Smaller sub markets exist in California as well ( Appendix B). Summer berries, 6% or less of total production berries in 2001, are found only in the Ventura County region. Soil fumigation occurs in spring and planting in June for fall harvest. Economically, the bulk of this market follows the Northern region prices and harvesting schedule although it extends longer into November and December. The Central Valley, down to 1 2% of berry production, parallels the main planting and harvesting, but berries go primarily to processing or fruit stands. Second year berries constitute approximately 5 7% of total production and are usually have lower quality, therefore the second year and picked primarily for processing. The economics of second year fruit parallels first year berries. Finally organic berry production is only 1 2% of production, but relies on nursery plants produced on fumigated soil which is allowed by Organic Certification Regulations and required to meet California State nursery certification cleanliness requirements ( http:// www. cdfa. ca. gov). 2001 Fresh Berry Volume and Prices Weekly Price  Volume Data 2001 California FRESH Week SD, O, LA ctys Oxnard South total Santa Maria Watsonvile North total Ending Volume Price Value Volume x Price Volume Volume Volume Value Vol x Price Volume Volume Volume Value Vol x Price 1/ 6 163800 $ 25.95 $ 3,821,250 $ 0.05 91700 72100 163800 $ 3,821,250 $ 0.14 1/ 13 182300 $ 25.38 $ 4,630,275 $ 0.06 85000 97300 182300 $ 4,630,275 $ 0.17 1/ 20 155600 $ 19.61 $ 2,510,675 $ 0.03 69400 86200 155600 $ 2,510,675 $ 0.09 1/ 27 446000 $ 14.32 $ 5,303,675 $ 0.06 140800 305200 446000 $ 5,303,675 $ 0.20 2/ 3 476500 $ 13.06 $ 6,185,550 $ 0.07 124600 351900 476500 $ 6,185,550 $ 0.23 2/ 10 994800 $ 14.58 $ 13,564,525 $ 0.16 215900 767100 983000 $ 13,564,525 $ 0.50 11800 2/ 17 272400 $ 14.75 $ 3,776,000 $ 0.05 82200 190200 272400 $ 3,776,000 $ 0.14 2/ 24 607400 $ 10.46 $ 9,156,908 $ 0.11 161700 445700 607400 $ 9,156,908 $ 0.34 3/ 3 224000 $ 7.92 $ 3,534,720 $ 0.04 50700 173300 224000 $ 3,534,720 $ 0.13 3/ 10 223000 $ 7.89 $ 3,518,940 $ 0.04 135600 87400 223000 $ 3,518,940 $ 0.13 3/ 17 882900 $ 7.34 $ 12,779,039 $ 0.15 259700 619700 879400 $ 12,734,414 $ 0.47 3500 3500 $ 44,625 $ 0.00 3/ 24 1811600 $ 7.54 $ 17,624,742 $ 0.21 473100 1276600 1749700 $ 17,096,823 $ 0.63 61900 61900 $ 527,919 $ 0.01 3/ 31 1746300 $ 11.87 $ 20,748,338 $ 0.25 453000 1183900 1636900 $ 19,511,077 $ 0.72 91900 17500 109400 $ 1,237,261 $ 0.02 4/ 7 1175900 $ 13.96 $ 16,072,502 $ 0.19 271500 730400 1001900 $ 13,856,277 $ 0.51 99300 74700 174000 $ 2,216,225 $ 0.04 4/ 14 2060200 $ 15.73 $ 31,147,250 $ 0.37 495600 1371800 1867400 $ 28,326,542 $ 1.05 125100 67700 192800 $ 2,820,708 $ 0.05 4/ 21 4371400 $ 9.37 $ 35,111,386 $ 0.42 910600 2738700 3649300 $ 29,009,643 $ 1.08 449300 272800 722100 $ 6,101,743 $ 0.11 4/ 28 5266700 $ 6.47 $ 33,920,560 $ 0.41 886300 3168200 4054500 $ 26,536,380 $ 0.99 833000 379200 1212200 $ 7,384,180 $ 0.13 5/ 5 5763200 $ 6.06 $ 34,441,951 $ 0.41 384700 2981400 3366100 $ 20,034,877 $ 0.74 1369500 1027600 2397100 $ 14,407,074 $ 0.26 5/ 12 5616300 $ 6.06 $ 34,439,763 $ 0.41 113600 2366500 2480100 $ 15,103,649 $ 0.56 1613100 1523100 3136200 $ 19,336,114 $ 0.35 5/ 19 4718900 $ 5.69 $ 27,473,360 $ 0.33 22900 1196800 1219700 $ 6,721,880 $ 0.25 1643400 1855800 3499200 $ 20,557,080 $ 0.37 5/ 26 4328500 $ 6.14 $ 27,944,850 $ 0.34 11600 671400 683000 $ 3,979,350 $ 0.15 1518400 2127100 3645500 $ 23,965,500 $ 0.44 6/ 2 3354100 $ 6.92 $ 24,600,740 $ 0.30 5100 336500 341600 $ 2,257,240 $ 0.08 824400 2188100 3012500 $ 22,343,500 $ 0.41 6/ 9 3635300 $ 7.95 $ 30,051,270 $ 0.36 7400 194000 201400 $ 1,591,060 $ 0.06 596800 2837100 3433900 $ 28,460,210 $ 0.52 6/ 16 3397700 $ 6.68 $ 22,664,880 $ 0.27 8400 47300 55700 $ 242,830 $ 0.01 356300 2985700 3342000 $ 22,422,050 $ 0.41 6/ 23 3029500 $ 6.71 $ 20,588,050 $ 0.25 5400 2500 7900 $ 52,860 $ 0.00 174600 2847000 3021600 $ 20,535,190 $ 0.37 6/ 30 2887700 $ 7.90 $ 22,812,830 $ 0.27 5600 2200 7800 $ 61,620 $ 0.00 149100 2730800 2879900 $ 22,751,210 $ 0.41 7/ 7 2375400 $ 7.82 $ 18,530,360 $ 0.22 110500 2264900 2375400 $ 18,530,360 $ 0.34 7/ 14 2303900 $ 8.40 $ 19,352,760 $ 0.23 109100 2194800 2303900 $ 19,352,760 $ 0.35 7/ 21 2055900 $ 8.40 $ 17,269,560 $ 0.21 total 26936400 $ 9.40 108800 1947100 2055900 $ 17,269,560 $ 0.31 7/ 28 2105500 $ 8.40 $ 17,686,200 $ 0.21 total lbs 309,768,600 129800 1975700 2105500 $ 17,686,200 $ 0.32 8/ 4 1931800 $ 8.40 $ 16,227,120 $ 0.19 cool costs $ 1.40 103700 1828700 1932400 $ 16,227,120 $ 0.29 8/ 11 1829000 $ 8.90 $ 16,168,800 $ 0.19 yield 30301 88500 1740500 1829000 $ 16,168,800 $ 0.29 8/ 18 1576500 $ 10.23 $ 16,081,200 $ 0.19 avr less cool $ 8.00 80400 1496100 1576500 $ 16,081,200 $ 0.29 8/ 25 1392900 $ 12.32 $ 16,992,610 $ 0.20 75200 1317700 1392900 $ 16,992,610 $ 0.31 9/ 1 1276100 $ 13.40 $ 17,220,890 $ 0.21 11.5 $ 0.695 62300 1213800 1276100 $ 17,220,890 $ 0.31 9/ 8 1279400 $ 11.04 $ 13,883,060 $ 0.17 process $ 0.306 41700 1237700 1279400 $ 13,883,060 $ 0.25 9/ 15 1039340 $ 8.44 $ 8,505,806 $ 0.10 23200 1016100 1039300 $ 8,505,806 $ 0.15 9/ 22 937000 $ 8.36 $ 6,119,400 $ 0.07 25500 911500 937000 $ 6,119,400 $ 0.11 9/ 29 949400 $ 5.06 $ 9,752,760 $ 0.12 $ 59,660 7600 23000 738600 761600 $ 9,315,280 $ 0.17 10/ 6 964000 $ 9.48 $ 10,787,600 $ 0.13 $ 7.850 $ 497,690 63400 26800 873800 900600 $ 10,086,340 $ 0.18 10/ 13 942100 $ 10.35 $ 9,799,040 $ 0.12 $ 923,160 117600 24000 757500 781500 $ 8,123,800 $ 0.15 10/ 20 801500 $ 8.58 $ 6,912,100 $ 0.08 $ 1,588,840 202400 26600 632500 659100 $ 5,683,040 $ 0.10 10/ 27 794900 $ 8.57 $ 6,796,860 $ 0.08 $ 2,234,110 284600 28700 481900 510600 $ 4,359,590 $ 0.08 11/ 3 510400 $ 9.57 $ 4,884,528 $ 0.06 $ 8.480 $ 2,147,136 253200 6500 250700 257200 $ 2,462,680 $ 0.04 11/ 10 478400 $ 12.43 $ 5,946,512 $ 0.07 $ 2,787,376 328700 19300 194900 214200 $ 2,229,430 $ 0.04 11/ 17 $ 1,301,680 153500 3200 10000 13200 11/ 24 $ 1,706,176 201200 11100 18600 29700 12/ 1 $ 8.49 $ 1,253,344 147800 2200 3000 5200 12/ 8 $ 892,096 105200 5000 5000 12/ 15 83335440 958,357,560 lbs $ 803,056 94700 7300 7300 12/ 22 $ 412,128 48600 10900 10900 weighted avr $ 8.49 $ 16,606,452 cool costs $ 1.40 Summer Total 1257500 total 55031900 $ 8.02 Gross avr less cool $ 7.09 26928.67453 total lbs 632,866,850 cool costs $ 1.40 yield 42417 11.5 $ 0.616 avr less cool $ 6.62 process $ 0.306 Total lbs 1,266,994,146 lbs/ acre 50392 11.5 $ 0.576 18.42995308 tons/ acre process $ 0.306 $ 707,341,195.00 FOB Freezer lbs 308,636,586 $ 590,671,579.00 w/ o cooler Freezer trays 17146477 $ 116,669,616.00 % processed 0.245522342 processed lbs 311869 24.6% 12359 fresh lbs 958358 75.4% 37880 lbs/ acre average 49983.33766 1,270,227 25413 extra w/ o price 0 49983.33766 Proc Report Total 1,276,716 lbs/ acre average total 50238.69673 10/ 17/ 2002 2001 Fresh Prices 2001 Costs Breakdown Weighted Averages of Costs Region Overhead Costs Total Operating costs Ground Prep Fumigation Post fume prep Planting Pesticides Fresh Harvest Proc. Harvest Weeding Field clearing CSC assess Capital Interest TOTALS South Coast $ 3,505 $ 26,201 $ 627 $ 1,778 $ 1,454 $ 2,356 $ 1,253 $ 12,850 $ 3,537 $ 713 $ 298 $ 131 $ 1,204 $ 27,928 w/ o fume $ 24,423 Santa Maria $ 2,443 $ 21,123 $ 621 $ 861 $ 1,153 $ 1,994 $ 1,046 $ 9,613 $ 3,985 $ 713 $ 108 $ 118 $ 911 $ 2,443 Watsonville $ 6,002 $ 27,016 $ 136 $ 1,728 $ 1,417 $ 1,605 $ 1,191 $ 18,372 $ 957 $ 102 $ 138 $ 1,370 $ 6,002 w/ o fume Weighted averages Wats + Santa Mari 5,070 $ 25,472 263 1,501 1,348 1,707 1,153 16,077 1,044 893 104 133 1,250 $ 29,041 w/ o fume $ 23,971 Total Costs $ 4,363 $ 25,411.15 $ 407 $ 1,592 $ 1,372 $ 1,947 $ 1,177 $ 14,541 $ 3,761 $ 807 $ 181 $ 130 $ 1,214 $ 29,774 $ 25,917 Costs North 14,920 $ 89,549,840 $ 403,078,720 Cultural Costs Fresh Harvest Proc Harvest South 10,223 $ 285,507,944 $ 267,852,823 $ 8,828 $ 14,541 $ 3,761 Total $ 375,057,784.00 $ 670,931,543.00 Revenues North $ 399,031,282 South $ 269,881,802 Total $ 668,913,084 Costs Total $ 748,617,035 Total