[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 146 (Friday, July 29, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50036-50041]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17910]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78407; File No. SR-CBOE-2016-057]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Chicago Board Options Exchange,
Incorporated; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of a
Proposed Rule Change Relating to Tied to Stock Orders

July 25, 2016.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on July 21, 2016, Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated
(the ``Exchange'' or ``CBOE'') filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described
in Items I and II below, which Items have been prepared by the
Exchange. The Exchange filed the proposal as a ``non-controversial''
proposed rule change pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(iii) of the Act
\3\ and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\4\ The Commission is publishing
this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from
interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A)(iii).
    \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    The proposed rule change deletes Rules 6.53(y), 6.77(e) and 15.2A.
The text of the proposed rule change is provided below.

(additions are underlined; deletions are [bracketed])
* * * * *
Chicago Board Options Exchange, Incorporated Rules
* * * * *
Rule 6.53. Certain Types of Orders Defined
    One or more of the following order types may be made available on a
class-by-class basis. Certain order types may not be made available for
all Exchange systems. The classes and/or systems for which the order
types shall be available will be as provided in the Rules, as the
context may indicate, or as otherwise specified via Regulatory
Circular.
    (a)-(x) No change.
    [(y) Tied to Stock Order. An order is ``tied to stock'' if, at the
time the Trading Permit Holder representing the order on the Exchange
receives or initiates the order, the Trading Permit Holder has
knowledge that the order is coupled with an order(s) for the underlying
stock or a security convertible into the underlying stock
(``convertible security''). The representing Trading Permit Holder must
include an indicator on each tied to stock order upon systemization,
unless:
    (i) The order is submitted to the Exchange as part of a qualified
contingent cross order (as defined in this Rule 6.53) through an
Exchange-approved device;
    (ii) the order is submitted to the Exchange for electronic
processing as a stock-option order (as defined in Rule 6.53C); or
    (iii) all of the component orders are systematized on a single
order ticket.
    An order is not ``tied to stock'' if it is not coupled with an
order(s) for the underlying stock or convertible security at the time
of receipt or initiation (e.g., an option order that is received or
initiated to hedge a previously executed stock transaction, an option
transaction or position that is hedged with a subsequently received or
initiated stock order).]
    . . . Interpretations and Policies:
    .01-.02 No change.
* * * * *
Rule 6.77. Order Service Firms
    (a)-(d) No change.
    [(e) Order service firms must submit reports pursuant to Rule 15.2A
with respect to the stock transactions it executes on behalf of market-
makers pursuant to this Rule 6.77.]
* * * * *
[Rule 15.2A. Reports of Execution of Stock Transactions
    In a manner and form prescribed by the Exchange, each Trading
Permit Holder must, on the business day following the order execution
date, report to the Exchange the following information for the executed
stock or convertible security legs of QCC orders, stock-option orders
and other tied to stock orders that the Trading Permit Holder executed
on the Exchange that trading day: (a) Time of execution, (b) execution
quantity, (c) execution price, (d) venue of execution, and (e) any
other information requested by the Exchange. A Trading Permit Holder
may arrange for its clearing firm to submit these reports on its
behalf; provided that if the clearing firm does not report an executed
stock order, the Trading Permit Holder will be responsible for
reporting the information.
    . . . Interpretation and Policies:

    .01 The Exchange will announce by Regulatory Circular any
determinations, including the manner and form of the report, that it
makes pursuant to Rule 15.2A.
    .02 A Trading Permit Holder (or its clearing firm) does not need to
report information pursuant to Rule 15.2A with respect to (a) stock-
option orders (as defined in Rule 6.53C) submitted to the Exchange for
electronic processing or (b) stock or convertible security orders
entered into an Exchange-approved device.
    .03 A Market-Maker (or its clearing firm) may include the
information required by Rule 15.2A in the equity reports submitted to
the Exchange pursuant to Rule 8.9(b).
    .04 If a tied to stock order executed at multiple options
exchanges, a Trading Permit Holder (or its clearing firm) may report to
the Exchange the information pursuant to Rule 15.2A for the entire
stock or convertible security component(s) rather than the portion of
the stock or convertible security component(s) applicable to the
portion of the order that executed at the Exchange.
    .05 In lieu of the time of execution pursuant to Rule 15.2A(a), the
Exchange may accept the time of the trade report if that time is
generally within 90 seconds of the time of execution.]
* * * * *
    The text of the proposed rule change is also available on the
Exchange's Web site (http://www.cboe.com/AboutCBOE/CBOELegalRegulatoryHome.aspx), at the Exchange's Office of the
Secretary, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

