 0.334 0.613 40.740 12.990 3.355 1.545 1.121 0.327 0.645 34.980 12.410 3.048 1.470 1.119 0.327 0.677 34.570 11.550 2.823 1.448 1.050 0.304 0.710 34.320 10.250 2.622 1.281 1.032 0.301 0.742 32.700 9.670 2.542 1.247 0.960 0.297 0.774 31.340 9.431 2.535 1.245 0.911 0.288 0.806 30.680 9.281 2.520 1.195 0.910 0.264 0.839 30.220 7.653 2.437 1.064 0.843 0.260 0.871 18.150 6.410 2.383 0.934 0.747 0.205 0.903 16.300 5.973 1.481 0.702 0.629 0.201 0.935 15.100 4.350 1.429 0.682 0.626 0.176 0.968 14.360 3.882 1.130 0.585 0.425 0.106 0.1 129.0 37.0 7.5 3.2 2.7 0.7 Average of yearly averages: 0.4 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: flcit6p Metfile: w12842. d vf PRZM scenario: FLcitrusC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 6.72 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Mar dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA B 33 IPSCND 1 UPTKF Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

FL citrus ( 1 banded app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha)

stored as flcit6bd. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLcitrusC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 39: 50 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 15.730 4.331 0.845 0.415 0.303 0.096 1962 10.450 4.382 1.419 0.531 0.373 0.101 1963 6.051 2.137 1.016 0.416 0.281 0.100 1964 32.570 9.522 1.897 1.039 0.758 0.206 1965 10.900 5.263 1.364 0.515 0.344 0.113 1966 21.190 6.865 1.639 0.703 0.473 0.139 1967 5.033 1.990 0.874 0.490 0.350 0.087 1968 17.290 5.485 1.118 0.586 0.426 0.111 1969 24.250 7.343 2.494 0.884 0.909 0.243 1970 10.230 3.419 1.348 0.559 0.496 0.128 1971 47.820 12.120 2.363 0.964 0.658 0.178 1972 13.580 4.138 0.847 0.398 0.320 0.099 1973 43.080 12.350 2.473 0.884 0.614 0.160 1974 18.510 7.859 1.729 0.781 0.522 0.183 1975 14.020 3.850 1.548 0.615 0.436 0.112 1976 37.730 11.100 2.278 0.899 0.629 0.162 1977 4.786 1.294 0.377 0.195 0.142 0.035 1978 5.432 1.450 0.477 0.234 0.249 0.067 1979 155.000 41.710 8.505 2.999 2.360 0.591 1980 11.440 3.093 0.840 0.483 0.398 0.109 1981 17.790 4.811 1.515 0.574 0.481 0.131 1982 