w/ o overhead $ 638,912,544.45 10/ 17/ 2002 Costs Breakdown 2001 Freezer Volumes Weekly Price  Volume Data PROCESSED Week SD, O, LA ctys Oxnard South total Santa Maria Watsonvile North total Ending Price Volume Volume Volume Monthly vol Monthly lbs Volume Volume Volume Monthly vol Monthly lbs Value Vol x Price 1/ 6 1/ 13 1/ 20 1/ 27 2/ 3 2/ 10 2/ 17 2/ 24 3/ 3 3/ 10 3/ 17 3/ 24 3/ 31 4/ 7 4/ 14 4/ 21 624 624 49420 49420 4/ 28 81042 82793 163835 164459 2960262 87808 87808 137228 2470104 5/ 5 372458 134752 507210 2190 217561 219751 5/ 12 478753 283452 762205 27546 106936 134482 5/ 19 530334 1031950 1562284 105093 163832 268925 5/ 26 419963 987381 1407344 4239043 76302774 252626 178727 431353 1054511 18981198 6/ 2 259863 855978 1115841 508709 139767 648476 6/ 9 230520 900252 1130772 506003 83591 589594 6/ 16 230886 923846 1154732 543455 135706 679161 6/ 23 171241 849752 1020993 474661 143716 618377 6/ 30 127260 571202 698462 5120800 92174400 290782 130948 421730 2957338 53232084 7/ 7 56300 303897 360197 216795 134931 351726 7/ 14 21059 174876 195935 196484 107253 303737 7/ 21 7914 64464 72378 203818 57594 261412 7/ 28 4091 16710 20801 649311 11687598 214118 59098 273216 1190091 21421638 8/ 4 1449 14801 16250 203097 76805 279902 8/ 11 3281 3281 19531 351558 157378 73340 230718 8/ 18 97803 69434 167237 8/ 25 58718 50157 108875 786732 14161176 9/ 1 19714 46568 66282 9/ 8 0 71052 71052 9/ 15 555 197713 198268 9/ 22 895 107700 108595 9/ 29 89350 89350 533547 9603846 10/ 6 26635 26635 10/ 13 39730 39730 10/ 20 86920 86920 10/ 27 44704 44704 197989 3563802 11/ 3 4043 78016 82059 11/ 10 6399 7439 13838 95897 1726146 11/ 17 12195 2790 11/ 24 249 12/ 1 11215 12/ 8 5289 12/ 15 974 12/ 22 South Total 10193144 North Total 6953333 total lbs 183476592 total lbs 125159994 yield 17947 yield 8389 Total total 17146477 10/ 17/ 2002 Freezer Prices Corrected 15 Aug 02 South Acres Total trays Total lbs Rounded lbs yld/ acre lbs Rounded yld/ acre Trays/ acre FR Trays/ acre PR FOB  cooler Ave. Price/ unit Rounded price/ a Gross/ acre 2001 10223 January Fresh 1175000 13512500 13512500 1322 1322 115 $ 14.83 $ 1.290 $ 1.290 $ 1,705 Frozen February Fresh 2210000 25415000 25415000 2486 2486 216 $ 12.75 $ 1.109 $ 1.109 $ 2,757 Frozen March Fresh 4615000 53072500 53072500 5191 5191 451 $ 10.49 $ 0.912 $ 0.912 $ 4,734 Frozen April Fresh 11,293,300 129872950 129872950 12704 12704 1105 $ 7.66 $ 0.666 $ 0.666 $ 8,461 Frozen 164459 2960262 2960262 290 290 16 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 89 May Fresh 7280500 83725750 83725750 8190 8190 712 $ 4.17 $ 0.363 $ 0.363 $ 2,973 Frozen 4239043 76302774 76302774 7464 7464 415 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 2,284 June Fresh 362600 4169900 4169900 408 408 35 $ 5.68 $ 0.494 $ 0.494 $ 202 Frozen 5120800 92174400 92174400 9016 9016 501 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 2,759 July Fresh Frozen 649311 11687598 11687598 1143 1143 64 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 350 August Fresh Frozen 19531 351558 351558 34 34 2 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 10 Total Fresh 26936400 309768600 309768600 30301 30301 2635 Fresh $ 20,832 Processed $ 5,492 April May June July August Total Proc 10193144 183476592 17947 1561 997 Total 48249 4196 $ 26,324 10898550 26901950 North Acres Total trays Total lbs Rounded lbs yld/ acre lbs Rounded yld/ acre Trays/ acre FR Trays/ acre PR FOB  cooler Ave. Price/ unit Rounded price/ a Gross/ acre 2001 14576 February Fresh 11800 135700 135700 9 9 1 $ 12.75 $ 1.109 $ 1.109 $ 10 March Fresh 174800 2010200 2010200 138 138 12 $ 8.95 $ 0.778 $ 0.778 $ 107 April Fresh 2709300 31156950 31156950 2138 2138 186 $ 6.34 $ 0.551 $ 0.551 $ 1,178 Frozen 137228 2470104 2470104 169 169 9 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 52 May Fresh 14287900 164310850 164310850 11273 11273 980 $ 4.75 $ 0.413 $ 0.413 $ 4,656 Frozen 1054511 18981198 18981198 1302 1302 72 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 398 June Fresh 13635800 156811700 156811700 10758 10758 935 $ 6.04 $ 0.525 $ 0.525 $ 5,648 Frozen 2957338 53232084 53232084 3652 3652 203 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 1,118 July Fresh 9618500 110612750 110612750 7589 7589 660 $ 6.85 $ 0.596 $ 0.596 $ 4,523 Frozen 1190091 21421638 21421638 1470 1470 82 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 450 August Fresh 7068700 81290050 81290050 5577 5577 485 $ 9.08 $ 0.790 $ 0.790 $ 4,406 Frozen 786732 14161176 14161176 972 972 54 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 297 September Fresh 4311240 49579260 49579260 3401 3401 296 $ 7.85 $ 0.683 $ 0.683 $ 2,323 Frozen 533547 9603846 9603846 659 659 37 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 202 October Fresh 3019000 34718500 34718500 2382 2382 207 $ 8.48 $ 0.737 $ 0.737 $ 1,756 Frozen 197989 3563802 3563802 244 244 14 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 75 November Fresh 352400 4052600 4052600 278 278 24 $ 7.45 $ 0.648 $ 0.648 $ 180 Frozen 95897 1726146 1726146 118 118 7 $ 0.306 $ 0.306 $ 36 Total Fresh 43265 3786 Fresh $ 24,787 Total Proc 8468 747 477 Processed $ 2,627 Total 51733 4533 Rotation Revenues TOTAL $ 27,414 Non rotation revenues thru sept MBr $ 25,367 Non rotation revenues 1st week sept $ 24,242 10/ 17/ 2002 Monthly Prices Revenues 1997 2000 Year Acres Grade Total Yield/ acre Percent yield Yield/ acre Ave. Price/ unit Gross/ acre Gross Revenue 2000 26340 Fresh 53,495 0.776 41512 $ 0.486 $ 22,763.03 $ 599,578,341.14 Processed 0.196 11983 $ 0.216 1999 24603 Fresh 55,822 0.786 43876 $ 0.614 $ 30,667.07 $ 754,501,984.42 Processed 0.174 11946 $ 0.312 1998 24164 Fresh 51,778 0.738 38212 $ 0.555 $ 24,133.72 $ 583,167,283.06 Processed 0.202 14343 $ 0.204 1997 22508 Fresh 51,164 0.78 39908 $ 0.520 $ 23,791.24 $ 535,493,193.91 Processed 0.19 11256 $ 0.270 Processed combination of frozen and juice, price/ unit weighted average of frozen and juice prices with volumes 2001 25143 Fresh 50392 0.743 37441 $ 0.616 $ 27,026.74 $ 679,533,358.01 Frozen 0.257 12951 $ 0.306 south 10223 Fresh 48248 30301 $ 0.695 $ 26,550.98 $ 271,430,637.87 Frozen 17947 $ 0.306 north 14920 Fresh 50806 42417 $ 0.576 $ 26,999.23 $ 402,828,451.92 Frozen 8389 $ 0.306 $ 674,259,089.79 10/ 17/ 2002 1997 2000 Revenues Watsonville Rotation Crop Economics Crops majority in Monterey or Santa Cruz Countries NASS Monterey County Crop Total CA Acres Total Crop Worth Total Revenue/ Acre Total Acres Total Crop Worth Revenue/ acre Cost of Production Net per acre Rent Cultural Harvest Crops/ year Time to Harvest Acres Lettuce 221500 1484115000 $ 6,700 $ 111,339 $ 658,905,000 $ 5,918 $ 8,069 1,100 1,090 5,313 3 45 to 60 Head 143500 1003496000 $ 6,993 $ 106,173 $ 775,283,000 $ 7,302 Leaf 43000 276877000 $ 6,439 $ 6,610 Brocolli 124000 536757000 $ 4,329 54,899 $ 258,962,000 $ 4,717 $ 4,862 265 500 960 3,225 2 to 2.5 90 to 120 days 400 Cauliflower 42000 222996000 $ 5,309 17,390 $ 102,567,000 $ 5,898 $ 5,339 1,050 550 1,386 3,196 2 to 2.5 90 to 110 days 60 Celery 23500 309711000 $ 13,179 10,030 $ 97,988,000 $ 9,769 Spinach, fresh 17000 103785000 $ 6,105 $ 13,204 $ 77,009,000 $ 5,832 Cabbage, fresh 13700 79583000 $ 5,809 2,087 $ 8,512,000 $ 4,079 Peppers, chili 3900 51427000 $ 13,186 $ 625 $ 4,513,000 $ 7,221 Greens, kale 2000 18700000 $ 9,350 $ 1,005 $ 4,825,000 $ 4,801 All Vegies 274120 2013549000 $ 7,346 $ 6,090 $ 1,256 10/ 17/ 2002 Rotation Crop Costs Nematocide Narrative Efficacy Nematocides used alone are efficacious against only a small portion of the pest complex in California strawberries ( Table 1, Pest Complex in application). They have no efficacy against soil borne disease, some insects, and weeds. This alone disqualifies nematocides from being a methyl bromide alternative for California strawberries. Currently registered nematocides are fenamiphos ( Nemacur), azadirachtin, metam sodium and 1,3 dichloropropene. Metam sodium and 1,3 dichloropropene are discussed in separate sections of this application.

