UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON D. C., 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES PC Code: 056502 DP Barcode: D319590 Date: August 9, 2005 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Revised Tier II Surface Water Exposure Values and Terrestrial Exposure Values for PCNB Based on Proposed Lower Application Rates ( Risk Mitigation Phase)

TO: Jill Bloom, Chemical Review Manager Special Review and Reregistration Division cc: Diana Locke, Ph. D., Risk Assessor Sherrie Kinard, Chemist RRB2/ HED ( 7509C)

FROM: Cheryl A. Sutton, Ph. D., Environmental Scientist Thomas M. Steeger, Ph. D., Senior Biologist R. David Jones, Ph. D., Senior Agronomist Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( 7507c)

APPROVED BY: Elizabeth Behl, Branch Chief Environmental Risk Branch IV Environmental Fate and Effects Division Background The Environmental Fate and Effects Division ( EFED) has revised the Tier II surface water values for the drinking water assessment and the ecological exposure assessment of pentachloronitrobenzene ( PCNB). Also revised were the terrestrial exposure values for use in the ecological exposure assessment. Exposure values were revised using the lower application rates proposed by the registrants for cabbage, peanuts and cotton. Also included in this memo for use during Phase Six of re registration, i. e., risk mitigation, are terrestrial and aquatic risk quotients ( RQs) that reflect the revised estimated environmental concentrations ( EECs) associated with the proposed reductions in applicaton rates.

Revised maximum annual application rates are: cabbage   22.5 lb ai/ A/ yr ( down from 30 lb ai/ A/ yr); peanuts   1 lb ai/ A/ yr ( down from 10 lb ai/ A/ yr); and cotton   1.5 lb ai/ A/ yr ( down from 2 lb ai/ A/ yr). For each of these uses, all modeling ( aquatic and terrestrial) is done assuming that the maximum application rates are given on an annual basis and that the maximum annual rate is equivalent to the maximum single application rate ( so that only single applications occur for each use). It is important to note that if the revised labels ( not available to EFED at the time of this review) state that the rates are per season, it may be necessary to further revise the estimated drinking water concentrations ( EDWCs) and EECs reported for cabbage, as cole crops may be planted more than once per year in some regions of the U. S. It is also assumed that the maximum application rate given for each use ( e. g., for peanuts) is the maximum rate across all labels ( including Special Local Need labels) for any type of soil application ( e. g., in furrow, t band, etc.) to that crop.

Revised Estimated Drinking Water Concentrations Table 1 presents the revised EDWCs associated with the use of PCNB on cabbage, peanuts and cotton at the reduced application rates proposed by the registrants. Input parameter values used for Tier II modeling are listed at the end of the PRZM/ EXAMS output file for each use ( Appendix A). With the exception of the reduced application rates, all model input parameter values are the same as those used in the most recent estimations of drinking water exposure concentrations presented in the July 7, 2005, EFED memo " Revised/ Refined Tier II Aquatic Exposure Values for the Drinking Water and Ecological Exposure Assessments of PCNB for Use During Phase 6   Risk Mitigation" ( DP Barcode D318569). The values to be used in the human health risk assessment for surface water sources of drinking water are associated with the highest maximum annual application rate, i. e., PCNB use on cabbage ( as the representative cole crop), and are in bold type in the table below.

Table 1. Revised Tier II surface water EDWC results for PCNB plus PCA for the drinking water assessment. Bolded values for cabbage are used in human health risk assessment.

PRZM/ EXAMS Results ( ppb) Crop ( Application Rate; # Applic. yr) Percentage Cropped Area acute 1 in 10 year 30 year average Cabbage ( 22.5 lb ai/ A; 1) 0.87 88.8 10.3 7.6 Peanuts ( 1 lb ai/ A; 1) 0.87 18.3 1.7 1.2 Cotton ( 1.5 lb ai/ A; 1) 0.87 26.9 5.7 3.8 Revised Estimated Environmental Concentrations The revised EECs for ecological risk assessment associated with PCNB use on cabbage, peanuts and cotton at the reduced application rates proposed by the registrants are presented in Table 2. With the exception of the reduced application rates, all PRZM/ EXAMS input parameter values are the same as those used in the most recent estimations of aquatic exposure concentrations presented in the July 7, 2005, EFED memo " Revised/ Refined Tier II Aquatic Exposure Values for the Drinking Water and Ecological Exposure Assessments of PCNB for Use During Phase 6   Risk Mitigation" ( DP Barcode D318569). The input parameter values are listed at the end of the PRZM/ EXAMS output file for each use ( Appendix A).

Table 2. Revised Tier II surface water EEC's for ecological risk assessment based on PCNB1 use on various crops.

Crop ( Application Rate; # Applic./ yr) Acute ( ppb) 1 in 10 Year 21 day Concentration ( ppb) 1 in 10 Year 60 day Concentration ( ppb)

Cabbage ( 22.5 lb ai/ A; 1) 36.4 15.3 9.5 Peanuts ( 1 lb ai/ A; 1) 8.2 3.1 1.9 Cotton ( 1.5 lb ai/ A; 1) 12.3 6.4 4.8 1 half lives are calculated based on total residues.

Revised Terrestrial Exposure Revised terrestrial exposure numbers were generated using TREX ( Version 1.22); output from the TREX model is included in Appendix B and relied on a default foliar dissipation half life of 35 days. Maximum and mean estimated PCNB residues on avian food items used in calculating dietary based risk quotients are presented in Table 3. Maximum equivalent doses of PCNB residues used in calculating dose based risk quotients for mammals are presented in Table 4.

Table 3. Maximum and mean estimated PCNB dietary residues on avian forage items for selected uses.

Use/ App. Method Application Rate lbs. a. i./ A (# app / interval, days) Food Items Maximum EEC ( mg/ kg) e Mean EEC ( mg/ kg) e Short grass 5400 1913 Tall grass 2475 810 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 3038 1013 Cabbage 22.5 ( 1 / NA)

Fruits, pods, seeds, and large insects 338 158 Short grass 240 85 Tall grass 110 36 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 135 45 Peanuts 1 ( 1 / NA)

Fruits, pods, seeds, and large insects 15 7 Short grass 360 128 Tall grass 165 54 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 203 68 Cotton 1.5 ( 1 / NA)

Fruits, pods, seeds, and large insects 23 11 Table 4. Maximum equivalent doses of PCNB in mammalian forage items for specific uses.

Maximum Body weight ( g) Use/ App. Method Application Rate lbs. a. i./ A (# app / interval, days) Food Items 15 35 1000 Short grass 5148 3558 825 Tall grass 2360 1631 378 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 2896 2002 464 Cabbage 22.5 ( 1 / NA)

Fruits, pods, and large insects 322 222 52 Maximum Body weight ( g) Use/ App. Method Application Rate lbs. a. i./ A (# app / interval, days) Food Items 15 35 1000 Seeds ( granivores) 72 49 11 Short grass 229 158 37 Tall grass 105 72 17 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 129 89 21 Fruits, pods, seeds, and large insects 14 9.9 2.3 Peanuts 1 ( 1 / NA)

Seeds ( granivores) 3.2 2.2 0.51 Short grass 343 237 55 Tall grass 157 109 25 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 193 133 31 Fruits, pods, and large insects 21 15 3.4 Cotton 1.5 ( 1 / NA)

Seeds ( granivores) 4.8 3.3 0.8 Revised Risk Estimation for Aquatic Species Table 5 presents the revised acute and chronic risk quotients for freshwater animals exposed to PCNB. Table 6 presents the revised acute risk quotients for estuarine/ marine animals exposed to PCNB. Chronic ecological toxicity data are not available for estuarine/ marine animals exposed to PCNB, so it is not possible to estimate risk to those animals at this time, and the likelihood of adverse chronic effects is presumed.

Table 5. Revised acute and chronic risk quotients for freshwater animals exposed to PCNB based on a bluegill sunfish acute LC50 of 100 µ g/ L and chronic NOEC of 13 µ g/ L and an acute Daphnia magna EC50 of 770 µ g/ L and chronic NOEC of 18 µ g/ L.