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

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

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

1. Purpose
    On August 13, 2014, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') approved CBOE Rules 6.53(y), 6.77(e) and 15.2A.\5\ Rule
6.53(y) defines a tied to stock order \6\ and requires the representing
Trading Permit Holder to include an indicator on each tied to stock
order upon systemization, subject to certain exceptions. Rule 15.2A
requires, in a manner and form prescribed by the Exchange, each Trading
Permit Holder (``TPH''), on the business day following the order
execution date, to report to the Exchange certain information regarding
the executed stock or convertible security legs of qualified contingent
cross (``QCC'') orders,\7\ stock-option orders and other tied to stock
orders that the TPH executed on the Exchange that trading day. Rule
6.77(e) subjects order service firms \8\ to the reporting requirements
set forth in Rule 15.2A with respect to stock transactions they execute
on behalf of market-makers on the floor of the Exchange. The Exchange
stated in rule filing SR-CBOE-2014-040 that it would issue a circular
announcing the implementation date for these rules within 90 days of
the date of filing, which implementation date would be within 180 days
of the date of filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Securities Exchange Act release No. 34-72839 (August 13,
2014), 79 FR 49123 (August 19, 2014) (SR-CBOE-2014-040).
    \6\ Rule 6.53(y) provides that an order is ``tied to stock'' if,
at the time the Trading Permit Holder representing the order on the
Exchange receives the order (if the order is a customer order) or
initiates the order (if the order is a proprietary order), has
knowledge that the order is coupled with an order(s) for the
underlying stock or a security convertible into the underlying stock
(``convertible security'' and, together with underlying stock,
``non-option'').
    \7\ A QCC order is an order to buy (sell) at least 1,000
standard option contracts or 10,000 mini-option contracts that is
identified as being part of a qualified contingent trade coupled
with a contra-side order to sell (buy) an equal number of contracts.
These orders may only be entered in the standard increments
applicable to simple orders in the options class under Rule 6.42.
For purposes of this order type, a ``qualified contingent trade'' is
a transaction consisting of two or more component orders, executed
as agent or principal, where: (a) At least one component is an NMS
stock, as defined in Rule 600 of Regulation NMS under the Act; (b)
all components are effected with a product or price contingency that
either has been agreed to by all the respective counterparties or
arranged for by a broker-dealer as principal or agent; (c) the
execution of one component is contingent upon the execution of all
other components at or near the same time; (d) the specific
relationship between the component orders (e.g., the spread between
the prices of the component orders) is determined by the time the
contingent order is placed; (e) the component orders bear a
derivative relationship to one another, represent different classes
of shares of the same issuer, or involve the securities of
participants in mergers or with intentions to merge that have been
announced or cancelled; and (f) the transaction is fully hedged
(without regard to any prior existing position) as a result of other
components of the contingent trade. QCC orders may execute without
exposure provided the execution is not at the same price as a public
customer order resting in the electronic book and is at or between
the national best bid or offer. A QCC order will be cancelled if it
cannot be executed. See Rule 6.53(u).
    \8\ Order service firms are TPH organizations that are
registered with the Exchange for the purpose of taking orders for
the purchase or sale of stocks or commodity futures contracts (and
options thereon) from market-makers on the floor of the Exchange and
forwarding such orders for execution. Rule 6.77(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 7, 2015, CBOE submitted a rule filing to delay the
implementation of these rules based on feedback it received from
TPHs.\9\ The Exchange stated in that rule filing that it would issue a
circular announcing the implementation date for the rules within 90
days of the date of the rule filing, which implementation date would be
within 180 days of the date of filing. In accordance with that filing,
the Exchange issued a regulatory circular on April 7, 2015, which
announced a July 1, 2015 implementation date for the tied to stock
marking and reporting requirements.\10\ On May 20, 2015, the Exchange
submitted a rule filing to further delay implementation of the
reporting requirement set forth in Rule 15.2A \11\ for 12 to 18 months
in order to evaluate the format of the reports in light of its entry
into a Regulatory Services Agreement with the Financial Industry
Regulatory Authority, Inc. (``FINRA'') \12\ to ensure information in
the reports could be incorporated into surveillances in an efficient
and effective manner. In that filing, CBOE announced its intention to
proceed with the implementation of the marking requirements set forth
in Rule 6.53(y) on July 1, 2015. On July 1, 2015, the Exchange
submitted a rule filing to further delay implementation of the marking
requirement set forth in Rule 6.53(y) with respect to orders submitted
to the Exchange for electronic processing for six to 18 months (the
filing confirmed implementation of the marking requirement with respect
to orders submitted to the Exchange for

