For EPA Use Only ID # ______________ SECTOR _________________________

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460 Under the Clean Air Act and the international treaty to protect the ozone layer ( the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer), the production and import of methyl bromide will be phased out in the United States on January 1, 2005. This application seeks information to support a U. S. request to produce and import methyl bromide for certain critical uses and circumstances beyond this 2005 phaseout date.

The information in this application will be used to review whether your use of methyl bromide is " critical" because no technically and economically feasible alternatives are available. In order to estimate the loss as a result of not having methyl bromide available, EPA needs to compare data ( yields, crops/ crop groupings, prices, revenues and costs) for your use of methyl bromide with uses of alternative pest control regimens.

If you submit a well documented application with sound reasons why alternatives are not technically and economically feasible, the U. S. government can be a better advocate for your exemption request internationally.

EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 324 hours per response and assumes a large portion of applications will be submitted by consortia on behalf of many individual users of methyl bromide. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a current OMB control number. The information contained in this application is critical to process and assess the need for methyl bromide. Filling out this application in its entirety will bolster the U. S. government's ability to strengthen the nomination package for the international review boards. OMB Control # 2060 0482 WHY IS THIS INFORMATION NEEDED? 2003 Application for Critical Use Exemption of Methyl Bromide for Pre Plant Use in 2005 and beyond in the United States Click on the Instructions tab located at the bottom of the screen for additional information. WHO APPLIES?

STATE CONTACTS HOW DO I APPLY?

IS MY INFORMATION CONFIDENTIAL?

WHEN IS THE INFORMATION NEEDED?

Mailing Address for applications being submitted by mail directly to the EPA: Address for applications being sent by courier or non U. S. Postal overnight express delivery to the EPA:

US Environmental Protection Agency US Environmental Protection Agency Methyl Bromide Critical Use Exemption Methyl Bromide Critical Use Exemption Office of Pesticide Programs Office of Pesticide Programs Mail Code 7503C 911 Bay, BEAD 1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW 1921 Jefferson Davis Highway Washington, DC 20460 Arlington, VA 22202 Telephone: ( 703) 308 8200 OMB Control # 2060 0482 You may either complete an electronic ( Microsoft Excel) or a printed version of the application. Please fill out each form or worksheet in the application as completely as possible. If you are completing the printed version and need extra space you may attach additional sheets as needed. Additional information may be available from your local state department of agriculture or at the sites listed below or by calling 1 800 296 1996. The applicant may assert a business confidentiality claim covering part or all of the information in the application by placing on ( or attaching to) the information, at the time it is submitted to EPA, a cover sheet, stamped or typed legend, or other suitable form of notice employing language such as trade secret, proprietary, or company confidential. Allegedly confidential portions of otherwise non confidential documents should be clearly identified by the applicant, and may be submitted separately to facilitate identification and handling by EPA. If the applicant desires confidential treatment only until a certain date or until the occurrence of a certain event, the notice should so state. Information covered by a claim of confidentiality will be disclosed by EPA only to the extent, and by means of the procedures set forth under 40 CFR Part 2 Subpart B; 41 FR 36902, 43 FR 400000. 50 FR 51661. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the information when it is received by EPA, it may be made available to the public by EPA without further notice to the applicant. Applicants submitting their application via e mail assume responsibility for the confidentiality of the electronic message transmission.

This application must be postmarked to the EPA address below no later than 120 days after the Notice was published in the Federal Register requesting critical use exemption applications. If you anticipate that you will need methyl bromide in 2005 because you believe there are no technically and economically feasible alternatives, then you should apply for the critical use exemption. This application may be submitted either by a consortium representing multiple users or by individual users. We encourage users with similar circumstances of use to submit a single application ( for example, any number of pre plant users with similar soil, pest, and climactic conditions can submit a single application.)

If a consortium is applying for multiple methyl bromide users, the economic data should be for a representative or typical user within the consortium unless otherwise noted. If economic or technical factors ( such as size of the farm) affecting the ability of this " representative user" to use alternatives are significantly different than other users in the consortium, more than one application should be submitted to reflect these differences.

Please contact your local, state, regional or national commodity association and/ or state representative agency to find out if they plan on submitting an application on behalf of your commodity group.

States that have agreed to participate in the exemption process are listed on EPA's website at www. epa. gov/ ozone/ mbr/ cueqa. html methyl. bromide@ epa. gov ( When submitting an application electronically, you should also print a hard copy, sign it, and submit it by mail)

If you have general questions about this application call:

Stratospheric Ozone Hotline 1 800 296 1996 INSTRUCTIONS The information provided by you in this application will be used to evaluate the requested methyl bromide use. The U. S. and other countries that are parties to the Montreal Protocol On Substances That Deplete The Ozone Layer decided that: " a use of methyl bromide should qualify as " critical" only if the nominating Party determines that: ( i) The specific use is critical because the lack of availability of methyl bromide for that use would result in a significant market disruption; and ( ii) There are no technically and economically feasible alternatives available to the user that are acceptable from the standpoint of environment and health and are suitable to the crops and circumstances of the nomination  "

WHERE DO I SUBMIT THE APPLICATION?

HOW CAN I RECEIVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION? Electronic Address for applications: EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant SECTIONS OF WORKBOOK OMB Control # 2060 0482 Printing worksheets To increase or decrease the size of the page that is viewable on the screen, go to the menu bar and select " View" and then " Zoom".

Navigating between worksheets The set of four arrows on the bottom left of the screen will help you navigate between worksheets. This is necessary to access the remaining worksheet tabs in the workbook that are not viewable. The two arrows with vertical lines to either the left or right will take you to the first worksheet and to the last worksheet respectively in the workbook. The inner two arrows allow you move the worksheet tabs to the right or to the left incrementally. The two arrows on the bottom right of the screen allow you to move the worksheet that you are viewing to the right or to the left. This is useful if the viewable area of on the screen is smaller than the entire page that is in the 7. Change the title row of the newly pasted worksheet from the old worksheet number to be consistent with the worksheet tab. 2. Select the top left corner of the worksheet ( this is the space to the left of column A and above row 1. You will know that the entire worksheet has been selected because the row and column marks as well as the worksheet itself Note: This is the only way you can copy a worksheet and not lose portions of the text instructions.

Viewing worksheets Worksheets are best viewed in " Page Break Preview." To select the view of the worksheet, go to the menu bar and select " View" and then " Page Break Preview." Page break preview shows only the printable area of the worksheet, with the blue lines that surround the screen indicating the edges of each page. 3. Go to the menu line at the top of the worksheet and select " Edit" then " Copy".

4. Go to the blank worksheet where you want the copied information to be pasted. 5. Again, select the top left corner of the worksheet ( left of column A and above row 1) to select the entire worksheet. 6. Go to the menu line at the top of the worksheet and select " Edit" then " Paste" Worksheet 1. Contact and Methyl Bromide Request Information Worksheet 2 D( 1& 2). Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for 2002 ( Annual or Perennial)

Worksheet 5. Application Summary Definitions Climate Zone Map Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Worksheet 3 B( 1& 2). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs ( Annual or Perennial) Worksheet 4. Future Research Plans Instructions Worksheet 2 B. Methyl Bromide  Historical Use for 1997  2002 Worksheet 2 C. Methyl Bromide  Crop/ Crop Grouping Yield & Gross Revenue for 2000  2002 Worksheet 2. Methyl Bromide 2. A tab with the name " Sheet 1" will appear at the bottom of the worksheet and will be highlighted in white. Take the cursor and double click the " new tab" 3. By double clicking in the tab you can now rename the worksheet to the appropriate number letter designation ( e. g., 3 A( 1), 3 A( 1)( a), etc.)

4. To move a newly inserted worksheet, simply drag the worksheet with your mouse to the desired location.

5. Once you add a new worksheet, Excel will automatically name each subsequently added worksheet as Sheet 2, Sheet 3, etc  Follow the instructions above to rename the new blank worksheets as appropriate.