EECs Acute Risk Quotients Chronic Risk Quotients Crop ( Application Rate; # Applic./ yr) Peak / 21 day Average/ 60 day Average ( µ g/ L) Freshwater Fish LC50 = 100 µ g/ L Freshwater Invertebrate LC50 = 770 µ g/ L Freshwater Fisha NOEC = 13 µ g/ L Freshwater Invertebrate NOEC = 18 µ g/ L Cabbage ( 22.5 lb ai/ A; 1) 36.4 15.3 9.5 0.36a     0.05 b         0.73   0.85

Peanuts ( 1 lb ai/ A; 1) 8.2 3.1 1.9 0.08b    0.01        0.15   0.17

Cotton ( 1.5 lb ai/ A; 1) 12.3 6.4 4.8 0.12a     0.02         0.37   0.36

a exceeds acute restricted use ( RQ   0.1) and endangered species level of concern ( RQ   0.05) b exceeds acute endangered species level of concern ( RQ   0.05)

Table 6. Revised acute risk quotients for estuarine/ marine animals exposed to PCNB based on a sheepshead minnow acute LC50 of 7900 µ g/ L and a mysid shrimp LC50 of 12 µ g/ L .

EECs Acute Risk Quotients Crop ( Application Rate; # Applic./ yr) Peak ( µ g/ L) Estuarine/ marine Fish LC50 = 7900 µ g/ L Estuarine/ marine Invertebrate LC50 = 12 µ g/ L Cabbage ( 22.5 lb ai/ A; 1) 36.4 < 0.01 3.03 a Peanuts ( 1 lb ai/ A; 1) 8.2 < 0.01 0.68a Cotton ( 1.5 lb ai/ A; 1) 12.3 < 0.01 1.03 a a exceeds acute high risk ( RQ   0.5), restricted use ( RQ   0.1) and endangered species level of concern ( RQ   0.05)

Revised Risk Estimation for Terrestrial Species As mentioned previously, terrestrial exposure is estimated using TREX. This model also calculates risk quotients; output from the TREX model is contained in Appendix B. Acute and chronic dietary based risk quotients for birds based on maximum PCNB residues are presented in Table 7a. Avian acute dose based risk quotients are also presented using a bobwhite quail LD50 greater than 2250 mg/ kg ( Table 7b). Since both the dietary based and dose based risk quotients rely on avian toxicity endpoints that exceed the highest concentration tested, all acute avian RQ values are less than the calculated values.

Table 7a. Revised avian acute and chronic dietary based risk quotients for selected uses of nongranular products of PCNB based on a bobwhite quail LC50 of > 54,000 mg/ kg diet ( ppm) and NOAEC of 600 mg/ kg diet ( ppm).

Use/ App. Method Application Rate lbs. a. i./ A (# app / interval, days) Food Items Maximum EEC ( mg/ kg) Acute RQ ( EEC/ LC50) Chronic RQ ( EEC/ NOAEC)

Short grass 5400 < 0.10 9.0a Tall grass 2457 < 0.05 4.1a Broadleaf plants/ small insects 3038 < 0.06 5.1a Cabbage 22.5 ( 1 / NA)

Fruits, pods, seeds, and large insects 338 < 0.01 0.56 Short grass 240 < 0.01 0.40 Tall grass 110 < 0.01 0.18 Use/ App. Method Application Rate lbs. a. i./ A (# app / interval, days) Food Items Maximum EEC ( mg/ kg) Acute RQ ( EEC/ LC50) Chronic RQ ( EEC/ NOAEC)

Broadleaf plants/ small insects 135 < 0.01 0.23 Peanuts 1 ( 1 / NA) Fruits, pods, seeds, and large insects 15 < 0.01 0.03 Short grass 360 < 0.01 0.60 Tall grass 165 < 0.01 0.28 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 203 < 0.01 0.34 Cotton 1.5 ( 1 / NA)

Fruits, pods, seeds, and large insects 23 < 0.01 0.04 a exceeds chronic risk level of concern ( RQ   1.0) Table 7b. Revised acute dose based RQ values for small ( 20 g), intermediate ( 100 g) and large ( 1,000 g) birds feeding on short or tall grass, broadleaf plants/ small insects, and fruits/ pods/ seeds/ large insects exposed to PCNB following single applications based on a bobwhite quail LD50 > 2250 mg/ kg bw ( ppm).

Acute Avian RQ Body weight ( g) Use/ App. Method Application Rate lbs. a. i./ A (# app / interval, days) Food Items 20 100 1000 Short grass < 0.31 < 0.88 < 3.9 Tall grass < 0.14 < 0.40 < 1.8 Broadleaf plants/ small insects < 0.17 < 0.49 < 2.2 Fruits, pods, seeds and large insects < 0.02 < 0.05 < 0.25 Cabbage 22.5 ( 1 / NA)

Short grass < 0.01 < 0.04 < 0.17 Tall grass < 0.01 < 0.02 < 0.08 Broadleaf plants/ small insects < 0.01 < 0.02 < 0.10 Fruits, pods, seeds and large insects < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 Peanuts 1 ( 1 / NA)

Short grass < 0.02 < 0.06 < 0.26 Tall grass < 0.01 < 0.03 < 0.12 Broadleaf plants/ small insects < 0.01 < 0.03 < 0.15 Fruits, pods, seeds and large insects < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.02 Cotton 1.5 ( 1 / NA)

Revised acute ( Table 8) and chronic ( Table 9) dose based risk quotients for mammals are based on maximum equivalent doses since toxicity estimates were based on oral exposure data.  8

Table 8. Revised acute dose based RQ values for small ( 15 g), intermediate ( 35 g) and large ( 1,000 g) mammals feeding on short or tall grass, broadleaf plants/ small insects, fruits/ pods/ large insects and seeds exposed to PCNB following single and multiple applications based on a rat LD50 > 5,050 mg/ kg bw ( ppm).

Acute Mammalian RQ Body weight ( g) Use/ App. Method Application Rate lbs. a. i./ A (# app / interval, days) Food Items 15 35 1000 Short grass 0.46 a 0.40 a 0.21 a Tall grass 0.21 a 0.18 b 0.10 b Broadleaf plants/ small insects 0.26 a 0.22 a 0.12 b Fruits, pods and large insects 0.03 0.02 0.01 Cabbage 22.5 ( 1 / NA)

Seeds ( granivores) 0.01 0.01 < 0.01 Short grass 0.02 0.02 0.01 Tall grass 0.01 0.01 < 0.01 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 0.01 0.01 0.01 Fruits, pods and large insects < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 Peanuts 1 ( 1 / NA)

Seeds ( granivores) < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 Short grass 0.03 0.03 0.01 Tall grass 0.01 0.01 0.01 Broadleaf plants/ small insects 0.02 0.01 0.01 Fruits, pods and large insects < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 Cotton 1.5 ( 1 / NA)

Seeds ( granivores) < 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 a exceeds acute restricted use ( RQ   0.2) and endangered species level of concern ( RQ   0.1) b exceeds acute endangered species level of concern ( RQ   0.1)  9

Table 9. Chronic dose based RQ values for small ( 15 g), intermediate ( 35 g) and large ( 1,000 g) mammals feeding on short or tall grass, broadleaf plants/ small insects, fruits/ pods/ large insects and seeds exposed to PCNB following single and multiple applications based on a rat NOEC of 10 mg/ kg bw ( ppm).

Chronic Mammalian RQ Body weight ( g) Use/ App. Method Application Rate lbs. a. i./ A (# app / interval, days) Food Items 15 35 1000 Short grass 234 a 200 a 107 a Tall grass 107 a 92 a 49 a Broadleaf plants/ small insects 132 a 113 a 60 a Fruits, pods and large insects 15 a 13 a 6.7 a Cabbage 22.5 ( 1 / NA)

Seeds ( granivores) 3.3 a 2.8 a 1.5 a Short grass 10 a 8.9 a 4.8 a Tall grass 4.8 a 4.1 a 2.2 a Broadleaf plants/ small insects 5.9 a 5.0 a 2.7 a Fruits, pods and large insects 0.65 0.56 0.3 Peanuts 1 ( 1 / NA)

Seeds ( granivores) 0.14 0.12 0.07 Short grass 16 a 13 a 7.2 a Tall grass 7.2 a 6.1 a 3.3 a Broadleaf plants/ small insects 8.4 a 7.5 a 4.0 a Fruits, pods and large insects 0.98 0.8 0.5 Cotton 1.5 ( 1 / NA)

Seeds ( granivores) 0.22 0.2 0.10 a exceeds chronic risk level of concern ( RQ  1.0)  10

APPENDIX A PRZM/ EXAMS MODELING OUTPUT FILES I. Estimated Drinking Water Concentration ( EDWC) Modeling Outputs ( Surface Water Only)