Regulatory Nematocides named in the TEAP 2001 report, fosthiazate, Enzone and avermectin, are not registered in California for use on strawberries. Enzone and fosthiazate do not have EPA registrations. 1,3 Dichloropropene Narrative Efficacy:

Telone   , active ingredient1,3 dichloropropene ( 1,3 D) is used as a nematocide with minimal efficacy against disease and weeds when used alone. Because it is not effective against the entire pest complex in California strawberries, this alone prevents it from being a methyl bromide replacement ( Table 1, Pest Complex, in application). Early efficacy work with Telone alone demonstrated it's poorer activity compared to methyl bromide/ chloropicrin standards ( 91 15 Pink Sheet, Appendix CC). And in fact in that study of repeated use over three years, already poor yields dropped with time. The MBTOC 1998 report ( page 51) also indicated Telone is effective only in combination with other components. The Federal Use Label also shows it is labeled only against nematodes.

The vast majority of work with Telone products ( 1,3 D alone) on strawberries in California has been done in combination with other fumigants.

Regulatory:

Shank applied Telone requires a 100 foot buffer zone the first year it is used on a plot, and a 300 foot buffer zone if used the next two years on the same ground ( See Telone II use label, Appendix G). In addition in California, use is limited by township caps, as an additional protection with respect to the classification 1,3 D as a B2 carcinogen ( Appendices O and P, http:// www. cdpr. ca. gov/ docs/ dprdocs/ methbrom/ telone/ mgmtplan. pdf). Recently township caps were doubled in townships where historical Telone use did not reach the maximum allowed under the caps ( in general 90,000 lbs per township.) This is, however a temporary increase until the amount of Telone " banked" from previous years is used up, or the registrant convinces the California Department of Pesticide Regulation that permanent increases are justified by reassessing the oncogenic risk. See further discussion on township caps in the discussion for 1,3 D/ Pic alternative regime. Metam Sodium Narrative Technical Feasibility Metam sodium has some activity against a larger portion of the California strawberry pest complex than other single potential alternatives ( Table 1, Pest Complex, in application). However, that activity is limited in many cases. For instance metam has weed activity against weeds and weed seeds of Bermudagrass, Chickweed, Dandelions, Ragweed, Henbit, Labsquarter, Pigweed, Watercress, Johnsongrass, Nightshade, Nutsedge ( suppression only), Wild Morning Glory and Purslane. But methyl bromide/ chloropicrin ( MBC) controls nutsedge well ( S. Fennimore, personal communication) compared to metam and MBC controls prostrate knotweed better than metam alone ( Appendix DD, Fennimore 2000 handout). Overall, weed biomass compared to the MBC standard was 37% higher when metam alone was used at 75 gal/ acre.

Metam nematode activity is suppression only against active forms of nematodes versus eggs ( requires pre irrigation for best activity and fully decomposed plant residues) ( Appendix G, Vapam Use Label). It is also reported to have activity against garden symphalan and against the soil borne diseases Rhizoctonia, Pythium, Phytophthora, Verticillium, and Sclerotina.

While metam sodium has activity against much of the California strawberry pest complex, yields of strawberry in ground treated only with metam sodium are not comparable with the methyl bromide/ chloropicrin standard ( Appendix T, Metam tab.) Twenty seven small plot trials conducted throughout the California strawberry growing regions from 1993 through 2001 show average total yields of 81% compared to methyl bromide/ chloropicrin standard for all forms of application of metam sodium alone. Clearly the product alone is not comparable to the MBC standard in California. Similar results are seen in trials in other parts of the US and the world. Twenty six trials of metam alone on strawberries averaged 79% yield compared to MBC standard. In all cases, non fume controls averaged 63% for the California trials ( omitting 4 trials with a non fume control of 98% of MBC yield where there was extremely low pest and disease pressure) and 60% for the out of state trials indicating a healthy degree of pest pressure was observed in the test plots.

Economic Analysis An overall economic analysis was done, even though it is clear metam alone is not technically feasible, to illustrate the impact of a 20% yield loss on California strawberry culture. When that overall yield of 81% ( Appendix T, Metam tab) is calculated into the 2001 baseline revenue for each region ( Application Worksheet 3 E Metam Totals), significant losses on a per acre basis are seen in the South and North. Even with the cost savings of the Metam application ( generally $ 1,000 less than the MBC standard) significant losses are seen in both regions. In the South, revenue loss was $ 3,594 per acre. In the North, revenue loss was $ 2,703 per acre for the Rotation grower and $ 4,741 per acre for the Non Rotation grower. Since the median acre size farm of our representative user is approximately 40 acres, these would result in total losses of $ 137,600 in the South and $ 108,120 and $ 189,640 in the North for rotation and non rotation growers respectively.

Regulatory Pressures Metam sodium recently completed review as a Toxic Air Contaminant with the California Air Resources Board's Scientific Review Panel ( Appendix R). While DPR continues their re evaluation of the material there is a great deal of concern regarding eventual buffer zone requirements when all the analyses are complete ( Appendix S, personal communications from Metam Sodium Task Force). It is possible buffer zone requirements of 500 feet or more may be required in some situations, which would render the material unusable in particularly urbanized settings.

Conclusion Metam Sodium use alone is not a methyl bromide/ chloropicrin replacement in California strawberries largely because of lack of complete efficacy against the entire pest complex, and significantly lower yields compared to the MBC standard resulting in significant per acre losses in revenue. Metam Sodium Yield Data California Data Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yield Metam yield Significance Metam rate Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation SCREC 1993 Small plot 73% 100% 82% sig 100 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Chandler 20 yr since Strbr,

weeding 2.5 hr more 94 10 Pink Sheet SCREC 1993 Small plot 69% 100% 84% sig 100 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Oso Grande 20 yr since Strbr,

weeding 2.5 hr more 94 10 Pink Sheet Watsonville 1994 2 fields 56% 100% 56% 100 gal/ acre spray NA NA, std Selva Strw/ vegie rota 96 13 Pink Sheet Monterey Bay Academy 1998 Small plot 50% 100% 70% 75 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Monterey Bay Academy 1998 Small plot 50% 100% 79% 75 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Monterey Bay Academy 1998 Small plot 50% 100% 67% 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet SCREC 1998 Small plot 46% 100% 82% 70 gal/ acre drip NA Black, std Camarosa NA 98 MBAO Larson Spence Farm 1998 Small plot 98% 100% 99% 75 gal/ acre drip 1 inch Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 1998 Small plot 98% 100% 110% 75 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 1998 Small plot 98% 100% 98% 75 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 1998 Small plot 98% 100% 103% 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Fresno Clovis 1999 NA 76% 100% 99% NA NA NA NA, std Chandler NA 2000 Handout Molinar Monterey Bay Academy 1999 Small plot 35% 100% 70% 75 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Monterey Bay Academy 1999 Small plot 35% 100% 80% 75 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Monterey Bay Academy 1999 Small plot 35% 100% 72% 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 1999 Small plot 80% 100% 102% 75 gal/ acre drip 1 inch Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 1999 Small plot 80% 100% 117% 75 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 1999 Small plot 80% 100% 105% 75 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 1999 Small plot 80% 100% 97% 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet California, Oxnard 2000 Small plot 71% 100% 79% 75 gal/ acre drip NA std IR 4 data MBAO 00 Haglund California, Oxnard 2000 Small plot 71% 100% 75% 37 gal/ acre spray 500 1000g/ a std IR 4 data MBAO 00 Haglund California, Salinas 2000 Small plot 65% 100% 74% 75 gal/ acre drip NA std IR 4 data MBAO 00 Haglund California, Salinas 2000 Small plot 65% 100% 66% 37 gal/ acre spray 500 1000g/ a std IR 4 data MBAO 00 Haglund Monterey Bay Academy 2000 Small plot 45% 100% 86% 75 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Monterey Bay Academy 2000 Small plot 45% 100% 70% 75 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Monterey Bay Academy 2000 Small plot 45% 100% 67% 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 2000 Small plot 77% 100% 85% 75 gal/ acre drip 1 inch Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 2000 Small plot 77% 100% 81% 75 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 2000 Small plot 77% 100% 79% 75 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet Spence Farm 2000 Small plot 77% 100% 81% 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches Green, std Selva MBr previous 01 02 Pink Sheet California, Oxnard 2001 Small plot 63% 100% 79% 50 gal/ acre drip NA, std Camarosa IR 4 data MBAO 01 Nelson California, Salinas 2001 Small plot 82% 100% 86% 50 gal/ acre drip NA, std Diamante IR 4 data MBAO 01 Nelson No on farm, large scale 67% 84%

70% average 85% 28 plots, omitting trials with non fume > 80% of MBC stand ( no pest pressure)

0.190186138 standard deviation 0.147947152 South 67% 79% 7 trials ( includes Fresno)