nonelectronic processing).\13\ In addition to the evaluation of the
proposed report format, CBOE indicated it intended to review the number
of tied to stock orders received and evaluate the number of reports it
could expect to receive with respect to those orders and the potential
impact of the reports on CBOE surveillances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-74067 (January 15,
2015), 80 FR 3267 (January 22, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-004).
    \10\ CBOE Regulatory Circular RG15-056 (April 7, 2015).
    \11\ Pursuant to CBOE Regulatory Circular RG13-102 (July 19,
2013), CBOE imposed a reporting requirement with respect to QCC
orders prior to the adoption of Rule 15.2A. As stated in that
circular, as long as the QCC functionality remains active, the
reporting requirement for QCC orders described in Regulatory
Circular RG13-102 would continue to be in effect until the
implementation of Rule 15.2A. Once implemented, the reporting
requirement in Rule 15.2A would supersede the QCC order reporting
requirement described in that circular. See also CBOE Regulatory
Circular RG15-087 (May 29, 2015).
    \12\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-75029 (May 21,
2015), 80 FR 30506 (May 28, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-051) (notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change).
    \13\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-75378 (July 7,
2016), 80 FR 40116 (July 13, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-067) (notice of
filing and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule change); see
also CBOE Regulatory Circular RG15-093 (June 19, 2015). CBOE notes
that it performed the systems work necessary for Exchange-approved
devices the Exchange makes available to floor brokers to have the
functionality to allow floor brokers to mark orders as tied to stock
at the time of systemization of the order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on this evaluation, the Exchange does not believe it is
necessary to maintain or fully implement the marking requirement or
implement the reporting requirement; therefore, the Exchange proposes
to delete these requirements in their entirety from its rules.\14\
Because the definition of tied to stock orders is only used in the
rules for the marking and reporting requirements, the proposed rule
change also deletes the definition of tied to stock orders. While CBOE
continues to believe this type of information would benefit its cross-
market activity surveillances, based on our evaluation, CBOE believes
the requirements would apply to only a small number of orders.\15\
During the evaluation period discussed above (during which the tied to
stock marking requirement was in effect for orders submitted to the
Exchange for nonelectronic processing), fewer than 0.25% of orders
submitted to the Exchange for nonelectronic processing included the
tied to stock indicator.\16\ If the marking and reporting requirements
were fully implemented, the number of orders to which they would apply
would be limited given the exceptions that currently exist in the rules
and other changes that CBOE has implemented. For example, subsequent to
the approval of SR-CBOE-2015-040, the Exchange amended CBOE Rule 6.53
to require complex orders of twelve (12) legs or less--one leg of which
may be for an underlying security or security future, as applicable--to
be entered on a single order ticket at time of systemization (referred
to herein as the ``single order ticket rule change'').\17\ These orders
are excepted from the tied to stock marking requirement under Rule
6.53(y)(iii) (which provides an exception if all the component orders
of a tied to stock order are systemized on a single order ticket) and
would often qualify for an exception from the reporting requirement
under Rule 15.2A (e.g., the exceptions under Interpretation and Policy
.02 which apply to (1) stock-option orders (as defined in Rule 6.53C)
submitted to the Exchange for electronic processing or (2) stock or
convertible securities orders entered onto an Exchange-approved
device). The single order ticket rule change--as well as provisions in
the rules exempting certain orders from the tied to stock marking and
reporting requirements--result in a number of orders qualifying for an
exemption from the tied to stock marking and reporting requirements.
This, in turn, reduces the number of orders to which the tied to stock
marking and reporting requirements would apply once implemented. As a
result, at this time, CBOE believes the benefits to its surveillances
for so few orders are outweighed by the additional costs to TPHs to
implement the marking requirement (for orders submitted for electronic
processing) and the reporting requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ As discussed above, prior to the adoption of Rule 15.2A,
the Exchange required TPHs to submit reports of stock trades related
to QCC transactions. This QCC stock leg reporting requirement
continued to apply during the delay to implementation of Rule 15.2A
and will continue to apply after deletion of the tied to stock
reporting requirement from the Rules. See supra note 11.
    \15\ As set forth in Rule 6.53(y), orders coupled with an order
for stock are defined as tied to stock orders; however, various tied
to stock orders are exempt from the marking requirement, including
QCC orders, stock-option orders submitted for electronic processing,
and orders for which all components are systematized on a single
order ticket. Similarly, as set forth in Rule 15.2A, Interpretation
and Policy .02, TPHs do not need to submit reports for stock-option
orders submitted to the Exchange for electronic processing or stock
or convertible security orders entered into an Exchange-approved
device. As a result, only a subset of tied to stock orders would be
subject to the marking and reporting requirements.
    \16\ Specifically, during the third quarter of 2015, the fourth
quarter of 2015 and the first quarter of 2016, the percentage of
orders submitted to the Exchange for nonelectronic processing that
included the tied to stock indictor was approximately 0.17%, 0.16%
and 0.21%, respectively.
    \17\ See Rule 6.53, Interpretation and Policy 02. In addition,
orders of more than twelve (12) legs (one leg of which may be for an
underlying security or security future, as applicable) may be split
across multiple order tickets subject to certain requirements. See
Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 34-74389 (February 26, 2015),
80 FR 11717 (March 4, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-011) and 34-75026 (May 21,
2015), 80 FR 30514 (May 28, 2015) (SR-CBOE-2015-048). Mandatory
compliance with this requirement went into effect June 1, 2015. See
CBOE Regulatory Circulars RG15-067 (April 22, 2015) and RG15-092
(June 17, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CBOE acknowledged in the initial filing to adopt the tied to stock
marking and reporting requirements relevant stock information would be
captured by the Consolidated Audit Trail (``CAT''), once the relevant
CAT provisions have been approved and implemented. Specifically, once
approved and implemented, Section 6.3 of the National Market System
Plan Governing the Consolidated Audit Trail would require each national
securities exchange to record and report to the CAT central repository
specified information for each order and execution, among other things,
on its exchange for eligible securities, which include stock and listed
options.\18\ Additionally, once approved and implemented, Section 6.4
of the Plan would require each national securities exchange to require
its members to report certain data to the central repository specified
information for each order and execution for eligible securities, among
other things.\19\ Under the Plan, as proposed, the central repository
would be responsible for the receipt, consolidation and retention of
all information reported to CAT pursuant to Rule 613 under Regulation
NMS.\20\ Exchanges would have access to the central repository,
including access to and use of the CAT data stored in the central
repository, for the purpose of performing their respective regulatory
and oversight responsibilities pursuant to federal securities laws,
rules and regulations.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 34-77724 (April 27,
2016), 81 FR 30614 (May 17, 2016) (notice of filing of the National
Market System Plan Governing the Consolidated Audit Trail (the
``Plan'')), at Section 6.3(d); see also 17 CFR 242.600(b)(46)
(definition of NMS security).
    \19\ See id. at Section 6.4(d).
    \20\ See id. at Section 1.1.
    \21\ See id. at Section 6.5(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the time of that initial tied to stock filing, the Exchange
expected implementation of CAT would not occur for several years.
However, since that time, an amended and restated version of the Plan
has been submitted by the self-regulatory organizations to the
Commission and published by the Commission for comment and
approval.\22\ As a result, the Exchange believes the implementation of
CAT may occur in the near future. The order and execution information
described above that would be reported to CAT is the same information
that the tied to stock reporting requirement was designed to capture
from TPHs. Because the Exchange would have access to this information
from the CAT central repository once implemented, CBOE no longer
believes the short-term benefits it may obtain from the tied to stock
marking and reporting requirements prior to the implementation of CAT
outweigh the costs to be undertaken by