Copying and pasting an entire worksheet's contents into a blank worksheet:

1. Select the worksheet to be copied by clicking on the worksheet tab at the bottom of the screen. The tab will turn white in color when it has been selected. EXCEL USER TIPS Inserting a blank worksheet:

1. To add additional blank worksheets in the Excel file, go to the menu line at the top of the worksheet and select " Insert" then " worksheet" Worksheet 3. Alternatives Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Pest and Crop Information INSTRUCTIONS Each worksheet number corresponds to the tab number in the electronic version of the application. Instructions specific to each worksheet are provided at the top of each sheet. A header row is included on each worksheet to include an application ID number that EPA will assign. EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant If you would like to print all worksheets that are contained in this workbook, go to the menu bar at the top of the screen and select " File" and then " Print." Then in the section of the menu that appears called " Print what," select " Entire Workbook." Yes No X X X Cell Fax X X Cell Fax OMB Control # 2060 0482 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 324 hours per response and assumes a large portion of applications will be submitted by consortia on behalf of many individual users of methyl bromide. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a current OMB control number. Daytime Phone E mail Address Alternate Contact Contact Name Reginald Brown ( 407) 894 1351 ( 407) 257 6148 or ( 407) 257 4694 dan@ ffva. com or maerts@ ffva. com ( 407) 894 7840 Specialty E mail Address Address Daytime Phone ( 407) 894 3071 reggie@ floridatomatoes. org If yes, the applicant assumes responsibility for the secure transmission of electronic submissions.

Applicant Name Primary Contact Contact Name ( Check One) Specialty Daniel A. Botts or Michael Aerts FFVA  Florida Tomato  Ruskin/ Palmetto Region Print Name Daniel A. Botts Director, Environmental and Pest Management Division, FFVA I certify that all information contained in this document is factual to the best of my knowledge.

Signature 11 Aug 03 Director, Environmental and Pest Management Division, FFVA Title Signature 11 Aug 03 Date Date Title Information in this application may be aggregated with information from other applications and used by the United States government to justify claims in the national nomination package that a particular use of methyl bromide be considered " critical" and authorized for an exemption beyond the 2005 phaseout. Use of aggregate data will be crucial to making compelling arguments in favor of critical use exemptions. By signing below, you agree now to assert any claim of confidentiality that would affect the disclosure by EPA of aggregate information based in part on information contained in this application. Print Name Daniel A. Botts ( 407) 894 4296 Florida Tomato Committee P. O. Box 140635 Orlando, FL 32814 0635 Agronomic Economic ( 407) 257 2027 4401 E. Colonial Dr. ( P. O. Box 140155) Orlando, FL 32803 ( 32814 0155 for P. O. B.) Economic Address Worksheet 1. Contact and Methyl Bromide Request Information The following information will be used to determine the amount of methyl bromide requested and the contact person for this request. It is important that we know whom to contact in case we need additional information during the review of the application.

Is this information Confidential Business Information?

Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association Agronomic 1. Location 2. Crop/ Crop Grouping 3.

4. Climate Zone Zones: ( check all that apply)

5. Soil Type & Organic Matter Light 100% Medium Heavy 0 to 2 % X 2 to 5 % over 5 %

6. Yes Pounds No X 7. Yes X CUE # 02 0046 No 8.

Year 2005 Acres 2006 Acres 2007 Acres 9.

10.

11. Yes Lbs No X 12. Yes Lbs No X OMB Control # 2060 0482 lbs. 2,090,000 Please explain why there may be variations in the pounds or acres treated from year to year. X  See 02

0046, p. 11 12 ( check all that apply) ( Indicate the climate zone designation by reviewing the U. S. climate zone map located at the end of this workbook or online at http:// www. usna. usda. gov/ Hardzone/ ushzmap. html.)

1____ 2a____ 2b____ 3a____ 3b____ 4a____ 4b____ 5a____ 5b____ 6a____ 6b____ 7a____ 7b____ 8a____ 8b___ 9a 80% 9b 20% 10a____ 10b____ 11____ over 400 acres 15,600 Worksheet 1. Contact and Methyl Bromide Request Information Total Pounds Active Ingredient ( a. i.) of Methyl Bromide 2,184,000 Total Area to be Treated If yes, please specify amount ( in pounds). If yes, please specify amount ( in pounds).

Do you anticipate that you will have any methyl bromide in storage after January 1, 2005? Methyl Bromide continues to be the most consistent and reliable pest control alternative for the pest complex targeted by preplant fumigation. The variation in consistency with alternatives at the present time presents unacceptable risks to both crop yields and quality.

Do you have access to recycled methyl bromide? 15,600 ( Indicate the soil type and percent organic matter where methyl bromide would be applied.)

Soil Type:

Organic Matter:

If a consortium is submitting this application, the data should be the total for the consortium. ( Include all crops/ crop groupings that benefit from an application of methyl bromide in a fumigation cycle. For a definition of fumigation cycle see Worksheet entitled " Definitions".)

Fresh Market Tomatoes ( includes Round, Roma, Cherry, Grape and others), 10% of crop double cropped ( Enter the state, region, or county.)

Ruskin/ Palmetto Production Region ( Hillsborough, Polk, Manatee, and Sarasota Counties)

Has this applicant previously applied for Critical Use Exemption of methyl bromide? Range of acres farmed by growers included in this application Is this applicant eligible for Quarantine and Preshipment ( QPS) uses of methyl bromide? 100  200 acres 200  400 acres 25  50 acres 50  100 acres Please explain why methyl bromide is being requested. ( Insert number or percentage of users in each category) 0  25 acres lbs. 15,600 lbs. What is the amount of methyl bromide being requested by this application ? ( Do NOT include QPS amounts)

2,090,000 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Worksheet Title 2 A Methyl Bromide  Crop & Pest Information If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect the representative user for the consortium.

The purpose of this worksheet is to determine pest infestation and crop information where methyl bromide is used. This forms the baseline for evaluating the impacts of using an alternative to replace methyl bromide.

2 B Methyl Bromide  Historical Use 1997  2002 If a consortium is submitting this application, all data should reflect the actual data for the consortium.

This worksheet provides data in actual usage for 1997 2002.

2 C Methyl Bromide  Crop/ Crop grouping Yield and Gross Revenue for 2000 2002 If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect the representative user for the consortium.

This worksheet provides crop/ crop grouping yield and gross revenue for 2000 through 2002.

The purpose of this worksheet is to determine past gross revenues when methyl bromide is used. This forms the baseline for evaluating the revenue impacts of using an alternative to replace methyl bromide.

2 D( 1 & 2) Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for 2002 If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect the representative user for the consortium.

This data is needed to estimate a baseline for operating costs in order to estimate changes in costs and the impact on operating profit and short run economic viability as a result of not using methyl bromide and to provide required information to the international review board.

The purpose of this worksheet is to determine operating expenses when methyl bromide is used. This forms the baseline for evaluating the cost impacts of using an alternative to replace methyl bromide. The data requested are designed to help you identify how your operation would change if methyl bromide were unavailable, which will be shown in Worksheet 3 B. Worksheet 2 D( 1) is for users with a fumigation cycle of less than 5 years. Worksheet 2 D( 2) is for users growing perennial crops following a single fumigation at establishment.

In collaboration with USDA, we will estimate fixed and overhead costs across crops and regions to ensure consistency within the U. S. nomination. OMB Control # 2060 0482 Purpose of Data: To establish a baseline estimate of crop/ crop grouping yields, gross revenues, and costs using methyl bromide.

Instructions specific to each worksheet are located at the top of each sheet. Worksheet 2. Methyl Bromide EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 1. Crop/ Crop Grouping or Consortium 2. Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec X** X**

2. Fumigation and Crop Timeline Beginning Fumigation Cycle Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 Land Preparation Fumigation Planting Harvest See narrative, p. 10 Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps Continuation of Fumigation Cycle ( if needed)

Month 13 Month 14 Month 15 Month 16 Month 17 Month 18 Month 19 Month 20 Month 21 Month 22 Month 23 Month 24 Land Preparation Fumigation Planting Harvest See narrative, p. 10 Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps OMB Control # 2060 0482 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Crop & Pest Information FFVA  Florida Tomato  Ruskin/ Palmetto Region ( Indicate when fumigation, major crop and pest management practices typically occur by shading the appropriate cells. Show a second crop if part of the fumigation cycle. If the fumigation cycle is longer than one year change the months to an appropriate interval. These tables are for annual crops but more than one crop may benefit from one methyl bromide fumigation. If application covers multiple crops/ crop groupings not grown sequentially, they will need to provide this information for all crops/ crop groupings. Please adjust timeline as necessary. Please provide additional comments or description below or on a separate page. Please begin the timeline with the first land preparation. For perennials, please begin with the year of land preparation and fumigation and indicate the years of production by yield or percentage of full production.) Which month does your fumigation cycle start? ( check only one)

Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON)

A comprehensive description that includes the timeline and variability in timing for specific field operations is given in the narrative ( see p. 10)

The Ruskin/ Palmetto Area has two cropping seasons in a given calendar year with some activities that bridge across calendar years. Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON)

Comments: 3. Target Pest( s) or Pest Problem( s):

Pest 1 Pest 2 Pest 3 Pest 4 Pest 5 4. Pest Economic Threshold Year Pest 1 Pest 2 Pest 3 Pest 4 Pest 5 5. Target Pest Infestation Pest 1 % Pest 2 % Pest 3 % Pest 4 % Pest 5 %

6. Representative User : see narrative, p. 23 24 see narrative, p. 23 24 Low density / unidentified ( Please estimate the percentage of the consortia's total growing area with a moderate to severe problem with these pests. Describe source of information such as a survey or expert estimate.) Low density / unidentified Common Name Genus 100 100 100 100 Percentage of Total Growing Area Source Threshold Low density / unidentified Low density / unidentified Low density / unidentified Units ( e. g. pests/ sq ft)

Describe a few crops that could follow this crop: * 400 cucumber Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Crop & Pest Information ( Please identify the top target pests or pest problems. Provide at least common name and genus and species if possible. Additional pests or pest problems can be provided as an attachment.)

Nightshade Solanum spp. Nutsedge Fusarium Wilt Cyperus rotundus / C. esculentus Fusarium oxysporum watermelon squash Average Farm Size Average acres in this crop Average Area Treated with Methyl Bromide: Acres cantalope 100 Other descriptive factors regarding representative user: For double crop on the same plastic, we have used cucumber as the model crop for budget purposes, other cucurbits may be planted. Acres Acres ( Please provide descriptive factors regarding your operation.) Root Knot Nematode Meloidogyne spp.

Source ( additional, see narrative, p. 21)

( Please provide the economic threshold information for each pest. Describe year and source of information such as survey or expert estimate.) EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

A B C Total Actual Pounds a. i. of Methyl Bromide Applied per Year Total Actual Acres Treated per Year* Average Pounds a. i. Applied per Acre per Year 1997 2,100,660 12,400 170 1998 2,140,660 12,900 166 1999 2,226,244 13,450 166 2000 1,956,000 13,000 150 2001 2,184,000 15,600 140 2002 2,090,400 15,600 134 OMB Control # 2060 0482 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant The downward trend in rates from 1997 reflect formulation changes from 98 2 to 67 33 and availability of products as the phase out schedule reduced the amounts of material available to distributors.

* Acreage numbers for 1997 1999 were given for round tomatos only. From 2000 to present, acreage included for all tomato cultivars.

Comments: ** Per annual cropping season, crop rotational considerations may result in a specific acre being treated more than once in a calendar year. Very low probability of occurrence. If there is a variation ( greater than 10%) in the quantity a. i., the acres treated or average application rate from year to year, please explain the reasons for the variation. What is the frequency of methyl bromide applied per area?** ( 1x / year, 2x / year, 1x / 3 years, etc.)

___ 1x____ times per __ year_____ Enter the total actual acres treated. Note: This number should be the total actual acres treated by the individual user or total actual acres treated for the entire consortium, for the year indicated. For furrow treatment the acres should include the area between the rows as well as the area of the rows. i. e. acres treated is the area of the cultivated fields being treated including the area between rows even if they are not treated.

Average Pounds a. i. Applied per Area per Year The average application rates in pounds a. i. of methyl bromide per area may be calculated by dividing Column A by Column B.

Year Worksheet 2 B. Methyl Bromide  Historical Use for 1997 2002 Total Actual Pounds a. i. of Methyl Bromide Applied per Year Enter the total actual pounds active ingredient ( a. i.) of methyl bromide applied. Note: This number should be the total pounds a. i. applied by the individual user or the entire consortium, for the year indicated. Include only the pounds active ingredient of methyl bromide. Do not include the pounds of chloropicrin that may be part of the same product.

Total Actual Acres Treated per Year Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E:

Column F:

Column G:

A B C D E F G Year Crops/ Crop Groupings Market Category Yield Unit of Measurement Price* ($) Gross Revenue per Acre ($)

2000 Tomato Fresh Market 1342 25 lb Carton $ 6.73 $ 9,031.66 2000 Tomato/ Cucumber Double Crop Fresh Market 1342/ 694 25 lb Carton/ bushel $ 6.73 / $ 10.72 $ 16,471.34 2001 Tomato Fresh Market 1373 25 lb Carton $ 9.26 $ 12,713.98 2001 Tomato/ Cucumber Double Crop Fresh Market 1373/ 592 25 lb Carton/ bushel $ 9.26 / $ 12.07 $ 19,859.42 2002 Tomato Fresh Market 1450 25 lb Carton $ 8.07 $ 11,701.50 2002 Tomato/ Cucumber Double Crop Fresh Market 1450/ 701 25 lb Carton/ bushel $ 8.07 / $ 10.65 $ 19,167.15 OMB Control # 2060 0482 Gross revenue per acre for each market category and or each crop/ crop grouping may be calculated using the data you entered as price times yield. If revenue is not equal to price times yield, you may enter a different revenue amount, but please explain the difference in the comments section below. Gross Revenue Price Enter the unit of measurement for each crop/ species ( lbs, cwt, carton, bin). If not by weight, specify in the comments section the average weight of the measure. Units of Measurement Enter average prices received by the users for that crop/ crop grouping and market category. Average price over all categories can be calculated separately, if needed. Enter marketing categories that determine prices received, for example, grade ( size, color), timeliness ( early season, late season), or end use ( fresh, processing). Itemize or aggregate these factors to the extent appropriate if lack of methyl bromide would effect the yields in each category.

Enter the yield per acre, or the proportion of total yields, obtained for that category. For perennial crops, please enter yields at full production. Be sure to indicate yields at other stages in the timeline in Worksheet 2 A. Yield Comments: Values given are for round tomatoes only. If this application is for multiple crops/ crop groupings ( e. g. nurseries producing evergreens, deciduous, and forbs) please indicate the proportion of land area allocated to each crop/ crop grouping. Worksheet 2 C. Methyl Bromide  Crop/ Species Yield & Gross Revenue for 2000 2002 Market Categories Be sure to enter the year. Use as many rows as needed for each year for all the crops/ crop groupings in the fumigation cycles from 2000 to 2002. If a fumigation cycle overlaps more than one calendar year, then the year of the fumigation cycle is the year methyl bromide was applied.

Enter all crops/ crop groupings that benefit from methyl bromide in the fumigation cycle. If multiple crops/ crop groupings are grown during the interval between fumigations ( e. g. tomatoes followed by peppers in a single growing season, or strawberries followed by lettuce over 2 or 3 years) include all of the crops/ crop groupings during the entire interval.

If someone other than the applicant benefits from the application of methyl bromide in the fumigation cycle and you do not have the quantitative data for the crops/ crop groupings grown on the same land, please indicate so in the comments section below. Year Crops/ Crop Groupings EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E: OMB Control # 2060 0482 For perennial crops ( Worksheet D( 2)), we have divided the lifespan into three basic periods: pre production ( including establishment), initial production, and full production. Please ensure that the timeline in Worksheet 2 A indicates the years of each period. Operating costs should be an average of costs incurred during each period. Please consider expected replanting rates and indicate which year dead or poorly performing young trees would be replaced. You may copy columns/ rows as needed if these periods need to be refined for your situation.

For inputs and operations detailed in Columns B and D, total costs can be calculated as Column B times Column D. Otherwise, enter total cost of the input or operation. As a check, you may add up Column E to obtain an estimate of total variable operating costs. These will not include fixed and overhead costs, nor a return to the owners' labor. It should, therefore, be less than gross revenues calculated in Worksheet 2 C. If it is not, please explain ( for example, unusually poor yields or unusually poor prices). For perennial crops, Column E should only be totaled for the years at full production. For all inputs and operations detailed in Column B, please specify the unit cost. Also, indicate all costs of applying methyl bromide, including any material costs, for example, tarps. If custom applied and separate costs are unavailable, write ' custom' and enter total cost in Column E. For all inputs and operations detailed in Column B, please specify the units of measurement. Worksheet 2 D( 1& 2). Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for 2002 Enter all operating costs incurred during a fumigation cycle. Users with a relatively short fumigation cycle ( less than five years) should use version D( 1); users cultivating perennial crops should use version D( 2). Users with multiple crops, either on the same area in a single fumigation cycle or on different areas treated separately, should copy this sheet and provide costs for each crop. If multiple crops are cultivated sequentially following a single fumigation, replace fumigation costs in Pre plant Operations with any additional pest control costs used prior to the following crops. If a fallow season is an important part of the fumigation cycle, include costs incurred ( for example, cultivating a cover crop) as a separate line or as a separate sheet, if costs are extensive. Please fill in the unshaded areas. The shaded areas can be used if the information is known.