11.520 3.143 0.812 0.355 0.387 0.109 1983 29.740 8.298 2.417 1.052 0.819 0.210 1984 18.480 4.821 0.941 0.427 0.304 0.088 1985 15.650 8.221 1.690 0.704 0.534 0.152 1986 42.920 13.360 2.605 0.972 0.650 0.177 1987 32.800 9.532 2.402 1.524 1.063 0.267 1988 21.790 5.786 1.411 0.535 0.374 0.121 1989 11.660 3.223 0.794 0.311 0.209 0.059 1990 10.070 2.551 0.494 0.227 0.210 0.068 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly B 34 0.032 155.000 41.710 8.505 2.999 2.360 0.591 0.065 47.820 13.360 2.605 1.524 1.063 0.267 0.097 43.080 12.350 2.494 1.052 0.909 0.243 0.129 42.920 12.120 2.473 1.039 0.819 0.210 0.161 37.730 11.100 2.417 0.972 0.758 0.206 0.194 32.800 9.532 2.402 0.964 0.658 0.183 0.226 32.570 9.522 2.363 0.899 0.650 0.178 0.258 29.740 8.298 2.278 0.884 0.629 0.177 0.290 24.250 8.221 1.897 0.884 0.614 0.162 0.323 21.790 7.859 1.729 0.781 0.534 0.160 0.355 21.190 7.343 1.690 0.704 0.522 0.152 0.387 18.510 6.865 1.639 0.703 0.496 0.139 0.419 18.480 5.786 1.548 0.615 0.481 0.131 0.452 17.790 5.485 1.515 0.586 0.473 0.128 0.484 17.290 5.263 1.419 0.574 0.436 0.121 0.516 15.730 4.821 1.411 0.559 0.426 0.113 0.548 15.650 4.811 1.364 0.535 0.398 0.112 0.581 14.020 4.382 1.348 0.531 0.387 0.111 0.613 13.580 4.331 1.118 0.515 0.374 0.109 0.645 11.660 4.138 1.016 0.490 0.373 0.109 0.677 11.520 3.850 0.941 0.483 0.350 0.101 0.710 11.440 3.419 0.874 0.427 0.344 0.100 0.742 10.900 3.223 0.847 0.416 0.320 0.099 0.774 10.450 3.143 0.845 0.415 0.304 0.096 0.806 10.230 3.093 0.840 0.398 0.303 0.088 0.839 10.070 2.551 0.812 0.355 0.281 0.087 0.871 6.051 2.137 0.794 0.311 0.249 0.068 0.903 5.432 1.990 0.494 0.234 0.210 0.067 0.935 5.033 1.450 0.477 0.227 0.209 0.059 0.968 4.786 1.294 0.377 0.195 0.142 0.035 0.1 43.1 12.3 2.5 1.1 0.9 0.2 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: flcit6bd Metfile: w12842. dv f PRZM scenario: FLcitrusC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 days Halfife B 35 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 2.24 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Mar 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