CBOE and TPHs in connection with efforts related to CAT's
implementation, especially in light of the small number of orders
expected to be impacted by the tied to stock requirements, as discussed
above.\23\ The Exchange also notes it may continue to request from TPHs
information regarding stock executions when necessary to perform cross-
market surveillances in connection with its regulatory duties.\24\ The
marking and reporting requirements were intended to reduce TPHs' and
the Exchange's administrative burden of manually gathering cross-market
information to tie non-option legs to option orders. Because the
Exchange has not yet implemented the reporting requirement, since
approval of the initial tied to stock rule filing, the Exchange has
continued, and will continue, to maintain the ability with this manual
process of requesting information, as necessary or appropriate. The
Exchange has, and expects to continue to have, sufficient resources to
perform these ad hoc reviews in connection with its surveillances,
particularly given the reduced number of orders with a stock component
for which CBOE may need this information and the implementation of the
single order ticket rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See id.
    \23\ While the Plan does not require orders to be marked as tied
to stock, because the Exchange will have access to all order and
execution information for stock and options through the central
depository, including timing information, the Exchange would not
need those orders to be marked. The purpose of the marking
requirement was to notify the Exchange the TPH that submitted a tied
to stock option order on CBOE would separately be submitting
execution information for a stock trade related to that marked
option order.
    \24\ See SR-CBOE-2014-040.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule change is consistent with
the Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to the
Exchange and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6(b) of the
Act.\25\ Specifically, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change
is consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \26\ requirements that the rules
of an exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts
and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest.
Additionally, the Exchange believes the proposed rule change is
consistent with the Section 6(b)(5) \27\ requirement that the rules of
an exchange not be designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \26\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \27\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In particular, CBOE believes it efficiently and effectively
conducts its regulatory surveillances of CBOE trading activity and
cross-market trading activity. While the information that would be
provided to CBOE from the tied to stock marking and reporting
requirements would enhance these surveillances, based on an evaluation
of the factors described above, CBOE has determined these enhancements
would apply to a small number of orders. The single order ticket rule
change--as well as provisions in the rules exempting certain orders
from the tied to stock marking and reporting requirements--result in a
number of orders qualifying for an exemption from the tied to stock
marking and reporting requirements. This, in turn, further reduces the
number of orders to which the tied to stock marking and reporting
requirements would apply once implemented. As a result, CBOE no longer
believes the benefits to its surveillances for a smaller number of
orders that may be obtained from implementation of these requirements
outweigh the additional costs to TPHs to implement the marking
requirement for orders submitted for electronic processing and the
reporting requirement. As discussed above, during an evaluation period
when the marking requirement for orders submitted for nonelectronic
processing was effective, fewer than 0.25% of orders submitted for
nonelectronic processing included the tied to stock indicator.
Additionally, as discussed above, CAT will capture this information, at
which time CBOE will be able to realize these potential benefits. CBOE
may continue to request from TPHs information regarding stock
executions when necessary so that it can continue to effectively
conduct its regulatory surveillances of CBOE trading activity and
cross-market activity.
    The proposed rule change has minimal impact on TPHs. With respect
to orders submitted to the Exchange for electronic processing, there
will be no change for TPHs, as they are currently not required, and no
longer will be in the future, to mark tied to stock orders (or perform
the system development work to comply with this marking requirement).
Additionally, TPHs currently are not required, and no longer will be in
the future, to submit reports related to tied to stock orders.\28\ With
respect to orders submitted to the Exchange for nonelectronic
processing, floor brokers will no longer be required to mark those
orders upon systemization, which was a small number of orders as noted
above. The marking and reporting requirements were intended to reduce
TPHs' and the Exchange's administrative burden of manually gathering
cross-market information to tie non-option legs to option orders.
Because the Exchange has not yet implemented the reporting requirement,
since approval of the initial tied to stock rule filing, the Exchange
has continued, and will continue, to maintain the ability with this
manual process of requesting information, as necessary or appropriate.
Deletion of these requirements merely changes the timing when TPHs may
need to submit information regarding tied to stock orders (within one
business day of execution of a tied to stock order v. in response to a
regulatory request). The Exchange has, and expects to continue to have,
sufficient resources to perform these ad hoc reviews in connection with
its surveillances, particularly given the reduced number of orders with
a stock component for which CBOE may need this information and the
implementation of the single order ticket rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ As discussed above, prior to the adoption of Rule 15.2A,
the Exchange required TPHs to submit reports of stock trades related
to QCC transactions. This QCC stock leg reporting requirement
continued to apply during the delay to implementation of Rule 15.2A
and will continue to apply after deletion of the tied to stock
reporting requirement from the Rules. See supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The term tied to stock order is used only in the rules for the tied
to stock marking and reporting requirements, which this filing proposes
to delete. Therefore, the Exchange believes deleting the definition is
consistent with the Act, as continued inclusion of the definition of a
term not used elsewhere in the rules would otherwise confuse investors.