The operations/ inputs listed here are not meant to be exhaustive or representative of your specific production system. They are meant to provide suggestions and to help you identify how your operation would change if methyl bromide were unavailable. Be as precise as necessary otherwise you may aggregate operations or inputs. For example, specify herbicide costs if additional treatments would become necessary with the use of a methyl bromide alternative, otherwise you may simply specify total pesticide costs. Please specify only variable operating costs.

This field is required only for methyl bromide. However, you may include specific amounts of other inputs or operations if you believe it helps to document the additional costs you would incur by using an alternative fumigant. Operation / Input Quantity Used per Acre Operation / Input for Perennial Crops Harvest costs may likewise be calculated as costs per acre ( Column B) plus variable costs per unit of yield ( Column C) times yield ( Column D). Total Cost per Acre Unit Costs Total Cost per Acre Constant Cost per Acre For harvest operations, specify costs that depend on land area, for example, picking costs, per acre of land.

Cost per Unit of Yield For harvest operations, specify costs that depend on amount of product harvested, for example, packing material, per unit of produce. Units Yield For harvest operations, indicate average yields or representative yields from Worksheet 2 C. EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant B C D E Quantity Used per Acre Units ( lbs, hours, etc) Unit Cost ($) Total Cost per Acre ($)

( Single Crop/ Double Crop)

$ 6,669.02 / $ 8,939.66 Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($)

$ 1,062.55 / $ 2,119.50 $ 3,708.00 / $ 5,145.00 For Enterprise Budget detail see Appendix II  B  2 Total Packing, Selling, and Related Overhead OMB Control # 2060 0482 Operation / Input A Worksheet 2 D( 1). Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for 2002 Total Preharvest Costs Land preparation Fumigation product ( methyl bromide)

application Irrigation Other costs Cultural Operations Seed / Seedlings Fertilizer / Soil Amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual)

Fuel / Machine Labor Other Costs Harvest Operations Labor Hauling Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Total Harvesting Costs EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant A B ( 1) C ( 1) D ( 1) E ( 1) B ( 2) C ( 2) D ( 2) E ( 2) B ( 3) C ( 3) D ( 3) E ( 3)

Operation or Input Quantity used per acre Units ( lbs,

hours, etc) Unit Cost Total Cost per Acre Quantity used per acre Units ( lbs,

hours, etc) Unit Cost Total Cost per Acre Quantity used per acre Units ( lbs,

hours, etc) Unit Cost Total Cost per Acre Establishment Operations Land preparation Fumigation product application Irrigation Seedlings Other costs Cultural Operations Fertilizer/ soil amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual)

Fuel/ machine labor Other costs Harvest Operations Constant Cost per Acre Cost per Unit of Yield Yield Total Cost Constant Cost per Acre Cost per Unit of Yield Yield Total Cost Constant Cost per Acre Cost per Unit of Yield Yield Total Cost Picking/ hauling Material Grading/ packing Other costs OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 2 D( 2). Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for Perennial Crops INITIAL PRODUCTION YEARS _____ FULL PRODUCTION YEARS _____

PRE PRODUCTION YEARS _______ EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Worksheet 3 A 3 B OMB Control # 2060 0482 If a consortium is submitting this application, the data for this table should reflect the representative user for the consortium.

This data is needed to estimate changes in costs and the impact on operating profit and short run economic viability as a result of not using methyl bromide and to provide required information to the international review board.

The purpose of this worksheet is to determine operating expenses when alternatives are used for evaluating the cost impacts of using an alternative to replace methyl bromide. The data requested are designed to help you identify how your operation would change if methyl bromide were unavailable. Worksheet 3 B( 1) is for users with a fumigation cycle of less than 5 years. Worksheet 3 B( 2) is for users growing perennial crops following a single fumigation at establishment.

In collaboration with USDA, we will estimate fixed and overhead costs across crops and regions to ensure consistency within the U. S. nomination. Please fill out this worksheet for each alternative specified in the U. S. Matrix and for other alternatives for which the economic evaluation would bolster the case that methyl bromide is needed. Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs Worksheet 3. Alternatives  Feasibility of Alternative Pest Control Regimens Title You must complete one worksheet for each alternative. Please inset the name of the alternative in the area on top of the page. If you prefer, you may provide the information requested in this worksheet in a narrative review. However, you must fill in the information in Question # 1 and # 3 or we will assume no yield or quality loss. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Purpose of Data: To estimate the loss as a result of not having methyl bromide available. EPA needs to compare data ( yields, crop/ species prices, gross revenues and costs) on the use of methyl bromide and alternative pest control regimens.

Complete worksheet 3 A for each alternative pest control regimen listed in the " U. S. Matrix" for chemical controls ( www. epa. gov/ ozone/ mbr/ cueqa. html) and the " International Matrix" for nonchemical pest controls ( www. epa. gov/ ozone/ mbr/ cue). Each worksheet contains a place holder in the title for you to insert the name of the specific alternative pest control regimen addressed. You should add additional worksheets as required.

Enter all alternative pesticides and pest control methods ( and associated cost and yield data) that would replace one treatment of methyl bromide throughout the fumigation cycle. See the Definition worksheet for a comprehensive definition on fumigation cycles. EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 1.

2.

Study # 1 2 3 4 5 3.

Units Units 4.

X No 5.

6. Based on multiple research trials conducted over the past 10 years and summarized in the narrative of 02 0046 ( in Appendix II B 1). Additional research submitted in Appendix I D, 2003 Application.

See 02 0046 ( in Appendix II B 1) and Appendix I B, 2003 Application OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Yield with Methyl Bromide Yield With Alternative Quality Impact Description Describe quality impacts such as: percent smaller fruit, reduced grade, smaller plants, crop damage, disease vector, etc. Refer to market category question in Worksheet 2 C.

Market Category For the information in # 1 above list: the study name, authors, publication, date, and if a copy is attached. 5 Details Attached? variable variable Enter Average Loss Nightshade Root Knot Nematode ( additional pests) Alternative:

% Yield Loss * Telone C 35, broadcast at 26 gallons ( 16.9 lbs a. i.) per acre, + Chloropicrin shanked into the bed at 150 gallons ( 150 lbs a. i.) per treated acre, + Devrinol ( 2 lbs a. i. per acre) and Dual Magnum ( 1.27 lbs a. i. per acre) applied to the bed top at plastic laying, followed by Sandea ( 0.05 lbs a. i. per acre) applied as a post emergent directed spray Yield Loss & Pest Control When Comparing This Alternative to Methyl Bromide Pest Being Tested Study # ( list below) Provide numerical estimates where possible.

variable Details % Pest Control *

variable variable variable 1 2 3 4 Study Information Soil Restriction Quality Loss *

Are there any variety or cultivar issues associated with this alternative? Are there any production delays ( planting/ harvesting) associated with this alternative?

( If yes, please explain) Extended pretransplanting period for Telone depends on soil temperature and moisture This information will be used to determine the amount of methyl bromide needed. Restrictions on Alternative Use Regulatory Restriction % of Area Details Nutsedge Fusarium Wilt variable variable Yes  Label Restriction 100% Organic Matter Restriction Off Site Damage ( outgassing) Other Restrictions ( Describe)  Township Caps 6%

Pest Resistant To Alternative Label Restriction Terminology  " Karst Geography"  see narrative, p. 15 16 * If no yield or quality loss information is given we will assume no losses. Only provide pest control information if yield or quality loss information is not available. EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 7.

8.

9.

Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5 Month 6 Month 7 Month 8 Month 9 Month 10 Month 11 Month 12 All efforts to reduce pest pressure through cultural practice during fallow periods are included in the alternative treatments. Those include cover crops, physical control, and flooding ( when possible).