0.157948153 0.067682733 North 71% 87% 21 trials 0.209087654 0.162328844 10/ 17/ 2002 Metam 1 Non California Metam Sodium Yield Data Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yield Metam yield Significance Metam rate Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation Florida 1993 Small plot 78% 100% 92% 100 gal/ acre drip NA std Chandler Had trouble with drip MBAO 94 Olsen Florida 1993 Small plot 78% 100% 97% 100 gal/ acre broadcast NA std Chandler Had trouble with drip MBAO 94 Olsen Florida 1996 Small plot 73% 100% 97% 100 gal/ acre spray NA 32.7% formulation MBAO 96 Noling Australia 1997 NA 60% 100% 80% 105 gal/ acre NA NA NA Selva 2nd season yield, no effects 1st year!! MBAO 97 Porter France 1998 Small plot 65% 100% 91% 138 gal/ acre drip NA NA NA MBAO 98 Fritsch France 1998 Small plot 65% 100% 87% 138 gal/ acre shank NA NA NA MBAO 98 Fritsch North Carolina 1998 Small plot 88% 100% 103% NA NA NA NA, std Chandler 0,1,2 week holes MBAO 98 Louws Spain 1998 Medium plot 60% 100% 79% 140g/ m2 NA NA NA, std NA Same plot 2 yrs MBAO 99 Cebolla Spain 1998 Medium plot 54% 100% 56% 140g/ m2 NA NA NA, std NA Same plot 2 yrs MBAO 99 Cebolla Florida 1999 Small plot 41% 100% 62% 195 gal/ acre spray NA NA Chandler MBAO 99 Locascio Florida 1999 Small plot 69% 100% 84% 195 gal/ acre spray NA NA Chandler MBAO 99 Locascio Florida, Dover 2000 Small plot 27% 100% 77% 75 gal/ acre drip NA std IR 4 data MBAO 00 Haglund Florida, Dover 2000 Small plot 2% 100% 34% 75 gal/ acre drip NA std IR 4 data MBAO 00 Haglund Florida, Dover 2000 Small plot 27% 100% 21% 37 gal/ acre spray 500 1000g/ a std IR 4 data MBAO 00 Haglund Florida, Dover 2000 Small plot 2% 100% 1% 37 gal/ acre spray 500 1000g/ a std IR 4 data MBAO 00 Haglund North Carolina 2001 Small plot 67% 100% 105% 37.5 gal/ a shank? NA std? Camarosa MBAO 01 Ferguson North Carolina 2001 Small plot 67% 100% 94% 37.5 gal/ a drip NA std? Camarosa MBAO 01 Ferguson Florida, Chancey 2001 Small plot 44% 100% 51% 37.5 gal/ a spray NA, std Camarosa IR 4 data MBAO 01 Nelson Florida, Duke 2001 Small plot 91% 100% 68% 37.5 gal/ a spray NA, std Camarosa IR 4 data MBAO 01 Nelson Spain, Huelva 2001 Small plot 80% 100% 80% 175 cc/ m2 NA NA Camarosa MBAO 01 Lopez Aranda Spain, Huelva 2001 Small plot 54% 100% 77% 175 cc/ m2 NA NA Camarosa MBAO 01 Lopez Aranda North Carolina, Plymouth 1998 Small plot 78% 100% 109% 37.5 gal/ acre shank? drip? Chandler no previous strber MBAO 00 Ferguson North Carolina, Plymouth 1999 Small plot 71% 100% 104% 37.5 gal/ acre shank? drip? Chandler no previous strber MBAO 00 Ferguson North Carolina, Plymouth 2000 Small plot 78% 100% 108% 37.5 gal/ acre shank? drip? Chandler no previous strber MBAO 00 Ferguson Spain, Huelva 1999 Small plot 70% 100% 96% 125 cc/ m2 shank Black std Camarosa MBAO 00 Lopez Aranda Spain, Huelva 2000 Small plot 68% 100% 94% 175 cc/ m2 shank Black std Camarosa MBAO 00 Lopez Aranda Spain, Huelva 2000 Small plot 63% 100% 82% 175 cc/ m2 shank Black std Camarosa MBAO 00 Lopez Aranda average 60% 79%

std dev 23% 27%

Solar plus Metam Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yield Metam yield Significance Metam rate Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation SCREC 1993 Small Plot 0.73 1 0.83 Sig 100 gal/ acre drip NA NA Chandler Weeding took 1.5 hrs longer than std 94 10 Pink Sheet SCREC 1993 Small Plot 0.69 1 0.8 sig 100 gal/ acre drip NA NA Oso Grande Weeding took 1.5 hrs longer than std 94 10 Pink Sheet 10/ 17/ 2002 Metam 2 Chloropicrin Yield Data California Data Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yield Pic yield Significance Pic rate Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation SCREC 1993 Small Plot 73% 100% 100% Non sig 100 lbs/ acre flat fume NA NA Chandler Weeding took 2 hrs longer than std 94 10 Pink Sheet SCREC 1993 Small Plot 69% 100% 100% Non sig 100 lbs/ acre flat fume NA NA Oso Grande Weeding took 2 hrs longer than std 94 10 Pink Sheet San Diego County 1994 0.2 acre 92% 100% 107% 300 lbs/ acre flat, shank NA Clear, std Chandler Pre fumed farm field 96 15 Pink Watsonville 1994 Small Plot 62% 100% 92% Non sig 20 gal/ acre shank? NA NA Selva 95 16 Pink Watsonville 1994 2 fields 56% 100% 94% Non sig 300 lbs/ acre flat, shank NA NA, std Selva Strw/ vegie rota 96 13 Pink Watsonville 1995 2 fields 70% 100% 95% Non sig 300 lbs/ acre flat, shank NA NA, std Selva Strw/ vegie rota 96 13 Pink Merced County 1997 0.5 acre NA 100% 103% Non sig 200 lbs/ acre flat, shank NA NA, std Chandler Grower did not allow non fume 98 24 Pink Sheet Oxnard 1997 NA 100% 103% NA 200 lbs/ acre flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt_

summary. xls SCREC 1997 Small Plot 77% 100% 87% Non sig ( 1%) 166 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA NA, std Camarosa 32 weeds vs 0 98 1 Pink Sheet Watsonville 1997 NA 100% 92% NA 200 lbs/ acre flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt_

summary. xls Watsonville 1997 NA 100% 93% NA 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA NA Selva 980609mbr_ alt_

summary. xls Merced County 1998 0.5 acre NA 100% 98% Non sig 200 lbs/ acre flat, shank NA NA, std Chandler 2nd year berries 98 24 Pink Orange County 1998 76% 100% 100% NA 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt_

summary. xls Oxnard 1998 NA 100% 91% NA 200 lbs/ acre flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt_

summary. xls Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 102% 14 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink San Diego County 1998 111% 100% 115% NA 200 lbs/ acre flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt_

summary. xls Santa Maria 1998 NA 100% 78% 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA, std Camarosa geeFumigation9 81. xls Watsonville 1998 1 acre NA 100% 89% NA 134 lbs/ acre shank? NA NA, std Aromas 99fumigation data sheet. xls MBA 1999 Small Plot 35% 100% 69% 14 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Merced County 1999 0.5 acre 54% 100% 67% Sig 200 lbs/ acre flat, shank NA NA, std Chandler Refume same ground 01 04 Pink Orange County 1999 0.15 acre 102% 100% 99% NA 200 lbs/ acre bed shank NA Black, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .07 acre 102% 100% 104% NA 14 gal/ acre drip NA Black, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .07 acre 102% 100% 103% NA 14 gal/ acre drip NA Black, VIF Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .07 acre 102% 100% 100% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Black, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .07 acre 102% 100% 103% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Black, VIF Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Oxnard 1999 0.5 acre NA 100% 92% NA 200 lbs/ acre flat shank NA Clear, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 108% 120 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 110% 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 98% 120 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 102% 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 99% 12 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 103% 20 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 104% 12 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 99% 1.02875 20 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 100% 14 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Santa Maria 1999 0.02 acre 70% 100% 97% NA 14 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF Camarosa 9899mbalt_ on_ f arm. xls Santa Maria 1999 0.02 acre 70% 100% 97% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF Camarosa 9899mbalt_ on_ f arm. xls Santa Maria 1999 0.02 acre 70% 100% 88% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Camarosa 9899mbalt_ on_ f arm. xls Santa Maria 1999 0.02 acre 70% 100% 83% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Black, std Camarosa 9899mbalt_ on_ f arm. xls Santa Maria 1999 0.02 acre 70% 100% 81% NA 14 gal/ acre drip NA Black, std Camarosa 9899mbalt_ on_ f arm. xls Santa Maria 1999 0.02 acre 70% 100% 75% NA 14 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Camarosa 9899mbalt_ on_ f arm. xls Santa Maria 1999 0.44 acre 70% 100% 87% NA 200 lbs/ acre bed NA Clear, VIF Camarosa 9899mbalt_ on_ f arm. xls Santa Maria 1999 0.22 acre 70% 100% 94% 200 lbs/ acre bed NA Clear, std Camarosa 9899mbalt_ on_ f arm. xls Watsonville 1999 .05 acre NA 100% 107% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Aromas 99fumigation data sheet. xls Watsonville 1999 .05 acre NA 100% 104% NA 200 lbs/ acre bed shank NA Clear, VIF Aromas 99fumigation data sheet. xls Watsonville 1999 .05 acre NA 100% 102% NA 200 lbs/ acre bed shank NA Clear, std Aromas 99fumigation data sheet. xls Watsonville 1999 .05 acre NA 100% 104% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF miguel. xls, 99 summary 10/ 17/ 2002 PIC 1 Chloropicrin Yield Data California Data Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yield Pic yield Significance Pic rate Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation Watsonville 1999 .05 acre NA 100% 89% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Green, std miguel. xls, 99 summary Watsonville 1999 .05 acre NA 100% 98% NA 24 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std miguel. xls, 99 summary MBA 2000 Small Plot 45% 100% 94% 21 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Oxnard 2000 0.05 acre 77% 100% 95%  0.01 120 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Camarosa 9900mbalt_ on_ f arm_ trials. xls Oxnard 2000 0.05 acre 77% 100% 98% 0.09 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Camarosa 9900mbalt_ on_ f arm_ trials. xls Oxnard 2000 0.05 acre 77% 100% 93% 0.11 120 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Camarosa 9900mbalt_ on_ f arm_ trials. xls Oxnard 2000 0.05 acre 77% 100% 99% 0.03 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Camarosa 9900mbalt_ on_ f arm_ trials. xls Oxnard 2000 0.05 acre 77% 100% 93% 0.11 12 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Camarosa 9900mbalt_ on_ f arm_ trials. xls Oxnard 2000 0.05 acre 77% 100% 93%  0.04 20 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Camarosa 9900mbalt_ on_ f arm_ trials. xls Oxnard 2000 0.05 acre 77% 100% 91% 0.07 12 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF Camarosa 9900mbalt_ on_ f arm_ trials. xls Oxnard 2000 0.05 acre 77% 100% 92% 0.02 20 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF Camarosa 9900mbalt_ on_ f arm_ trials. xls Salinas 2000 Small Plot 77% 100% 103% 21 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Santa Maria 2000 .73 acres 74% 100% 88% 0.9525 25 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 90% 0.055714286 75 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 83% 75 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 89% 100 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 98% 100 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 102% 100 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 107% 100 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 98% 125 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 106% 125 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 96% 160 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 97% 160 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 101% 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Santa Maria 2000 0.05 acre 76% 100% 107% 200 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Fumigation Data SM 98 01. xls Watsonville 2000 1 acre NA 100% 95% drip NA Clear, VIF 0001_ ramos_ yie ld_ data. xls 96% All trials 57 trials 95% Trials where non fume < 80% MBC 18 trials 97% South 39 trials 94% North drip 94% 8%

shank 96% 10%

low rates 94% 8%

Non California Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yield Metam yield Metam rate Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation 10/ 17/ 2002 PIC 2 Chloropicrin/ Metam Data California Data Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yield Regime yield Significance Regime rate Pic/ Metam Ratio Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation MBA 1998 Small Plot 50% 100% 51% 14 gal/ acre Met 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 106% 14 gal/ acre Met 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet MBA 1999 Small Plot 35% 100% 76% 14 gal/ acre Met 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Oxnard 1999 0.5 acre NA 100% 98% NA 200 lbs/ acre Met 45 gal/ acre flat shank, drip NA Clear, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 105% 14 gal/ acre Met 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet MBA 2000 Small Plot 45% 100% 113% 14 gal/ acre Met 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Salinas 2000 Small Plot 77% 100% 101% 14 gal/ acre Met 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Watsonville 2000 1 acre NA 100% 93% drip NA Clear, VIF 0001_ ram os_ yield_ d ata. xls Average 98%