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

    CBOE does not believe that the proposed rule change will impose any
burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The proposed rule change
deletes rules the Exchange only partially implemented. With respect to
orders submitted to the Exchange for electronic processing, there will
be no change for TPHs, as

they are currently not required, and no longer will be in the future,
to mark tied to stock orders (or perform the system development work to
comply with this marking requirement). Additionally, TPHs currently are
not required, and no longer will be in the future, to submit reports
related to tied to stock orders.\29\ With respect to orders submitted
to the Exchange for nonelectronic processing, floor brokers will no
longer be required to mark those orders upon systemization. The
Exchange notes that floor brokers were not burdened with any costs upon
implementation of that limited marking requirements, as CBOE was
responsible for that development work for devices that floor brokers
may use to systematize orders represented in open outcry. Therefore,
deletion of these rules has no impact on TPHs with respect to orders
submitted for electronic processing and eliminates a requirement for
floor brokers to include an indicator on a small number of orders. As
the Exchange never implement the reporting requirement for any orders,
deletion of that rule will have no impact on TPHs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

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

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

    Because the proposed rule change does not: (i) Significantly affect
the protection of investors or the public interest; (ii) impose any
significant burden on competition; and (iii) become operative prior to
30 days from the date on which it was filed, or such shorter time as
the Commission may designate, if consistent with the protection of
investors and the public interest, the proposed rule change has become
effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act and Rule 19b-
4(f)(6)(iii) thereunder.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) requires the Exchange to
give the Commission written notice of the Exchange's intent to file
the proposed rule change, along with a brief description and text of
the proposed rule change, at least five business days prior to the
date of filing of the proposed rule change, or such shorter time as
designated by the Commission. The Exchange has satisfied this
requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A proposed rule change filed under Rule 19b-4(f)(6) \31\ normally
does not become operative prior to 30 days after the date of the
filing. However, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii) \32\ permits the Commission to
designate a shorter time if such action is consistent with the
protection of investors and the public interest. The Exchange has asked
the Commission to waive the 30-day operative delay so that the proposal
may become operative immediately upon filing. The Exchanges requests a
waiver because of the minimal impact this proposed rule change will
have on TPHs, the small number of orders to which the tied to stock
marking and reporting requirements would apply, and the Exchange's
continued ability to access to information regarding stock executions
by requesting it from TPHs when necessary so that it can continue to
effectively conduct its regulatory surveillances of CBOE trading
activity and cross-market activity. Additionally, the Exchange notes
that in the rule filings to delay implementation of the marking
requirement set forth in Rule 6.53(y) with respect to orders submitted
to the Exchange for electronic processing and the reporting requirement
set forth in Rule 15.2A, the Exchange has stated that it would
implement these requirements by July 1, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6).
    \32\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that waiver of the 30-day operative delay
is consistent with the protection of investors and the public interest.
The Commission notes that the Exchange notes that: (1) The number of
orders to which the tied to stock marking and reporting requirements
would apply are low and (2) even without the marking and reporting
requirements, the Exchange has, and expects to continue to have,
sufficient resources to perform ad hoc reviews in connection with its
surveillance. Accordingly, the Commission hereby waives the 30-day
operative delay and designates the proposed rule change as operative
upon filing.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ For purposes only of waiving the 30-day operative delay,
the Commission has also considered the proposed rule's impact on
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. See 15 U.S.C.
78c(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed rule
change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \34\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