1. Cabbage ( representative cole crop) at 22.5 lb ai/ A/ yr stored as cabbage dwa reduced. out Chemical: pcnb PRZM environment: FLcabbageC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 39: 00 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w12842. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 04: 28 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 57.94 49.87 26.35 11.84 8.554 2.562 1962 62.77 52.09 39.09 25.83 19.27 6.7 1963 60.99 49.79 27.3 13.92 11.75 6.973 1964 73.73 60.21 43.91 27.35 21.4 10.32 1965 66.72 53.89 28.73 18.95 15.84 7.473 1966 63.44 50.55 24.92 15.51 13.02 6.324 1967 88.83 71.31 41.08 21.23 17.29 7.239 1968 64.72 52.27 36.82 22.66 20.23 9.099 1969 74.53 63.92 37.7 24.63 20.4 11.05 1970 67.92 57.93 33.23 16.95 12.81 7.226 1971 94.2 79.05 40.1 32.81 27.11 10.83 1972 91.83 74.22 52.45 27.51 21.24 9.784 1973 64.9 51.86 34 22.35 17.18 8.082 1974 62.59 50.28 26.95 17.23 16.71 7.236 1975 63.08 51.21 30.93 25.22 20.27 8.904 1976 77.76 66.7 39.14 21.75 16.75 8.73 1977 63.82 50.89 31.05 18.28 13.81 6.206 1978 62.53 50.63 26.84 15.44 12.42 6.621 1979 125 102 51.64 32.77 26 14.93 1980 71.93 58.13 34.08 18.3 14.29 8.036 1981 77.49 62.18 43.36 27.44 20.82 9.558 1982 66.39 57.83 32.72 29.87 23.97 11.93 1983 66.43 54.41 32.86 21.16 16.89 9.935 1984 64.3 57.28 36.2 19.57 15.2 7.024 1985 116 93.89 49.25 31.77 26.49 10.62 1986 63.4 53.71 34.31 19.77 17.03 9.283 1987 65.69 53.33 33.52 20.07 16.69 9.748 1988 103 84.79 51.04 39.55 29.77 12.05 1989 64.62 52.51 40.1 25.2 19.99 9.979 1990 63.19 51.34 27 15.91 13.14 7.086 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032258064516129 125 102 52.45 39.55 29.77 14.93 0.0645161290322581 116 93.89 51.64 32.81 27.11 12.05 0.0967741935483871 103 84.79 51.04 32.77 26.49 11.93 0.129032258064516 94.2 79.05 49.25 31.77 26 11.05 0.161290322580645 91.83 74.22 43.91 29.87 23.97 10.83 0.193548387096774 88.83 71.31 43.36 27.51 21.4 10.62 0.225806451612903 77.76 66.7 41.08 27.44 21.24 10.32 0.258064516129032 77.49 63.92 40.1 27.35 20.82 9.979  11

0.290322580645161 74.53 62.18 40.1 25.83 20.4 9.935 0.32258064516129 73.73 60.21 39.14 25.22 20.27 9.784 0.354838709677419 71.93 58.13 39.09 25.2 20.23 9.748 0.387096774193548 67.92 57.93 37.7 24.63 19.99 9.558 0.419354838709677 66.72 57.83 36.82 22.66 19.27 9.283 0.451612903225806 66.43 57.28 36.2 22.35 17.29 9.099 0.483870967741936 66.39 54.41 34.31 21.75 17.18 8.904 0.516129032258065 65.69 53.89 34.08 21.23 17.03 8.73 0.548387096774194 64.9 53.71 34 21.16 16.89 8.082 0.580645161290323 64.72 53.33 33.52 20.07 16.75 8.036 0.612903225806452 64.62 52.51 33.23 19.77 16.71 7.473 0.645161290322581 64.3 52.27 32.86 19.57 16.69 7.239 0.67741935483871 63.82 52.09 32.72 18.95 15.84 7.236 0.709677419354839 63.44 51.86 31.05 18.3 15.2 7.226 0.741935483870968 63.4 51.34 30.93 18.28 14.29 7.086 0.774193548387097 63.19 51.21 28.73 17.23 13.81 7.024 0.806451612903226 63.08 50.89 27.3 16.95 13.14 6.973 0.838709677419355 62.77 50.63 27 15.91 13.02 6.7 0.870967741935484 62.59 50.55 26.95 15.51 12.81 6.621 0.903225806451613 62.53 50.28 26.84 15.44 12.42 6.324 0.935483870967742 60.99 49.87 26.35 13.92 11.75 6.206 0.967741935483871 57.94 49.79 24.92 11.84 8.554 2.562 0.1 102.12 84.216 50.861 32.67 26.441 11.842 Average of yearly averages: 8.71793333333333 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: cabbage dwa reduced Metfile: w12842. dvf PRZM scenario: FLcabbageC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: pcnb Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 295.3 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 4.42E 5 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.13E 4 torr Solubility sol 4.4 mg/ L Kd Kd mg/ L Koc Koc 6469.5 mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 1.83 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 3110 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 1460 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1555 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 10 cm Application Rate: TAPP 25.2 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 08 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 3 UPTKF  12

Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR IR Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF total none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

2. Peanuts at 1.0 lb ai/ A/ yr stored as peanuts dwa reduced. out Chemical: pcnb PRZM environment: NCpeanutC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17: 12: 46 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w13737. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 06: 30 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 12.49 9.949 5.543 3.363 2.871 1.244 1962 6.896 5.606 3.244 2.418 1.999 1.356 1963 27.33 23.31 11.81 5.804 4.503 2.113 1964 22.07 17.68 10.32 5.599 4.234 1.99 1965 6.481 5.121 2.724 1.774 1.486 0.9939 1966 9.782 7.651 4.399 2.452 1.991 1.347 1967 10.95 8.886 4.983 3.926 3.127 1.688 1968 3.648 3.052 1.741 1.484 1.427 1.101 1969 13.25 11.54 6.561 3.628 3.17 1.562 1970 7.75 6.56 4.359 2.755 2.532 1.465 1971 8.787 7.142 4.267 2.989 2.469 1.363 1972 4.467 3.554 2.113 1.65 1.5 1.075 1973 8.369 6.632 3.307 2.517 2.268 1.362 1974 7.604 6.365 4.891 2.979 2.532 1.307 1975 17.31 13.42 6.582 3.791 3.358 1.962 1976 6.262 4.962 2.871 1.728 1.747 1.05 1977 6.933 5.581 3.403 2.207 1.892 1.399 1978 7.445 6.162 5.028 3.673 3.163 1.675 1979 10.32 8.585 6.004 3.819 3.15 1.974 1980 13.49 10.81 5.497 3.146 2.638 1.546 1981 8.16 6.737 3.575 2.471 2.382 1.341 1982 5.24 4.236 2.604 1.768 1.523 1.118 1983 9.103 7.207 4.168 2.503 2.08 1.284 1984 21.46 17 9.557 5.889 4.719 2.128 1985 8.124 6.469 3.815 2.424 2.169 1.47 1986 4.371 3.52 2.348 1.564 1.252 0.8034 1987 7.21 5.873 3.382 2.189 1.768 1.245 1988 3.595 2.922 1.815 1.34 1.268 0.8078 1989 5.055 4.456 3.167 2.005 1.88 1.179 1990 8.676 7.011 3.883 2.298 1.884 1.094 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032258064516129 27.33 23.31 11.81 5.889 4.719 2.128 0.0645161290322581 22.07 17.68 10.32 5.804 4.503 2.113 0.0967741935483871 21.46 17 9.557 5.599 4.234 1.99 0.129032258064516 17.31 13.42 6.582 3.926 3.358 1.974 0.161290322580645 13.49 11.54 6.561 3.819 3.17 1.962 0.193548387096774 13.25 10.81 6.004 3.791 3.163 1.688 0.225806451612903 12.49 9.949 5.543 3.673 3.15 1.675 0.258064516129032 10.95 8.886 5.497 3.628 3.127 1.562  13