Stdev 13%

10/ 17/ 2002 PicMetam 1 1,3 D Chloropicrin California Data Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yRegime yield Significance Regime rate Ratio of a. i. s Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation Watsonville? 1991 Small Plot 51% 100% 64% sig 38 gal/ acre Telone C shank NA clear, std Seascape 3 yer same ground, lower yields with time, less weed control 91 15 Pink Sheet Watsonville? 1991 Small Plot 51% 100% 91% not sig 76 gal/ acre Telone C shank NA clear, std Seascape 3 yer same ground, lower yields with time, less weed control 91 15 Pink Sheet San Diego County 1994 0.2 acre 92% 100% 104% 454 lbs/ acre 70/ 30 flat, shank NA Clear, std Chandler Pre fumed farm field 96 15 Pink Watsonville 1994 2 fields 56% 100% 97% Non sig 454 lbs/ acre 70/ 30 flat, shank NA NA, std Selva Strw/ vegie rota 96 13 Pink Watsonville 1995 2 fields 70% 100% 1% Non sig 454 lbs/ acre 70/ 30 flat, shank NA NA, std Selva Strw/ vegie rota 96 13 Pink Watsonville 1995 2 fields 70% 100% 1% Non sig 409 lbs/ acre 30/ 70 flat, shank NA NA, std Selva Strw/ vegie rota 96 13 Pink Merced County 1997 0.5 acre NA 100% 103% Non sig 400 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat, shank NA NA, std Chandler Grower did not allow nonfume 98 24 Pink Oxnard 1997 NA 100% 107% NA 400 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt _ summary. xls Santa Maria 1997 NA 100% 94% NA 400 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt _ summary. xls SCREC 1997 Small Plot 77% 100% 97% Non sig ( 1%) 236 lbs/ acre 40/ 60 bed, shank NA NA, std Camarosa 14 weeds vs 0 98 1 Pink Watsonville 1997 NA 100% 97% NA 400 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt _ summary. xls Watsonville 1997 NA 100% 72% NA 400 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 bed NA NA Selva 980609mbr_ alt _ summary. xls MBA 1998 Small Plot 50% 100% 97% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 1 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink MBA 1998 Small Plot 50% 100% 92% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink MBA 1998 Small Plot 50% 100% 110% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 2.4 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink MBA 1998 Small Plot 50% 100% 95% 25 gal/ acre InLine drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink MBA 1998 Small Plot 50% 100% 100% 40 gal/ acre 65/ 35 bed shank NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Merced County 1998 0.5 acre NA 100% 101% Non sig 400 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat, shank NA NA, std Chandler 2nd year berries 98 24 Pink Orange County 1998 76% 100% 103% NA 400 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 bed, shank NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt _ summary. xls Oxnard 1998 NA 100% 86% NA 400 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt _ summary. xls Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 110% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 1 inches NA, std Selva All yields much< grower std 01 02 Pink Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 110% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva All yields much< grower std 01 02 Pink Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 112% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 2.4 inches NA, std Selva All yields much< grower std 01 02 Pink Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 115% 25 gal/ acre InLine drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva All yields much< grower std 01 02 Pink Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 98% 40 gal/ acre 65/ 35 bed shank NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink San Diego County 1998 111% 100% 115% NA 200 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat NA NA Camarosa 980609mbr_ alt _ summary. xls Santa Maria 1998 NA 100% 96% 420 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 bed, shank NS, std Camarosa geeFumigation Watsonville 1998 1 acre NA 100% 95% NA 23 gal/ acre NA drip? NA NA, std Aromas 99fumigation data sheet. xls MBA 1999 Small Plot 35% 100% 95% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 1 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink MBA 1999 Small Plot 35% 100% 92% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink MBA 1999 Small Plot 35% 100% 93% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 2.4 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink MBA 1999 Small Plot 50% 100% 69% 25 gal/ acre InLine drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink MBA 1999 Small Plot 35% 100% 100% 40 gal/ acre 65/ 35 bed shank NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Merced County 1999 0.5 acre 54% 100% 84% Non sig 200 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat, shank NA NA, std Chandler Refume same ground 01 04 Pink Orange County 1999 .07 acre 102% 100% 96% NA 35 gal/ acre 65/ 35 drip NA Black, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .07 acre 102% 100% 95% NA 35 gal/ acre 65/ 35 drip NA Black, VIF Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .07 acre 102% 100% 100% NA 21 gal/ acre 65/ 35 drip NA Black, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .07 acre 102% 100% 94% NA 21 gal/ acre 65/ 35 drip NA Black, VIF Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .04 acre 102% 100% 105% NA 240 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 bed shank NA Black, VIF Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Orange County 1999 .15 acre 102% 100% 100% NA 350 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 bed shank NA Black, VIF Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Oxnard 1999 0.5 acre NA 100% 92% NA 425 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat shank NA Clear, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Oxnard 1999 0.5 acre NA 100% 93% NA 388 lbs/ acre 65/ 35 flat shank NA Clear, std Camarosa Jim_ m. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 102% 240 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 106% 350 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, std Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 100% 240 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 96% 350 lbs/ acre bed, shank NA Clear, VIF Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 104% 21 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 95% 20 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, std Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 102% 21 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Oxnard 1999 0.05 acre 86% 100% 94% 20 gal/ acre drip NA Clear, VIF Camarosa drip_ yields. xls Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 116% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 1 inches NA, std Selva All yields much< grower std 01 02 Pink Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 113% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva All yields much< grower std 01 02 Pink Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 123% 42 gal/ acre InLine drip 2.4 inches NA, std Selva All yields much< grower std 01 02 Pink Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 114% 25 gal/ acre InLine drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva All yields much< grower std 01 02 Pink Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 107% 40 gal/ acre 65/ 35 bed shank NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink 10/ 17/ 2002 1,3 D Pic 1 1,3 D, Chloropicrin, Metam Data California Data Location Year Test Size Non fume yield MBR standard yield Regime yield Significance Regime rate 1,3 D/ Pic/ Metam Ratio Application Volume Tarp type Variety Comments Citation MBA 1998 Small Plot 50% 100% 73% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 103% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Salinas 1998 Small Plot 98% 100% 109% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet MBA 1999 Small Plot 35% 100% 68% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 112% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Salinas 1999 Small Plot 80% 100% 89% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet MBA 2000 Small Plot 45% 100% 111% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Salinas 2000 Small Plot 77% 100% 101% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 1.7 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Salinas 2000 Small Plot 77% 100% 107% 25 gal/ acre InLine/ 45 gal/ acre drip 2.4 inches NA, std Selva 01 02 Pink Sheet Watsonville 2000 1 acre NA 100% 95% InLine drip NA Clear, VIF 0001_ ramo s_ yield_ dat a. xls Average 95%

Stdev 17%

10/ 17/ 2002 1,3 D Pic Metam 1 Weeding cost Based on discussion with Dr. Rachel Goodhue, University of California Davis, Department of Agricultural Resources and Economics Hand Weeding Costs Adjustment Study South adjusted North adjusted MBr/ Pic $ 248 $ 713 $ 957 Pic shank $ 359 $ 1,032 $ 1,385 Pic shank + Metam $ 269 $ 773 $ 1,038 Telone C35 shank $ 270 $ 776 $ 1,042 Telone C35 shank + Metam $ 259 $ 745 $ 999 Pic EC drip $ 446 $ 1,282 $ 1,721 Pic EC drip + metam $ 349 $ 1,003 $ 1,347 InLine drip $ 330 $ 949 $ 1,273 InLine + metam $ 357 $ 1,026 $ 1,378 10/ 17/ 2002 Weeding Costs 1 Methyl Bromide Alternatives Cost and Application Analysis  2001 Compiled 6/ 8/ 2001 Wait Per TREATED Acre Time Minimum Average Combos Material Type Low High Units Days Operation Days Well ? Low High Low High Low High Low High Low High A Flat MBr  Pic 57/ 43 Shank 250 375 lbs 7 Bed up 7 1, 2, 3, 4 650 975 193 218 256 289 400 600 1,499 2,082 1,790 Bed MBr  Pic 57/ 43 Shank 250 375 lbs 7 7 1, 2, 3, 4 650 975 256 289 200 300 1,106 1,564 1,335 B Flat Telone C35 Shank 350 400 lbs 21 Bed up 21 1, 4 875 1,156 193 218 256 289 400 600 1,724 2,263 1,993 Tel + Metam Flat Telone C35 Shank 350 400 lbs 7 Bed up 875 1,156 193 218 256 289 400 600 1,866 2,438 2,152 2,437 Bed Metam sodium Drip 37 50 gal 21 28 1, 2, 3, 4 2? 143 175 Tel C35 Flat Telone C35 coinject Shank 350 400 lbs 21 Flat 875 1,156 193 218 256 289 400 600 2,104 3,023 2,563 2,278 Pic Shank 200 400 lbs 14 Bed up 21 1, 2, 4 3? 380 760 Flat Telone C35 coinject Shank 350 400 lbs 21 Flat 875 1,156 193 218 256 289 400 600 2,246 3,198 2,722 Pic Shank 200 400 lbs 14 Bed up 380 760 Bed Metam sodium Drip 37 50 gal 21 28 1, 2, 3, 4 143 175 InLine C Bed Inline + VIF tarp Drip 34 34 gal 21 21 1, 2, 4 731 731 526 594 200 300 1,457 1,625 1,541 1,541 Bed Inline + VIF tarp Drip 34 34 gal 14 731 731 526 594 300 400 1,699 1,900 1,799 Inline + Met Waiting period 5 1,799 Bed Metam sodium Drip 37 50 gal 21 26 1, 2, 3, 4 143 175 Pic drip Bed Pic EC + Std tarp Drip 24 24 gal 21 21 1, 2 3? 612 966 256 289 200 300 1,068 1,556 1,312 1,455 Bed Pic EC + VIF tarp Drip 24 24 gal 28 28 1, 2 3? 612 966 526 594 200 300 1,338 1,860 1,599 Pic + Met Bed Pic EC + Std tarp Drip 24 24 gal 21 612 966 256 289 300 400 1,311 1,831 1,571 1,366 Waiting period 5 Bed Metam sodium Drip 37 50 gal 21 26 1, 2, 3 4? 143 175 Pic Flat Flat Pic Shank 200 200 lbs 7 Bed up 380 380 193 218 256 289 300 400 1,271 1,462 1,366 1,208 Bed Metam sodium Drip 37 50 gal 21 28 1, 2, 3 4? 143 175 Bed Pic Shank 200 200 lbs 21 380 380 256 289 300 400 1,079 1,244 1,161 Pic flat + Met Bed Metam sodium Drip 37 50 gal 21 28 1, 2, 3 4? 143 175 1,366 Bed Inline + Drip 34 34 gal 21 731 731 526 594 300 400 1,659 1,886 1,772 Pic EC + VIF tarp Drip 4 4 gal 21 21 1, 2, 3 4? 102 161 Bed Inline + Drip 34 34 gal 21 731 731 526 594 300 400 1,801 2,061 1,931 Pic EC + VIF tarp Drip 4 4 gal 21 102 161 Waiting period 5 Metam sodium Drip 37 50 gal 21 26 1, 2, 3, 4 143 175 Metam Bed Metam sodium Drip 50 50 gal 21 21 3 2? 4? 175 175 256 289 200 300 631 764 698 698 A  Standard MBr Applications B  Telone C35 Combinations C  Drip and Shank Combinations * Fumigation is conducted in order to obtain Materials Application method 1 A growth response Telone C35  Telone II Shank on the flat 2 Soil borne fungi control ( Verticillium, Phytophthora , etc.) Pic Shank on the flat, shank to the bed 3 Weed control Inline Drip to the bed 4 Nematode control Pic EC Drip to the bed Metam sodium Drip to the bed, rate depending on objective Bed Costs per treated acre Rate Total Cost Application Method and Material Tarp Cost Application Cost Controls* Fumigant Materials Flat Fumigant costs $/ Unit Low High Unit Lbs/ gal 1 Basamid 3.50 $ 3.75 $ Lbs 2 Chloropicrin 1.90 $ 2.60 $ Lbs 13.76 3 Chloropicrin EC 1.90 $ 3.00 $ Lbs 13.42 322.1419 966.43 $