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

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-CBOE-2016-057 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

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

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2016-057. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-CBOE-2016-057 and should be
submitted on or before August 19, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\35\
Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-17910 Filed 7-28-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Janet Cakir/RTP/USEPA/US

09/24/2007 05:09 PM

To

<EMAIL_ADDRESS> cc

Lisa Conner/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Ron Evans/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Subject

Ozone Final RIA Kick-Off between EPA/OAR/OAQPS and OMB

Rob,

     Thanks for arranging to meet with us this Friday.  I'd like to do a quick overview of our plans for the Ozone Final RIA and then take some time to identify and discuss any carry-over issues from the proposal.  The call-in for 1:00 on Friday is<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Thanks,

Janet

_______________________________________

Janet F. Cakir, Ph.D.

Environmental Protection Specialist

Air Benefits Cost Group

109 TW Alexander Dr., (C439-02)

Research Triangle Park, NC 27711

Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>

Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>

email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>


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 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: 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 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 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. OMB Control # 2060 0482 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant SECTIONS OF WORKBOOK 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.

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 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. 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 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" 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. 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 Cell Fax 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?

4401 E. Colonial Dr.; Box 140155 Agronomic Orlando, FL 32814 0155 Economic Agronomic Economic 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 Michael J. Aerts I certify that all information contained in this document is factual to the best of my knowledge.

Signature 11 Aug 03 Asst. Director, Environmental and Pest Management Division, FFVA Title Signature 11 Aug 03 Date Print Name Michael J. Aerts If yes, the applicant assumes responsibility for the secure transmission of electronic submissions.

Applicant Name Primary Contact Contact Name ( Check One) Specialty Michael J. Aerts or Daniel A. Botts Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association Specialty E mail Address Address Daytime Phone Daytime Phone E mail Address Alternate Contact Contact Name ( 407) 894 1351 ( 407) 257 4694 or ( 407) 257 6148 maerts@ ffva. com or dan@ ffva. com ( 407) 894 7840 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. 1. Location 2. Crop/ Crop Grouping 3.

cannot determine cannot determine cannot determine 4. Climate Zone Zones: ( check all that apply)

5. Soil Type & Organic Matter Light 95% Medium x Heavy 0 to 2 % x 2 to 5 % x over 5 %

6. Yes Pounds No x 7. Yes CUE #

No x 8.

Year 2005 Acres 2006 Acres 2007 Acres 9.

10.

11. Yes Lbs No x 12. Yes Lbs Please explain why methyl bromide is being requested. ( Insert number or percentage of users in each category) 0  25 acres lbs. 1,600 lbs. What is the amount of methyl bromide being requested by this application ? ( Do NOT include QPS amounts)

214,400 200  400 acres 25  50 acres 50  100 acres cannot determine cannot determine ( Enter the state, region, or county.)

Florida 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".)

Eggplants  Statewide Has this applicant previously applied for Critical Use Exemption of methyl bromide? Range of acres farmed by growers included in this application 100  200 acres ( Indicate the soil type and percent organic matter where methyl bromide would be applied.)

Soil Type:

Organic Matter:

Is this applicant eligible for Quarantine and Preshipment ( QPS) uses of methyl bromide?

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 crop yield and quality. preplant fumigation. The variation in consistency with alternatives at the present time presents unacceptable risks to both Do you have access to recycled methyl bromide?

If yes, please specify amount ( in pounds). 1,600 1,600 Worksheet 1. Contact and Methyl Bromide Request Information Total Pounds Active Ingredient ( a. i.) of Methyl Bromide 214,400 Total Area to be Treated ( check all that apply) ** The average farm size of a grower is about 400 acres. Some double cropping takes place in southwest part of the state.

( 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_ 6%___ 9a__ 11%__ 9b_ 11%___ 10a_ 55%__ 10b__ 17%__ **

over 400 acres OMB Control # 2060 0482 lbs. 214,400 Please explain why there may be variations in the pounds or acres treated from year to year. No x storage after January 1, 2005? If yes, please specify amount ( in pounds).

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*

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 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 Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps Which month does your fumigation cycle start? ( check only one)

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

Comments:

narrative. See page 14. Other key crop steps include items such as pruning, tying, mulch removal, string removal and Other key pest steps include insecticide, fungicide and herbicide applications, burndown of crop and cover cropping. stake removal where practices. Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Crop & Pest Information Fumigation Cycle Start is dependent on regionally differences. See Eggplant Production Timeline on page 14 of the narrative. Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association, Eggplants ( 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.) OMB Control # 2060 0482 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 See narrative, page 14. 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 : Nutsedge Root Knot Nematodes Morningglory Cyperus rotundus & C. esculentus Meloidogyne spp.