0.290322580645161 10.32 8.585 5.028 3.363 2.871 1.546 0.32258064516129 9.782 7.651 4.983 3.146 2.638 1.47 0.354838709677419 9.103 7.207 4.891 2.989 2.532 1.465 0.387096774193548 8.787 7.142 4.399 2.979 2.532 1.399 0.419354838709677 8.676 7.011 4.359 2.755 2.469 1.363 0.451612903225806 8.369 6.737 4.267 2.517 2.382 1.362 0.483870967741936 8.16 6.632 4.168 2.503 2.268 1.356 0.516129032258065 8.124 6.56 3.883 2.471 2.169 1.347 0.548387096774194 7.75 6.469 3.815 2.452 2.08 1.341 0.580645161290323 7.604 6.365 3.575 2.424 1.999 1.307 0.612903225806452 7.445 6.162 3.403 2.418 1.991 1.284 0.645161290322581 7.21 5.873 3.382 2.298 1.892 1.245 0.67741935483871 6.933 5.606 3.307 2.207 1.884 1.244 0.709677419354839 6.896 5.581 3.244 2.189 1.88 1.179 0.741935483870968 6.481 5.121 3.167 2.005 1.768 1.118 0.774193548387097 6.262 4.962 2.871 1.774 1.747 1.101 0.806451612903226 5.24 4.456 2.724 1.768 1.523 1.094 0.838709677419355 5.055 4.236 2.604 1.728 1.5 1.075 0.870967741935484 4.467 3.554 2.348 1.65 1.486 1.05 0.903225806451613 4.371 3.52 2.113 1.564 1.427 0.9939 0.935483870967742 3.648 3.052 1.815 1.484 1.268 0.8078 0.967741935483871 3.595 2.922 1.741 1.34 1.252 0.8034 0.1 21.045 16.642 9.2595 5.4317 4.1464 1.9884 Average of yearly averages: 1.40143666666667 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: peanuts dwa reduced Metfile: w13737. dvf PRZM scenario: NCpeanutC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: pcnb Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 295.3 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 4.42E 5 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.13E 4 torr Solubility sol 4.4 mg/ L Kd Kd mg/ L Koc Koc 6469.5 mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 1.83 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 3110 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 1460 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1555 days Halfife Hydrolysis: pH 5 0 days Half life Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half life Hydrolysis: pH 9 0 days Half life Method: CAM 1 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm Application Rate: TAPP 1.12 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 04 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 3 UPTKF  14

Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR IR Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF total none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

3. Cotton at 1.5 lb ai/ A/ yr s tored as cotton dwa reduced. out Chemical: pcnb PRZM environment: MScottonC. txt modified Wedday, 22 January 2003 at 11: 52: 38 EXAMS environment: ir298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 15: 34: 12 Metfile: w03940. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 05: 46 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 17.43 15.02 10.03 8.788 7.802 4.119 1962 10.81 9.077 6.376 4.6 3.961 2.867 1963 20.56 16.89 9.236 5.417 4.447 2.448 1964 24.78 20.15 10.81 6.895 6.544 4.753 1965 28.61 22.82 12.13 6.473 5.19 3.602 1966 18.87 16.49 9.947 6.941 5.722 3.463 1967 37.04 30.11 18.55 12.48 10.69 5.112 1968 14.3 12.75 9.89 7.262 6.16 3.693 1969 8.73 7.202 4.24 2.5 2.139 1.784 1970 16.79 14.31 11.22 9.026 8.179 4.47 1971 34.75 28.23 19.58 13.17 10.76 6.323 1972 12.41 10.47 7.223 4.748 4.038 2.838 1973 17.75 14.63 9.523 6.905 5.787 3.725 1974 16.25 13.17 8.09 5.738 5.186 4.024 1975 15.68 13.09 9.409 6.423 6.058 4.144 1976 26.79 22.21 15.52 11.21 10.06 5.455 1977 19.96 16.88 9.72 6.024 5.384 4.241 1978 15.36 13.65 10.76 6.799 5.729 3.51 1979 28.45 23.95 17.77 13.95 13.59 8.958 1980 30.53 25.9 17.75 14.59 12.37 7.467 1981 17.22 14.85 9.772 7.833 6.707 3.859 1982 24.1 20.18 13.29 12.09 10.23 6.289 1983 30.99 27.39 17.64 11.52 10.06 6.54 1984 11.21 9.291 5.581 4.035 3.828 3.159 1985 21.92 18.25 10.58 7.075 6.1 3.492 1986 25.99 21.37 14.32 8.773 7.484 4.113 1987 13.25 11.93 7.475 4.743 4.233 2.92 1988 12.76 10.86 7.072 6.082 5.689 3.524 1989 24 19.86 13.57 10.14 8.748 5.079 1990 14.75 12.26 7.492 5.613 4.808 3.434 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032258064516129 37.04 30.11 19.58 14.59 13.59 8.958 0.0645161290322581 34.75 28.23 18.55 13.95 12.37 7.467 0.0967741935483871 30.99 27.39 17.77 13.17 10.76 6.54 0.129032258064516 30.53 25.9 17.75 12.48 10.69 6.323 0.161290322580645 28.61 23.95 17.64 12.09 10.23 6.289 0.193548387096774 28.45 22.82 15.52 11.52 10.06 5.455 0.225806451612903 26.79 22.21 14.32 11.21 10.06 5.112 0.258064516129032 25.99 21.37 13.57 10.14 8.748 5.079  15

0.290322580645161 24.78 20.18 13.29 9.026 8.179 4.753 0.32258064516129 24.1 20.15 12.13 8.788 7.802 4.47 0.354838709677419 24 19.86 11.22 8.773 7.484 4.241 0.387096774193548 21.92 18.25 10.81 7.833 6.707 4.144 0.419354838709677 20.56 16.89 10.76 7.262 6.544 4.119 0.451612903225806 19.96 16.88 10.58 7.075 6.16 4.113 0.483870967741936 18.87 16.49 10.03 6.941 6.1 4.024 0.516129032258065 17.75 15.02 9.947 6.905 6.058 3.859 0.548387096774194 17.43 14.85 9.89 6.895 5.787 3.725 0.580645161290323 17.22 14.63 9.772 6.799 5.729 3.693 0.612903225806452 16.79 14.31 9.72 6.473 5.722 3.602 0.645161290322581 16.25 13.65 9.523 6.423 5.689 3.524 0.67741935483871 15.68 13.17 9.409 6.082 5.384 3.51 0.709677419354839 15.36 13.09 9.236 6.024 5.19 3.492 0.741935483870968 14.75 12.75 8.09 5.738 5.186 3.463 0.774193548387097 14.3 12.26 7.492 5.613 4.808 3.434 0.806451612903226 13.25 11.93 7.475 5.417 4.447 3.159 0.838709677419355 12.76 10.86 7.223 4.748 4.233 2.92 0.870967741935484 12.41 10.47 7.072 4.743 4.038 2.867 0.903225806451613 11.21 9.291 6.376 4.6 3.961 2.838 0.935483870967742 10.81 9.077 5.581 4.03 3.828 2.448 0.967741935483871 8.73 7.202 4.24 2.5 2.139 1.784 0.1 30.944 27.241 17.768 13.101 10.753 6.5183 Average of yearly averages: 4.3135 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: cotton dwa reduced Metfile: w03940. dvf PRZM scenario: MScottonC. txt EXAMS environment file: ir298. exv Chemical Name: pcnb Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 295.3 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 4.42E 5 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.13E 4 torr Solubility sol 4.4 mg/ L Kd Kd mg/ L Koc Koc 6469.5 mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 1.83 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 3110 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 1460 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1555 days Halfife Hydrolysis: pH 5 0 days Half life Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half life Hydrolysis: pH 9 0 days Half life Method: CAM 1 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm Application Rate: TAPP 1.68 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.064 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 20 04 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 3 UPTKF  16

Record 18: PLVKRT PLDKRT FEXTRC 0.5 Flag for Index Res. Run IR IR Flag for runoff calc. RUNOFF total none, monthly or total( average of entire run)