FL pepper ( 1 broadcast app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha)

stored as flpepper. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLpeppersC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 41: 28 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 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 34.480 11.490 3.231 1.172 0.932 0.245 1962 35.420 12.810 2.891 1.260 0.880 0.240 1963 55.450 17.140 3.383 1.222 0.819 0.210 1964 33.170 9.844 2.618 1.525 1.040 0.264 1965 14.470 6.002 2.770 1.182 0.805 0.203 1966 17.580 4.999 1.394 0.599 0.651 0.184 1967 30.430 8.350 2.087 0.815 0.872 0.234 1968 21.780 8.655 3.183 1.441 0.989 0.251 1969 30.700 9.756 2.412 1.241 0.913 0.241 1970 86.010 28.280 9.186 3.331 2.364 0.602 1971 40.680 11.260 2.490 1.262 0.864 0.220 1972 26.800 7.766 2.913 1.864 1.319 0.328 1973 13.930 4.008 1.192 0.760 0.664 0.183 B 36 1974 29.450 7.853 1.582 0.608 0.449 0.147 1975 13.700 5.363 1.291 0.636 0.437 0.112 1976 14.390 4.917 1.706 0.792 0.706 0.181 1977 78.120 22.250 5.526 2.718 1.820 0.456 1978 13.980 4.001 1.206 0.656 0.475 0.136 1979 131.000 37.190 7.824 3.046 2.036 0.509 1980 37.640 10.420 2.036 0.843 0.883 0.231 1981 12.230 3.248 1.170 0.543 0.432 0.133 1982 53.640 19.240 6.125 3.366 2.273 0.563 1983 13.720 3.753 0.999 0.456 0.499 0.135 1984 45.150 11.700 3.827 1.555 1.294 0.330 1985 48.390 12.950 2.520 1.343 0.998 0.272 1986 23.970 6.659 2.131 0.787 0.536 0.171 1987 48.020 14.390 3.752 1.550 1.150 0.293 1988 27.140 7.111 2.119 1.301 1.059 0.298 1989 42.380 12.660 2.595 1.009 0.676 0.187 1990 18.650 5.833 1.416 0.615 0.451 0.121 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 131.000 37.190 9.186 3.366 2.364 0.602 0.065 86.010 28.280 7.824 3.331 2.273 0.563 0.097 78.120 22.250 6.125 3.046 2.036 0.509 0.129 55.450 19.240 5.526 2.718 1.820 0.456 0.161 53.640 17.140 3.827 1.864 1.319 0.330 0.194 48.390 14.390 3.752 1.555 1.294 0.328 0.226 48.020 12.950 3.383 1.550 1.150 0.298 0.258 45.150 12.810 3.231 1.525 1.059 0.293 0.290 42.380 12.660 3.183 1.441 1.040 0.272 0.323 40.680 11.700 2.913 1.343 0.998 0.264 0.355 37.640 11.490 2.891 1.301 0.989 0.251 0.387 35.420 11.260 2.770 1.262 0.932 0.245 0.419 34.480 10.420 2.618 1.260 0.913 0.241 0.452 33.170 9.844 2.595 1.241 0.883 0.240 0.484 30.700 9.756 2.520 1.222 0.880 0.234 0.516 30.430 8.655 2.490 1.182 0.872 0.231 0.548 29.450 8.350 2.412 1.172 0.864 0.220 0.581 27.140 7.853 2.131 1.009 0.819 0.210 0.613 26.800 7.766 2.119 0.843 0.805 0.203 0.645 23.970 7.111 2.087 0.815 0.706 0.187 0.677 21.780 6.659 2.036 0.792 0.676 0.184 0.710 18.650 6.002 1.706 0.787 0.664 0.183 0.742 17.580 5.833 1.582 0.760 0.651 0.181 0.774 14.470 5.363 1.416 0.656 0.536 0.171 0.806 14.390 4.999 1.394 0.636 0.499 0.147 0.839 13.980 4.917 1.291 0.615 0.475 0.136 0.871 13.930 4.008 1.206 0.608 0.451 0.135 0.903 13.720 4.001 1.192 0.599 0.449 0.133 0.935 13.700 3.753 1.170 0.543 0.437 0.121 0.968 12.230 3.248 0.999 0.456 0.432 0.112 0.1 75.9 21.9 6.1 3.0 2.0 0.5 Average of yearly averages: 0.3 B 37 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: flpepper Metfile: w12844. dv f PRZM scenario: FLpeppersC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 2.24 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Mar 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