Ipomoea spp.

Low Density/ Undefined Nightshade Solanum spp.

Source See Narrative, pages 23 and 24.

Other descriptive factors regarding representative user: Acres Acres ( Please provide descriptive factors regarding your operation.)

Average Farm Size Average acres in this crop Average Area Treated with Methyl Bromide: Acres Southern Blight Schlerosium rolfsii See pages 22 and 23 of the narrative. ( 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.)

Common Name Genus Low Density/ Undefined Describe a few crops that could follow this crop: 200 200 cucurbits*

* For double crop on the same plastic, we have used cucumber as the model for budget purposes; other cucurbits may be planted. Percentage of Total Growing Area Source Threshold Low Density/ Undefined Units ( e. g. pests/ sq ft) EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant OMB Control # 2060 0482 Worksheet 2 A. Methyl Bromide  Crop & Pest Information Low Density/ Undefined ( 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/ Undefined ( 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 1,997 360,092 2,400 150 1998 330,084 2,200 150 1999 280,834 2,000 140.4 2000 252,751 1,800 140.4 2001 252,700 1,800 140.2 2002 252,700 1,800 140.2 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 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 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.) *

____ 1____ time per ___ year_____ OMB Control # 2060 0482 descriptions impacting planted acreages, pest impacts, cultural impacts, and rates applied per Comments: The downward trend in sales from 1997 reflects formulation changes ( and availability of products) from 98: 2 to 67: 33 as the phase out schedule reduced the amounts of material available to distributors. * Per annual cropping season, crop rotational considerations may result in a specific area being treated more than once in a calendar year, but this has a very low probability of occurrence. acre. Pages 16 through 21 of the CUE petition # 02 0054 describe the factors affecting the application of methyl bromide. Refer to these pages in the original narrative for further specifics and EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 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 ($) Gross Revenue per Acre ($)

1997 eggplant fresh 707 33 lb. Bushel $ 8.63 $ 6,101.41 1998 eggplant fresh 773 33 lb. Bushel $ 9.32 $ 7,204.36 1999 eggplant fresh 811 33 lb. Bushel $ 10.35 $ 8,393.85 2000 eggplant fresh 842 33 lb. Bushel $ 10.02 $ 8,436.84 2001 eggplant fresh 766 33 lb. Bushel $ 11.48 $ 8,793.68 2002 eggplant fresh 766 33 lb. Bushel $ 11.48 $ 8,793.68 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 Comments: 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 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E: 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.

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 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 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. EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant B C D E Quantity Used per Acre Units ( lbs, hours, etc) Unit Cost ($) Total Cost per Acre ($)

6,704.38 $

Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($)

1,638.00 $

1,890.00 $ Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Total Harvesting Costs Harvest Operations Labor Hauling Material Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual)

Fuel / Machine Labor Other Costs Cultural Operations Seed / Seedlings Fertilizer / Soil Amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Other costs Fumigation product ( methyl bromide)

application Irrigation Pre plant Operations  Total Land preparation A Worksheet 2 D( 1). Methyl Bromide  Baseline  Operating Costs for 2002 See Eggplant Enterprise Budget Worksheets included in Appendix II  B  2 of the narrative.

Total Packing, Selling and Related Overhead OMB Control # 2060 0482 Operation / Input 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 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. 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. EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 1.

2.

Study # 1 2 3 4 5 3.

Units Units 4.

x No 5.

6. * 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.

The Telone label says, " Do not apply in areas overlying Karst geology." This language take literally would appear to prohibit Pest Resistant To Alternative Yes  Label Restriction Organic Matter Restriction  Township Caps Soil Restriction the use of Telone products in Florida. 100% of Dade County cannot use Telone. See pages 15 and 16 of the narrative and pages 22 and 23 of CUE peition # 02 0054. This information will be used to determine the amount of methyl bromide needed. Restrictions on Alternative Use Regulatory Restriction % of Area Details 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) See pages 15 and 16 of the narrative and pages 22 and 23 of CUE petition # 02 0054. 1 2 3 4 See Appendices 1 A, 1 B, 1 C and 1 D in the narrative portion of the petition Alternative:

% Yield Loss * Telone C35 + chloropicrin + Devrinol + Treflan . See pages 25 and 26 of the narrative and narrative in MB CUE Petition # 02 0054.

Yield Loss & Pest Control When Comparing This Alternative to Methyl Bromide Pest Being Tested Study # ( list below) Provide numerical estimates where possible.

Details % Pest Control *

Study Information For the information in # 1 above list: the study name, authors, publication, date, and if a copy is attached. 5 Enter Average Loss Details See Appendices 1 A, 1 B, 1 C and 1 D in the narrative portion of the petition and 2002 CUE submission # 02 0054. Attached?

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 See Appendices 1 A, 1 B, 1 C and 1 D in the narrative portion of the petition. and 2002 CUE submission # 02 0054. OMB Control # 2060 048 Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant Off Site Damage ( outgassing) Other Restrictions ( Describe) 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 Non Chemical Pest Control ( please describe) Units ( gals, lbs. Etc.)