II. Estimated Exposure Concentration ( EEC) Modeling Outputs ( for Ecological Exposure)

1. Cabbage ( representative cole crop) at 22.5 lb ai/ A/ yr stored as cabbage eco reduced. out Chemical: pcnb PRZM environment: FLcabbageC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 16: 39: 00 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 12.7 10.68 5.333 2.577 1.949 0.6377 1962 23.56 17.52 9.545 7.143 5.621 2.177 1963 20.75 15.34 6.718 3.692 3.318 2.434 1964 23.13 17.77 11.47 8.026 6.655 3.731 1965 15.24 11.57 6.377 5.161 4.588 2.705 1966 14.4 10.74 5.111 3.994 3.609 2.211 1967 23.04 17.17 10.01 5.758 4.857 2.417 1968 18.85 14.74 9.038 6.302 6.091 3.135 1969 17.9 15.07 9.281 7.075 6.176 3.997 1970 17.09 13.64 7.95 4.651 3.763 2.758 1971 29.88 25.15 12.81 9.56 8.329 3.764 1972 28.78 21.56 14 7.977 6.514 3.605 1973 14.73 11.03 8.058 6.205 5.052 2.942 1974 22.31 16.39 7.679 5.035 4.832 2.544 1975 17.38 13.17 8.475 7.12 6.079 3.043 1976 22.22 18 9.674 6.131 5.039 3.141 1977 14.8 10.96 6.99 4.691 3.776 2.152 1978 14.12 10.66 5.424 3.758 3.28 2.225 1979 48.85 36.44 16.29 9.867 8.255 5.248 1980 18.04 13.63 8.051 4.985 4.18 3.055 1981 24.57 18.28 11.19 7.894 6.352 3.406 1982 21.1 16.43 10.51 8.87 7.383 4.305 1983 15.61 12.09 7.687 5.917 5.058 3.682 1984 16.17 13.18 8.349 5.192 4.277 2.51 1985 43.87 32.81 15.44 9.208 8.183 3.66 1986 14.76 12.01 7.997 5.313 4.921 3.429 1987 16.17 12.54 7.858 5.565 4.967 3.489 1988 37.09 28.96 15.84 11.55 9.196 4.249 1989 15.02 11.67 10.16 7.172 6.077 3.764 1990 14.53 11.09 5.647 4.176 3.659 2.561 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032258064516129 48.85 36.44 16.29 11.55 9.196 5.248 0.0645161290322581 43.87 32.81 15.84 9.867 8.329 4.305 0.0967741935483871 37.09 28.96 15.44 9.56 8.255 4.249 0.129032258064516 29.88 25.15 14 9.208 8.183 3.997 0.161290322580645 28.78 21.56 12.81 8.87 7.383 3.764  17

0.193548387096774 24.57 18.28 11.47 8.026 6.655 3.764 0.225806451612903 23.56 18 11.19 7.977 6.514 3.731 0.258064516129032 23.13 17.77 10.51 7.894 6.352 3.682 0.290322580645161 23.04 17.52 10.16 7.172 6.176 3.66 0.32258064516129 22.31 17.17 10.01 7.143 6.091 3.605 0.354838709677419 22.22 16.43 9.674 7.12 6.079 3.489 0.387096774193548 21.1 16.39 9.545 7.075 6.077 3.429 0.419354838709677 20.75 15.34 9.281 6.302 5.621 3.406 0.451612903225806 18.85 15.07 9.038 6.205 5.058 3.141 0.483870967741936 18.04 14.74 8.475 6.131 5.052 3.135 0.516129032258065 17.9 13.64 8.349 5.917 5.039 3.055 0.548387096774194 17.38 13.63 8.058 5.758 4.967 3.043 0.580645161290323 17.09 13.18 8.051 5.565 4.921 2.942 0.612903225806452 16.17 13.17 7.997 5.313 4.857 2.758 0.645161290322581 16.17 12.54 7.95 5.192 4.832 2.705 0.67741935483871 15.61 12.09 7.858 5.161 4.588 2.561 0.709677419354839 15.24 12.01 7.687 5.035 4.277 2.544 0.741935483870968 15.02 11.67 7.679 4.985 4.18 2.51 0.774193548387097 14.8 11.57 6.99 4.691 3.776 2.434 0.806451612903226 14.76 11.09 6.718 4.651 3.763 2.417 0.838709677419355 14.73 11.03 6.377 4.176 3.659 2.225 0.870967741935484 14.53 10.96 5.647 3.994 3.609 2.211 0.903225806451613 14.4 10.74 5.424 3.758 3.318 2.177 0.935483870967742 14.12 10.68 5.333 3.692 3.28 2.152 0.967741935483871 12.7 10.66 5.111 2.577 1.949 0.6377 0.1 36.369 28.579 15.296 9.5248 8.2478 4.2238 Average of yearly averages: 3.09922333333333 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: cabbage eco reduced Metfile: w12842. dvf PRZM scenario: FLcabbageC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: pcnb Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 295.3 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 4.42E 5 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.13E 4 torr Solubility sol 4.4 mg/ L Kd Kd mg/ L Koc Koc 6469.5 mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 1.83 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 2248 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 2004 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1124 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 10 cm Application Rate: TAPP 25.2 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 08 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm  18

Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 3 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)

2. Peanuts at 1.0 lb ai/ A/ yr stored as peanuts eco reduced. out Chemical: pcnb PRZM environment: NCpeanutC. txt modified Satday, 12 October 2002 at 17: 12: 46 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 Metfile: w13737. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 06: 30 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 5.202 3.839 1.932 1.216 1.073 0.4878 1962 2.841 2.168 1.192 0.9264 0.7963 0.5642 1963 10.88 8.926 4.017 2.115 1.71 0.8641 1964 8.604 6.613 3.494 2.006 1.6 0.8169 1965 2.704 2.007 1.032 0.7225 0.627 0.4644 1966 3.955 2.877 1.537 0.9287 0.7885 0.5467 1967 4.224 3.212 1.719 1.381 1.151 0.6868 1968 1.591 1.242 0.7109 0.6207 0.5697 0.4861 1969 5.232 4.305 2.226 1.316 1.145 0.6292 1970 3.274 2.599 1.612 1.076 0.9819 0.6351 1971 3.466 2.645 1.496 1.076 0.9237 0.5579 1972 1.811 1.36 0.7597 0.6116 0.5753 0.457 1973 3.363 2.498 1.168 0.9628 0.8608 0.5628 1974 2.954 2.269 1.722 1.097 0.9421 0.5364 1975 6.689 4.761 2.296 1.411 1.249 0.8046 1976 2.672 1.985 1.06 0.6928 0.6932 0.463 1977 2.741 2.079 1.233 0.8043 0.7329 0.5629 1978 2.899 2.241 1.816 1.386 1.21 0.7074 1979 4.084 3.287 2.181 1.406 1.198 0.8223 1980 5.645 4.22 1.991 1.179 1.072 0.6713 1981 3.283 2.529 1.247 0.9229 0.8893 0.5555 1982 2.053 1.565 0.9309 0.6691 0.6045 0.4719 1983 3.53 2.632 1.388 0.9109 0.7929 0.5321 1984 8.383 6.203 3.237 2.14 1.784 0.898 1985 3.251 2.429 1.39 0.947 0.8519 0.6125 1986 1.716 1.316 0.7701 0.5739 0.4874 0.36 1987 2.732 2.125 1.092 0.7725 0.6561 0.4902 1988 1.476 1.131 0.6694 0.508 0.4612 0.3391 1989 2.07 1.713 1.117 0.7438 0.7039 0.4651 1990 3.375 2.542 1.345 0.8371 0.7186 0.4486 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032258064516129 10.88 8.926 4.017 2.14 1.784 0.898 0.0645161290322581 8.604 6.613 3.494 2.115 1.71 0.8641 0.0967741935483871 8.383 6.203 3.237 2.006 1.6 0.8223 0.129032258064516 6.689 4.761 2.296 1.411 1.249 0.8169 0.161290322580645 5.645 4.305 2.226 1.406 1.21 0.8046  19