( see narrative, p. 25) Chloropicrin 150 lbs 1 OMB Control # 2060 0482 Comments: Alternative: Telone C 35, broadcast at 26 gallons ( 16.9 lbs a. i.) per acre, + Chloropicrin shanked into the bed at 150 gallons ( 150 lbs a. i.) per treated acre, + Devrinol ( 2 lbs a. i. per acre) and Dual Magnum ( 1.27 lbs a. i. per acre) applied to the bed top at plastic laying, followed by Sandea ( 0.05 lbs a. i. per acre) applied as a post emergent directed spray Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON)

Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps Harvest Continuation of Alternative Cycle ( if needed)

Planting Land Preparation Fumigation Planting Harvest Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps ( Indicate when fumigation, major crop and pest management practices typically occur by shading the appropriate cells. Show a second crop if part of the fumigation cycle. If the fumigation cycle is longer than one year change the months to an appropriate interval. These tables are for annual crops but more than one crop may benefit from one methyl bromide fumigation. If application covers multiple crops/ crop groupings not grown sequentially, they will need to provide this information for all crops/ crop groupings. Please adjust timeline as necessary. Please provide additional comments or description below or on a separate page. Please begin the timeline with the first land preparation. For perennials, please begin with the year of land preparation and fumigation and indicate the years of production by yield or percentage of full production.) Alternative Timeline Time Interval ( e. g. MONTH/ YEAR/ SEASON) Beginning Fumigation Cycle Land Preparation Fumigation Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Use Rate of Chemical Alternative Quantity a. i. per Acre # of Acres Treated # of Applications per Year Active Ingredient ( a. i.) Name of Product and Formulation Units ( gals, lbs. Etc.) 1 Telone 16.9 lbs Devrinol 2 1,3  Dichloropropene lbs Dual Magnum SANDEA Napropamide 1 1 1 Non Chemical Pest Control ( please describe) 1.27 0.05 lbs lbs S metolachlor Halosulfuron EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E: OMB Control # 2060 0482 Unit Costs Operation / Input for Perennial Crops For perennial crops ( Worksheet B( 2)), we have divided the lifespan into three basic periods: pre production ( including establishment), initial production, and full production. Please ensure that the timeline in Worksheet 3 A indicates the years of each period. Operating costs should be an average of costs incurred during each period. Please consider expected replanting rates and indicate which year dead or poorly performing young trees would be replaced. You may copy columns/ rows as needed if these periods need to be refined for your situation.

Quantity Used per Acre This field is required only for methyl bromide. However, you may include specific amounts of other inputs or operations if you believe it helps to document the additional costs you would incur by using an alternative fumigant. Constant Cost per Acre For all inputs and operations detailed in Column B, please specify the unit cost. Also, indicate all costs of applying methyl bromide, including any material costs, for example, tarps. If custom applied and separate costs are unavailable, write ' custom' and enter total cost in Column E. Worksheet 3 B( 1& 2). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs Enter all operating costs incurred during a fumigation cycle. Users with a relatively short fumigation cycle ( less than five years) should use version B( 1); users cultivating perennial crops should use version B( 2). Users with multiple crops, either on the same area in a single fumigation cycle or on different areas treated separately, should copy this sheet and provide costs for each crop. If multiple crops are cultivated sequentially following a single fumigation, replace fumigation costs in pre plant Operations with any additional pest control costs used prior to the following crops. If a fallow season is an important part of the fumigation cycle, include costs incurred ( for example, cultivating a cover crop) as a separate line or as a separate sheet, if costs are extensive. Please fill in the unshaded areas. The shaded areas can be used if the information is known.

Operation / Input The operations/ inputs listed here are not meant to be exhaustive or representative of your specific production system. They are meant to provide suggestions and to help you identify how your operation would change if methyl bromide were unavailable. Be as precise as necessary otherwise you may aggregate operations or inputs. For example, specify herbicide costs if additional treatments would become necessary with the use of a methyl bromide alternative, otherwise you may simply specify total pesticide costs. Please specify only variable operating costs. Alternative: [ Insert Alternative]

For inputs and operations detailed in Columns B and D, total costs can be calculated as Column B times Column D. Otherwise, enter total cost of the input or operation. As a check, you may add up Column E to obtain an estimate of total variable operating costs. These will not include fixed and overhead costs, nor a return to the owners' labor. It should, therefore, be less than gross revenues calculated in Worksheet 2 C. If it is not, please explain ( for example, unusually poor yields or unusually poor prices). For perennial crops, Column E should only be totaled for the years at full production. For harvest operations, specify costs that depend on land area, for example, picking costs, per acre of land.

Units For all inputs and operations detailed in Column B, please specify the units of measurement.

Cost per Unit of Yield For harvest operations, specify costs that depend on amount of product harvested, for example, packing material, per unit of produce.

Yield For harvest operations, indicate average yields or representative yields from Worksheet 3 A.

Total Cost per Acre Total Cost per Acre B C D E Quantity Used per Acre Units ( lbs, hours, etc) Unit Cost ($) Total Cost per Acre ($)

( Single Crop / Double Crop)

$ 7,097.00 / $ 9,307.68 Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($)

$ 998.52 / $ 1,992.33 $ 3,462.12 / $ 4,836.38 For Enterprise Budget detail see Appendix II  B  2 Total Packing, Selling, and Related Overhead OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 B( 1). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs Harvest costs may likewise be calculated as costs per acre ( Column B) plus variable costs per unit of yield ( Column C) times yield ( Column D).

EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Total Preharvest Costs Alternative: Telone C 35, broadcast at 26 gallons ( 16.9 lbs a. i.) per acre, + Chloropicrin shanked into the bed at 150 gallons ( 150 lbs a. i.) per treated acre, + Devrinol ( 2 lbs a. i. per acre) and Dual Magnum ( 1.27 lbs a. i. per acre) applied to the bed top at plastic laying, followed by Sandea ( 0.05 lbs a. i. per acre) applied as a postemergent directed spray Operation / Input A Land preparation Fumigation product ( methyl bromide)

application Irrigation Other costs Cultural Operations Seed / Seedlings Fertilizer / Soil Amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual)

Fuel / Machine Labor Other Costs Harvest Operations Labor Hauling Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Total Harvesting Costs Overhead EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Alternative:

A B ( 1) C ( 1) D ( 1) E ( 1) B ( 2) C ( 2) D ( 2) E ( 2) B ( 3) C ( 3) D ( 3) E ( 3)

Operation or Input Quantity used per acre Units ( lbs,

hours, etc) Unit Cost Total Cost per Acre Quantity used per acre Units ( lbs,

hours, etc) Unit Cost Total Cost per Acre Quantity used per acre Units ( lbs,

hours, etc) Unit Cost Total Cost per Acre Establishment Operations Land preparation Fumigation product application Irrigation Seedlings Other costs Cultural Operations Fertilizer/ soil amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual)

Fuel/ machine labor Other costs Harvest Operations Constant Cost per Acre Cost per Unit of Yield Yield Total Cost Constant Cost per Acre Cost per Unit of Yield Yield Total Cost Constant Cost per Acre Cost per Unit of Yield Yield Total Cost Picking/ hauling Material Grading/ packing Other costs OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 3 B( 2). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs for Perennial Crops PRE PRODUCTION YEARS _______ INITIAL PRODUCTION YEARS _____ FULL PRODUCTION YEARS _____

[ Insert Alternative ] EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 1. 1 4 2 5 3 2. 1 4 2 5 3 3. 1 4 2 5 3 4.

5.

6. Yes X No 7. Yes X No 8.

From:

X To:

9.

Years Amount ($) 1993 2003 $ 1.1 million 1993 2003 $ 1.6 million 1993 2003 $ > 3 million 10. $ > 5.7 million ( total across all production regions)

Cost 11. ( see Appendix II B 1, CUE 02 0046, and Appendices I A, I B)

Telone C 35, broadcast at 26 gallons ( 16.9 lbs a. i.) per acre, + Chloropicrin shanked into the bed at 150 gallons ( 150 lbs a. i.) per treated acre, + Devrinol ( 2 lbs a. i. per acre) and Dual Magnum ( 1.27 lbs a. i. per acre) applied to the bed top at plastic laying, followed by Sandea ( 0.05 lbs a. i. per acre) applied as a post emergent directed spray Growers are prepared to shift from methyl bromide when consistently effective and economical alternatives become available that do not reduce their competitiveness in the global marketplace. OMB Control # 2060 0482 Please provide an overview/ timeline of the plan to transition away from using methyl bromide. VIF Technology Nutsedge Fusarium Wilt Nightshade ( Describe each investment and its associated costs. e. g. specialized machinery, etc.) Grower In Kind Research / Field Plots FFVA / FFVREF Florida Tomato Committee / Gadsden County Tomato Association What is the cumulative amount spent and the types of contributions this consortium has made to fund research to develop alternatives to methyl bromide since 1992? ( e. g. consortium dues, direct research funding, etc.)