4 MeBr 3.00 $ 3.50 $ Lbs 5 MeBr 50/ 50

$ 2.50 $ Lbs 6 MeBr 57/ 43

$ 2.60 $ Lbs 7 MeBr 67/ 33 2.60 $ 3.10 $ Lbs 8 MeBr/ Pic in general 2.50 $ 3.10 $ Lbs 9 Inline 21.50 $ 25.00 $ Gal 10.09 10 Telone C35 2.50 $ 2.89 $ Lbs 11 Telone II 2.45 $ 2.85 $ Lbs Calculated Telone II cost from Pic and Telone C35 costs 12 Metam sodium 2.85 $ 3.50 $ Gal 10.09 $/ lb Tarp costs Low High Lbs/ acre Standard tarp, flat 0.77 $ 0.87 $ 250 via Paul Niday Standard tarp, bed 0.77 $ 0.87 $ 333 VIF tarp 1.55 $ 1.75 $ 339 Bed width Linear ft/ acre Lbs tarp/ acre Average 68 7,687 323 333 52 10,052 342 Few materials to put on Many materials to put on $/ acre $/ acre Application costs Low High Low High 200 300 300 400 $/ Unit Pricing Sources Material Low High Unit Ameribrom ( Gene BrownChloropicrin

$ 1.90 $ Lbs Ameribrom ( Gene BrownMeBr 50/ 50

$ 2.50 $ Lbs Ameribrom ( Gene BrownMeBr 57/ 43

$ 2.60 $ Lbs BASF ( W. Pennington) Basamid 3.50 $ 3.75 $ Lbs TriCal ( Paul Niday) Chloropicrin 2.20 $ 2.60 $ Lbs TriCal ( Paul Niday) Chloropicrin EC 2.40 $ 3.00 $ Lbs TriCal ( Paul Niday) Inline 21.50 $ 25.00 $ Gal TriCal ( Paul Niday) MeBr 3.00 $ 3.50 $ Lbs TriCal ( Paul Niday) MeBr 67/ 33 2.60 $ 3.10 $ Lbs TriCal ( Paul Niday) Telone C35 2.50 $ 2.89 $ Lbs AMVAC ( Chuck DuerksenMetam sodium 2.85 $ 3.50 $ Gal 1 2 34 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A B C D E F G Specific gravity of materials ( depends on temperate) 65.%

Material Lbs/ gal Gal/ A Lbs/ trt A lbs if % qround trted pure chloropicrin material 1.65 g/ ml 13.76 1 13.8 8.9 chloropicrin EC 1.61 g/ ml 13.42 24 322.1 209.4 Inline ( Telone C35EC) 1.21 g/ ml 10.09 35 353.1 229.5 metam sodium 1.21 g/ ml 10.09 50 504.4 327.9 propargyl bromide, toulene f1.335 g/ ml 11.13 1 11.1 7.2 pure methyl iodide 2.28 g/ ml 19.01 15 285.1 185.3 methyl iodide with emulsifie1.65 g/ ml 13.76 24 330.1 214.6 Telone II 10.1 Coinjection calculations Gallons Inline 34.0 LBS Inline 343.1 Gal Telone 22.1 Gal Pic 11.9 LBS Telone 183.6 LBS Pic 159.5 Gals Pic to get to 200 lbs Pic/ acre 4.0 Additional lbs of Pic 53.6 Total lbs in application 396.7 Area calculations Bed width 52 Bed top 24 Bed ft/ acre 10,052 # beds 1 Bed length 400 Acres 0 Rate 350 Flat amt 14 Bed amt 6 Tarp calculations Tarp width 68 Bed ft/ acre 10,052 Tarp thickness ( mils) 1.25 Inches 12 Constant 30,000 Lbs/ acre tarp 342 68 323 52 342 332.5 Most use 1.25 mil tarp in WAT Most use 1.5 mil tarp in OX About half and half 1.25 and 1.5 in SM White is a heavy material, so add 2% to weight High density is a heavy material, so add 1% in weight VIF add 2% in weight Tarp costs ( as of 010507, probably will not change much for a year or so) Tarp costs drive by butane and propoane costs, demand of which drive by industry not heating markets $/ lbs Tarp Low high Clear smooth $ 0.77 $ 0.79 Clear embossed $ 0.85 $ 0.87 Black embossed $ 0.83 $ 0.85 Brown and green $ 1.33 $ 1.38 Brown and green $ 1.45 $ 1.45 VIF $ 1.60 $ 1.60 12.00 in/ ft 43,560.00 ft2/ acre 52.00 Bed c c 24.00 Bed top 0.46 Top/ c c Cost of fumigation materials $/ Unit Approximate Material Low High Unit Application cost ($/ acre)

1 Chloropicrin Lbs 2 MeBr Lbs 3 MeBr 50/ 50 Lbs 4 MeBr 57/ 43 Lbs 5 MeBr 67/ 33 Lbs 6 Basamid Lbs 7 Inline Gal 8 Telone C35 Lbs 9 Metam sodium Gal Other:

10 11 12 13 14 15 Vegetable Rotation Narrative Vegetable crop growers would also suffer with loss of previously fumigated land. Many vegetable crops in the Watsonville area rotate with strawberry growers. They benefit from reduced disease and weed pressure, saving approximately $ 100$ 200 per acre all the way to $ 400 per acre ( Appendix C). Vegetable crops on average brought revenues of approximately $ 7,000 per acre in Monterey County in 2001 ( Appendix K, tab " Rotation Crop Costs"). Yet most vegetable crops are also very low margin at present. UC Davis cost of production documents for Broccoli and Cauliflower show net per acre calculations of $ 265 and $ 1050 per acre, while lettuce has costs of $ 8069 per acre in 2001, yet gross per acre on average of only $ 5918 per acre. With such close margins, or lack thereof, any savings may make the difference between solvency and debt for vegetable growers by using strawberry ground. Chloropicrin Narrative Technical Feasibility Efficacy. Chloropicrin used alone has some activity against much of the California Pest Complex, but not comparable to the MBC standard. Chloropicrin has good efficacy against Pseudomonas solancearum, Cylindrocladium fungi, Phytophthora, Fusarium, Pyrenochaeta, Pythium, Rhizoctonia, Sclentina, Slcerotium, Verticillium, clubroot organism Plasmodiophora, soil pox Actinomyces ipomoea ( Table 1, Pest Complex in application, and Appendix G, Metapicrin label). Chloropicrin alone as some control of cut worms, grubs, wireworms, and suppression of weeds if used with tarps. It has no control over some key weeds, knotweed, clovers, and filaree and limited control over others that MBC does control ( Appendix DD, Fennimore 2002 handout). Chloropicrin has no reported activity against nematodes. Nematodes may likely become an increasing problem then in repeated use of Chloropicrin. MBC has controlled nematodes so well for decades, hard to measure future impact of this pest when faced with less than adequate control from Chloropicrin.

Yield data A large number of small plot and on farm trials of chloropicrin alone, applied either as shank or drip, have been done in the California strawberry growing regions ( Appendix T, Pic tab). When pest pressure is present, chloropicrin applied alone averages 95% of the MBC standard. The preferred method of application for reasons of safety and cost savings, drip application, is slightly lower at 94% of the MBC standard. Shank applications were 96% of the MBC standard, but this method of application is not allowed in some areas ( for instance Ventura County) because of the greater potential of escape of material into the air and subsequent exposure to workers and the public. Yet, the rotation growers in the Northern region would have to do flat chloropicrin soil fumigation to provide the most thorough pest control, or vegetable growers will not rent the land in the second year for their purposes.

Nearly all of the data was generated on land previously and repeatedly fumed with the MBC standard. Few experiments exist which showed repeated use on the same land. The trials run in Merced County ( Appendix CC, Pink Sheet 01 04), included repeated use of chloropicrin on the same land. The berries were carried over two years from the first application, and re fumed the third year. Yield reduction from year 1 to 3 on the same ground was approximately 33% of the MBC standard. A similar trend begins to be seen in the Oxnard data of 1999 and 2000 ( Appendix T, Pic tab). A drop in overall yields of about 9% occurred the second year paralleling the increase in pest pressure as demonstrated by the yields on non fumigated land which dropped from 86% the first year ( essentially no pest pressure) to 77% of MBC the second year. Most conclusive is a study by Dr. Doug Shaw and Dr. Kirk Larson on comparisons of repeated alternative use with the MBC standard ( Appendix GG, Shaw and Larson, 1999). Successive treatments with chloropicrin over three years compared to MBC showed a steady decline in yield compared to MBC from 2.2% the first year, to10.6% the second year, ending with 13.7% the third year.

More recently work with very impermeable film ( VIF) has been conducted. But results are variable with many examples of phytotoxicity occurring. Further work determining rates and plant back times with VIF are underway. Each grower needs to be able to test these results in their own specific conditions. More time and work are needed to determine at the farm level, the optimal use conditions for chloropicrin because of the very small economic margins that California strawberry growers currently face.

Economic Analysis When the overall yield 95% ( Appendix T, Pic tab) is calculated into the 2001 baseline revenue for each region ( Application Worksheet 3 E PIC Totals), losses again are observed on a per acre basis in both regions. In the South losses are $ 949 per acre. In the North, rotation grower in the first year average a plus $ 525 per acre, although this is a $ 1,188 per acre loss from the MBC standard. For the northern non rotation grower losses average $ 2,263 per acre. The overall average for the North is a loss of $ 869 per acre. Since the median acre size farm of our representative user is approximately 40 acres, these would result in total losses of $ 37,960 in the South and $ 90,520 for the Northern non rotation grower.