0.193548387096774 5.232 4.22 2.181 1.386 1.198 0.7074 0.225806451612903 5.202 3.839 1.991 1.381 1.151 0.6868 0.258064516129032 4.224 3.287 1.932 1.316 1.145 0.6713 0.290322580645161 4.084 3.212 1.816 1.216 1.073 0.6351 0.32258064516129 3.955 2.877 1.722 1.179 1.072 0.6292 0.354838709677419 3.53 2.645 1.719 1.097 0.9819 0.6125 0.387096774193548 3.466 2.632 1.612 1.076 0.9421 0.5642 0.419354838709677 3.375 2.599 1.537 1.076 0.9237 0.5629 0.451612903225806 3.363 2.542 1.496 0.9628 0.8893 0.5628 0.483870967741936 3.283 2.529 1.39 0.947 0.8608 0.5579 0.516129032258065 3.274 2.498 1.388 0.9287 0.8519 0.5555 0.548387096774194 3.251 2.429 1.345 0.9264 0.7963 0.5467 0.580645161290323 2.954 2.269 1.247 0.9229 0.7929 0.5364 0.612903225806452 2.899 2.241 1.233 0.9109 0.7885 0.5321 0.645161290322581 2.841 2.168 1.192 0.8371 0.7329 0.4902 0.67741935483871 2.741 2.125 1.168 0.8043 0.7186 0.4878 0.709677419354839 2.732 2.079 1.117 0.7725 0.7039 0.4861 0.741935483870968 2.704 2.007 1.092 0.7438 0.6932 0.4719 0.774193548387097 2.672 1.985 1.06 0.7225 0.6561 0.4651 0.806451612903226 2.07 1.713 1.032 0.6928 0.627 0.4644 0.838709677419355 2.053 1.565 0.9309 0.6691 0.6045 0.463 0.870967741935484 1.811 1.36 0.7701 0.6207 0.5753 0.457 0.903225806451613 1.716 1.316 0.7597 0.6116 0.5697 0.4486 0.935483870967742 1.591 1.242 0.7109 0.5739 0.4874 0.36 0.967741935483871 1.476 1.131 0.6694 0.508 0.4612 0.3391 0.1 8.2136 6.0588 3.1429 1.9465 1.5649 0.82176 Average of yearly averages: 0.58333 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: peanuts eco reduced Metfile: w13737. dvf PRZM scenario: NCpeanutC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: pcnb Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 295.3 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 4.42E 5 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.13E 4 torr Solubility sol 4.4 mg/ L Kd Kd mg/ L Koc Koc 6469.5 mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 1.83 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 2248 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 2004 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1124 days Halfife Hydrolysis: pH 5 0 days Half life Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half life Hydrolysis: pH 9 0 days Half life Method: CAM 1 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm Application Rate: TAPP 1.12 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 15 04 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm  20

Record 17: FILTRA IPSCND 3 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)

3. Cotton at 1.5 lb ai/ A/ yr stored as cotton eco reduced. out Chemical: pcnb PRZM environment: MScottonC. txt modified Wedday, 22 January 2003 at 11: 52: 38 EXAMS environment: pond298. exv modified Thuday, 29 August 2002 at 16: 33: 30 Metfile: w03940. dvf modified Wedday, 3 July 2002 at 09: 05: 46 Water segment concentrations ( ppb)

Year Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 1961 6.901 5.554 3.394 3.005 2.731 1.503 1962 4.162 3.374 2.238 1.791 1.617 1.284 1963 8.359 6.379 3.175 1.969 1.694 1.028 1964 9.719 7.439 3.792 2.663 2.546 1.861 1965 11.21 8.335 4.153 2.446 2.056 1.559 1966 7.798 6.41 3.613 2.542 2.207 1.494 1967 14.67 11.14 6.395 4.502 3.971 2.103 1968 5.617 4.816 3.65 2.779 2.412 1.641 1969 3.635 2.812 1.498 0.9791 0.8796 0.788 1970 6.483 5.212 3.902 3.191 2.928 1.715 1971 13.51 10.31 6.774 4.826 4.114 2.617 1972 5.189 4.153 2.73 1.892 1.679 1.309 1973 7.076 5.478 3.383 2.431 2.141 1.516 1974 5.997 4.648 2.872 2.218 2.056 1.686 1975 6.192 4.922 3.348 2.407 2.315 1.696 1976 10.36 8.088 5.449 4.094 3.755 2.243 1977 7.444 6.085 3.406 2.354 2.186 1.833 1978 6.045 5.2 3.82 2.576 2.248 1.517 1979 11.6 9.124 6.341 5.078 4.913 3.454 1980 11.74 9.495 6.229 5.365 4.762 3.232 1981 7.163 5.912 3.71 3.027 2.665 1.756 1982 9.742 7.561 4.831 4.255 3.704 2.463 1983 12.36 10.38 6.614 4.355 3.955 2.835 1984 4.761 3.766 2.237 1.73 1.633 1.445 1985 8.592 6.681 3.599 2.509 2.298 1.431 1986 9.885 7.647 4.935 3.209 2.832 1.721 1987 5.496 4.761 2.768 1.896 1.685 1.283 1988 5.125 4.148 2.613 2.316 2.154 1.411 1989 9.996 7.748 4.938 3.781 3.369 2.132 1990 6.163 4.855 2.874 2.186 1.952 1.516 Sorted results Prob. Peak 96 hr 21 Day 60 Day 90 Day Yearly 0.032258064516129 14.67 11.14 6.774 5.365 4.913 3.454 0.0645161290322581 13.51 10.38 6.614 5.078 4.762 3.232 0.0967741935483871 12.36 10.31 6.395 4.826 4.114 2.835 0.129032258064516 11.74 9.495 6.341 4.502 3.971 2.617 0.161290322580645 11.6 9.124 6.229 4.355 3.955 2.463  21

0.193548387096774 11.21 8.335 5.449 4.255 3.755 2.243 0.225806451612903 10.36 8.088 4.938 4.094 3.704 2.132 0.258064516129032 9.996 7.748 4.935 3.781 3.369 2.103 0.290322580645161 9.885 7.647 4.831 3.209 2.928 1.861 0.32258064516129 9.742 7.561 4.153 3.191 2.832 1.833 0.354838709677419 9.719 7.439 3.902 3.027 2.731 1.756 0.387096774193548 8.592 6.681 3.82 3.005 2.665 1.721 0.419354838709677 8.359 6.41 3.792 2.779 2.546 1.715 0.451612903225806 7.798 6.379 3.71 2.663 2.412 1.696 0.483870967741936 7.444 6.085 3.65 2.576 2.315 1.686 0.516129032258065 7.163 5.912 3.613 2.542 2.298 1.641 0.548387096774194 7.076 5.554 3.599 2.509 2.248 1.559 0.580645161290323 6.901 5.478 3.406 2.446 2.207 1.517 0.612903225806452 6.483 5.212 3.394 2.431 2.186 1.516 0.645161290322581 6.192 5.2 3.383 2.407 2.154 1.516 0.67741935483871 6.163 4.922 3.348 2.354 2.141 1.503 0.709677419354839 6.045 4.855 3.175 2.316 2.056 1.494 0.741935483870968 5.997 4.816 2.874 2.218 2.056 1.445 0.774193548387097 5.617 4.761 2.872 2.186 1.952 1.431 0.806451612903226 5.496 4.648 2.768 1.969 1.694 1.411 0.838709677419355 5.189 4.153 2.73 1.896 1.685 1.309 0.870967741935484 5.125 4.148 2.613 1.892 1.679 1.284 0.903225806451613 4.761 3.766 2.238 1.791 1.633 1.283 0.935483870967742 4.162 3.374 2.237 1.73 1.617 1.028 0.967741935483871 3.635 2.812 1.498 0.979 0.8796 0.788 0.1 12.298 10.2285 6.3896 4.7936 4.0997 2.8132 Average of yearly averages: 1.8024 Inputs generated by pe4. pl  8 August 2003 Data used for this run: Output File: cotton eco reduced Metfile: w03940. dvf PRZM scenario: MScottonC. txt EXAMS environment file: pond298. exv Chemical Name: pcnb Description Variable Name Value Units Comments Molecular weight mwt 295.3 g/ mol Henry's Law Const. henry 4.42E 5 atm m^ 3/ mol Vapor Pressure vapr 1.13E 4 torr Solubility sol 4.4 mg/ L Kd Kd mg/ L Koc Koc 6469.5 mg/ L Photolysis half life kdp 1.83 days Half life Aerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacw 2248 days Halfife Anaerobic Aquatic Metabolism kbacs 2004 days Halfife Aerobic Soil Metabolism asm 1124 days Halfife Hydrolysis: pH 5 0 days Half life Hydrolysis: pH 7 0 days Half life Hydrolysis: pH 9 0 days Half life Method: CAM 1 integer See PRZM manual Incorporation Depth: DEPI 0 cm Application Rate: TAPP 1.68 kg/ ha Application Efficiency: APPEFF 0.99 fraction Spray Drift DRFT 0.01 fraction of application rate applied to pond Application Date Date 20 04 dd/ mm or dd/ mmm or dd mm or dd mmm  22

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)  23

APPENDIX B TREX ( Version 1.22) OUTPUT.  24  25  26  27  28  29


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69709-69711]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28145]

Vol. 77

Tuesday,

No. 224

November 20, 2012

Part II

Securities and Exchange Commission

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

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.; Notice of
Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend Its
Fee and Rebate Schedule; Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 77 , No. 224 / Tuesday, November 20, 2012 /
Notices

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-68226; File No. SR-NSX-2012-19]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Its Fee and Rebate Schedule