Name of Organization / Research Institution Formulation Changes Formulation Changes ( please specify)

( check all that apply)

Cultural Practices ( please specify) Other Pesticides ( please specify)

EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Grant requests made to USDA, EPA, state, or other funding group. ( see research summaries in 02 0046 and current application narrative) Investment Other total investments, if any, made to reduce your reliance on methyl bromide? How will you minimize your use and/ or emissions of methyl bromide? What would be the best currently available alternative if methyl bromide were not available? Prioritize the alternative chemicals or cultural practices to be tested.

Iodomethane Will yield/ quality loss be measured? Telone Application Methodologies Will economic impacts be measured? Fosthiazate Provide a list of alternative chemicals or cultural practices that have been tested. Root Knot Nematode ( additional pests, see narrative p. 21) Worksheet 4. Future Research Plans Please describe future plans to test alternatives to methyl bromide. You may use this worksheet to describe all future plans.

Identify the top 3 to 5 target pests for your research.

_____% methyl bromide, _____% chloropicrin _____% methyl bromide, _____% chloropicrin Virtually Impermeable Film ( VIF)

Non Chemical Methods ( please specify) Tarpaulin ( High Density Polyethylene)

Other Trifloxysulfuron Na ( other technology as research dictates) 1.

2.

3.

4. 2005 5. 2005 6.

2006 2,090,000 lbs. 15,600 2007 2,090,000 lbs. 15,600 Not Technically Feasible Not Economically Feasible OMB Control # 2060 0482 Potential Alternatives Reasons see 02 0046 see 02 0046 Area Treated Acres Place an " X" in the column( s) labeled " Not Technically Feasible" and/ or " Not Economically Feasible" where appropriate. Use the " Reasons" column to describe why the potential alternative is not feasible. Area Treated Acres No assurances that issues associated with potential alternatives will be resolved, or that the currently described best available alternative will provide economically or technically feasible long term solutions. Acres Treated with Methyl Bromide 15,600 Acres If methyl bromide is requested for additional years, reason for request: Crop: Fresh Market Tomatoes ( includes Round, Roma, Cherry, Grape and others), 10% of crop double cropped Pounds of Methyl Bromide Requested 2,184,000 lbs. Consortium Name: FFVA  Florida Tomato  Ruskin/ Palmetto Region Location: Ruskin/ Palmetto Production Region ( Hillsborough, Polk, Manatee, and Sarasota Counties) For EPA Use Only ID # _______________ SECTOR __________________________

Worksheet 5. Application Summary This worksheet will be posted on the web to notify the public of requests for critical use exemptions beyond the 2005 phase out for methyl bromide. Therefore, this worksheet cannot be claimed as CBI. EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 82 Fumigation cycle:

Year:

Comparable data:

2 year example:

Other beneficiary example Crop cycle change example:

Crop Grouping EPA Form # 7620 18a The period of time between methyl bromide fumigations.

If a fumigation cycle overlaps more than one calendar year, " year" refers to the calendar year when methyl bromide is applied ( or the beginning of the cycle).

In order to compare revenues and costs with and without methyl bromide, data on alternatives for pest control, yields, revenues, and costs must be for the same time interval as the methyl bromide fumigation cycle. If, however, quantitative data, is not available for the entire fumigation cycle, then to be comparable, the quantitative data for the alternatives should cover the same portion of the fumigation cycle as the quantitative data for methyl bromide, and the rest of the cycle should be discussed in the comments sections.

If a methyl bromide fumigation is made every 2 years, then the 2001 fumigation cycle began in 2001 and would end in 2003. The data should cover the methyl bromide costs and usage for the methyl bromide fumigation made in 2001, and all yields and revenues received and other costs incurred during the 2 year period. To be comparable, the data on alternatives should cover a similar 2 year period beginning in 2005 beginning at the same time of year when a methyl bromide fumigation would be made. The data should cover all methyl bromide alternatives used, and all yields and revenues received during that 2 year interval. Other pest control and other costs would only need to be provided for that interval if they would change from what they were with methyl bromide.

If someone other than the applicant benefits from a methyl bromide fumigation, you should comment on these benefits if you do not have quantitative data for the entire fumigation cycle. For example, if a rotational crop in the second year benefits from a methyl bromide fumigation a year earlier, but there is quantitative data only on the first crop, then the data on the alternatives should cover only the first crop, and the benefits of methyl bromide and the additional pesticides that would have to be used on the rotational crop should be discussed in the comments sections.

If in a one year interval, methyl bromide is applied, tomatoes are grown and harvested followed by peppers, then the fumigation cycle would be one year including the tomatoes and peppers. If, however, without methyl bromide, it is not possible to follow tomatoes with peppers in the same one year interval, then the alternative data on pesticides, costs, yields, and revenues should just cover tomatoes. The loss of profit from not being able to grow peppers with the alternatives would be part of the loss from not having methyl bromide.

The applicant can group simliar crops together if: ( i) Crops would experience similar yield and quality losses in the absence of methyl bromide; and ( ii) Crops are grown on the same fumigation and cultivation cycle with similar operating costs. For example, nursery crops including various flower or tree species can be aggregated, with average yields per acre and prices. However, if crops are distinctly different in revenues and operating costs, or the cycles, the applicant may want to present yield, price and operating costs for each crop separately and also indicate the proportion of land area allocated to each crop. Definitions: OMB Control # 2060 0482 Pre Plant


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 20, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 51268-51269]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20332]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-2011-0024; FMCSA-2011-0102]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Vision

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of renewal of exemptions; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew the exemptions from the
vision requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations for
16 individuals. FMCSA has statutory authority to exempt individuals
from the vision requirement if the exemptions granted will not
compromise safety. The Agency has concluded that granting these
exemption renewals will provide a level of safety that is equivalent to
or greater than the level of safety maintained without the exemptions
for these commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers.

DATES: This decision is effective August 16, 2013. Comments must be
received on or before September 19, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) numbers: Docket No. [Docket No. FMCSA-2006-
24015; FMCSA-2011-0024; FMCSA-2011-0102], using any of the following
methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery or Courier: West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number for this notice. Note that DOT posts all comments
received without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information included in a comment. Please see the Privacy Act
heading below.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) is
available 24 hours each day, 365 days each year. If you want
acknowledgment that we received your comments, please include a self-
addressed, stamped envelope or postcard or print the acknowledgement
page that appears after submitting comments on-line.
    Privacy Act: Anyone may search the electronic form of all comments
received into any of our dockets by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or of the person signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
You may review DOT's Privacy Act Statement for the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) published in the Federal Register on January
17, 2008 (73 FR 3316).

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may renew an exemption
from the vision requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10), which applies to
drivers of CMVs in interstate commerce, for a two-year period if it
finds ``such exemption would likely achieve a level of safety that is
equivalent to or greater than the level that would be achieved absent
such exemption.'' The procedures for requesting an exemption (including
renewals) are set out in 49 CFR part 381.

Exemption Decision

    This notice addresses 16 individuals who have requested renewal of
their exemptions in accordance with FMCSA procedures. FMCSA has
evaluated these 16 applications for renewal on their merits and decided
to extend each exemption for a renewable two-year period. They are the
following:

Juan D. Adame (TX)
Joel A. Cabrera (FL)
Rick A. Ervin (NM)
Ronald R. Fournier (NY)

Thomas W. Kent (IN)
Craig C. Lowry (MT)
Adolph L. Romero (FL)
Larry D. Warneke (WA)
Stanley C. Anders (SD)
Sherman W. Clapper (ID)
Eric Esplin (UT)
Ronald D. Jackman II (NV)
Gerald Kortesmaki (MN)
Robert J. MacInnis (MA)
Rodney W. Sukalski (MN)
Lonnie Wendinger (MN)
    The exemptions are extended subject to the following conditions:
(1) That each individual has a physical examination every year (a) by
an ophthalmologist or optometrist who attests that the vision in the
better eye continues to meet the requirements in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10),
and (b) by a medical examiner who attests that the individual is
otherwise physically qualified under 49 CFR 391.41; (2) that each
individual provides a copy of the ophthalmologist's or optometrist's
report to the medical examiner at the time of the annual medical
examination; and (3) that each individual provide a copy of the annual
medical certification to the employer for retention in the driver's
qualification file and retains a copy of the certification on his/her
person while driving for presentation to a duly authorized Federal,
State, or local enforcement official. Each exemption will be valid for
two years unless rescinded earlier by FMCSA. The exemption will be
rescinded if: (1) The person fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of the exemption; (2) the exemption has resulted in a lower
level of safety than was maintained before it was granted; or (3)
continuation of the exemption would not be consistent with the goals
and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315.