More critical though is the increasing yield loss over time. Based on the loss of 13.7% of the MBC standard after three successive years of chloropicrin use ( Appendix GG, Shaw and Larson, 1999), losses for the Northern rotation grower would approach $ 2,459 per acre, a total loss of $ 98,360 for the third year alone.

While the rotation grower almost breaks even with a loss of $ 31 per acre, one must consider that growers aren't all rotation or non rotation, and that accumulation of pest pressure with repeated use of chloropicrin alone will continually lower yields with time. It is also unknown the economic impact of yields for vegetable growers using strawberry land only fumigated with chloropicrin.

Regulatory Pressures The California Department of Pesticide Regulation is re evaluating chloropicrin at this time with anticipated completion of the review in approximately 2 3 years. There are already sensitivities around the use of the material due to its physiological effects ( lacrimation and upper respiratory discomfort) at very low levels in the air ( Appendix S). Chloropicrin is also currently listed as a toxic air contaminant in the state, and could be subject to additional regulatory restraints after thorough review by the Scientific Review Panel of the Air Board. Of greatest concern is what additional regulatory restraints could be in place in 2005 as a result of the DPR re evaluation, particularly increases in required buffer zones which would limit the products use in the highly urbanized strawberry growing regions.

Buffer zones for the material currently vary from county to county and depend upon local conditions such as proximity of a field to sensitive sites. In most cases if a sensitive site ( occupied buildings, residences, businesses, schools, hospitals etc.) is within 300 feet of a field, a 100 foot or more buffer zone is required depending on the size of the acreage to be fumigated at a given time. These buffer zones are actually larger than buffer zone requirements for methyl bromide applications near most sensitive sites ( 60 feet minimum depending upon application method and acres to be fumigated at a given time.) ( Appendix X, Chloropicrin Permit Conditions)

In addition, the most effective rates of chloropicrin when applied alone are 200 lbs/ acre or more. The local county Ag Commissioner offices in California issue permits to applicators for all applications of chloropicrin. All of the Ag Commissioner offices in the strawberry growing regions either highly discourage or prohibit shank or drip applications of 200 lbs/ acre or more of chloropicrin. Even drip applications, with mitigation measures such as overhead sprinklers should leaks or release occur, are limited to less than 200 lbs/ acre by the Commissioners ( personal communications with Ag Commissioners in Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara [ limits to 150 lbs/ acre], San Luis Obispo, Santa Cruz, and Monterey Counties.) In addition California Department of Pesticide Regulation is also highly concerned about uses at or above 200 lbs/ acre.

Conclusion Chloropicrin used alone is not a replacement for the MBC standard because of lack of full efficacy, lower yield performance against the MBC standard particularly with repeated use over time on the same ground, and increased regulatory pressures within California. 1,3 Dichloropropene and Chloropicrin Technical Feasibility Efficacy. Telone   ( 1,3 dichloropropene) is used as a nematocide with minimal efficacy against disease and weeds when used alone. Because it is not effective against the entire pest complex in California strawberries, this alone prevents it from being a methyl bromide replacement ( Table 1, Pest Complex, in application). Early efficacy work with Telone alone demonstrated its poorer activity compared to methyl bromide/ chloropicrin standards ( Appendix CC, 91 15 Pink Sheet). And in fact in that study of repeated use over three years, already poor yields dropped with time. The MBTOC 1998 report ( page 51) also indicated it is effective only in combination with other components. The Federal Use Label also shows it is labeled only against nematodes.

Chloropicrin alone has some activity against much of the California Pest Complex. Chloropicrin has good efficacy against Pseudomonas solancearum, Cylindrocladium fungi, Phytophthora, Fusarium, Pyrenochaeta, Pythium, Rhizoctonia, Sclentina, Slcerotium, Verticillium, clubroot organism Plasmodiophora, soil pox Actinomyces ipomoea ( Table 1, Pest Complex, in application). Chloropicrin alone has some control of cut worms, grubs, wireworms, and suppression of weeds if used with tarps ( Appendix G, Metapicrin label.) It has no control over some key weeds, knotweed, clovers, and filaree and limited control over others that MBC does control ( Appendix DD, Fennimore 2002 handout). While used primarily as a fungicide, its control of anthracnose is unknown, and this disease has become an increasingly important problem in California strawberries and is controlled by MBC. Chloropicrin has no reported activity against nematodes. Nematodes may likely become an increasing problem with repeated use of Chloropicrin. MBC has controlled nematodes so well for decades and it is difficult to measure the future impact of this pest when faced with less than adequate control from Chloropicrin.

Combined Efficacy The main drawback of the 1,3 D chloropicrin alternative combination is the lack of control of weeds. Some increased control of weeds has been observed with InLine applications using VIF mulch. However, as in all drip applications, weed control is not observed along the sides of the beds where the drip application did not reach. Application of herbicides is not a simple solution because these side weeds are under the mulch. Removal requires extensive labor to lift the tarp sides, pull the weeds, and replace the tarp along the sides. Use of additional herbicides would simply add to the operational costs as would increased labor to hand weed. Yields When the yield data is analyzed for both shank and drip applications of Telone C35 or InLine, some interesting overall results are observed. When only data from trials where untreated controls had yields of 80% or less of the MBC standard are considered, the overall yields with 1,3 D/ chloropicrin averages 94% of the MBC standard ( Appendix T, 1,3 D Pic tab). When drip and shank applications are separated, drip was better at 97% versus 90% for shank. Analysis of 10 studies comparing MBC with 1,3 D/ chloropicrin applications by Shaw and Larson showed an overall loss of 14.7% compared to MBC. No studies or work is available on repeated use of 1,3 D/ chloropicrin on the same land. Since Shaw and Larson showed steady declines in yields over 3 years of chloropicrin use, and 1,3 D has limited efficacy on the pest complex, one would anticipate steady losses with use of this material. In particular, weed pressure may increase so significantly with repeated use to further contribute to yield loss.

Other problems have been experienced with drip applications of InLine. Phytoptoxicity is seen sometimes if appropriate plant back timings were not used during the study. Soil temperatures are critical to calculating accurate plant back times, the cooler the temperature, the longer the plant back. Damaged to irrigation piping and systems can occur if proper flushing of the system is not done after fumigation. And leaks in an irrigation system can result in pooling of chemical and therefore spotty delivery to the field resulting in variable efficacy throughout the field or phytotoxicity after planting strawberry transplants. And volume delivery of the drip material has been found to be inappropriate for very sandy soils ( no spread through the bed) or resulted in collapsed beds with too much volume, of poor efficacy and spread in heavier soil. In short, use of this drip material requires more specific soil type, moisture, and delivery conditions. All of these problems are still under investigation by researchers, particularly rates in different soils, to find optimal conditions from which growers can then safely trial the material in their own specific circumstances.

Economic Analysis For drip applications, the most economical and safest application technology, there are potential up front costs for ensuring irrigation systems are leak proof and proper valves and safeguards are in place to prevent backflow of materials into water sources. In addition, 1,3 Dichloropropene and chloropicrin are very corrosive substance and if proper care is not taken to clean out systems after application, valves and piping corrode and need replacement. Growers need to replace PVC pipe, which is corroded by 1,3 D and chloropicrin, with non PVC piping such as Oval Hose. The first growers using the technology state that they had minimal up front costs or donations of equipment to upgrade their systems. For the general grower upgrade costs could run thousands of dollars to replace PVC piping and add proper valve and flow equipment. We estimate yearly costs of $ 100 per acre to upgrade and maintain drip systems based on discussions with experienced growers.

The economics associated with soil preparation come into play for 1,3 D/ chloropicrin applications. Soil preparation and soil moisture are more critical than with MBC applications ( Appendix G, Telone C35 and InLine labels). Soil temperature is also more critical. According to label directions, if soil temperatures drop below 40 ° F, the material loses effectiveness on application and requires an even longer plant back period. The normal plant back period is roughly 1 week for every 10 gallons per acre applied ( Appendix G). At best this leaves a plant back period of 21 days compared to the 7 days for MBC. Even so, the Southern grower pulling crop at the beginning of July can fit in Telone C35 or InLine applications.

The Northern growers however will lose revenue from not harvesting the second half of September ($ 1,262 per acre) for rotational growers. There is some savings in not paying harvest costs for two weeks, a total of $ 459 per week ( fresh harvest costs for North divided by 35 weeks harvest), or $ 918 per acre. The nonrotational growers will have to obtain their land sooner, paying one quarter year's rent to prevent the vegetable grower from doing one last vegetable crop. Land rent in the northern region ranges from $ 1800 2400 per acre. One quarter of the average rent, $ 2,100, is $ 525.

Economic analysis was done with best case scenarios. For the Southern grower and the Northern non rotation grower, it was assumed drip application of InLine was the most efficacious and cost effective. In addition, for the Southern grower it is assumed he has just enough time for soil preparation, fumigation, and plant back time of 21 days. For the rotation grower in the North, flat fumigation of Telone C35 is the only option to ensure coverage of the entire field in anticipation of use the next year by vegetable growers. As such, when these costs are added in, the Southern grower still sees a loss of $ 520 per acre a total loss of $ 20,800 for the 40 acre representative user. In the North, the non rotation grower experiences a loss of $ 895 per acre for a total loss of $ 35,800. The rotational grower experiences the greater loss of $ 2,099 per acre to use of the more expensive flat fumigation with Telone C35, and greater yield loss with that treatment. The total loss for the 40 acre representative rotation grower is $ 83,960. On average for the Northern grower, losses would be $ 1,497 per acre, or $ 59,880 for the 40 acre Northern grower. This are minimum possible losses because if plant back time, particularly in the colder north, increases so does loss of revenue by having to take land back earlier.

Regulatory Pressures 1,3 Dichloropropene The Federal Label requires a 100 foot buffer zone for drip applied Telone ( Appendix G). For shank applied Telone, a 100 foot buffer zone is required the first year and a 300 foot buffer zone is required for the next two years on the same ground. In addition, in California, use is limited by township caps, as an additional protection with respect to the classification of 1,3 D as a B2 carcinogen ( Appendix O, P, and S). Recently township caps were doubled in townships where historical Telone use did not reach the maximum allowed under the caps, in general 90,000 lbs per township ( Appendix S). This is, however a temporary increase until the amount of Telone " banked" from previous years is used up, or the registrant convinces the California Department of Pesticide Regulation that permanent increases are justified by reassessing the oncogenic risk.

Township caps originally set by California were 90,250 " adjusted" pounds per township per year ( Appendix P). Adjusted pounds are actual pounds of 1,3 D applied times an application factor. This calculates out to approximately 345 acres in a township can be treated with InLine using VIF mulch. Since a township is approximately 25,000 acres, and many townships in the Northern and Southern strawberry growing regions have over a thousand acres in strawberries in many townships, obviously not all strawberries growers could use Telone products.

DPR recently doubled the township cap in many of the townships where previous use did not equal the maximum amount allowed under the old township cap. In essence, the unused amount was " banked" for future use. This, however, is only a temporary solution until the banked amounts are used up. Meanwhile the 1,3 D registrant is working with DPR to revise regional modeling schemes to determine whether permanent caps should be recalculated based on each regions weather conditions. Such analysis so far is predicted to result in caps close to the current increased caps or between the old and new.