November 14, 2012.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Exchange Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is
hereby given that on November 2, 2012, National Stock Exchange, Inc.
(``NSX[supreg]'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule
change, as described in Items I, II and III below, which Items have
been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comment on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

    The Exchange is proposing to amend its Fee and Rebate Schedule (the
``Fee Schedule'') issued pursuant to Exchange Rule 16.1(a) to modify
the rebates for certain orders executed in the Exchange's Order
Delivery and Automated Response (``Order Delivery'') mode. The text of
the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's Web site at
www.nsx.com, at the Exchange's principal office, and at the
Commission's public reference room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend Section II of its Fee Schedule
to modify the rebates for orders executed in the Exchange's Order
Delivery mode in securities with quoted prices of at least one dollar.
Under Section II of the Fee Schedule, the Exchange offers ETP Holders
both a Primary and Alternate Fee Schedule with six (6) tiers of
progressively greater rebates.\3\ An ETP Holder's monthly average daily
trading volume (``ADV'') determines which rebate tier the ETP Holder
meets. The Exchange proposes to consolidate tiers and increase the
rebates under Section II of the Fee Schedule for Order Delivery
participants as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ETP Holders that are Order Delivery participants
automatically receive the Alternate Fee Schedule upon meeting the
minimum ADV threshold of 1,500,000 in Order Delivery Mode and
10,000,000 shares in Automatic Execution Mode. Under the Alternate
Fee Schedule, ETP Holders will receive up to an additional $0.0003
liquidity adding rebate over the tiered rebates contained in the
Primary Fee Schedule when the tier requirements are met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Tier 1--ADV range would change from 0 and <10.0 million to
0 & <12.0 million. Rebate amount is unchanged.
     Tier 2--ADV range would change from 10.0 and <12.0 million
to 12.0 & <14.0 million. Rebates would change from $0.0011 to $0.0014
in the Primary Fee Schedule and from $0.0014 to $0.0017 in the
Alternate Fee Schedule.
     Tier 3--ADV range would change from 12.0 and <15.0 million
to 14.0 & <16.0 million. Rebates would change from $0.0015 to $0.0018
in the Primary Fee Schedule and from $0.0018 to $0.0021 in the
Alternate Fee Schedule.
     Tier 4--ADV range would change from 15.0 and <20.0 million
to 16.0 million and above. Rebates would change from $0.0021 to $0.0024
in the Primary Fee Schedule and from $0.0024 to $0.0027 in the
Alternate Fee Schedule.
     Tiers 5 and 6 would be deleted.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Order Delivery participants that met the ADV thresholds
required by tiers 5 and 6 were eligible to receive a 25% market data
rebate. NSX clarified that this rebate would apply to the Exchange's
highest tier under the proposal, tier 4. See Email from Chris
Solgan, Senior Regulatory Counsel, NSX to Ronesha A. Butler, Special
Counsel and David A. Garcia, Attorney-Advisor, Division of Trading
and Markets, dated November 8, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes improving rebates is a reasonable method to
incentivize ETP Holders that use Order Delivery to submit greater order
volumes to the Exchange, which would result in increased revenues to
the Exchange. Finally, the Exchange notes that it operates in a highly
competitive market in which market participants can readily favor
competing venues. In such an environment, the Exchange must continually
review, and consider adjusting, its fees and rebates to remain
competitive with other exchanges. The Exchange believes that the
proposed rule change reflects this competitive environment.
Operative Date and Notice
    The Exchange currently intends to make the proposed modifications,
which are effective on filing of this proposed rule, operative as of
commencement of trading on November 2, 2012.\5\ Pursuant to Exchange
Rule 16.1(c), the Exchange will ``provide ETP Holders with notice of
all relevant dues, fees, assessments and charges of the Exchange''
through the issuance of a Regulatory Circular of the changes to the Fee
Schedule and will post a copy of the rule filing on the Exchange's Web
site (www.nsx.com).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Because the proposed changes are effective November 2, 2012,
trading activity occurring on November 1, 2012 will be billed under
the then existing Fee Schedule when ETP Holders are invoiced at
month end.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule change is consistent
with the provisions of Section 6(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 \6\ (the ``Act''), in general, and Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\7\
in particular in that it is designed to provide for the equitable
allocation of reasonable dues, fees and other charges among its members
and other persons using the facilities of the Exchange. Moreover, the
proposed rebate structure under Section II of the Fee Schedule is not
discriminatory in that all ETP Holders are eligible to submit (or not
submit) liquidity adding trades and quotes, and may do so at their
discretion in the daily volumes they choose during the course of the
measurement period. The volume adjustments are reasonable methods to
incentivize the submission of such orders. All similarly situated ETP
Holders are subject to the same fee structure, and access to the
Exchange is offered on terms that are not unfairly-discriminatory.
Volume-based rebates and discounts have been widely adopted in the
equities markets, and are equitable because they are open to all ETP
Holders on an equal basis and provide rebates that are reasonably
related to the value of an exchange's market quality associated with
the

requirements for the favorable pricing tier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \7\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received written comments on
the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The proposed rule change has taken effect upon filing pursuant to
Section 19(b)(3)(A)(ii) of the Exchange Act \8\ and subparagraph (f)(2)
of Rule 19b-4 \9\ thereunder, because, as provided in (f)(2), it
changes ``a due, fee or other charge applicable only to a member''
(known on the Exchange as an ETP Holder). At any time within 60 days of
the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest,
for the protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(ii).
    \9\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml ); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please
include File Number SR-NSX-2012-19 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Elizabeth M. Murphy,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2012-19. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2012-19 and should be
submitted on or before December 11, 2012.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.
Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-28145 Filed 11-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 151 (Monday, August 6, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 38259-38261]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16757]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0183]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Philippine Sea, Rota

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone for
certain waters off the Port of Rota. The Coast Guard believes this
safety zone is necessary to protect all divers participating in this
underwater military exercise from potential safety hazards associated
with vessel traffic in the area. This safety zone will prohibit persons
and vessels not involved in the exercise from being in the safety zone
unless authorized by the Captain of the Port Guam (COTP) or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. on September 16,
2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0183 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email call or email Chief Todd Wheeler, Sector Guam Waterways
Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
FR Federal Register
NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to ensure the safety of divers in
the water during an underwater military exercise in support of the
biennial Exercise Valiant Shield from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. on September
16, 2018.
    In response, on May 21, 2018, the Coast Guard published a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) titled Safety Zone; Philippine Sea, Rota (83
FR 23400-23402). There, we stated the

background and proposed regulatory action, and requested comments on
our proposed regulatory action related to this safety zone. During the
comment period that ended June 20, 2018, we received no comments.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority in 33 U.S.C.
1231. The Captain of the Port Guam (COTP) has determined that potential
hazards associated with the exercise will be a safety concern. The
purpose of this rule is to protect all divers participating in this
underwater military exercise from potential safety hazards associated
with vessel traffic in the area.

IV. Discussion of Comments, Changes, and the Rule

    As noted above, we received no comments on our NPRM published May
21, 2018. The Exercise Valiant Shield coordinator did send an updated
time for when the divers will enter the water. The safety zone has
moved up seven hours from the previous safety zone that was proposed in
the NPRM. The changes are reflected in the regulatory text of this
rule.
    This rule establishes a safety zone from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m. on
September 16, 2018. The safety zone will cover all navigable waters two
miles off of the Port of Rota. This safety zone is necessary to protect
all divers participating in this underwater military exercise from
potential safety hazards associated with vessel traffic in the area.
This proposed rulemaking would prohibit persons and vessels not
involved in the exercise from being in the safety zone unless
authorized by the COTP or a designated representative.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the size,
location, duration, and time of day of the safety zone. Vessel traffic
would be able to safely transit around this safety zone. Moreover, the
Coast Guard would issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners via VHF-FM
marine channel 16 about the zone, and the rule would allow vessels to
seek permission to enter the zone.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard received no comments from the Small Business
Administration on this rulemaking. The Coast Guard certifies under 5
U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    While some owners or operators of vessels intending to transit the
safety zone may be small entities, for the reasons stated in section
V.A. above, this rule will not have a significant economic impact on
any vessel owner or operator.
    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.1D, which guide the
Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have determined that this action is
one of a category of actions that do not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves
a safety zone lasting for 12 hours that will