Basis for Renewing Exemptions

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31315(b)(1), an exemption may be granted for no
longer than two years from its approval date and may be renewed upon
application for additional two year periods. In accordance with 49
U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, each of the 16 applicants has satisfied the
entry conditions for obtaining an exemption from the vision
requirements (71 FR 14566; 71 FR 30227; 73 FR 27014; 75 FR 50799; 76 FR
17481; 76 FR 28125; 76 FR 29022; 76 FR 44082). Each of these 16
applicants has requested renewal of the exemption and has submitted
evidence showing that the vision in the better eye continues to meet
the requirement specified at 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10) and that the vision
impairment is stable. In addition, a review of each record of safety
while driving with the respective vision deficiencies over the past two
years indicates each applicant continues to meet the vision exemption
requirements.
    These factors provide an adequate basis for predicting each
driver's ability to continue to drive safely in interstate commerce.
Therefore, FMCSA concludes that extending the exemption for each
renewal applicant for a period of two years is likely to achieve a
level of safety equal to that existing without the exemption.

Request for Comments

    FMCSA will review comments received at any time concerning a
particular driver's safety record and determine if the continuation of
the exemption is consistent with the requirements at 49 U.S.C. 31136(e)
and 31315. However, FMCSA requests that interested parties with
specific data concerning the safety records of these drivers submit
comments by September 19, 2013.
    FMCSA believes that the requirements for a renewal of an exemption
under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315 can be satisfied by initially
granting the renewal and then requesting and evaluating, if needed,
subsequent comments submitted by interested parties. As indicated
above, the Agency previously published notices of final disposition
announcing its decision to exempt these 16 individuals from the vision
requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(10). The final decision to grant an
exemption to each of these individuals was made on the merits of each
case and made only after careful consideration of the comments received
to its notices of applications. The notices of applications stated in
detail the qualifications, experience, and medical condition of each
applicant for an exemption from the vision requirements. That
information is available by consulting the above cited Federal Register
publications.
    Interested parties or organizations possessing information that
would otherwise show that any, or all, of these drivers are not
currently achieving the statutory level of safety should immediately
notify FMCSA. The Agency will evaluate any adverse evidence submitted
and, if safety is being compromised or if continuation of the exemption
would not be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C.
31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA will take immediate steps to revoke the
exemption of a driver.

Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket numbers FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-
2011-0024; FMCSA-2011-0102 and click the search button. When the new
screen appears, click on the blue ``Comment Now!'' button on the right
hand side of the page. On the new page, enter information required
including the specific section of this document to which each comment
applies, and provide a reason for each suggestion or recommendation. If
you submit your comments by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an
unbound format, no larger than 8[frac12] by 11 inches, suitable for
copying and electronic filing. If you submit comments by mail and would
like to know that they reached the facility, please enclose a stamped,
self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and material received during the
comment period and may change this proposed rule based on your
comments. FMCSA may issue a final rule at any time after the close of
the comment period.

Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert the docket number
FMCSA-2006-24015; FMCSA-2011-0024; FMCSA-2011-0102 and click
``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket Folder'' and you will find all
documents and comments related to the proposed rulemaking.

    Issued on: August 9, 2013.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-20332 Filed 8-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


MEMORANDUM Subject: 10/ 15/ 01 Voice Mail Message for Jill Knickerbocker, Waste Management, Inc. from Laurie Solomon, EPA I left a voice mail message for Jill Knickerbocker inquiring whether Waste Management's Model City facility had an on site incinerator or whether it received all of its incinerator ash from other locations. If it is the latter, I requested Ms. Knickerbocker to provide us with a list of facilities that send their ash to the Model City facility for treatment and disposal or simply disposal.

Subject: 10/ 16/ 01 Voice Mail Message from Jill Knickerbocker, Waste Management, Inc.

Ms. Knickerbocker said that the Model City facility does not have an on site incinerator. Some of the ash that they currently have is from Trade Waste's incinerator in Sauget, IL and some of it is from Waste Technologies Industries' (WTI) incinerator in East Liverpool, OH. In the future, the WTI facility may have more K088 that they would like to burn and send the ash to Model City. In addition, the Onyx incinerator in Port Arthur, TX has K088 derived from waste that they would like to burn. The resulting ash may go to Model City.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 21 (Thursday, January 31, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 703-705]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00452]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. IC18-19-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-725); Comment
Request; Extension

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of information collection and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) is soliciting public comment on the currently approved
information collection FERC-725 (Certification of Electric Reliability
Organization; Procedures for Electric Reliability Standards) and
submitting the information collection to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review. Any interested person may file comments
directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments to the
Commission as explained below. On September 27, 2018, the Commission
published a Notice in the Federal Register in Docket No. IC18-19-000
requesting public comments. The Commission received one public comment
which is addressed here and in the related submittal to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due March 4, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by OMB Control No. 1902-
0225, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Attention: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Desk Officer.
    A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Commission, in
Docket No. IC18-19-000, by either of the following methods:
     eFiling at Commission's Website: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. For user assistance, contact FERC Online Support
by email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by phone at:<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll-free), or<PHONE_NUMBER> for TTY.
    Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>, and fax at (202)
273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: FERC-725, Certification of Electric Reliability
Organization; Procedures for Electric Reliability Standards.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0225.
    Type of Request: Three-year extension of the FERC-725 information
collection requirements with no changes to the current reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
    Abstract: The FERC-725 contains the following information
collection elements:
    Self Assessment and ERO (Electric Reliability Organization)
Application: The Commission requires the ERO to submit to FERC a
performance assessment report every five years. The next assessment is
due in 2019. Each Regional Entity submits a performance assessment
report to the ERO.
    Submitting an application to become the ERO is also part of this
collection.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Commission does not expect any new ERO applications to
be submitted in the next five years and is not including any burden
for this requirement in the burden estimate. FERC still seeks to
renew the regulations pertaining to a new ERO application under this
renewal but is expecting the burden to be zero for the foreseeable
future. 18 CFR 39.3 contains the regulation pertaining to ERO
applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Reliability Assessments: 18 CFR 39.11 requires the ERO to assess
the reliability and adequacy of the Bulk-Power System in North America.
Subsequently, the ERO must report to the Commission on its findings.
Regional entities perform similar assessments within individual
regions. Currently the ERO submits to FERC three assessments each year:
Long term, winter, and summer. In addition, the North American Electric
Reliability