Dr. Tom Trout of USDA has provided an analysis of the impacted acres of strawberries in each county based on the old and new township cap ( Appendix P). His analysis shows at best that Telone products will not be available to 47% of the total strawberry acreage in the state. For the strawberry growing regions, his study projects unavailable acres according to the following table ( based on 2001 acreage):

Region Total Acres Straw Acres Unavailable % of Acres Watsonville 10,759 4,344 40.4% Santa Maria 3,817 1,645 43% Ventura County 7,777 4,228 54% Orange County 2,446 243 10%

Roughly half of the Southern acreage would not be able to use Telone products. And roughly 40% of the Northern acreage would not. Considering it is not economical for the Northern rotation growers, to account for concentration of non rotation acres in the same affected townships, from 40 100% of the 2,500 acres of non rotational growers acres in the Watsonville area could use the material, although they could still suffer losses using it over MBC. Much of the land in the Watsonville area however is not amenable to drip applications because of soil type and hilliness, further reducing use of the material. The 1645 acres in Santa Maria would be available and only 4,228 acres in Ventura. At best then, 8,373 strawberries acres may be able to use the material. This roughly calculates to availability to approximately 30% of strawberry growers at best even under the expanded township caps.

!, 3 D is also classified as a toxic air contaminant in the state of California and will undergo additional scrutiny in future. This classification, in addition to the classification as a B 2 probable carcinogen contributes to an uncertain regulatory future in California.

Chloropicrin The California Department of Pesticide Regulation is re evaluating chloropicrin at this time with anticipated completion of the review in approximately 2 3 years. There are already sensitivities around the use of the material due to its physiological effects ( lacrimation and upper respiratory discomfort) at very low levels in the air. Chloropicrin is also currently listed as a toxic air contaminant in the state, and could be subject to additional regulatory restraints after thorough review by the Scientific Review Panel of the California Air Resources Board. Of greatest concern is what additional regulatory restraints could be in place in 2005 as a result of the DPR re evaluation, particularly increases in required buffer zones, which would limit the products use in the highly urbanized strawberry growing regions ( Appendix S).

Buffer zones for chloropicrin currently vary from county to county and depend upon local conditions such as proximity of a field to sensitive sites ( Appendix X). In most cases if a sensitive site ( occupied buildings, residences, businesses, schools, hospitals etc.) is within 300 feet of a field, a 100 foot or more buffer zone is required depending on the size of the acreage to be fumigated at a given time. These buffer zones are actually larger than buffer zone requirements for methyl bromide applications near most sensitive sites ( 60 feet minimum depending upon application method and acres to be fumigated at a given time.)

Conclusion The combined soil fumigation regime of 1,3 dichloropropene and chloropicrin is questionable as a methyl bromide alternative. It is on the edge economically for some growers and significantly limited by township caps in California, at best limiting it to 33% of the strawberry acreage. The most efficacious application is drip application of InLine, yet its use is limited by various geographical and soil factors. For instance drip applications are difficult on hilly land, of which approximately half of the Watsonville growing region has hills. In addition, if the soil is too sandy, the material does not spread out in the bed giving poor coverage. If the soil is too heavy, again poor coverage results because it cannot move effectively through the heavy soil. Or worse yet, if material is applied too quickly in high volumes, beds can collapse, as they have in some of the experimental trials. Finally, if not properly rinsed, irrigation systems can corrode increasing grower costs for replacements, or phytotoxicity can result if material left in the system reaches transplants.

This combination is also under continual regulatory scrutiny because of acute toxicity and the carcinogenic classification of 1,3 D. While research work continues on improving yield and use potential, 1,3 D/ chloropicrin is not currently an alternative for the majority of strawberry growers.

Growers need 3 4 years of practice with this regime in their own specific field and climate conditions to perfect any potential use of the regime. With the very low margins present in the current strawberry market, growers can only afford to do relatively small acreage at a time to minimize potential losses until they perfect conditions using the alternatives.


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 29, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24552-24554]
[FR Doc No: 2018-11434]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket No. FMCSA-2017-0060]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Hearing

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

ACTION: Notice of applications for exemption; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces receipt of applications from 30 individuals
for an exemption from the hearing requirement in the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) to operate a commercial motor
vehicle (CMV) in interstate commerce. If granted, the exemptions would
enable these hard of hearing and deaf individuals to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 28, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments bearing the Federal Docket
Management System (FDMS) Docket No. FMCSA-FMCSA-2017-0057 using any of
the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
     Mail: Docket Management Facility; U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor,
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal Holidays.
     Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the
docket number(s) for this notice. Note that all comments received will
be posted without change to http://www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. Please see the Privacy Act heading below
for further information.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments, go to http://www.regulations.gov at any time or Room W12-140
on the ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays. The FDMS is available 24 hours each day, 365
days each year. If you want acknowledgment that we received your
comments, please include a self-addressed, stamped envelope or postcard
or print the acknowledgement page that appears after submitting
comments online.
    Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to http://www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed
at http://www.dot.gov/privacy.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have questions
regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket, contact Docket
Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Under 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA may grant an exemption
from the FMCSRs for a five-year period if it finds ``such exemption
would likely achieve a level of safety that is equivalent to or greater
than the level that would be achieved absent such exemption.'' The
statute also allows the Agency to renew exemptions at the end of the
five-year period. FMCSA grants exemptions from the FMCSRs for a two-
year period to align with the maximum duration of a driver's medical
certification.
    The 30 individuals listed in this notice have requested an
exemption from the hearing requirement in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11).
Accordingly, the Agency will evaluate the qualifications of each
applicant to determine whether granting the exemption will achieve the
required level of safety mandated by statute.
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding hearing
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(11) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person first perceives a

forced whispered voice in the better ear at not less than 5 feet with
or without the use of a hearing aid or, if tested by use of an
audiometric device, does not have an average hearing loss in the better
ear greater than 40 decibels at 500 Hz, 1,000 Hz, and 2,000 Hz with or
without a hearing aid when the audiometric device is calibrated to
American National Standard (formerly ASA Standard) Z24.5--1951.
    This standard was adopted in 1970 and was revised in 1971 to allow
drivers to be qualified under this standard while wearing a hearing
aid, 35 FR 6458, 6463 (April 22, 1970) and 36 FR 12857 (July 3, 1971).
    On February 1, 2013, FMCSA announced in a Notice of Final
Disposition titled, Qualification of Drivers; Application for
Exemptions; National Association of the Deaf, (78 FR 7479), its
decision to grant requests from 30 individuals for exemptions from the
Agency's physical qualification standard concerning hearing for
interstate CMV drivers. Since the February 1, 2013 notice, the Agency
has published additional notices granting requests from hard of hearing
and deaf individuals for exemptions from the Agency's physical
qualification standard concerning hearing for interstate CMV drivers.

II. Qualifications of Applicants

Alan M. Bridgeford

    Mr. Bridgeford, age 47, holds an operator's license in Nevada.

Mataio Brown

    Mr. Brown, age 22, holds an operator's license in Mississippi.

Leroy Carter

    Mr. Carter, age 38, holds an operator's license in Ohio.

Robert M. Cates

    Mr. Cates, age 66, holds a class A CDL in New Mexico.

Rocky R. Chin

    Mr. Chin, age 50, holds a class A CDL in Washington.

Ralph E. Craig

    Mr. Craig, age 80, holds a class A CDL in Illinois.

Cesar DeLeon

    Mr. DeLeon, age 28, holds an operator's license from Texas.

Brody DiPasquale

    Mr. DiPasquale, age 24, holds an operator's license in Maryland.

Edward J. Duhon

    Mr. Duhon, age 41, holds an operator's license in Alabama.

Lyle Eash

    Mr. Eash, age 39, holds an operator's license in Ohio.

Richard R. Fisher

    Mr. Fisher, age 31, holds an operator's license in Pennsylvania.

Kimberly I. Foss

    Ms. Foss, age 50, holds a class A CDL in California.

Bradley Ledford

    Mr. Ledford, age 29, holds an operator's license in Tennessee.

Dustin McFadden

    Mr. McFadden, age 39, holds an operator's license in Texas.

Francisco M. Mendoza

    Mr. Mendoza, age 46, holds an operator's license in California.

Jack W. Mitchell

    Mr. Mitchell, age 68, holds an operator's license in Texas.

Eugene Mostepan

    Mr. Mostepan, age 37, holds an operator's license in California.

Steven Moorehead

    Mr. Moorehead, age 58, holds a class A CDL in Ohio.

Gary T. Nagel

    Mr. Nagel, age 60, holds an operator's license in Minnesota.

Marcel Paul

    Mr. Paul, age 41, holds an operator's license in Washington.

Dexter E. Perez

    Mr. Perez, age 32, holds an operator's license in Wisconsin.

Connie Ralston

    Ms. Ralston, age 41, holds an operator's license in Georgia.

Noble D. Reed

    Mr. Reed, age 53, holds a class A CDL in Texas.

Kurt Sanders

    Mr. Sanders, age 47, holds an operator's license in Virginia.

David L. Schibilla

    Mr. Schibilla, age 62, holds a class A CDL in Illinois

Pamela Singleton

    Ms. Singleton, age 54, holds an operator's license in Texas.

Robert W. Slate

    Mr. Slate, age 35, holds an operator's license in New Mexico.

Willine D. Smith

    Ms. Smith, age 56, holds a class A CDL in Georgia.

Michael R. Tayman

    Mr. Tayman, age 41, holds an operator's license in Maine.

Jason R. Winemiller

    Mr. Winemiller, age 44, holds a class A CDL in Illinois.

III. Request for Comments

    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, FMCSA requests
public comment from all interested persons on the exemption petitions
described in this notice. We will consider all comments received before
the close of business on the closing date indicated in the dates
section of the notice.

IV. Submitting Comments

    You may submit your comments and material online or by fax, mail,
or hand delivery, but please use only one of these means. FMCSA
recommends that you include your name and a mailing address, an email
address, or a phone number in the body of your document so that FMCSA
can contact you if there are questions regarding your submission.
    To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and
in the search box insert the docket number FMCSA-2017-0060 and click
the search button. When the new screen appears, click on the blue
``Comment Now!'' button on the right hand side of the page. On the new
page, enter information required including the specific section of this
document to which each comment applies, and provide a reason for each
suggestion or recommendation. If you submit your comments by mail or
hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\
by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. If you submit
comments by mail and would like to know that they reached the facility,
please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or envelope.
    We will consider all comments and materials received during the
comment period. FMCSA may issue a final determination any time after
the close of the comment period.

V. Viewing Comments and Documents

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this
preamble, go to http://www.regulations.gov and in the search box insert
the docket number

FMCSA-2017-0060 and click ``Search.'' Next, click ``Open Docket
Folder'' and you will find all documents and comments related to this
notice.

    Issued on: May 17, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-11434 Filed 5-25-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P