FL tomato ( 1 broadcast app of 2.24 kg ai/ ha)

stored as fltomato. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLtomatoC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 44: 04 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 Metfile: w12844. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 30 Water segment concentrations ( ppb) B 38 Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 25.070 8.577 2.317 0.834 0.643 0.168 1962 35.480 13.440 2.998 1.303 0.915 0.248 1963 56.460 17.450 3.445 1.245 0.834 0.214 1964 33.930 10.070 2.679 1.564 1.064 0.270 1965 14.720 6.106 2.819 1.206 0.822 0.207 1966 13.760 3.913 1.424 0.614 0.611 0.175 1967 28.780 7.898 2.129 0.832 0.861 0.232 1968 22.100 8.783 3.232 1.463 0.997 0.253 1969 28.780 9.145 2.222 1.178 0.867 0.230 1970 81.200 26.510 8.712 3.160 2.248 0.573 1971 41.570 11.510 2.546 1.293 0.885 0.226 1972 26.990 7.822 2.932 1.799 1.291 0.321 1973 12.620 3.684 1.200 0.765 0.629 0.174 1974 26.650 7.106 1.437 0.546 0.408 0.137 1975 13.860 5.426 1.306 0.645 0.443 0.113 1976 12.630 4.933 1.711 0.794 0.684 0.176 1977 78.820 22.450 5.576 2.743 1.836 0.460 1978 14.260 4.080 1.233 0.670 0.485 0.135 1979 135.000 38.120 8.020 3.124 2.088 0.522 1980 34.430 9.528 1.862 0.776 0.838 0.220 1981 12.360 3.284 1.183 0.549 0.417 0.130 1982 54.440 20.050 6.184 3.281 2.217 0.549 1983 11.650 3.181 1.031 0.426 0.493 0.132 1984 50.780 13.160 4.109 1.629 1.355 0.346 1985 44.910 12.020 2.339 1.281 0.957 0.262 1986 21.840 6.069 1.897 0.702 0.480 0.158 1987 45.490 13.630 3.515 1.486 1.111 0.284 1988 27.170 7.120 1.763 1.160 0.965 0.275 1989 43.380 12.960 2.618 1.005 0.677 0.187 1990 19.350 6.047 1.468 0.640 0.469 0.124 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 135.000 38.120 8.712 3.281 2.248 0.573 0.065 81.200 26.510 8.020 3.160 2.217 0.549 0.097 78.820 22.450 6.184 3.124 2.088 0.522 0.129 56.460 20.050 5.576 2.743 1.836 0.460 0.161 54.440 17.450 4.109 1.799 1.355 0.346 0.194 50.780 13.630 3.515 1.629 1.291 0.321 0.226 45.490 13.440 3.445 1.564 1.111 0.284 0.258 44.910 13.160 3.232 1.486 1.064 0.275 0.290 43.380 12.960 2.998 1.463 0.997 0.270 0.323 41.570 12.020 2.932 1.303 0.965 0.262 0.355 35.480 11.510 2.819 1.293 0.957 0.253 0.387 34.430 10.070 2.679 1.281 0.915 0.248 0.419 33.930 9.528 2.618 1.245 0.885 0.232 0.452 28.780 9.145 2.546 1.206 0.867 0.230 0.484 28.780 8.783 2.339 1.178 0.861 0.226 0.516 27.170 8.577 2.317 1.160 0.838 0.220 0.548 26.990 7.898 2.222 1.005 0.834 0.214 0.581 26.650 7.822 2.129 0.834 0.822 0.207 0.613 25.070 7.120 1.897 0.832 0.684 0.187 0.645 22.100 7.106 1.862 0.794 0.677 0.176 B 39 0.677 21.840 6.106 1.763 0.776 0.643 0.175 0.710 19.350 6.069 1.711 0.765 0.629 0.174 0.742 14.720 6.047 1.468 0.702 0.611 0.168 0.774 14.260 5.426 1.437 0.670 0.493 0.158 0.806 13.860 4.933 1.424 0.645 0.485 0.137 0.839 13.760 4.080 1.306 0.640 0.480 0.135 0.871 12.630 3.913 1.233 0.614 0.469 0.132 0.903 12.620 3.684 1.200 0.549 0.443 0.130 0.935 12.360 3.284 1.183 0.546 0.417 0.124 0.968 11.650 3.181 1.031 0.426 0.408 0.113 0.1 76.6 22.2 6.1 3.1 2.1 0.5 Average of yearly averages: 0.2 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: fltomato Metfile: w12844. dv f PRZM scenario: FLtomatoC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Descriptio n Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.23E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 7.10E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 0 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 2.24 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Mar 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of B 40 entire run)

FL Turf ( 1 broadcast app of 6.72 kg ai/ ha)