Corporation (NERC, the Commission-approved ERO) also submits various
other assessments as needed.
    Reliability Standards Development: Under section 215 of the FPA,
the ERO is charged with developing Reliability Standards. Regional
Entities may also develop regional specific standards.
    Reliability Compliance: Reliability Standards are mandatory and
enforceable upon approval by the Commission. In addition to the
specific information collection requirements contained in each standard
(cleared under other information collections), there are general
compliance, monitoring and enforcement information collection
requirements imposed on applicable entities. Audits, spot checks, self-
certifications, exception data submittals, violation reporting, and
mitigation plan confirmation are included in this area.
    Stakeholder Survey: The ERO uses a stakeholder survey to solicit
feedback from registered entities \2\ in preparation for its three year
and five year self-performance assessment. The Commission assumes that
the ERO will perform another survey prior to the 2019 self-assessment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A ``registered entity'' is an entity that is registered with
the ERO. All Bulk-Power System owners, operators and users are
required to register with the ERO. Registration is the basis for
determining the Reliability Standards with which an entity must
comply. See http://www.nerc.com/page.php?cid=3%7C25 for more
details.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other Reporting: This category refers to all other reporting
requirements imposed on the ERO or regional entities in order to comply
with the Commission's regulations. For example, FERC may require NERC
to submit a special reliability assessment. This category captures
these types of one-time filings required of NERC or the Regions.
    The Commission implements its responsibilities through 18 CFR part
39.
    Type of Respondent: Electric Reliability Organization, Regional
entities, and registered entities.
    Summary and Response to Public Comment: In response to the Notice
of Information Collection and Request for Comments published in the
Federal Register on September 21, 2018, the Commission received one
comment from Utility Services, Inc. The comment sought clarification on
certain compliance provisions contained in the Rules of Procedure of
the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), which are
approved by the Commission. The comment maintained that, depending on
the Commission's answer, the information collection burden on
applicable entities associated with the application of the NERC Rules
of Procedure could be affected.
    The Commission finds this proceeding is not the proper forum to
request clarification regarding the scope and application of the NERC
Rules of Procedure. Such requests may be directed to NERC or, more
formally, through a petition to the Commission proposing changes to the
NERC Rules of Procedure. Such a request, if filed with the Commission,
would be addressed after notice and opportunity for comment and the
development of a record. By contrast, while the comment states that the
request for clarification is motivated by uncertainty among applicable
entities (i.e., the commenter's unnamed clients), that assertion is
unsubstantiated. In addition, the provisions in the NERC Rules of
Procedure referenced by the commenter were approved by the Commission
in response to a petition filed by NERC, to which no comments were
received.
    Estimate of Annual Burden: \3\ The Commission estimates the total
annual burden and cost \4\ for this information collection in the table
below. For hourly cost (for wages and benefits), we estimate that 70%
of the time is spent by Electrical Engineers (code 17-2071, at $66.90/
hr.), 20% of the time is spent by Legal (code 23-0000, at $143.68/hr.),
and 10% by Office and Administrative Support (code 43-0000, at $41.34/
hr.). Therefore, we use the weighted hourly cost (for wages and
benefits) of $79.70 {or [(0.70) * ($66.90/hr.)] + [(0.20) * $143.68/
hr.] + [(0.10) * $41.34/hr.]{time} .
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Burden'' is the total time, effort, or financial resources
expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or
provide information to or for a Federal agency. For further
explanation of what is included in the information collection
burden, refer to Title 5 Code of Federal Regulations 1320.3.
    \4\ Costs (for wages and benefits) are based on wage figures
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for May 2017 (at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and benefits information (at
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm).
    \5\ In instances where the number of responses per respondent is
``1,'' the Commission Staff thinks that the actual number of
responses varies and cannot be estimated accurately.

                       FERC-725--Certification of Electric Reliability Organization; Procedures for Electric Reliability Standards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                             Annual number                   Average burden hours     Estimated total
         Type of respondent            Type of reporting       Number of     of responses    Total number       & cost ($) per      annual burden hrs. &
                                          requirement         respondents   per respondent   of responses     response (rounded)     cost ($) (rounded)
                                     .....................             (A)         (B) \5\     (A) x (B) =  (D)..................  (C) x (D)
                                                                                (C)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric Reliability Organization    Self-Assessment......  ..............              .2              .2  4,160 hrs.; $331,552.  832 hrs.; $66,310.
 (ERO).
                                     Reliability            ..............             5.5             5.5  15,600 hrs.;           85,800 hrs.;
                                      Assessments.                                                           $1,243,320.            $6,838,260.
                                     Reliability            ..............               2               2  20,280 hrs.;           40,560 hrs.;
                                      Compliance.                                                            $1,616,316.            $3,232,632.
                                     Standards Development  ..............               1               1  21,840 hrs.;           21,840 hrs.;
                                                                                $1,740,648.            $1,740,648.
                                     Other Reporting......               1               1               1  2,080 hrs.; $165,776.  2,080 hrs.; $165,776.
                                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ERO, Sub-Total.................  .....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .....................  151,112 hrs.;
                                                                                $12,043,626.
Regional Entities..................  Self-Assessment......  ..............              .2             1.4  4,160 hrs.; $331,552.  5,824 hrs.; $464,173.
                                     Reliability            ..............               1               7  15,600 hrs.;           109,200 hrs.;
                                      Assessments.                                                           $1,243,320.            $8,703,240.
                                     Reliability            ..............               1               7  37,440 hrs.;           262,080 hrs.;
                                      Compliance.                                                            $2,983,968.            $20,887,776.
                                     Standards Development  ..............               1               7  2,340 hrs.; $186,498.  16,380 hrs.;
                                                                                $1,305,486.
                                     Other Reporting......               7               1               7  1,040 hrs.; $82,888..  7,280 hrs.; $580,216.
                                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Regional Entities, Sub-Total...  .....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .....................  400,764 hrs.;
                                                                                $31,940,891.
Registered Entities................  Stakeholder Survey...  ..............              .2           281.8  8 hrs.; $637.60......  2,254 hrs.; $179,676.
                                     Reliability                   * 1,409               1           1,409  400 hrs.; $31,880....  563,600 hrs.;
                                      Compliance.                                                                                $44,918,920.
                                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Registered Entities, Sub-Total.  .....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .....................  565,854 hrs.;
                                                                                $45,098,596.
                                                           ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Burden Hrs. and Cost.....  .....................  ..............  ..............  ..............  .....................  1,117,730 hrs.;
                                                                                $89,083,113.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Estimated.

    As indicated in the table, there was a decrease from eight to seven
in the number of Regional Entities because the Southwest Power Pool
dissolved in 2018. Other changes from previous estimates are based on
new data in the proposed NERC 2019 Business Plan and Budget to reflect
changes in the number of FTEs (full-time equivalent employees) working
in applicable areas. Reviewing the NERC Compliance database, we
determined the number of unique U.S. entities is 1,409 (compared to the
previous value of 1,446). Lastly, in several instances, the amount of
time an FTE devotes to a given function may have been increased or
decreased.
    Comments: Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of
the Commission, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden and
cost of the collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility and clarity of the information collection; and (4) ways to
minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are
to respond, including the use of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.

     Dated: January 9, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2019-00452 Filed 1-30-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: September 9, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 175)]
[Notices]
[Page 52339-52340]
[DOCID:fr09se08-59]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 6902-072]

City of Martinsville, WV, American Municipal Power-Ohio, Inc.;
Notice of Application for Transfer of License, and Soliciting Comments,
Motions To Intervene, and Protests

September 3, 2008.
    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Application Type: Transfer of License.
    b. Project No.: 6902-072.
    c. Date Filed: August 19, 2008.
    d. Applicants: City of Martinsville, WV (transferor); American
Municipal Power-Ohio, Inc. (transferee).
    e. Name and Location of Project: The Willow Island Lock and Dam
Project is located on the Ohio River in Pleasants County, West Virginia
and Washington County, Ohio.
    f. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    g. Applicant Contacts: For the transferor: Francis E. Francis, City
of Martinsville, WV, C/O Spiegel & McDiarmid, 1333 New Hampshire
Avenue, Washington, DC 20036.
    For the transferee: Michael A. Swiger, American Municipal Power-
Ohio, Inc., C/O Van Ness Feldman, 1050 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20007-3877.
    h. FERC Contact: Robert Bell at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    i. Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to
intervene: September 15, 2008.
    All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:
Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and
interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of
paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the
Commission's Web site under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission
strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the Project
Number on any comments or motions filed.
    The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all
intervenors filing a document with the Commission to serve a copy of
that document on each person in the official service list for the
project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the documents on that resource agency.
    j. Description of Application: The Applicants seek Commission
approval to transfer the license for the Willow Island Lock and Dam
Project from City of Martinsville, WV to American Municipal Power-Ohio,
Inc.
    k. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the
Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at
http://www.ferc.gov using the ``FERRIS'' link. Enter the docket number
(P-9985) in the docket number field to access the document. For
assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the addresses in item
g. above.
    l. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    m. Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene--Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    n. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents--Any filings must
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'', as applicable, and the Project Number of the
particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-
named documents must be filed by providing the original and eight
copies to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any
motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the
Applicants specified in the particular application.
    o. Agency Comments--Federal, State, and local agencies are invited
to file comments on the described application. A copy of the
application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicants.
If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for
filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of
an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicants'
representatives.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-20866 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 81 (Wednesday, April 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 23580]
[FR Doc No: 2011-10058]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER11-3377-000]

Horseshoe Bend Wind, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial
Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
Horseshoe Bend Wind, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is May 10, 2011.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: April 20, 2011.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-10058 Filed 4-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P