prohibit entry into navigable waters 2 miles off the coast of the Port
of Rota; however, vessel traffic would be able to safely transit around
the safety zone. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(c) of Appendix A, Table 1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023-
01-001-01, Rev. 01. A Record of Environmental Consideration supporting
this determination is available in the docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.
    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-
1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No.
0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T14-0183 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T14-0183   Safety Zone; Philippine Sea, Rota.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: All waters off
of the Port of Rota, from surface to bottom, encompassed by a line
connecting the following points beginning at 14[deg]08'07'' N,
145[deg]08'00'' E, thence to 14[deg]08'53'' N, 145[deg]06'51'' E,
thence to 14[deg]09'12'' N, 145[deg]07'13'' E, thence to 14[deg]08'16''
N, 145[deg]08'08'' E, and along the shore line back to the beginning
point. These coordinates are based on NAD 1983.
    (b) Regulations. (1) The general regulations governing safety zones
contained in Sec.  165.23 apply. This proposed rulemaking would
prohibit persons and vessels not involved in the exercise from being in
the safety zone unless authorized by the Captain of the Port (COTP)
Guam or a designated representative.
    (2) To seek permission to enter, contact the COTP Guam or the
COTP's representative by VHF channel 16 or by telephone at 671-355-
4821. Those in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative.
    (c) Enforcement period. This section will be enforced from 11 a.m.
to 11 p.m. on September 16, 2018.

    Dated: July 13, 2018.
Christopher M. Chase,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port Guam.
[FR Doc. 2018-16757 Filed 8-3-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register: March 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 59)]
[Notices]
[Page 15484-15485]
[DOCID:fr29mr10-112]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket No. FRA-2010-005-N-5]

Railroad Safety Technology Program Grant Program

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Funds Availability, Solicitation of Applications.

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

SUMMARY: The Rail Safety Technology Program is a newly authorized
program under the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA) (Pub. L.
110-432; October 16, 2008). The program authorizes the Department of
Transportation to provide grants to passenger and freight rail
carriers, railroad suppliers, and State and local governments for
projects that have a public benefit of improved railroad safety and
efficiency. The program makes available $50,000,000 in Federal funds.
This grant program has a maximum 80 percent Federal and minimum 20
percent grantee cost share (cash or in-kind) match requirement.

DATES: FRA will begin accepting grant applications 10 days after
publication of this Notice of Funding Availability in the Federal
Register. Applications may be submitted until July 1, 2010. Reviews
will be conducted immediately following the solicitation close date.
Selection announcements will be made on or around September 3, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Applications for grants under this Program must be submitted
electronically to Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov) following the
detailed procedures in the grant application package online. The
Grants.gov Web site allows organizations to find and apply
electronically for competitive grant opportunities from all Federal
grant-making agencies. Any entity wishing to submit an application
pursuant to this notice should immediately initiate the process of
registering with Grants.Gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Those interested in responding to this
solicitation are strongly encouraged to first call Dr. Mark Hartong,
FRA, Senior Electronics Engineer (Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail:
Mark.Hartong@dot.gov), or Mr. David Blackmore, FRA, Program Manager-
Advanced Technologies (Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
David.Blackmore@dot.gov), to discuss the prospective idea, its
potential responsiveness to the solicitation, and potential for FRA
interest. Taking this action could forestall costly efforts by
interested parties whose proposed work may not be of interest to FRA
under this grant. Non-technical inquiries should be directed to the
Grants Officer, Ms. Jennifer Capps (Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail:
Jennifer.Capps@dot.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Authority and Funding: The Railroad Safety Technology Program
(RSTP) authorized under section 105 of the RSIA (Division A, Pub. L.
110-432) (49 U.S.C. 20158), authorizes the appropriation of $50
million annually for fiscal years (FY) 2009 through 2013. The
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act of 2010 provided $50 million for this purpose.

    Eligible Organizations: Title 49 U.S.C. 20158 provides that
``Grants shall be made under this section to eligible passenger and
freight railroad carriers, railroad suppliers, and State and local
governments for projects * * * that have a public benefit of improved
safety and network efficiency.''
    To be eligible for assistance, entities must have either received
approval of the Technology Implementation Plans (TIP) and Positive
Train Control Implementation Plans (PTCIP) required by 49 U.S.C.
20156(e)(2) and 20157, or demonstrate to the satisfaction of FRA that
they are currently developing the required plans. Preference will be
given in the following order:
    1. Entities that have completed and received FRA approval of both
their TIP and PTCIP.
    2. Entities that have completed and received FRA approval of their
PTCIP.
    3. Entities that have submitted their PTCIP to FRA for approval.
    4. Entities that have certified to FRA progress towards completion
of their PTCIP and TIP.
    5. All other entities.
    Collaborative project submissions by freight and passenger
carriers, suppliers, and State and local governments on eligible
projects will be evaluated more favorably.
    Eligible Projects: Grant awards will focus on using technologies or
methods that are ready for deployment, or of sufficient technical
maturity that they can be made ready for deployment within the 24
months of the grant award. FRA will give preference to collaborative
projects by multiple railroads that have active railroad carrier and
sponsoring public authority participation in the following order:
    Priority 1: Projects that:
    (a) Support the resolution of Northeast Corridor Positive Train
Control (PTC) interoperability issues,
    (b) Support the resolution of mixed freight and passenger PTC
interoperability issues in the Los Angeles Basin, or
    (c) Facilitate sharing of PTC communications infrastructure and
spectrum.
    Priority 2: Projects that:
    (a) Support high-speed passenger operations using general freight
PTC technologies,
    (b) Optimize PTC deployment on the core 2015 PTC territory, or
    (c) Support PTC deployment on non-2015 core PTC territory.
    Priority 3: All other projects.
    Selection Criteria: Applications will be evaluated and ranked based
on both technical and cost/price factors.
    Technical Factors (75% overall weighting):
    1. Responsiveness to Solicitation Intent and Requirements (20%):
Degree to which proposal meets the conceptual intent and submission
requirements of the solicitation.
    2. Significance for Implementing Interoperable PTC Deployment and
Fit with FRA Mission (30%): Degree to which successful implementation
of proposed idea would make interoperable PTC deployment more
technically or economically practical (includes contribution to cost
effectiveness, reliability, safety, availability, or maintainability),
and fit within FRA's primary mission of ensuring the safety of the
Nation's approximately 700 railroads.
    3. Technical Merit (20%): Degree to which proposed ideas exhibit a
sound

scientific and engineering basis; how well the proposed ideas could be
practically applied in, and would be compatible with, the railroad
environment; and perceived likelihood of technical and practical
success.
    4. Key Personnel and Supporting Organization (15%): The technical
qualifications and demonstrated experience of key personnel proposed to
lead and perform the technical efforts; qualifications of primary and
supporting organizations to fully and successfully execute proposal
plan within proposed timeframe and budget.
    5. Collaborative Efforts (15%): The degree to which proposed effort
is supported by multiple entities and the applicability and
availability of results to the larger railroad industry.
    Cost/Price Factor (25% overall weighting):
    1. Affordability and degree to which proposed effort appears to be
a good value for the amount of funding requested. This includes the
reasonableness and realism of the proposed costs (60%).
    2. The extent of proposed cost sharing or cost participation under
the proposed effort (exclusive of the applicant's prior investment)
(40%).
    All evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are
significantly more important than cost or price alone. Technical
evaluation is appreciably more important than cost or price and, as
such, greater consideration shall be given to technical excellence
rather than cost or price alone. An offer must be found acceptable
under all applicable evaluation factors to be considered eligible for
award. Awards will be made to responsible applicants whose offers
provide the best value to the Government in terms of technical
excellence, cost or price, and performance risk to include consistency
and accord with the objectives of the solicitation and FRA's expressed
areas of interest.
    Requirements and Conditions for Grant Applications: Detailed
application requirements and conditions may be found in the grant
application guidance (RSS-RSTG-FY2010-1) for this solicitation on
Grants.gov.
    Information Collection: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
under emergency clearance procedures, has approved the information
collection associated with the Rail Safety Technology Program for 6
months. The approval number for this collection of information is OMB
No. 2130-0587, and the expiration date is September 30, 2010. FRA will
be publishing a Notice in the Federal Register shortly in which the
agency will be seeking regular OMB Clearance for this collection of
information. Such approvals are normally good for 3 years. FRA will
publish a Notice for this second OMB approval once it is obtained.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on March 23, 2010.
Brenda Moscoso,
Acting Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety/Chief Safety
Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-6889 Filed 3-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P