stored as fltrf2. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLturfC. txt modified Monday, 16 June 2003 at 14: 48: 06 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 Metfile: w12834. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 28 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 1.002 0.281 0.055 0.025 0.018 0.004 1962 7.009 2.224 0.446 0.157 0.105 0.026 1963 4.488 1.350 0.278 0.141 0.094 0.023 1964 3.242 1.074 0.272 0.141 0.094 0.023 1965 4.357 1.324 0.279 0.098 0.065 0.031 1966 75.100 20.580 4.010 1.702 1.138 0.281 1967 23.500 8.681 1.744 0.618 0.412 0.102 1968 2.098 0.747 0.302 0.106 0.071 0.017 1969 3.826 1.099 0.268 0.097 0.065 0.016 1970 16.210 5.052 1.012 0.402 0.270 0.067 1971 20.450 5.574 1.085 0.412 0.277 0.068 1972 29.990 8.880 1.933 0.706 0.473 0.117 1973 4.027 1.176 0.265 0.094 0.063 0.015 1974 20.510 8.790 1.742 0.611 0.415 0.103 1975 14.710 4.033 0.800 0.281 0.187 0.046 1976 60.440 15.770 3.056 1.096 0.731 0.180 1977 5.174 1.417 0.279 0.098 0.066 0.016 1978 36.120 10.010 1.952 1.156 0.771 0.196 1979 52.270 21.440 4.211 1.486 0.993 0.245 1980 4.486 1.244 0.242 0.104 0.069 0.017 1981 7.784 2.125 0.440 0.154 0.133 0.035 1982 19.430 6.855 1.634 0.711 0.474 0.117 1983 32.370 10.600 2.902 1.023 0.683 0.169 1984 61.590 16.620 3.234 1.175 0.784 0.193 1985 7.673 2.084 0.406 0.216 0.146 0.036 1986 0.103 0.030 0.006 0.002 0.001 0.000 1987 7.969 3.163 0.680 0.463 0.309 0.076 1988 11.520 3.105 1.056 0.371 0.248 0.061 1989 5.379 1.537 0.298 0.104 0.070 0.017 1990 0.318 0.107 0.021 0.007 0.005 0.001 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032 75.100 21.440 4.211 1.702 1.138 0.281 0.065 61.590 20.580 4.010 1.486 0.993 0.245 0.097 60.440 16.620 3.234 1.175 0.784 0.196 0.129 52.270 15.770 3.056 1.156 0.771 0.193 0.161 36.120 10.600 2.902 1.096 0.731 0.180 0.194 32.370 10.010 1.952 1.023 0.683 0.169 0.226 29.990 8.880 1.933 0.711 0.474 0.117 0.258 23.500 8.790 1.744 0.706 0.473 0.117 B 41 0.290 20.510 8.681 1.742 0.618 0.415 0.103 0.323 20.450 6.855 1.634 0.611 0.412 0.102 0.355 19.430 5.574 1.085 0.463 0.309 0.076 0.387 16.210 5.052 1.056 0.412 0.277 0.068 0.419 14.710 4.033 1.012 0.402 0.270 0.067 0.452 11.520 3.163 0.800 0.371 0.248 0.061 0.484 7.969 3.105 0.680 0.281 0.187 0.046 0.516 7.784 2.224 0.446 0.216 0.146 0.036 0.548 7.673 2.125 0.440 0.157 0.133 0.035 0.581 7.009 2.084 0.406 0.154 0.105 0.031 0.613 5.379 1.537 0.302 0.141 0.094 0.026 0.645 5.174 1.417 0.298 0.141 0.094 0.023 0.677 4.488 1.350 0.279 0.106 0.071 0.023 0.710 4.486 1.324 0.279 0.104 0.070 0.017 0.742 4.357 1.244 0.278 0.104 0.069 0.017 0.774 4.027 1.176 0.272 0.098 0.066 0.017 0.806 3.826 1.099 0.268 0.098 0.065 0.016 0.839 3.242 1.074 0.265 0.097 0.065 0.016 0.871 2.098 0.747 0.242 0.094 0.063 0.015 0.903 1.002 0.281 0.055 0.025 0.018 0.004 0.935 0.318 0.107 0.021 0.007 0.005 0.001 0.968 0.103 0.030 0.006 0.002 0.001 0.000 0.1 59.6 16.5 3.2 1.2 0.8 0.2 Average of yearly averages: 0.1 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: fltrf2 Metfile: w12834. d vf PRZM scenario: FLturfC. tx t EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: napropamide Description Variable Name Value Units Comment s Molecular weight mwt 271 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 8.20E 10 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.70E 07 torr Solubility sol 740 mg/ L Kd Kd 8 mg/ L Koc Koc mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 0.0047 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 557 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 0.5 cm Application Rate: TAPP 6.72 kg/ ha B 42 Application Efficiency: APPEFF 1 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 1 Mar 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 Pond Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF none none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

FL turf ( 2 apps of 3.36 kg ai/ ha 60 days apart)

stored as fltrf2ap. out Chemical: napropamide PRZM environment: FLturfC. txt modified Monday, 16 June 2003 at 14: 48: 06 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 Metfile: w12834. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 28 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)