Refer to Appendix I in the CUE narrative for a complete overview of alternative experimental projects undertaken since the Other Key Pest Steps Worksheet 3 A. Alternatives  Technical Feasibility of Alternatives to Methyl Bromide See pages 25 and 26 of the narrative and the discussion of non chemical pest control alternatives included in pages 27 through 32 of CUE petition # 02 0054. 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 Planting Harvest Fallow Other Key Crop Steps with these delays.

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

Harvest Continuation of Alternative Cycle ( if needed)

Planting Land Preparation Fumigation Fallow Other Key Crop Steps Other Key Pest Steps OMB Control # 2060 048 Comments: Alternative: Telone C35 + chloropicrin + Devrinol + Treflan . See Pages 25 and 26 of the narrative.

initial CUE submission, and additional alternatives work planned for the immediate future.

Refer to page 26 and Appendix II within the narrative for a description of delays and costs associated Land Preparation Fumigation ( 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 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 482 es 482 Column A:

Column B:

Column C:

Column D:

Column E:

Total Cost per Acre Yield For harvest operations, indicate average yields or representative yields from Worksheet 3 A.

Total 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. 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. 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: Telone C35 + chloropicrin + Devrinol + Treflan . 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 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. B C D E Quantity Used per Acre Units ( lbs, hours, etc) Unit Cost ($) Total Cost per Acre ($)

7,079.38 $

Constant Cost per Acre ($) Cost per Unit of Yield ($) Yield Total Cost per Acre ($)

1,474.20 $

1,701.00 $ Total Harvesting Costs Hauling Material Grading / Packing / Storage Other Costs Harvest Operations Labor Fuel / Machine Labor Other Costs Fungicide Nematicide Irrigation Labor ( manual) Fertilizer / Soil Amendments Pesticides Insecticide Herbicide Cultural Operations Seed / Seedlings Irrigation Other costs Land preparation Fumigation product ( methyl bromide)

application Pre plant Operations  Total Costs Alternative: Telone C35 + chloropicrin + Devrinol + Treflan .

Operation / Input A 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 Worksheet 3 B( 1). Alternatives  Changes in Operating Costs See Eggplant Enterprise Budget Worksheets included in Appendix II of the narrative.

Total Packing, Selling and Related Overhead OMB Control # 2060 0482 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 No 7. Yes No 8.

x From:

x To:

9.

Years Amount ($)

10. $

Cost 11. Will economic impacts be measured? trifloxysulfuron sodium Tarpaulin ( High Density Polyethylene)

Other depends on specific study depends on specific study Will yield/ quality loss be measured? solarization flooding halosulfuron 1.3 dichloropicrin Also, as per Orlando Workshop discussions on June 24, 2003, this question does not apply to soil fumigation petitions. effective alternative is made available that is technically and economically feasible. Currently, there is no program to 1,3 dichloropropene _ 98__% methyl bromide, __ 2__% chloropicrin __ 67__% methyl bromide, _ 33_% chloropicrin Virtually Impermeable Film ( VIF)

Non Chemical Methods ( please specify) 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. nutsedge root knot nematodes Southern Blight Provide a list of alternative chemicals or cultural practices that have been tested. Nightshade Morningglory How will you minimize your use and/ or emissions of methyl bromide? chloropicrin metam sodium transition to that doesn't have excessive monetary risks, unpredictability, and production timing issues and conflicts. What would be the best currently available alternative if methyl bromide were not available? Currently, the best alternative has been a strategy of applying 1,3 dichloropropene broadcast, followed 3  4 weeks later Prioritize the alternative chemicals or cultural practices to be tested.

metam sodium iodomethane Formulation Changes Grant requests made to USDA, EPA, state, or other funding group.

See research summaries in CUE # 02 0054 and current application narrative. Investment with an additional application of chloropicrin plus Devrinol plus Treflan made to the bed before laying plastic.

Please provide an overview/ timeline of the plan to transition away from using methyl bromide. The Florida eggplant industry will transition away from dependency from methyl bromide as soon as an efficacious, cost Other total investments, if any, made to reduce your reliance on methyl bromide? Formulation Changes ( please specify)

( check all that apply)

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

Refer to Appendix 1 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 OMB Control # 2060 0482 ( Describe each investment and its associated costs. e. g. specialized machinery, etc.)

Refer to Appendix 1 EPA Form # 7620 18a Pre Plant 1.

2.

3.

4. 2005 5. 2005 6.

2006 214,400 lbs. 1,600 2007 214,400 lbs. 1,600 Not Technically Feasible Not Economically Feasible 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.

Consortium Name: Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association Location: Florida Crop: Eggplants Pounds of Methyl Bromide Requested 214,400 lbs.

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 1,600 Acres If methyl bromide is requested for additional years, reason for request:

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.

Potential Alternatives Reasons See CUE # 02 0054 See Cue # 02 0054 OMB Control # 2060 0482 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